[HN Gopher] Santa Ragione says Apple is delisting Wheels of Aure...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Santa Ragione says Apple is delisting Wheels of Aurelia 'without
       justification'
        
       Author : saubeidl
       Score  : 27 points
       Date   : 2025-07-15 17:15 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.gamedeveloper.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.gamedeveloper.com)
        
       | leakycap wrote:
       | The image at the top of this article is beautiful, so I was
       | confused why Apple would pull such an aesthetically pleasing
       | game.
       | 
       | But then I searched the App Store for the game. The description
       | still says "80% off!" from prior endless sales, the art style is
       | pretty bad even for the 2015 copyright date, and the storyline is
       | "I just robbed that bank" and similarly shallow storylines.
       | 
       | This isn't art as people would think of it, this reminds me of a
       | run of the mill flash game from another decade.
        
         | theletterf wrote:
         | I don't think you're talking of the same game.
         | https://mrdavepizza.com/wheels-of-aurelia/
        
           | leakycap wrote:
           | You think that I'm looking at the wrong thing? I'm looking at
           | "Wheels of Aurelia" in the App store, subtitle "Interactive
           | Italian Road Trip" and published by Santa Ragione srl
           | 
           | Did you take the time to download it or look at the listing
           | vs the article?
           | 
           | The article itself has a large image and no screenshots of
           | the app. The app looks nothing like the image in the article,
           | though.
        
         | AlotOfReading wrote:
         | Art doesn't have to be _good_. It 's a visual novel and there's
         | plenty of dialogue that attempts to have meaningful themes
         | (regardless of whether it succeeds). I'm not sure why it
         | shouldn't be considered art.
        
           | leakycap wrote:
           | Did you look at the App Store listing, or download and try
           | the free app? It's surprisingly bad. I was ready to comment
           | against this decision until I looked at it myself.
        
             | AlotOfReading wrote:
             | No, I simply looked at a few videos of people playing it.
             | Note that I'm not saying it's a good game, just that being
             | a bad game doesn't imply it's not art.
        
               | leakycap wrote:
               | The developer -sorry, studio- is the one claiming this is
               | art. I was curious, looked, and saw nothing remotely
               | resembling art.
               | 
               | I encourage you to review the App Store listing since
               | that is what is being removed. The description on this
               | free app still shows "80% off limited time sale!" on this
               | art (which is now free, so the description makes no
               | sense).
               | 
               | I think this is much ado about nothing. If you cared
               | about the app, make it something people want. Nobody
               | wants a game from 2015 with bad graphics and lackluster
               | storyline.
        
               | saubeidl wrote:
               | Art is in the eye of the beholder.
        
         | privatelypublic wrote:
         | You say that as if some of the most popular game franchises
         | aren't direct continuations of flash games.
         | 
         | Flash was readily available, low cost (before creative cloud),
         | had few to no platform specific issues. Basically- the easiest
         | possible entry for young devs and game devs.
        
       | duxup wrote:
       | >We firmly believe that removing fully functional artistic works
       | simply due to infrequent updates undermines the value and
       | sustainability of games as cultural and artistic products. Like
       | books, films, and music albums, video games represent complete
       | creative works that do not inherently require continual updates
       | beyond maintaining basic functionality
       | 
       | Is the Apple app store there to provide that kind of perpetual
       | access?
       | 
       | A book's perpetual existence is mostly because a physical copy
       | exists, that's not really the same, nor is anyone assuring it
       | still exists.
       | 
       | I do sympathize with the issue about requiring updates and etc, I
       | ran into that with Google recently, but I'm not sure I buy into
       | this idea that requiring updates shouldn't happen ever because
       | "my game is like art and art doesn't require updates".
        
         | Rohansi wrote:
         | It's a pretty sad trap to fall into. All of these games are
         | doomed to fall out of support and never be played again if
         | nobody maintains them. Consoles have emulators and PC games
         | usually just keep working but what is the solution for the
         | mobile games worth saving?
        
           | Someone wrote:
           | > Consoles have emulators
           | 
           | All of them written by hobbyists, without support from
           | console manufacturers, isn't it?
           | 
           | Is there anything that Apple does to prevent hobbyists from
           | writing an iOS emulator? If so, do other manufacturers do
           | better?
        
         | wodenokoto wrote:
         | As a customer, yes. I own iOS games that I cannot play and
         | frankly I think that sucks.
        
         | mdiesel wrote:
         | If they provided a plausible way to sideload then they'd be on
         | stronger grounds. It's the same as Stop Killing Games. Apple
         | shouldn't carry the burden of hosting forever, but equally they
         | can't just make something disappear forever.
        
           | duxup wrote:
           | I'm not opposed to side loading in general, but the idea that
           | side loading would work perpetually for old code also doesn't
           | seem possible.
        
             | barnabee wrote:
             | I used to think this but we have DOSBox, etc.
             | 
             | Even if something stopped working, that doesn't mean it can
             | never work again.
             | 
             | Apple aren't obliged to keep the platform backwards
             | compatible as long as they let people try to run their
             | software.
        
           | mey wrote:
           | Apple should commit to a support life cycle on the front end
           | then. You are being sold this product with support for a
           | minimum of 'x' time frame. You are not 'buying' this.
           | 
           | Ideally what Stop Killing Games would like is game
           | preservation, but at minimum we need honesty/transparency
           | about product market places. I finally know what my minimum
           | OS lifecycle is for my Pixel phone, and I can make a
           | comfortable purchase decision based on that.
           | 
           | Even Steam isn't immune to this, it simply has an good track
           | record relative compared to most other platforms.
           | 
           | Apple took a ~30% cut of the sale of the product. That should
           | calculate into it's servicing of the product. To Ross Scott's
           | points (and many others), if you have a perpetual service but
           | a onetime/lifetime payment, the business model will
           | eventually not net out.
        
       | 1659447091 wrote:
       | The other post[0] has a link with a more balanced take which
       | provides what some of these app store rules are. It's curious
       | that they don't simply add the necessary (by store policy): ' _"
       | Compatibility updates" include device resolution adds, of which
       | there have been three since the last time the game was updated._'
       | 
       | That is not a change to the game (or their art), simply an update
       | that keeps the game in compliance. However, that would also mean
       | that they now have to comply with the newer privacy policies that
       | have been put in place since their last update, and declare what
       | data it and any 3rd party dependancies siphons from Appstore
       | users. IMO, it's worth considering that that would be worth
       | causing a fuss about if one did not want to expose this
       | information.
       | 
       | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44574059
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-07-15 23:02 UTC)