Finding one needle in all the haystacks in the universe.

Discussion in 'Public Game Developers Forum' started by TheOctagonTheory, Apr 30, 2013.

  1. TheOctagonTheory

    TheOctagonTheory Well-Known Member

    Sep 7, 2011
    129
    0
    0
    semi-retired
    Tokyo, Japan
    Damn there are so many new bad amateurish simple games in the iTunes App Store everyday. They seem like they were coded by 8-year-olds. It is almost impossible to find the good games. Anyone who has a day of coding experience under his belt can put a game there. I'm starting to think that it should be licensed and only people with a few years of coding under their belt and who has achieved a specified level of competence should be allowed to sell their games. Either that or there should be two categories: Good Games, and Shit Games.
     
  2. ThreeCubes

    ThreeCubes Well-Known Member

    Oct 13, 2012
    743
    0
    0
    Well at the moment apple thinks it helps sells there phone. The make most of the money on the hardware and they want to prove they have loads of apps for it.

    If they did seperate the apps then there would be like 5000 in the good category and 700000 in the shit one.

    Maybe at some point they will decide its quality and not quantity.
     
  3. dancj

    dancj Well-Known Member

    Jan 25, 2011
    967
    4
    18
    They already do. That's one of the differences between iOS and Android.
     
  4. AlienSpace

    AlienSpace Well-Known Member

    May 28, 2010
    416
    0
    16
    Independent developer
    I agree that it'd be nice if there were 2 tiers. The bottom tier would be basically what's there now... meaning minimal checks and requirements to be allowed into the App Store. The top tier would have higher standards and possibly even a per-app submission fee. This alone would cut down on the thousands of crapware that gets shoveled into the store every week.

    Of course the question then becomes what exactly would the top-tier requirement and standards be. I dont have an answer to this, as it would almost certainly involve a certain amount of subjectivity. Anything that you could think of that would not be subjective on the part of reviewers would lend itself to gaming of the system very easily.
     
  5. Rubicon

    Rubicon Well-Known Member

    Feb 22, 2011
    1,535
    1
    0
    Lead Programmer, Chief Bottlewasher
    Isle of Wight, UK
    I have an easy answer. It should cost $1,000 to submit a new app to the store. If it's nor capable of making that much, it's because it's shite. But that figure is also easily affordable to a serious dev and ridiculous to those just punting out "my first snake"
     
  6. psj3809

    psj3809 Moderator

    Jan 13, 2011
    12,747
    543
    113
    England
    I like the vast selection and enjoy spending time scanning the app store trying to find some 'hidden' gem. Yes there appears (to me) to be a lot of rubbish games yet on the other hand people have such varied tastes.

    A lot of games i cant stand (Angry Birds/Tiny Wings) are huge huge hits !

    Then theres games i love (old retro style graphics which seem to turn a lot of kids off) and kids hate them.

    To me a platformer has left/right/jump buttons, seems a platformer on iOS is an endless runner with one button to jump.

    So i think 'keep the crap in' as we all have different tastes, theres screenshots/youtube/reviews to check and if after that you take a chance and the games rubbish you've lost a dollar or so (thank god its not like the 80's where you wasted $12 on hard earned pocket money on some bad title)
     
  7. dancj

    dancj Well-Known Member

    Jan 25, 2011
    967
    4
    18
    I just use the Popular tab in AppShopper I filter out the crap.
     
  8. ChaoticBox

    ChaoticBox Well-Known Member

    Oct 8, 2008
    878
    6
    18
    Male
    Developer
    Toronto Canada
    Apple's own guidelines contain an "amateur hour" clause (quoted verbatim) warning that "cobbled together" or "practice" apps will get rejected. But the reviewers let in new garbage/reskins/templates/scams daily. I'd hate to see the crap they actually reject!
     
  9. AlienSpace

    AlienSpace Well-Known Member

    May 28, 2010
    416
    0
    16
    Independent developer
    I agree that any decent game/app will make this much back eventually, but it's still daunting for an indie to pay this much up front. Because of the nature of the App Store even good games can be buried by the crap, and so even good games can make very little. A good game that might make a couple thousand dollars will now see it's income drop by 50%. So, this would discourage crap but also good games from small indie devs.

    But like I said before, adding even a small(ish) fee will get rid of a ton of the crap, say around $100. Then add stricter review standards. Finally, you could have the 2-tier thing, but allow games/apps to enter the top tier by being popular in the App Store. So, take your $1000 requirement... what if a game has to make $1000 in order to make it to the "top tier"? Now we have a decent system... we've cut out a lot of the crap and have an unbiased method (relies on sales numbers) to move "good" games to a higher more visible tier.
     
  10. deemen

    deemen Well-Known Member

    Mar 16, 2013
    50
    0
    0
    It's interesting that you guys are advocating more strict control over apps in the App Store. As a dev, I wish Apple would stop telling us what to do (for instance not being able to download and run LUA code from the web, according to the TOS).

    To me, wading through the crap is an app discoverability problem. Google might have a slight edge there, they already have the search technology. I don't see too many apps being a problem, as long as the crap is buried deep in the store and the good stuff floats to the top (like Google search rankings).
     
  11. AlienSpace

    AlienSpace Well-Known Member

    May 28, 2010
    416
    0
    16
    Independent developer
    Different issues. I can see why they wouldnt want downloadable code because that basically negates the approval process. You can submit anything you want and then change it later with new downloaded code. So, I have no problem with that rule.

    That's why I'm not proposing stricter controls, just more levels of control. This would help exactly what you're talking about, discoverability. Players will know that if they go to the Top Tier AppStore section they will see a smaller subset of games, that will generally have better quality and value than they Bottom Tier ones. Developers dont need to do anything differently, or be subjected to any more strict criteria. But, if they want to be in the Top Tier then they can opt in by making their game better, pass the higher standards certification, and once their game sells more than $1,000 (or whatever) their game automatically moves to that tier. That seems like a good compromise to me.

    Here's what I propose:
    -get rid of the $100/year developer fee
    -add a $100/game submission fee
    -add an extra "Top Tier" certification (w/ some small fee... maybe $50)
    -for games that have the Top Tier certification, once they make $1000 they move up to the Top Tier section of the App Store
    -change the "New & Noteworthy" section to give games that have passed the Top Tier Cert, preference over non-certified games, or maybe do a 50/50 split.

    There you go, simple. For developers that submit 1 game per year or less, this doesnt cost them any more... and might actually cost less. It also disincentivizes those who submit tons of crap games, since right now it doesnt cost anything to submit a new app to the store. So overall we'll get fewer crap games, a higher percentage of quality ones, and get a new section with better quality games in the store for better/easier discoverability for customers.
     
  12. deemen

    deemen Well-Known Member

    Mar 16, 2013
    50
    0
    0
    That's what I mean. I don't want to have to deal with an approval process. Used properly, being able to download LUA code would make apps as flexible as web-apps are right now. As a developer, this is a good thing.

    This is the business model of consoles, where a cert can cost $10,000+, and I think it's a bad thing. We should be fighting for more open platforms, not closed one. Granted that means putting up with crapware, but there are better ways to deal with that than arbitrary fees and approval processes imposed on developers. Having a class-based system of developers will only further entrench the top players in the app store (EA, Supercell, Zynga, etc.).

    I think the cost of trying to stop the crap games is too great. Let shitty developers make crap games, but feature the best games in a curated store. This does not mean adding more cert requirements! Cert requirements are total shit. I hope Apple will do away with app certification altogether at some point (pipe dream). The only thing they need to prevent is fraud and obvious scams.
     
  13. MidianGTX

    MidianGTX Well-Known Member

    Jun 16, 2009
    3,738
    10
    38
    And that's going to make it easier to find quality apps, how?
     
  14. deemen

    deemen Well-Known Member

    Mar 16, 2013
    50
    0
    0
    More developer freedom = better apps. I am in favor of solving the problem with better search and discovery rather than more restrictions / certs.
     
  15. I kinda wish there was maybe a top 100 list, where you could filter app store contents based on their past rankings. Only apps that had gained access to the top 100 list at anytime in the past would be shown. Or something like that.
     
  16. k1lljoy_89

    k1lljoy_89 Well-Known Member

    Nov 25, 2011
    5,783
    0
    0
    Look out your window.
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  17. AlienSpace

    AlienSpace Well-Known Member

    May 28, 2010
    416
    0
    16
    Independent developer
    So you dont want Apple in charge of approving games, but you want Apple in charge of determining which ones get promoted? Sorry, all you're doing is moving the intervention from one place to another.

    So if you're saying is that you want zero approval process, then I disagree with this. Now, for YOU this might be a great idea, but for APPLE this is a terrible idea. And, since Apple is in the business of doing what's best for them and not what's best for you, then you might be out of luck.

    Personally I dont have a problem with Apple having an approval process, and actually I'd like it to be a more strict one. I'd still be fine with them allowing people to install unapproved apps if they want to, but I dont want them on the App Store. I think that having too little control is just as bad as having too much control. Too lax cert requirements can be as bad as too strict. Yes, consoles like Xbox and PS have historically had very, very strict controls.. and I think that's bad. But, too little and you end up with a huge pile of crap. Just look at what happened in the 80's when the gaming industry crashed. A big part of the problem was the large numbers of crappy games that saturated the market.
     
  18. Simengie

    Simengie Well-Known Member

    May 14, 2012
    101
    0
    0
    As a developer, you idea ruins good game like we put out that have made huge money on ads due to large downloads. By all measures these apps are top tier but your system would require revenue that apple tracks and would bury us in such a system.

    You want to get rid of crap games? Then remove the free tier and put us all back on cost equal quality model. As long as free is an option then expect crap apps. Better yet if it is a pay game from a non AAA studio good chance it is crap if priced at .99 or 1.99.

    I really feel a lot of folks are posting that have never had to get an app past Apple review. It is not as easy you think. Scammer exploit holes in the system and Apple is working to close them they find them. And I have seen images of stuff here on TA forums that was reject time after time because it was thar crappy. If you think what is there is crappy then you really have no idea how bad it can be.

    But your pay per app to be on store is just stupid.
     
  19. TheOctagonTheory

    TheOctagonTheory Well-Known Member

    Sep 7, 2011
    129
    0
    0
    semi-retired
    Tokyo, Japan
    I'm the guy who started this thread and I'm surprised to find that so many people agree with me. I thought I was breaking a taboo and I'd be run out of town on a rail.

    Anyway I have been through Apple's review system and I got my game through. Although it was my only game (I do have years of coding experience though) I think it's a quality game - it took 1.5 years to develop in my spare time after work. And the game got excellent reviews from established game industry publications - like Edge Online. But still the sales were unbelievably sad. I credit this partly to my lack of marketing skills but mostly due to the amount of crap smothering the good stuff and making the good stuff hard to find.

    So having had a game in the App Store I think I'm qualified to state an opinion. But I think AlienSpace had the best ideas on how to 'solve' the problem. I wish AlienSpace worked for Apple and was in charge of the App Store approval process.
     
  20. kaply

    kaply Well-Known Member

    Mar 29, 2013
    138
    0
    0
    #20 kaply, May 1, 2013
    Last edited: May 1, 2013
    Two major issues with the idea behind filtering out crap games.

    1. Your crap is someone else's gold. Everyone has different standards. Granted there are some out there that can almost universally be considered crap, but even then there might be some interesting implementation in there that makes it interesting for some one.

    2. Any time you place a restriction, it's an incentive for someone to break it and gain from it. Usually that someone will be the person with the bigger pocket and can afford to break the restrictions. Place a restriction requiring the developer to selling 1,000 games to get into a better tier? Lets start up some websites that just buy up 1,000 games to get it into the better tier. I'd imagine $1,000 for zynga, etc. isn't a big issue. It's basically forcing a base marketting scheme into selling an app that didn't exist before.
     

Share This Page