11 ms·

Luck be a Landlord is now banned in 13 countries on the Google Play Store

116 points by _bfhp 3y ago

autokad 3y ago
>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. >According to Google, the app "contains content that doesn't comply with the Gambling policy." > 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. I don't think its saying it violates google's gambling policy, it violates the gambling policy of those countries
- barbazoo 3y ago
  https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.trampolinetales.lbal https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.trampoline... > Luck be a Landlord is a roguelike deckbuilder about using a slot machine to earn rent money and defeat capitalism. This game does not contain any real-world currency gambling or microtransactions.
- jermaustin1 3y ago
  But the game is just a game, there is no gambling. You don't pay money or get money... well you buy the game, but the slot machine aspect is a game mechanic, the same as an RPG will have a dice roll in the background and check against your stats and buffs.
  - rvnx 3y ago
    "Apps that simulate gambling, or games of chance or skill that are conducive to gambling are prohibited in the above locales" Luck be a Landlord seems to be a harmless Slot Simulator with RPG elements. It's harmless. Or, seen from the legislators from these countries; is it harmless ? Or is it the beginning of a gambling addiction ? From my perspective I'd like this app to be available everywhere, but it seems to be more a political issue than a policy issue directly. Usually game developers hide such mechanics under bonus stages or lootboxes from what I've seen.
    - zuminator 3y ago
      It's not a question of whether or not it's harmless. It seems to me that it plainly violates the "apps that simulate gambling" clause. It looks and plays like a slot machine. That's different from Jetpack Joyride, which is a side scroller that has a brief slot-machine element that's not really central to the gameplay. Almost all video games have random elements but they're not gambling themed. I'm not Muslim but my understanding is that the Qur'an views gambling with the same level of condemnation as it views consumption of alcohol. Games with nudity/sexual content, homosexual characters, alcohol, gambling, etc., are (unfortunately in my opinion) banned in multiple Islamic nations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_by_... As long as we're on the subject, the Google Play storefront of this app is very much lacking in any reason why someone should want to plunk down US$5 for it. Maybe an embed of the release video? For that matter the release video itself could benefit from having a voiceover that explains a little of what's going on and makes it sound fun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcbKTeJ6uXU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcbKTeJ6uXU (Parenthetically I was surprised to just now find out that this game was in my Steam library. Was it in a Humble Bundle at some point?)
  - OtherShrezzing 3y ago
    In strict implementations of Islam, the forbidden practice is "games of chance", rather than "financial betting", so a virtual slot-machine (or even a real slot machine that doesn't accept coins) is forbidden in the same way a real slot machine is.
    - kroltan 3y ago
      Are MMORPGs banned in islamic countries? They also offer variable rewards with apparent (virtual) value given the same input. Or do the policymakers care mainly about how the chance is presented? I am aware that you are probably not directly involved with whatever ratings board is relevant, and probably can't respond authoritatively, but if you could indulge my idle curiosity it would be really cool.
      - fatfingerd 3y ago
        I think its roughly the same with MPAA rating system when it steps into "adult themes", etc. A movie can show all the same scenes and still not be rated the same because they can be framed as tangential or they can have the main role model dependent on a casino for income, needing alcohol like Popeye needs spinach and saying their calling in life is the perfect one night stand.
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    Simulated slot machines aren't appropriate in games marketed/sold to children. They're on the same level of inappropriate sleaze as "candy cigarettes" (which you may not have heard of before, because they're rightly banned in many countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candy_cigarette#Sales_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candy_cigarette#Sales_laws)
- gwbas1c 3y ago
  The issue is that other apps with similar (or outright copied) functionality are allowed in those countries. The problem is with Google's inconsistent appeals process, not with the laws of those countries.
  - RajT88 3y ago
    I wonder if the word 'Luck' in the title is what is causing all the ruckus. Could be some arbitrary guideline not documented that reviewers have to follow for certain countries. Who knows?
  - johndhi 3y ago
    Well maybe Google got specific complaints about this app. It's actually better that they only ban some not all, isn't it?
    - rvnx 3y ago
      Curious what would happen if he would create a bot that let people play that game on Kick ? Would be good promotion for the Steam game too.
    - Paul-Craft 3y ago
      Wouldn't it be better if they didn't arbitrarily, selectively, and capriciously apply their policies?
      - johndhi 3y ago
        I'd say no, actually
  - mango7283 3y ago
    The problem is absolutely the laws of those countries. Arguing "but you allow X" will just get X also banned, not make them see the light that the law is unjust.
- paulddraper 3y ago
  > it violates the gambling policy of those countries FYI for future reference, countries' policies are more commonly referred to as "Laws."
  - jahsome 3y ago
    I love it when people are simultaneously needlessly condescending and also wrong.
    - autokad 3y ago
      who, me or paul?
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - Brian_K_White 3y ago
        Anyone might be wrong, and so you might be ready to hear in what way you were wrong, but one thing you were not at all was condescending. It was Paul if you ask me, even without the deduction.
      - paulddraper 3y ago
        I was condescending. But I wasn't wrong, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
        fragmede 3y ago
        What is on the books, as a criminal or civil violation, and what are the policies of the local gaming commission, as well as what's actually enforced on the ground, mean that laws differ from policy. It sounds like Google may be complying where they're not legally required to or wouldn't face fines for.
        jahsome 3y ago
        I'm not an expert but as I understand it, laws are a component of policy. By at least one definition policy broadly encompasses how those laws are implemented, and enforced, as well as regulations that aren't technically part of legal code. It's a nitpicky distinction, but an important one, and one I wouldn't have even been concerned about had you not taken the Very Smart tone.
voytec 3y ago
How Is Google operating legally in Iran?
- exac 3y ago
  Perhaps they are not, but it makes sense for them to keep their Iranian policies up to date so they can enter the country as soon as possible if they are allowed.
  - catchnear4321 3y ago
    what’s interesting is that it isn’t geo-fenced for north korea. but it is for south korea.
    - fatfingerd 3y ago
      North Korea is entirely GEO fenced for all android apps so no policy specifics need to be identified, unlike Iran where free games could be played but could cause a problem if they violate local law or South Korea where Google actually sells android apps.
exac 3y ago
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. 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.
- ryandrake 3y ago
  If you get pulled over for speeding, you won't convince the judge with "Well, other cars were also speeding."
  - blooalien 3y ago
    Actually, in some cases / places, you absolutely can get away with that defense if you weren't being too far over the speed limit, and can be convincing enough about your assertion that you were simply "keeping up with the normal flow of traffic".
npinsker 3y ago
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.
blooalien 3y ago
On the bright side, having a valid thing to complain about publicly does act as a form of "free publicity" for your game; So there's that... ;)
benatkin 3y ago
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.
settyness 3y ago
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. 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.
tavavex 3y ago
> "Apps that simulate gambling, or games of chance or skill that are conducive to gambling are prohibited in the above locales." 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? 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.
johndhi 3y ago
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. 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.
- tspike 3y ago
  Why is there not even lip service paid to consistent enforcement?
  - Spivak 3y ago
    Because running a global service in multiple sovereign jurisdictions makes it impossible to have consistent enforcement. Would you have it so only the laws of the country of the company's HQ matters? If you mean why isn't Google bringing the banhammer down on every app that fails to meet the criteria isn't that what you want? Allow as much as possible until a government complains?
  - ceph_ 3y ago
    It's a slot machine game. Seems like it's being enforced properly in this scenario.
  - janoc 3y ago
    Because they enforce when someone complains. They aren't going to proactively ban stuff unless they really have to (e.g. something that is very obviously illegal/scam/etc.) So if nobody complained about the other apps, they didn't get banned. It is that easy. That someone else does something that violates those policies/laws too doesn't mean that you get a free pass, unfortunately.
    - tspike 3y ago
      I'd buy that if the app stores weren't proactively rejecting apps for the same reasons they fail to enforce on others.
notacoward 3y ago
> A literal clone of my game, which raised $6,000,000 in venture capital Ding ding ding! There's your explanation for you.
- hyperhello 3y ago
  Are you saying the Google reviewer is on the take?
  - AustinDev 3y ago
    No but their VC's probably have people to talk to in order so sort out these sorts of situations.
  - vinceguidry 3y ago
    Cash rules everything. Indie devs get the shaft. The fact of the matter is that with $6MM you can hire the talent needed to actually make a game like this palatable to conservative regimes. The reskin of this game hides the offensive elements. It also happens to take the soul out of the game. By turning it from a gambling game to a 'roguelike deckbuilder' you manage to transform it from gambling to playing games, avoiding the censors. LbaL author, being just one person, would be completely unaware of how games are built and marketed around the world.
newobj 3y ago
LOL. 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. Anyway, it's a brilliant game.
nxjwixisuxh 3y ago
> "Apps that simulate gambling, or games of chance or skill that are conducive to gambling are prohibited in the above locales.” The outrage is unwarranted imho. The app in question looks like a slot machine and that’s the core game mechanic.
DrFlipper 3y ago
What is the appeal of this game? (Beyond exploiting addictive personalities with a very thinly-veiled gambling simulator that is rightly being banned.) 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? https://store.steampowered.com/app/1404850/Luck_be_a_Landlord/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/1404850/Luck_be_a_Landlor...
- bubblematrix 3y ago
  Agreed, it literally looks like a slot machine app...
- bakies 3y ago
  You're missing the rougelike part. This game is more about deck building and rougelike elements than it is about gambling. The button to spin is indeed the least interesting part of the game.
  - waffleiron 3y ago
    I’ve played the game, its indeed a roguelike deckbuilder. Instead of drawing a hand of cards the same thing is simulated as a slot machine spin. Mechanically the game isn’t much different, aesthetically it is. There is a significant level of strategy involved and a low level of luck to win.
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    'Roguelike' has lost all meaning. Rogue never had any "deck building". Roguelike is not meant to mean any game that uses RNG.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      > Roguelike is not meant to mean any game that uses RNG. The ORIGINAL ROGUE had random elements, what are you on?
jd24 3y ago
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.
harrisonjackson 3y ago
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. 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. 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. 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.
- echelon 3y ago
  This only happened because App Stores are a central point of failure (and control and undue taxation). Tell your legislators that Google and Apple need to open up to web installs. To make them first class, with no hurdles and no scare tactics. In order to help facilitate this, open up devices to other stores from the moment of device activation - Google Play should be on iPhone, App Store should be on Android, etc. And build proper first-party browser support for "this website has an app, click to install". If a customer knows about you and wants you, they should be able to grab you from your website. Or another marketplace. The App Store system as it stands today is perverse and draconian.
  - yorwba 3y ago
    Google is already open to web installs, in the sense that any user who wants to play the game can download the apk and install it on most Android phones without issue. But that doesn't mean people will actually do so. E.g. if most installs stem from Google promoting the game on the Play Store, using only a website also means losing out on that free publicity. (Or not-free, since Google takes a cut.)
viktorcode 3y ago
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.
- sirbranedamuj 3y ago
  It's a slot machine in aesthetics only. A klondike solitaire game is as much of a slot machine as this game - you shuffle the deck and hope that the order of the cards is just right that you're able to complete all of the foundations. You make occasional decisions along the way but it's ultimately just luck of the draw. I would argue that this game has more agency and skill involved than your average klondike game, actually. Banning shit purely based on the aesthetics is really dumb, particularly when other games get away with having similar aesthetics in their games _including the one that is a direct rip-off of this one!_
tmcd2k 3y ago
On the plus side, I love Luck be a Landlord and only found out it was on mobile thanks to this post. Looking forward to playing it on my phone.
paxys 3y ago
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.
camdenlock 3y ago
> Luck be a Landlord is a roguelike deckbuilder about using a slot machine to earn rent money and defeat capitalism.
froggit 3y ago
You seem to be too "bew hew my game got banned" to see the golden marketing opportunity that has fallen in your lap. 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.
butz 3y ago
Open source it and upload to F-Droid? Or, if technically possible, build a PWA version.

116 points by _bfhp 3y ago

>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. >According to Google, the app "contains content that doesn't comply with the Gambling policy." > 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. I don't think its saying it violates google's gambling policy, it violates the gambling policy of those countries

barbazoo 3y ago
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.trampolinetales.lbal https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.trampoline... > Luck be a Landlord is a roguelike deckbuilder about using a slot machine to earn rent money and defeat capitalism. This game does not contain any real-world currency gambling or microtransactions.
jermaustin1 3y ago
But the game is just a game, there is no gambling. You don't pay money or get money... well you buy the game, but the slot machine aspect is a game mechanic, the same as an RPG will have a dice roll in the background and check against your stats and buffs.
- rvnx 3y ago
  "Apps that simulate gambling, or games of chance or skill that are conducive to gambling are prohibited in the above locales" Luck be a Landlord seems to be a harmless Slot Simulator with RPG elements. It's harmless. Or, seen from the legislators from these countries; is it harmless ? Or is it the beginning of a gambling addiction ? From my perspective I'd like this app to be available everywhere, but it seems to be more a political issue than a policy issue directly. Usually game developers hide such mechanics under bonus stages or lootboxes from what I've seen.
  - zuminator 3y ago
    It's not a question of whether or not it's harmless. It seems to me that it plainly violates the "apps that simulate gambling" clause. It looks and plays like a slot machine. That's different from Jetpack Joyride, which is a side scroller that has a brief slot-machine element that's not really central to the gameplay. Almost all video games have random elements but they're not gambling themed. I'm not Muslim but my understanding is that the Qur'an views gambling with the same level of condemnation as it views consumption of alcohol. Games with nudity/sexual content, homosexual characters, alcohol, gambling, etc., are (unfortunately in my opinion) banned in multiple Islamic nations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_by_... As long as we're on the subject, the Google Play storefront of this app is very much lacking in any reason why someone should want to plunk down US$5 for it. Maybe an embed of the release video? For that matter the release video itself could benefit from having a voiceover that explains a little of what's going on and makes it sound fun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcbKTeJ6uXU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcbKTeJ6uXU (Parenthetically I was surprised to just now find out that this game was in my Steam library. Was it in a Humble Bundle at some point?)
- OtherShrezzing 3y ago
  In strict implementations of Islam, the forbidden practice is "games of chance", rather than "financial betting", so a virtual slot-machine (or even a real slot machine that doesn't accept coins) is forbidden in the same way a real slot machine is.
  - kroltan 3y ago
    Are MMORPGs banned in islamic countries? They also offer variable rewards with apparent (virtual) value given the same input. Or do the policymakers care mainly about how the chance is presented? I am aware that you are probably not directly involved with whatever ratings board is relevant, and probably can't respond authoritatively, but if you could indulge my idle curiosity it would be really cool.
    - fatfingerd 3y ago
      I think its roughly the same with MPAA rating system when it steps into "adult themes", etc. A movie can show all the same scenes and still not be rated the same because they can be framed as tangential or they can have the main role model dependent on a casino for income, needing alcohol like Popeye needs spinach and saying their calling in life is the perfect one night stand.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  Simulated slot machines aren't appropriate in games marketed/sold to children. They're on the same level of inappropriate sleaze as "candy cigarettes" (which you may not have heard of before, because they're rightly banned in many countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candy_cigarette#Sales_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candy_cigarette#Sales_laws)
gwbas1c 3y ago
The issue is that other apps with similar (or outright copied) functionality are allowed in those countries. The problem is with Google's inconsistent appeals process, not with the laws of those countries.
- RajT88 3y ago
  I wonder if the word 'Luck' in the title is what is causing all the ruckus. Could be some arbitrary guideline not documented that reviewers have to follow for certain countries. Who knows?
- johndhi 3y ago
  Well maybe Google got specific complaints about this app. It's actually better that they only ban some not all, isn't it?
  - rvnx 3y ago
    Curious what would happen if he would create a bot that let people play that game on Kick ? Would be good promotion for the Steam game too.
  - Paul-Craft 3y ago
    Wouldn't it be better if they didn't arbitrarily, selectively, and capriciously apply their policies?
    - johndhi 3y ago
      I'd say no, actually
- mango7283 3y ago
  The problem is absolutely the laws of those countries. Arguing "but you allow X" will just get X also banned, not make them see the light that the law is unjust.
paulddraper 3y ago
> it violates the gambling policy of those countries FYI for future reference, countries' policies are more commonly referred to as "Laws."
- jahsome 3y ago
  I love it when people are simultaneously needlessly condescending and also wrong.
  - autokad 3y ago
    who, me or paul?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - Brian_K_White 3y ago
      Anyone might be wrong, and so you might be ready to hear in what way you were wrong, but one thing you were not at all was condescending. It was Paul if you ask me, even without the deduction.
    - paulddraper 3y ago
      I was condescending. But I wasn't wrong, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
      - fragmede 3y ago
        What is on the books, as a criminal or civil violation, and what are the policies of the local gaming commission, as well as what's actually enforced on the ground, mean that laws differ from policy. It sounds like Google may be complying where they're not legally required to or wouldn't face fines for.
      - jahsome 3y ago
        I'm not an expert but as I understand it, laws are a component of policy. By at least one definition policy broadly encompasses how those laws are implemented, and enforced, as well as regulations that aren't technically part of legal code. It's a nitpicky distinction, but an important one, and one I wouldn't have even been concerned about had you not taken the Very Smart tone.

voytec 3y ago

How Is Google operating legally in Iran?

exac 3y ago
Perhaps they are not, but it makes sense for them to keep their Iranian policies up to date so they can enter the country as soon as possible if they are allowed.
- catchnear4321 3y ago
  what’s interesting is that it isn’t geo-fenced for north korea. but it is for south korea.
  - fatfingerd 3y ago
    North Korea is entirely GEO fenced for all android apps so no policy specifics need to be identified, unlike Iran where free games could be played but could cause a problem if they violate local law or South Korea where Google actually sells android apps.

exac 3y ago

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. 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.

ryandrake 3y ago
If you get pulled over for speeding, you won't convince the judge with "Well, other cars were also speeding."
- blooalien 3y ago
  Actually, in some cases / places, you absolutely can get away with that defense if you weren't being too far over the speed limit, and can be convincing enough about your assertion that you were simply "keeping up with the normal flow of traffic".

npinsker 3y ago

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.

blooalien 3y ago

On the bright side, having a valid thing to complain about publicly does act as a form of "free publicity" for your game; So there's that... ;)

benatkin 3y ago

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.

settyness 3y ago

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. 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.

tavavex 3y ago

> "Apps that simulate gambling, or games of chance or skill that are conducive to gambling are prohibited in the above locales." 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? 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.

johndhi 3y ago

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. 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.

tspike 3y ago
Why is there not even lip service paid to consistent enforcement?
- Spivak 3y ago
  Because running a global service in multiple sovereign jurisdictions makes it impossible to have consistent enforcement. Would you have it so only the laws of the country of the company's HQ matters? If you mean why isn't Google bringing the banhammer down on every app that fails to meet the criteria isn't that what you want? Allow as much as possible until a government complains?
- ceph_ 3y ago
  It's a slot machine game. Seems like it's being enforced properly in this scenario.
- janoc 3y ago
  Because they enforce when someone complains. They aren't going to proactively ban stuff unless they really have to (e.g. something that is very obviously illegal/scam/etc.) So if nobody complained about the other apps, they didn't get banned. It is that easy. That someone else does something that violates those policies/laws too doesn't mean that you get a free pass, unfortunately.
  - tspike 3y ago
    I'd buy that if the app stores weren't proactively rejecting apps for the same reasons they fail to enforce on others.

notacoward 3y ago

> A literal clone of my game, which raised $6,000,000 in venture capital Ding ding ding! There's your explanation for you.

hyperhello 3y ago
Are you saying the Google reviewer is on the take?
- AustinDev 3y ago
  No but their VC's probably have people to talk to in order so sort out these sorts of situations.
- vinceguidry 3y ago
  Cash rules everything. Indie devs get the shaft. The fact of the matter is that with $6MM you can hire the talent needed to actually make a game like this palatable to conservative regimes. The reskin of this game hides the offensive elements. It also happens to take the soul out of the game. By turning it from a gambling game to a 'roguelike deckbuilder' you manage to transform it from gambling to playing games, avoiding the censors. LbaL author, being just one person, would be completely unaware of how games are built and marketed around the world.

newobj 3y ago

LOL. 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. Anyway, it's a brilliant game.

nxjwixisuxh 3y ago

> "Apps that simulate gambling, or games of chance or skill that are conducive to gambling are prohibited in the above locales.” The outrage is unwarranted imho. The app in question looks like a slot machine and that’s the core game mechanic.

DrFlipper 3y ago

What is the appeal of this game? (Beyond exploiting addictive personalities with a very thinly-veiled gambling simulator that is rightly being banned.) 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? https://store.steampowered.com/app/1404850/Luck_be_a_Landlord/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/1404850/Luck_be_a_Landlor...

bubblematrix 3y ago
Agreed, it literally looks like a slot machine app...
bakies 3y ago
You're missing the rougelike part. This game is more about deck building and rougelike elements than it is about gambling. The button to spin is indeed the least interesting part of the game.
- waffleiron 3y ago
  I’ve played the game, its indeed a roguelike deckbuilder. Instead of drawing a hand of cards the same thing is simulated as a slot machine spin. Mechanically the game isn’t much different, aesthetically it is. There is a significant level of strategy involved and a low level of luck to win.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  'Roguelike' has lost all meaning. Rogue never had any "deck building". Roguelike is not meant to mean any game that uses RNG.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    > Roguelike is not meant to mean any game that uses RNG. The ORIGINAL ROGUE had random elements, what are you on?

jd24 3y ago

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.

harrisonjackson 3y ago

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. 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. 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. 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.

echelon 3y ago
This only happened because App Stores are a central point of failure (and control and undue taxation). Tell your legislators that Google and Apple need to open up to web installs. To make them first class, with no hurdles and no scare tactics. In order to help facilitate this, open up devices to other stores from the moment of device activation - Google Play should be on iPhone, App Store should be on Android, etc. And build proper first-party browser support for "this website has an app, click to install". If a customer knows about you and wants you, they should be able to grab you from your website. Or another marketplace. The App Store system as it stands today is perverse and draconian.
- yorwba 3y ago
  Google is already open to web installs, in the sense that any user who wants to play the game can download the apk and install it on most Android phones without issue. But that doesn't mean people will actually do so. E.g. if most installs stem from Google promoting the game on the Play Store, using only a website also means losing out on that free publicity. (Or not-free, since Google takes a cut.)

viktorcode 3y ago

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.

sirbranedamuj 3y ago
It's a slot machine in aesthetics only. A klondike solitaire game is as much of a slot machine as this game - you shuffle the deck and hope that the order of the cards is just right that you're able to complete all of the foundations. You make occasional decisions along the way but it's ultimately just luck of the draw. I would argue that this game has more agency and skill involved than your average klondike game, actually. Banning shit purely based on the aesthetics is really dumb, particularly when other games get away with having similar aesthetics in their games _including the one that is a direct rip-off of this one!_

tmcd2k 3y ago

On the plus side, I love Luck be a Landlord and only found out it was on mobile thanks to this post. Looking forward to playing it on my phone.

paxys 3y ago

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.

camdenlock 3y ago

> Luck be a Landlord is a roguelike deckbuilder about using a slot machine to earn rent money and defeat capitalism.

froggit 3y ago

You seem to be too "bew hew my game got banned" to see the golden marketing opportunity that has fallen in your lap. 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.

butz 3y ago

Open source it and upload to F-Droid? Or, if technically possible, build a PWA version.