Apple's policy on Loot boxes?
Zuko_ILC
Member Posts: 1,524 ★★★★★
I've updated my game but don't see any of the disclosures? I believe this is game is now in violation of Apple policy so I'm not sure thats a good thing? Anyone know what's going on?
-2
Comments
Not sure what that means
There is your answer
Its apple GUIDELINES, not POLICY.
Only pertains to purchases with $$$. So only crystals directly purchased with $$$, purchase with units doesn't count because they can be earned in game.
100% to get a 5* champ suffices. Does not need to be broken down further.
That doesn't answer anything
All three of these statements are essentially false.
Apple's guidelines document is essentially a FAQ for app store approval. It is, for all intents and purposes, the primary source for app developers to reference for Apple's app store approval policies.
Everyone interpreting the guidelines in a sufficiently literal manner to claim that only cash purchases are affected by the lootbox clause are inconsistently failing to interpret the guidelines as stating when taken similarly literally that unit purchases are disallowed, because the guidelines clearly state that ALL in-app purchases must use the in-app purchase mechanism. In-game currencies are only implicitly allowed by virtue of statements guiding how they should be regulated. No actual statement says they are legal. So if only purchases with cash count for loot boxes, they should also only count for legal in-game unlocks, which means unit purchases are illegal. That is clearly a nonsensical position.
Apple doesn't specifically describe how the odds need to be described. But common sense dictates, and in every other case where a game company has disclosed odds they have interpreted the clause to mean, that the intent of the policy is to accurately describe rarity differences to the people buying the lootbox. But even if Apple doesn't require further break downs, Kabam already voluntarily states that within a rarity tier all champions are equally likely to drop. They already give the information you claim they do not need to give under Apple's guidelines.
As to why Kabam hasn't published odds, the fact that the app is in the app store implies it was approved. That means either the approval person failed to hold the app for this reason, Kabam convinced the app approval person that the odds were not necessary, Kabam intends to publish the odds soon and that was satisfactory for Apple, or Kabam negotiated a remediation process with Apple of a more complex nature.
Or Apple isn't currently serious about enforcing that guideline and wants to see how many game companies conform voluntarily. Before I start guessing which of those it is, I'll wait to see if anything materializes today.
Didn’t future fight have to announce their drop rates for crates bought with gems? Equivalent to crystals bought with units in Mcoc.
Yes which is why I'm confused about these crystals
There is already a thread for this thing. And the answer is there multiple times.
When they know something they will say it
Yeah... I'm not reading through over 700 comments of people's thoughts and interpretations of apples guidelines, and not actual facts. Way too much clutter in that thread.
Technically, all we know is that the developers of Future Fight interpreted the clause to require that. Just as any one of us could be wrong about how Apple itself chooses to interpret its guidelines (which is entirely and arbitrarily up to them) it is also possible the guy who decided to publish odds for Future Fight could have been wrong about the need to do so or misunderstood a communication from Apple.
From what I can gather, companies that are choosing to publish odds are doing so for lootboxes that are purchased with in-game currency, so the belief that this is not necessary isn't universal. But that only tells us what other people think, not what would happen if someone chose to ignore the lootbox guidelines.
I believe the clause covers in-app currency purchased lootboxes in general and actual game companies seem to believe that as well, and there's strong circumstantial evidence that this is the case given how Apple has historically published and enforced other guidelines related to purchases. But this is also a dynamic situation that can easily have additional factors at play. Apple may not be fully enforcing the guideline yet. Apple may be willing to negotiate with publishers who request more time to comply. Apple might ratchet compliance requirements higher over time. Outside of the process, we can only make reasonable conjectures as to why companies are doing what they are doing.
I mistook your post for stating rather than evoking. My apologies. Presume my post is directed at the sources.
By exposing drop rates, we all get peace of mind knowing that the rates aren't tampered with!!!
Only reason why I want to see them!