App rejected twice for forced Ad

EpicfaylEpicfayl Member Posts: 3
edited March 2012 in iPhone and Android Publishing
So, I called apple. They told me that you can't charge for an app that requires the user to click anything to continue to the app itself.
My test app has the playhaven on startup with "yes" or "no thanks" ad.
Is this the wave of the future and I need to learn to code instead?
I was cool with the gamesalad splash screen. I dig gamesalad.
Is playhaven going to continue to add in "forced ads?"
Is this a go free or pay, ultimatum?
My last submission was rejected two weeks ago. I resubmitted the same app repackaged by gamesalad hoping for a different reviewer or different ad, but same story.
HALP.
«1

Comments

  • CloudsClouds Member Posts: 1,599
    I think SaladStraightShooter is dealing with a few of these at the moment, maybe PM him.
  • tenrdrmertenrdrmer Member, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-Chef Posts: 9,934
    yep you need to send this into GS so they can address it specifically. Also be sure to include the email from apple and any screenshots they sent back. It seems apple has a reviewer that needs his nut sack cut off and is interpreting the guidelines differently than intended. many many games have some form of check this out or click no thanks ads at the start of them.
    Warning There was an error rendering this rich post.
  • EpicfaylEpicfayl Member Posts: 3
    Thanks for the tip. I did.

    My fault I guess, but I waited (it's been about two weeks since the first rejection)
    for others to post about it, and didn't see anything.
    Thought it was odd that I was the only one having this issue with "forced ad."

    Anyway, thanks all.
  • simo103simo103 Member, PRO Posts: 1,331
    @Epicfayl .... I have seen the other posts from people in the same position as you ... this is the Apple wording:
    "We found that your app requires customers to view advertisements prior to using it, which is inconsistent with the recommendations in the iOS Human Interface Guidelines. Complying with the iOS Human Interface Guidelines is required by the App Store Review Guidelines. People use your application to get things done or to be entertained; they don’t want to feel as if they’re being forced to watch an advertisement."

    I kind of like Apple trying to keep a level of quality ... I think it has been stated before by many that they wish Apple would be stricter to keep crap out. I also think in the case of the rejected Apps ... it is a reviewer following the directions ... and those that got thru were by a reviewer not paying attention .. just like how some get thru without selecting dual orientations etc.

    Lastly if they are rejecting you for having the ad ... and that can't be resolved .. you could consider upgrading back to 0.9.90 so you could publish pre-Playhaven ad:

    http://forums.gamesalad.com/discussion/40244/cool-tip-for-changing-the-gs-version-number-in-your-project

    Lastly would anyone who has an App on the store that has Playhaven enabled in a PAID app .. please consider posting their game link here so the comments in iTunes can be monitored to see if this is at all an issue with customers.
  • EpicfaylEpicfayl Member Posts: 3
    Simo103, thanks for the roll back tip. I'll do that tonight.
    I assumed whatever the packaging was on gamesalad's side would
    implement the play haven coding.
    Yay!
  • DigiChainDigiChain Member, PRO Posts: 1,288
    I wonder how many people are having their GS apps rejected by Apple due to playhaven?

    I'm awaiting review now and it does make me wonder whether I should reject the binary and republish with an older version of GS - I'll be pretty fed up if its rejected because of the ads and I have to wait another week for them to look at it again!
  • jnica23jnica23 Member Posts: 47
    I just got my game approved with the ad... http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/the-grid/id508521241?mt=8
  • BBEnkBBEnk Member Posts: 1,764
    I had one approved two days ago with basic version of GS with ads no problems.
  • EpicfaylEpicfayl Member Posts: 3
    David was my contact's name, though don't know how many of those there'll be.
    Appreciate the effort!
  • tenrdrmertenrdrmer Member, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-Chef Posts: 9,934
    edited March 2012
    @SSS this has happened to me quite frequently. By your response I can see that GS will continue to promote ads on our games. I'm not keen on having someone else's game advertised on mine. I doubt Apple with review their rules because of GS.
    Hey sorry to start what is likely going to be a flame war. but…. if you don't want ads for other games in your app. Then buy pro. You are using this service at 0 cost right now. and they working for a solution to the issue.
    Warning There was an error rendering this rich post.
  • jnica23jnica23 Member Posts: 47
    As someone who loves games, I will say that if I pay for a game and there is an ad in it, I'm not happy. As a game developer who wants to make games but can't afford $500 pro membership and there is nothing between pro and free - to have an ad placed at the start of my game - I feel like I can't charge people that $0.99... not that I can't but there's something that just feels wrong about it... and I think Apple should make a standard rule - no ads in apps that charge money! I know we all want to make a buck but there should be a line. IMHO this is a cheap way for GS to make a little money, at the same time disenfranchise the non pro members and force them to look for different alternatives. T-shirt Booth tweeted about one such alternative the other day, and I will say it looks very interesting at a fraction of the cost of GS pro...
  • heathccheathcc Member Posts: 113
    edited March 2012
    With all due respect, I believe some Apple reviewers are viewing a paid application with advertisements as something users don't want or expect when they pay for an app. They are being a customer advocate based on the expectations of tens of millions of App Shoppers.

    But you guys are awesome and you deserve to be paid....

    PLEASE introduce a level of membership that is less than $500 with more limited features so a hobbyist or people learning the ropes can give you money :-). Example: I'll send you $100 right now if you remove the ads and make it like the free version used to be six weeks ago...but I can't do the Pro version yet.

    EDIT: I'd also be willing to pay a per App fee...

    Thanks- H
  • tenrdrmertenrdrmer Member, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-Chef Posts: 9,934
    Well they could always do away with Free iOS publishing and go back to the $99 to publish to a mobil platform. I think that would be pretty awesome personally.
    Warning There was an error rendering this rich post.
  • DigiChainDigiChain Member, PRO Posts: 1,288
    I still don't really see 15-1 as being a good figure. It must mean there are a hell of a lot of GS apps being rejected right now!

    I fully understand GS seeking a way to make money, but seems it was foolish to introduce something that clearly isn't established as being acceptable within Apples guidlines...
  • UnicornInvasionUnicornInvasion Member Posts: 301
    Play Haven is causing so many problems! Can't we make it optional?
  • mynameisacemynameisace Hull, UKMember Posts: 2,484
    edited March 2012
    Trying to avoid causing a flame well also (if no flame war starts, we've done well @tenrdrmer haha)...

    Photoshop or paying a freelance artist to create art costs money.
    Logic Pro or paying a freelance musician to create music costs money.
    Gamesalad is already offering a HUGELY generous service in being able to download the software and develop a million games for FREE... The huge bonus is that users are able to publish to iOS, Mac and HTML5 for FREE... That is incredible... Just think about it for a minute, you are given the option to make money using Gamesalad for no money. Gamesalad are a business and need to make money or the coders don't get paid and then development stops.

    Ace
  • jnica23jnica23 Member Posts: 47
    Is there a download for the old version without Play Haven?
  • MotherHooseMotherHoose Member Posts: 2,456
    @mynameisace … many great things in life are free … many come without 3rd party advertisements:
    Example: This is Free!
    and, MIT's new online appInventor will be free when released.

    Gimp is free and has many more features than Photoshop
    Seashore is free
    Inkscape is free
    GarageBand is free
    Xcode is free

    Love GameSalad … but an ad in a game does not mean that GS is totally free … nothing is free when money changes hands …
    Would love to give GS $500 … but need to have value for that money … not just ways to make more money from consumers.
    I've done professional beta-testing for years … cannot recall any company ever charging fees for beta versions of anything!

    IMO (and all this post is my opinion) I almost believe that GS does not intend to make any monies from PH ads
    … but does intend to make money from forcing members to upgrade to Pro to get rid of those ads.

    Ultimately, gameEngines should not strive to control the content of developers' program …
    and GS developers being forced to pay $500 or have their appsContent appended by an arbitrary and mayhap offensive ad … is appalling!

    I want GS to be successful … I am grateful for what they do … I would gladly pay a $99/yr. for publishing capabilities.

    and, Ace, I am not going to mention October 2010 and your reaction to GS publishing your games under their name.

    @jnica23 … there are many places online that still have the download for 0.9.90 … Here is one!

    @};- MH
    "Games lubricate the body and the mind." — Benjamin Franklin
  • LeonardDeveloperLeonardDeveloper Member Posts: 4,630
    edited March 2012
    @tenrdrmer
    Well they could always do away with Free iOS publishing and go back to the $99 to publish to a mobil platform. I think that would be pretty awesome personally.
    My view exactly... Maybe $99 per platform.... It would certainly give stencil a quick in the a*s
    Anyway, I don't think tehyre going to be changing from free in a long time...
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For all those saying shouldn't we make play haven optional... or get rid of it...
    That is just in my opinion a load of crap... GS is letting you use their service for completely free, Its just an ad, Really just an insignificant add... No other SDK lets you make apps as easy as GS lets them make for complete free... You're making apps, Without code... You should be paying GS.. Be thankful its free,
    Cheers,
    J.Leonard
    Warning There was an error rendering this rich post.
  • hellopoophellopoop Removed Posts: 1
    edited March 2012
    Just to clear the air here. Know one has said anything about not being thankful for GS. GS is company, not a charity. If GS wasn't profitable already then they wouldn't have continue with business. They can make profit elsewhere.
  • simo103simo103 Member, PRO Posts: 1,331
    edited March 2012
    @LeonardDeveloper ... Jack I don't think anyone is unappreciative of what GS does. What is being said ... IMO ... is that please GS make an entry level fee for basic (free to play around with and publish to arcade, maybe $99 to publish to iOS and PRO like it is). You see the objection to Playhaven is this: Rightly or wrongly it is perceived by customers as BS ... paying for a game and then getting ads. Apples objection to it also states this ... "People use your application to get things done or to be entertained; they don’t want to feel as if they’re being forced to watch an advertisement." So it makes anything produced by the FREE community as negative right from the get-go, which could impact sales etc.
    How much money will GS make off Playhaven anyway .. doubt it would be more than $99 per year from me ... so take my money!
    Lastly it was GS business model to make it free to use. They are a business not a charity so they must have seen some $$ benefit from mass adoption of the software. Now if I believed for a second that a Playhaven like idea was their plan all along then ok but there has been numerous shifts in ways to make money in the last year or so (and beyond) so I am convinced a lot of this stuff is being 'made up as they go along' and like in the past .. customer feedback can help them shape a better plan ... I believe your free customers are saying .... take Playhaven away (optionally) and let us pay you $99!
    My real 'lastly' this time .... a lot of push back against this has been if you are a real business then $500 per year isn't much money .... well GS stated goal is for everyone to make games .... so many here aren't in business, some do it for a hobby, some for education, some for fun .... perhaps we don't want/need Pro features but we don't want our apps to make customers feel like they are getting shafted. I can't for the life of me think of a reason that GS doesn't do the Free/$99/$500 pay scale ... it seems to fix all the issues and wishes of the GS community! Don't you think it better your customers 'want to' pay you money than 'have to' to avoid a perceived negative!
  • LeonardDeveloperLeonardDeveloper Member Posts: 4,630
    @simo103
    I completley agree simon...
    as stated yes going back to $99 would do the world good.. But I don't think GS are in a decision of even considering that now...
    But for example @unicorninvasion "Play Haven is causing so many problems! Can't we make it optional?" No, We can't not unless we find GS another form of income from the freebies of the community..
    Warning There was an error rendering this rich post.
  • tenrdrmertenrdrmer Member, Sous Chef, Senior Sous-Chef Posts: 9,934
    @simo103 I have to disagree with you on one point. There are a lot of users who are completely unappreciative of what GS is giving them for free. Its bound to happen when we have so many underage kids who are used to not paying for anything the can torrent online. its not that they don't want to pay. they don't feel they should have to because they feel they are entitled to the world at no cost. Im not talking about everyone or any one user in particular but surly we agree we have a large amount of users here who fall right into this category.
    Warning There was an error rendering this rich post.
  • simo103simo103 Member, PRO Posts: 1,331
    @tenrdrmer .... good point ... I guess with the general discussion over this issue, I (and I think a few others) felt all FREE users where getting thrown into the same boat ... and I know that wasn't anyones intention. Yes I agree with your point ... and still a 3 tier price scheme would fix this (and better still ... slow down a little of the junk hitting the app store perhaps). Anyway ... hope GS at least consider it.
  • jnica23jnica23 Member Posts: 47
    edited March 2012
    I agree with the 3 tier pricing. The GS community right now is either in the poor or rich class. There needs to be a middle. And I want people to know that I think GS is a great tool for developing games and I've learned a lot using it but it's frustrating when you don't have the money for a pro membership and you want to make your game the best it can be, you become limited in what your game can offer. My initial intention was to make about 5 games or so with the free version of GS and what ever revenue I received I would use to buy the pro membership. That was my plan. And it still is my plan. I want to make games! But when I saw the PlayHaven ad instead of the GS splash screen i felt discouraged. I felt that charging people for my game with an ad in it... personally I wouldn't like that... and that it would hurt sales and reviews... but that's yet to be seen, since my first day only 2 people downloaded my game and the 2nd day only 1...

    Yesterday I decided to make my game free and see if there is any increase in downloads. Right now the game market is so saturated that if you dont have some kind of marketing plan or ad, your game is bound to drown in the shtload of games out there... so in a way I can understand PlayHaven and ads... but I would much rather have my game on PlayHaven than PlayHaven in my game...

    if anyone is interested, this is my game...
    http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/the-grid/id508521241?mt=8

    @MotherHoose thanks for the link. Is there a download for the viewer as well? that would be awesome.
  • bazookaBenbazookaBen Member Posts: 318
    My initial intention was to make about 5 games or so with the free version of GS and what ever revenue I received I would use to buy the pro membership. That was my plan. And it still is my plan. I want to make games! But when I saw the PlayHaven ad instead of the GS splash screen i felt discouraged. I felt that charging people for my game with an ad in it... personally I wouldn't like that... and that it would hurt sales and reviews... but that's yet to be seen, since my first day only 2 people downloaded my game and the 2nd day only 1...

    i think the key here is risk vs. reward.

    If you had paid $500 upfront for a Pro, it would be far less frustrating trying to circumvent all the barriers in the Free account. This increases your ability to make a better game, hence increasing your probability of success.

    my gut says, that in the offices of GameSalad, there is a chart showing how much revenue Pro users are making, vs Free users. There's bound to be a massive difference.




  • Holderness_Media_IncHolderness_Media_Inc Member Posts: 118
    So has anyone successfully re-submitted their rejected app and gotten approved? My newest app Waviary was just rejected because of the PlayHaven ad, same as the other threads about it. Seems like re-submitting would be pointless, as it will be the exact same problem. :/
  • MotherHooseMotherHoose Member Posts: 2,456
    IMO … Apple may flag a rejected app … thus when resubmitted … send the update to the tester that rejected it … or attach the reason for rejection to it … to make sure the problem(s) is corrected.

    image MH
  • Holderness_Media_IncHolderness_Media_Inc Member Posts: 118
    Not sure if the forums are working or not at the moment, but I'll try anyways.
    Is there any way possible to get my rejected app approved if I re-submit? I've been advertising it as being released on the 23rd, I gave myself plenty of time, the app went into review and got rejected right away because of PlayHaven. This is really frustrating because it's the first app I've had that's already generating a tiny bit of buzz with no marketing, just from tweeting the Youtube trailer. People are excited and looking forward to it, and I feel it will do well in sales.

    http://www.ehmac.ca/showthread.php?p=1180510#post1180510
    http://www.idesignsound.com/coming-soon-new-ipad-instrument-from-holderness-media/


    I tried doing the tip to change GS versions on the project, but it won't open in GS 0.9.90, just crashes immediately.
    I don't like complaining about free software, but this PlayHaven stuff is honestly awful.

    I planned to upgrade to Pro with the money I make from Waviary, but between PlayHaven, the Mac publishing problem last month, no Universal support even on the horizon, etc. has forced me to seriously consider switching to another SDK. Please GS, tell me it's gonna be ok. Tell me you still love me, I want to stay, baby. Lol
    Just being goofy, I appreciate everything GS does, but I am stressing on this one a bit.
  • MotherHooseMotherHoose Member Posts: 2,456
    @Holderness_Media_Inc … how did you do the version changes?

    this tool works well: TextFinderX …
    Search .91 and Replace with .90 … save as a copy …

    also note that .91 has to have been removed or zipped to stop overriding opening projects.

    republish with GS … once you resubmit to Apple …
    you can ask to have the review expedited …

    image MH
Sign In or Register to comment.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2024