GS Review System
Hello!
What do you think about this idea: if you want to publish a game in GS (AppStore version, not adhoc), GameSalad team (maybe their workers, or sous-chefs - but I prefer the first one) have to review your game (like Apple), and approve it?
In that way, we would avoid low quality games (such as Father Simons) , which discredit the GameSalad tool.
I've hope that you understand what I'm talking about
Cheers!
What do you think about this idea: if you want to publish a game in GS (AppStore version, not adhoc), GameSalad team (maybe their workers, or sous-chefs - but I prefer the first one) have to review your game (like Apple), and approve it?
In that way, we would avoid low quality games (such as Father Simons) , which discredit the GameSalad tool.
I've hope that you understand what I'm talking about
Cheers!
Comments
Shadows Peak is an atmospheric psychological horror that explores the dark side of a player.
just my sanctimonious opinion...
kipper
If you can name one tool that takes this approach, you will be nominating an exception.
Personally I think Apple should weed out the games that are undeserving of their app store - or represent a rip-off to their customers (such as the game you mentioned).
The main problem is that there can sometimes be a fine line between artistic choices and (in someone elses eyes) poor design. Or maybe retro-graphics / poor quality graphics? Minimilistic sound design / incomplete sound? etc etc.
But I do know what you mean - it'd just be a tricky thing to implement
The best thing GameSalad could do is take away their free model and go back to be paid.
but just saying if u go though the content file inside the ipa u can know it is mage be GS
http://www.thatgameforum.com/
http://gshelper.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/GameSaladCookbook#p/
http://gamesalad.com/wiki/
http://www.deepblueapps.com/Deep_Blue_Ideas_Ltd./Home.html
http://www.gamesalad.es/
http://thatgameforum.com/threads/gs-videos.360/
my email: calvin9403@hotmail.com
my skype: calvin9403
Apple just needs to step it up and do their jobs right. Weed out the crap and stop allow obvious rip offs and half made games into the app store.
And Calvin how many people do you think have a clue or will spend the time screwing with and ipa to see what SDK was used. most people don't know what an SDK is.
No, Epic doesn't deal with approving games, especially when somebody has payed a cool $1.000.000 just to licence the SDK. They just make sure in the beginning that you can pay for it.
Imagine if you have spent 2 years and $10 million to develop a game, it turns out bad, and Epic doesn't allow you to publish it, it doesn't make any sense what you are suggesting here.
Only Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft or in this case Apple, are usually the only ones that can disapprove if they wanted to.
@ calvin when im on the forum on my iphone your signature alone takes up my whole screen. I think you can trim it down now
An upfront fee to buy the software on the app store would be a different matter though, i'd be quite willing to give the GameSalad people a one off $99 fee if the tools were solid, then I could buy a subscription for support and the most advanced features.
The way I look at it, the App Store is the antithesis of modern video games where only big companies can release console games due to the high cost of production. In the App Store, ANYONE can release an app. Sure, it makes the store crowded and more difficult to find things due to the sheer volume of apps. But that's the price you pay to have access to hundreds of thousands of free/low cost apps. Yes, most of them are crappy but to me, it's all worth it to find a $0.99 indie gem like Tiny Wings.
As far as GS is concerned, I think it's impractical for them to do quality checks. I'd rather they spent their resources (which is probably what they do) on making the GS SDK better. I've said it in other threads-- I'm all for $99/year for GS basic. I think GS basic is definitely worth it.
What do you guys think about having an a la carte option for the subscriptions? Basically, the idea is this. Basic would cost $99/year. Each feature that is currently in Pro could be added to your basic subscription on a per feature basis. So if you only need GC leaderboards, it would cost you Basic + X per year. They could have deals where if you add 2 or more features to your Basic subscription, the cost per added feature would be less. The current Pro membership would be kept as is and would be a bargain compared to paying for adding the features individually.
- Jeff
In response to the thread in general.
About charging $99/year, I don't think the quality would improve that much, and people would still release template based games, maybe even more so, to recoup cost even faster.
The only real solution is to not release templates unfortunately. If you look at professional games, how many templates can you buy from them, none, thats because they are protecting their IP. Even if a clone comes out a later date, it will never be the same, as the person who makes a clone still have to put all that time, money and effort into it.
It would be easy to do as you simply pay to authorize a single appID. Then with that appID you can build as many versions and adHocs as you like.
My suggestion would be $50 per app. I think that's reasonable with all the pro features in it.
Plus, keep it free for GS arcade publishing for those who just want to have a play around with the software.
In fact you could even leave the $500 subscription option as an 'unlimited appIDs' per year. I like this plan.
The Secret of Father Simons - poor, short, rip off. And it's selling pretty good with many, many one star reviews.
I could give you more examples.