They've said there will be a review process, and it sounds like it's going to be more restrictive than Apple's, though they are going to try and automate as much of it as possible.
I'm curious about the details of such a process. I think it would be a shame if they're as restrictive as Apple when it comes to "objectionable content". If the Ouya wants to be a serious hub for indie gaming, they're gonna have go in the other direction on this.
They have to be even more restrictive to be a serious hub for indie gaming. They won't be seen as serious if they allow every app that a hack threw together in 5 minutes to flood the console, and it'd seriously harm serious developers' ability to make money.
Where did you hear that, Dreamwriter? Everything I've read from them since the beginning has said the exactly opposite. They're going to let on any game that fulfills a few very basic requirements, such as having some free-to-play portion, and not being malicious or illegal. I'm trying to find some better quotes about it, since I know they've spoken on this topic, but here's one for now:
The Ouya store will have a minimal approval process that allows a wide variety of titles, Uhrman said, but there will be one requirement that is non-negotiable: every game on Ouya will be free-to-play in some form.
"Yes, we will have a requirements list at launch, but we don't have a list yet. Our goal is to keep the [technical requirements checklist] to a minimum, and focus primarily on legal issues (e.g. don't make a Mickey Mouse game if you're not Disney) rather than interface standards and the like."
The extreme openness of the store is one of the cornerstones of the platform.
Very interesting, thanks for the link, Dreamwriter! I'd been curious to see more from some of the recent meet-ups, so that's just the kind of video I was looking for. :)
I think no matter what criteria OUYA choose, no matter how high or low the bar is set, the process absolutely has to be transparent.
That for me is key. I should know before I even submit my game exactly what the criteria are, how they will be judged, and ideally who will be judging (even if it's just a generic "OUYA Store Representative", rather than an actual name).
Also, there is nothing worse than being rejected and not knowing the reasons why, or just getting a cut and paste response like "You did not meet the criteria". If I thought I didn't meet the criteria, I wouldn't have submitted!
If things are crystal clear, then firstly it'll cut down on the number of spurious submissions. Secondly, developers will know before they start a project what is needed to get on the OUYA store, and so don't pour their heart and soul into a game that is never likely to get approved. Thirdly, it'll prevent any feelings that the bigger developers with more money and/or contacts are able to somehow bypass the system. (And lets be honest, it'd take some mighty big balls for OUYA to turn around to Square and say "actually, you need to change x, y and z for final fantasy III to be approved". But any feelings of resentment from smaller devs can still be pre-empted at this stage)
It's all very well having open hardware, but if the store is closed and opaque, it's not going to make for an open console
I don't mind even a long review process as long as it is shortened to a minimum with later updates. Sometimes on Amazon I have to do a quick fix for critical bug that went unnoticed and I have to wait a week for the fix to be approved. Of course on OUYA you only have one hardware to worry about instead of thousands of phones and tablets - so it's less likely to have such bug (but still - IAP problems may need quick changes sometimes).
I totally agree on the transparency thing - as a veteran of the iOS Wars, for the first few years Apple's list of rules was vague, and you never knew if your app would be rejected or not. And the rejection notice was often vague too. They were hard (and very annoying) times, especially when you were used to Nintendo's large list of explicit lot-check rules.
They have to be even more restrictive to be a serious hub for indie gaming.
By 'objectionable', I meant Apple's restrictive unwillingness to publish content that they view as being politically or socially offensive or sensitive. That runs counter to my idea of what Ouya is all about, and it runs counter to the ethos of any indie movement that has arisen in any medium ever.
Apple stopped doing that long ago, that was in their vague era. Now they have a very specific set of guidelines, the only "objectionable" content they don't like is porn now.
I'll admit I'm not too familiar with iOS gaming. In the spirit of informing myself, I tried to go straight to the source to read their app guidelines, but apparently I have to have a developer account to access them (which I find a bit odd to be honest).
Anyway, I read a Wikipedia article on this topic, and then there was this:
In August 2012, Josh Begley created an iPhone app that sent out a Push notification whenever a US military Drone aircraft struck a target. The app was rejected, Apple finding the content "objectionable and crude"[36]
So that took place around the time Ouya was kickstarting last year. The article also mentions that they have guidelines against violence as well. As for pornography, I can see maybe why they wouldn't want that, but what of nudity, especially in a sexual but not explicit context? I would hope Ouya would be more open to these sorts of sexual, political, and social things that Apple's so-called walled garden doesn't seem to want to be a part of.
There was also Endgame: Syria which was rejected for being too political. That raised all sorts of interesting questions not only about the conflict itself, but about the rights and wrongs of making a conflict that is still ongoing, and exploring it through a game.
That is the sort of game that could really mark OUYA out as a platform where you don't just get run-of-the-mill, 'neutral' games, but games that really push the medium to new and exciting places
Verge: "OUYA will filter for pornography, not quality"
On whether the market will fill up with low quality games:
"It's a possibility, for sure: Uhrman told us that while Ouya will conduct a 'light review' to filter out copyright infringement, malware, and pornography, there's no standard for quality."
So, I think that's what they were referring to with the "wild west" comment, not just some subjective quality curation.
They very specifically mentioned crap games that it looked like a developer only took 5 minutes working on, in association to that "wild west" comment.
"We don't want the store to become a dumping ground for every app that's written in 5 minutes, that someone thinks they should be able to charge for...We have absolutely no interest in making it a Wild West open festival for everyone that can hack a quick app together."
That doesn't sound at all like he was talking about copyright infringement, malware, or pornography.
If you want to have an open market app store succeed, you need to solve discoverability. In other words, anyone can publish a game, the higher the game quality, the more it succeeds.
OUYA has a blank slate: they can make the store any way they see fit. They also have limited time. But along with the games themselves, this will define the actual user experience of the OUYA, and ultimately, make or break it
Well, two things. For one, consider the source of the quotes. One of them is by a medium-level guy giving a presentation to a couple dozen people. The other quote was given by the CEO at a massive public press event.
The second thing is that I don't think that quote is quite so clear-cut as you think it is. He doesn't really specify what level of quality he's talking about. I think he's talking about games that are so hacked together and broken that they could be considered malware, and the quote from Uhrman seems to back that up.
They very specifically mentioned crap games that it looked like a developer only took 5 minutes working on, in association to that "wild west" comment.
"We don't want the store to become a dumping ground for every app that's written in 5 minutes, that someone thinks they should be able to charge for...We have absolutely no interest in making it a Wild West open festival for everyone that can hack a quick app together.
There are two terms that are used there: "every app that's written in 5 minutes" and "hack a quick app together". A game thrown together in 5 minutes isn't just low quality, it's outright non-functional. And, in a way, that makes it "malware".
"Malware" is a tricky subject. Technically, I suppose you could say that it only refers to software that is intended to break things and cause problems. But it doesn't actually matter what the intent was; if an app that causes problems or is just outright broken, it doesn't matter to the user or to the store whether that was intended or not.
Why do I bring this up? Because when people get their app denied or banned and the stated reason is "malware", there are going to be people who say they're innocent, and the app wasn't intend to cause problems. Now, whoever works at OUYA approving/denying apps could try to look through every case and do their best to figure out whether the author really meant to create malware or not. But that would be a lot of effort, take a lot of time, and honestly it just doesn't matter.
It reminds me of forum trolling; as a mod, you may ban someone for trolling and they may say they weren't trying to be a jerk. But it doesn't really matter; if they won't stop posting in a way that causes problems, they have to go, either way. It's the same with apps. If someone makes an broken, problematic app, it has to go, whether it's intended to be malware or not.
Point is, they say that (besides legal issues like copyright and pornography) the only issue they'll really be watching for is malware... but that category includes any non-functional app by default, since OUYA has no way of knowing whether it's "real" malware or not.
GaussIon
Posts: 0Member
Dreamwriter
Posts: 768Member
Answers
It was mentioned at the Q&A in the recent get-together in the UK. Here, it's right at the beginning of this video, like a minute in.
http://skillsmatter.com/podcast/home/qa-for-first-ouya-meetup
"We have absolutely no interest in making it a Wild West open festival for everyone that can hack a quick app together."
That for me is key. I should know before I even submit my game exactly what the criteria are, how they will be judged, and ideally who will be judging (even if it's just a generic "OUYA Store Representative", rather than an actual name).
Also, there is nothing worse than being rejected and not knowing the reasons why, or just getting a cut and paste response like "You did not meet the criteria". If I thought I didn't meet the criteria, I wouldn't have submitted!
If things are crystal clear, then firstly it'll cut down on the number of spurious submissions. Secondly, developers will know before they start a project what is needed to get on the OUYA store, and so don't pour their heart and soul into a game that is never likely to get approved. Thirdly, it'll prevent any feelings that the bigger developers with more money and/or contacts are able to somehow bypass the system. (And lets be honest, it'd take some mighty big balls for OUYA to turn around to Square and say "actually, you need to change x, y and z for final fantasy III to be approved". But any feelings of resentment from smaller devs can still be pre-empted at this stage)
It's all very well having open hardware, but if the store is closed and opaque, it's not going to make for an open console
Website
That is the sort of game that could really mark OUYA out as a platform where you don't just get run-of-the-mill, 'neutral' games, but games that really push the medium to new and exciting places
Website
They very specifically mentioned crap games that it looked like a developer only took 5 minutes working on, in association to that "wild west" comment.
"We don't want the store to become a dumping ground for every app that's written in 5 minutes, that someone thinks they should be able to charge for...We have absolutely no interest in making it a Wild West open festival for everyone that can hack a quick app together."
That doesn't sound at all like he was talking about copyright infringement, malware, or pornography.
OUYA has a blank slate: they can make the store any way they see fit. They also have limited time. But along with the games themselves, this will define the actual user experience of the OUYA, and ultimately, make or break it
Website
There are two terms that are used there: "every app that's written in 5 minutes" and "hack a quick app together". A game thrown together in 5 minutes isn't just low quality, it's outright non-functional. And, in a way, that makes it "malware".