>Today I received an email from Google Play Support stating that Luck be a Landlord has been geo-blocked in the following countries: United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Iran, Jordan, South Korea, Libya, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen.<p>>According to Google, the app "contains content that doesn't comply with the Gambling policy."<p>> It should go without saying that I 100% disagree with this decision. Luck be a Landlord does not violate any gambling policy that Google has in their terms of service.<p>I don't think its saying it violates google's gambling policy, it violates the gambling policy of those countries
One of least effective ways to argue your case is by pointing to other apps that have the same violations. I say that having submitted 50+ apps across various categories and dealing with thousands of app review exchanges to get them released. You can find apps that violate all sorts of guidelines and laws and it is super frustrating when yours gets blocked but it is part of the business.<p>Did they slip by a reviewer that didn't care? Did they use their "VC" illuminati connections? Are they such a big player the rules don't apply? It doesn't really matter or have anything to do with getting YOUR app released and the reviewer you are talking to will most likely ignore that completely.<p>Your best bet is to remove or change the mechanic if possible, resubmit, and then add it back in during a future update if you feel strongly about it.<p>It is possible those other apps have something that allows them to keep it... and by communicating nicely and earnestly with your reviewer you might find a way to skirt the rules, if a way exists. For us, it was frequently tweaking copy or TOS or other minor changes that allowed us to release an app with only superficial changes that the initial review made it seem like we were totally screwed. I do get the instinct to just say FU though.
As someone who makes decisions like the one Google made here at work, sorry, dude, but arguing about it publicly isn't going to change much.<p>Almost certainly Google has received pressure from these countries on this issue and their business there is more important to google than your single app. Google likely isn't being unreasonable - but the governments of these countries are. Sorry.
What is the appeal of this game? (Beyond exploiting addictive personalities with a very thinly-veiled gambling simulator that is rightly being banned.)<p>It looks so boring. I can't tell if the reviewers proclaiming this as an "innovation" in the "roguelike" (?) genre are trolling or not. It's an ugly slot machine game where you click a buttonn to spin. This would have been uninspired trash in 1993. What am I missing?<p><a href="https://store.steampowered.com/app/1404850/Luck_be_a_Landlord/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://store.steampowered.com/app/1404850/Luck_be_a_Landlor...</a>
That clone the author mentions in passing is pretty sad. They didn’t even try to change the items or anything about the game to make it their own — literally everything except graphics seems to be lifted directly from the original. Then they went and raised $6m off the back of someone else’s hard work and savvy design.
The game is literally a virtual slot machine. The fact that it doesn't have real money involved doesn't make it legal in all those countries with restrictive gambling laws. And it's bizarre to bring up other games like Jetpack Joyride in your claim when they primarily have non-gambling mechanics and yours doesn't.
The author conveniently forgets to mention that Luck the Landlord game is primarily a slot-machine. Instead, they provide counter examples of games that have slot machine mechanics in them to argue that Play Store policies are applied inconsistently.
It seems to be a recurring case with app review processes that Apple and Google only review your app, and won't allow comparisons to be made to other apps.<p>From a game theory perspective, perhaps this makes sense, as any bargaining power that a successful app might have to come to a special agreement with Apple/Google is diminished if their app isn't in compliance.
I'm not discouraged when stuff like this happens because I hope it will piss people off enough to trigger a change in the current system, where Apple and Google dictate how people use their mobile computers. This kind of stuff will always happen until the fundamental structure changes.
> "Apps that simulate gambling, or games of chance or skill that are conducive to gambling are prohibited in the above locales.”<p>The outrage is unwarranted imho. The app in question looks like a slot machine and that’s the core game mechanic.
I'd guess his app was reported by his competitors. If the author wants to make things fair he'll need to report the other apps and have them investigated under the same policies.
This game's primary mechanic is decision making and deck-building. There is no wagering or gambling of money real or otherwise. Only someone grossly misinformed could consider this game gambling, and by their logic would disqualify all games that had any elements of randomness.<p>I did a double take when I saw this title on the front page of Hacker News. I didn't think it was super well known and I just started playing it again. I hate gambling in games more than anything, and it kills me to see 2K continue to get away with literal slot machines and roulettes, with real money and given an "E" for "Everyone" by a group that is run by a lot of these triple-A board members.
You seem to be too "bew hew my game got banned" to see the golden marketing opportunity that has fallen in your lap.<p>Add something along the lines of "so badass it's illegal in 13 countries" to the description and watch sales skyrocket. People love banned stuff.
LOL.<p>Do they know that you don't even actually put money in the slot machine to spin it? The only money you spend in the game is paid to the titular infernal rent seeker.<p>Anyway, it's a brilliant game.
On the bright side, having a valid thing to complain about publicly <i>does</i> act as a form of "free publicity" for your game; So there's that... ;)
> "Apps that simulate gambling, or games of chance or skill that are conducive to gambling are prohibited in the above locales."<p>This is such a strange decision. I know that this game has no microtransactions, actual gambling or any other forms of monetization, outside of paying to purchase this game. Does this mean that any games where chance plays a major role are off-limits? Or is it the slot machine-like appearance?<p>What I wonder is, are gacha games still available in these regions? They seem to be a lot more resembling of actual gambling, but few places appeared interested in regulating them.