3 ms·
While both are stringent and designed to protect consumers, I'm not sure there are many other parallels between the processes of Apple and Nintendo. As a develo
by ajg1977 17y ago
While both are stringent and designed to protect consumers, I'm not sure there are many other parallels between the processes of Apple and Nintendo. As a developer who's gone through the process of submitting games many times to Nintendo, these are why it's a far better process than Apple have.
(Note these all apply to Sony/Microsoft too).
1) You can send Nintendo a proposed game design before starting any work and they will approve/deny it. Depending on how much detail you provide, you may only get a conditional approval, but you can submit more information or revisit later in development. If your game never stands a chance of being published, you'll have wasted nothing more than the time to create the documents.
2) If Nintendo have a problem with your game, they will tell you exactly what the issue is. There's no ambiguous reference to some clause. They will say ABC is in violation of XYZ.
3) If your game fails you can get a real live person on the phone or via email to discuss the issue and what would be an acceptable change.
4) Nintendo not only test that your game is compliant, they will test it for functionality and quality too. This is completely the opposite to Apple who will happily allow buggy pieces of crap on the store that meet their guidelines.
5) Nintendo provide comprehensive access to documents and newsgroups that contain examples of common problems and suggestions, from the staff who test the games, in how to avoid them.
There are more I can think of, but these are the big differences. Frankly trying to suggest that Apple's process is in some way better than Nintendo's is just a crock.
- masterj 17y agoSome very good points, but something to keep in mind. There is a much lower bar to creating a phone application than a console application, leading to many, many times the number of applications that Apple must look at compared to Nintendo. To provide that same level of attention and care that Nintendo gives to developers for one of it's (few) products to app developers would be impossible for a company of Apple's size. Not that I don't think they couldn't do some of the above, and 2 should be a given.
- buster 17y agoFirst, the point of that is to reduce the number of applications. Second: Apple is much larger then Nintendo, so they have the resources for sure. Anyway, the free approach of the android market is the best way, in my opinion. Oh, and also, that "free" model has worked for quite some years on PCs, Macs and every other computer, so why shouldn't it work just as fine on a mobile phone?
- masterj 17y ago"First, the point of that is to reduce the number of applications" True, quality over quantity, which I think we will see more of from Apple in the future. The goal at first was to attract as many developers as possible. Now that they have established the store, we will see more discrimination. Hence the removal of the 'cookie-cutter' applications of late. Maybe I'm wrong about that though. "Second: Apple is much larger then Nintendo, so they have the resources for sure." True, but they also have many more product lines including a major operating system and much more hardware to support and develop than Nintendo. I was simply pointing out the failures of the comparison.
- Tichy 17y ago"To provide that same level of attention and care that Nintendo gives to developers for one of it's (few) products to app developers would be impossible for a company of Apple's size." Sure, but if they can't provide the required service, perhaps they shouldn't offer the product to begin with.