The World Ends With You blocks iPad despite Apple's rules prohibiting that

[Greyskull]

Originally Posted by polycontrale

Admitting to piracy is never going to make you look good. But either way, it's just not going to be playable on an iPod touch. If you really bought it, ask Apple for a refund.

If he (or she) purchased the application, it isn't piracy. Please, don't attempt to convince me otherwise. I'm 33, and have owned "media" in every format imaginable. The DMCA doesn't circumvent (as of yet) the Fair Use doctrine derived from the SC case of Sony Corp. v. Universal Studios. It isn't morally wrong, which is more important to me, to be frank.

[JBRUU]

Originally Posted by GeekyDad

I think you should complain to Apple about it. If people are silent (other than complaining about it on a forum Apple doesn't care about), nothing gets done. Make a ruckus. Use whatever means are available to App Store customers to make your voice heard where it needs to be heard.

That's what I think.

Exactly.

[geoelectric]

Originally Posted by Greyskull

If he (or she) purchased the application, it isn't piracy. Please, don't attempt to convince me otherwise. I'm 33, and have owned "media" in every format imaginable. The DMCA doesn't circumvent (as of yet) the Fair Use doctrine derived from the SC case of Sony Corp. v. Universal Studios. It isn't morally wrong, which is more important to me, to be frank.

I both agree with you totally, and hope that we can discuss this in a different thread. This sort of debate has a nasty way of hijacking every thread it touches.

[Platyrrhine]

Originally Posted by Greyskull

If he (or she) purchased the application, it isn't piracy. Please, don't attempt to convince me otherwise. I'm 33, and have owned "media" in every format imaginable. The DMCA doesn't circumvent (as of yet) the Fair Use doctrine derived from the SC case of Sony Corp. v. Universal Studios. It isn't morally wrong, which is more important to me, to be frank.

Perhaps, but...

Originally Posted by aguyyyy

Actually, I DID buy this on iTunes initially after seeing that it was available on the App Store on my sister's iPhone, so I went to my computer and purchased it on iTunes there. However, when I tried to sync the IPA using iTunes to my iPod, it didn't let me. It was then I discovered that it wasn't compatible with the iPod Touch, so yes, I then went to I********s (yes, I have it and I do occasionally pirate other apps) and then downloaded the IPA. Before I installed, I then copied the pirated IPA to my computer just in case and deleted the useless IPA from iTunes knowing that I could not transfer it via iTunes, but I would still be able to download it from iTunes if needed. So yes, I too lost $18 and I'm trying to figure out a way to get it to work on my iPod. I thought that a game like TWEwY was actually so good when I first played it on my friend's DS that I felt like supporting the devs and paying for it for once.

Would you like to hear the story of my entire life now? :P

...that changes things!

Anywho, I haven't purchased the game or any other game by SE as their games don't interest me, but I vote we start a revolution and storm their HQ.

[Greyskull]

Originally Posted by geoelectric

I both agree with you totally, and hope that we can discuss this in a different thread. This sort of debate has a nasty way of hijacking every thread it touches.

Yes, I know. It wouldn't be an issue if people simply took a common sense approach to it. Perhaps some users are too young to even remember the pre-digital mediascape; when ownership was implied as opposed to licensing. I tell you one thing, consumers are a lot more willing to take it in the rear then they had in the past.

I know there are plenty of users here that have extensive ROM collections. Ya know, those are legal to own if you have a physical copy of the original. IMO, it's also perfectly moral if you had owned a copy which is unuseable for any reason aside from having sold it.

I wonder how many TA users know that there used to be PC software rental shops.

Sorry if anyone thinks I've threadjacked; this is just an issue that drives me up a wall.

[polycontrale]

Originally Posted by Greyskull

Yes, I know. It wouldn't be an issue if people simply took a common sense approach to it. Perhaps some users are too young to even remember the pre-digital mediascape; when ownership was implied as opposed to licensing. I tell you one thing, consumers are a lot more willing to take it in the rear then they had in the past.

I know there are plenty of users here that have extensive ROM collections. Ya know, those are legal to own if you have a physical copy of the original. IMO, it's also perfectly moral if you had owned a copy which is unuseable for any reason aside from having sold it.

I wonder how many TA users know that there used to be PC software rental shops.

Sorry if anyone thinks I've threadjacked; this is just an issue that drives me up a wall.

I'm anything but young (I'm older than you), and I'm actually one of the people encouraging others to go ahead and modify the ipa they purchased. The person I replied to did, in fact, admit to pirating other apps (as was noted by the poster above you), and that's what I was referring to. So... Yeah.

[chaos_envoys]

I can confirm that the iphone ver of the game plays well on the ipad 3..
I modded my itunes bought .ipa file to make it compatible with ipad and installed using "that" application, and the game plays really well.. The menu is crisp and the field is a little pixelated using 2x mode.. No crash so far..

[imdakine1]

I wonder if TA would consider moving this forum to an article since this issue impacts us as consumers but also companies producing ios apps. All companies producing ios apps need to be held to the same standard. One of the reasons the ios apps are so popular is that it has allowed small and independent game companies or app companies to produce across platforms.

We won't have .99 - 4.99 priced apps if only the large game and app companies produced and the apple or android systems wouldn't be as popular. I'm not against paying $19.99 or $17.99 although I am unsure which version to get since I hear the ipad version is not even supported for the retina display but I am against having major companies not play by the same rules.

Lastly, this can have a BIGGER implication which is other app companies can start looking for loop holes as well and since so many new apps make it into the market apple can't stop all of the companies that are doing something like this... In turn this can actually have a negative impact to the openness of small companies being able or willing to do universal apps or keep this prices low etc...

I'm not a tech person and have no clue if what square has done is close to breaking the rules or not but it does seem fishy... Although I know square has not ever done universal apps I don't know if they have blocked an iphone app to be used on the ipad or not??? If not, this is a bad precedent for them to begin and one that needs to be strongly considered by Apple.

I believe TA has a strong voice and one that can make a difference with this issue. We as consumers unfortunately are weaker (not by #'s) but by media coverage or apple caring...

I strongly urge TA to consider exploring this issue from the long-term impact this may cause ios and apps in the future... I also think they need to defend and prevent other smaller companies from the harm this may cause ios apps as well as make sure ALL companies are held to the same scrutiny and rules.

[JJE]

It would seem to me that this is a badly executed gambit on the part of SqE to compel iPad owners to purchase the iPad version. Although why anyone would want to use a graphically rich iPhone app on their iPad, aside from being able to boast of saving a few bucks on an app that comes to market with a hefty price tag, is beyond me.
Whether I get a premium product on my iPad with their iPad version is another question altogether.
Apple has certainly been caught short. Where they might be forgiven for missing smaller devs who have tried the same thing, allowing SqE to play hanky-poo with the Dev License Agreement simply cannot be allowed.

[geoelectric]

Originally Posted by imdakine1

I wonder if TA would consider moving this forum to an article since this issue impacts us as consumers but also companies producing ios apps.

I tweeted about this to Hodapp before posting in the boards here. He never replied, so my guess is as of that point there was no interest. Possible if this gets momentum in the boards that might change.

It's a shame, because I feel this really needs visibility. Beyond feeling personally a little screwed, I'm concerned it will break the tablet ecosystem.

I work for Mozilla, and see the pain of developing for Android firsthand. When you develop for a phone, your stuff often won't work on tablets. And when it works on this tablet here, it might not work on this tablet there. One of the reasons iOS is great is because device->tablet compatibility is assured, and because (generally) forward compatibility is assured.

When a developer does something--whether intentional or not--that changes that, I feel it has to be swatted quickly. Otherwise it's legitimized for all developers, and we'll be siloed on device just like Android is.

That's so many more times true for a large developer like Square Enix. This method of lockout just cannot contribute to a high-profile success story, or we'll all pay the price.