Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 255 posts

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#111

Post by ssully »

_5uxp wrote: post #87
mkaic wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely disagree with this take. I'd argue that all it means is that filmmakers have learned to make more exciting films. Cinema is a young art form and hasn't even been around for 200 year, it's no surprise to me that the movies of today are fundamentally different and more engaging than movies from last century.

They are more dumb tho, scripts and dialogues are so much simple. They rarely give you the feeling of once a lifetime seeing experience. Most of them have too much CGI and sometimes not even looking rea at all.

Sorry, but you are just generalizing based on the top blockbuster movies. Films have never been more diverse in their style and quality and, in my opinion, offer something for everyone.

If you are looking for movies that focus on strong dialogue and character work those movies are still being made and are fantastic.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#112

Post by mindslight »

hedora wrote: post #45

We need copyright reform for cases like this. In particular, copyright infringement damages should be capped at a small multiple of lost sales. That way, when a copyrighted work goes of market (or is no longer sold at a reasonable mass-market rate), there would be no penalty for redistributing it. (Derivative works might need to be handled differently, since the above effectively invalidates the GPL, though not Apach…

Reforming copyright length is more straightforward than trying to come up with some roundabout way to incentivize it. Angry Birds was released in 2009, 14 years ago. By its publisher's own admission, it has run the bulk of its financial value. Angry Birds should now be in the public domain, including source code that should have been escrowed as the creative work (distributed binaries are mere mechanical derivatives). Copyright is not property - one decade is plenty of time to economically benefit from a work, after which a work is solidly in the commons of culture and shouldn't be subject to monopoly control.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#113

Post by dbspin »

tensor wrote: post #58
petepete wrote: post #9

It's almost as if when given the choice people prefer games without microtransactions, even if they're older and have fewer features/powerups etc.

I won't play any iOS game with either ads or with a "free but micro-transaction model." If you look in the pay up front category on the app store, there are very very few games. It's too bad.

Lots of great games on Apple arcade. All add free and microtransaction free. Pay to rent but pretty low cost, and lots of them are not available on any other platform.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#114

Post by forevergreenyon »

petepete wrote: post #9

It's almost as if when given the choice people prefer games without microtransactions, even if they're older and have fewer features/powerups etc.

solution: don't give people that choice... this aligns all corporate-business incentives which are the only ones that matter when considering how to run stores.

I'm really worried since it occurred to me that going forwards the only way to really change what any computer device does/can do is through app stores. No more programming languages; specially not 'open ones' for your own computer hygiene (or safety).

heck, at this moment I'm worried about a future (I hope it stays a future plan forever) agendas against teaching people to read and write. Now that computers can engage in verbal (oral) communication is just a matter of time.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#115

Post by branko_d »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #62
tensor wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't play any iOS game with either ads or with a "free but micro-transaction model." If you look in the pay up front category on the app store, there are very very few games. It's too bad.

I think we should really call out Apple and Google for mismanagement here. Imagine if there was the option to play a game for an hour as a free trial, and then buy the game instead of having to plunk down $4.99 sight-unseen - or having your game in the Free category with the microtransaction shovelware around it. If I'm the developer who wants users to have any semblance of try-before-you-buy, the free category (with…

I always wondered why Apple can't implement something similar to Steam refunds.

Quote from https://store.steampowered.com/steam_refunds:

You can request a refund for nearly any purchase on Steam—for any reason. Maybe your PC doesn't meet the hardware requirements; maybe you bought a game by mistake; maybe you played the title for an hour and just didn't like it.

It doesn't matter. Valve will, upon request via help.steampowered.com, issue a refund for any reason, if the request is made within the required return period, and, in the case of games, if the title has been played for less than two hours.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#116

Post by amanaplanacanal »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #53
sdwr wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean Taylor Swift?

Taylor Swift has actually grown on me

It's not really my kind of music, but huge respect for her. She's obviously got tons of talent and has figured out how to turn it into big $$$$.

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#118

Post by ssully »

scrollaway wrote: post #61
NackerHughes wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only speaks of how severely the attention span of the average person has plummeted in recent decades. It's impossible to sit through a movie without enough dopamine-inducing distractions or MTV-style jump cuts every few seconds.

Your post has it all in just two sentences: Maximum cynicism, "kids these days", "movies these days", randomly bringing up MTV, whinging about attention span, bringing up dopamine. Really .. can you at least try to not be so cynical about the present? Everybody's walking around with a star trek device in their pocket that has all of the world's knowledge, can remote call anyone on earth, and can translate any languag…

[flagged]

Re: Rovio delists original Angry Birds from PlayStore because it's still too popular

#119

Post by rchaud »

mynameishere wrote: post #37
cld8483 wrote: post #11

They can't compete with what they once were, so they bury the past. I suspect many industries are like this. If classic movies were played alongside new Hollywood releases, the new movies would probably be choked out. Accordingly, Disney will even restrict the availability of their old movies on DVD. They can't stand competing with their former great selves.

Movies probably not. But I wonder what would happen if a band like the Beatles ever showed up again. Would they suck the air out of the room? Would they get trapped on a five year tour after two albums? Would they get ignored?

You make it sound as if Beyonce, Drake, Taylor Swift and Bieber don't already account for 80% of Spotify's artist payouts.
Post reply on HN