Apple relaxes App Store rules to allow game streaming

[Hanno Labuschagne]

Apple relaxes App Store rules to allow game streaming

Apple Inc. adjusted its App Store review guidelines to loosen restrictions on iPhone and iPad games that stream directly from the internet and in-app purchase rules that have frustrated developers.

The changes are relatively small. But they suggest Apple is listening to app makers that have complained about the company’s stringent guidelines.

Apple is not changing its 15% to 30% fees taken from app downloads, in-app purchases and subscriptions, but Friday’s update means that these fees will be applied in fewer cases.

[Bloomberg]

 

[elf_lord_ZC5]

Just make your games, playable in a browser, sidestep the whole issue.

 

[system32]

The new rules will still require games to be submitted individually.

Google, Microsoft, Nvidia Corp, etc not going to be happy.

It's a streaming service - just like music and movie.
Music & movie streaming don't require each song / movie to be review and approved by Apple.

 

[system32]

Just make your games, playable in a browser, sidestep the whole issue.

These are game streaming services - the game runs in the cloud.
Perhaps WebAssembly could give them the control they need.

The issue is that as I consumer I own the device and Apple is not allowing side loading on MY device.

 

[friedpiggy]

One of my main gripes about apple products. Its my frikken device and I should be able to use it for what I want, not have some corporate clown who has his panties in a bunch denying me the right to play xyz game because they cant get a 30% cut.

 

[CataclysmZA]

It's a streaming service - just like music and movie.
Music & movie streaming don't require each song / movie to be review and approved by Apple.

Indeed, but there are games on xCloud and Stadia that offer in-app purchases, and Apple's ToS specifically forbids this.

While this does protect Apple's revenue stream, it also protects consumers who have locks on purchases on their account from accidentally overspending because their kid is buying Fortnite skins. Apple's main motiviation in their court challenge to Epic is based around this idea that their account-wide measures are there to protect consumers from overspending and fraud in applications that may seek to hijack their banking details.

The workaround is fine enough. You're not going to be playing a dozen games on xCloud, so having dedicated icons on the homescreen that launch xCloud instances for those specific games is not difficult to implement for Microsoft and Google.

 

[system32]

Indeed, but there are games on xCloud and Stadia that offer in-app purchases, and Apple's ToS specifically forbids this.

While this does protect Apple's revenue stream, it also protects consumers who have locks on purchases on their account from accidentally overspending because their kid is buying Fortnite skins. Apple's main motiviation in their court challenge to Epic is based around this idea that their account-wide measures are there to protect consumers from overspending and fraud in applications that may seek to hijack their banking details.

The workaround is fine enough. You're not going to be playing a dozen games on xCloud, so having dedicated icons on the homescreen that launch xCloud instances for those specific games is not difficult to implement for Microsoft and Google.

What about the children...
What about security...
Using those two excuses you can justify anything including Apples consumer unfriendly practices - ask Spotify, Netflix vs Apple Music and Apple TV.

This issue is that Apple uses the iStore to disadvantage consumers choice and impacts competing products like Google Stadia, MS xCloud, etc.

Fortunately there are a few antitrust investigations coming up which should help consumers.