sudotstar

I think that’s the rub, in my theoretical scenario, Apple is not blocking the distribution or sale of iOS applications through third-party means, they’d enforce their existing restrictions on and power over building iOS applications in the first place. Developers would absolutely still be able to distribute unsigned applications - end user iOS devices would just be unable to install them.

It sounds ridiculous to me, and as I wrote earlier, it would be a clear violation of the spirit of the DMA, but I don’t see any reason why this scenario would not be technically possible for Apple to pull off.

I’m not too sure that these actions violate the letter of the law here, even though I agree that they’re 100% in violation of the spirit of the law.

It’s been some years since I’ve put the mobile development world behind me, in no small part because of Apple’s shenanigans, but the way I understand how this might work - Apple may be required to allow “iOS software” to be installed from third party stores, but software that runs on iOS must either be signed using a certificate that only allows installation in a developer or enterprise context (which require explicit and obvious user consent to that specific use case, and come with other restrictions such as the installation only lasting for a limited period of time), or through an “appstore” certificate that allows installation on any device, but the actual application package will need to go through Apple’s pipeline (where I believe it gets re-signed before final distribution on the App Store). All certificates, not just the appstore ones, are centrally managed by Apple and they do have the power to revoke, or refuse to renew, any of those certificates at-will.

If my understanding is correct (I’d appreciate if any up-to-date iOS devs could fact-check me), then Apple could introduce or maintain any restrictions they please on handling this final signing step, even if at the end of the day the resulting software is being handed back to developers to self-distribute, they can just refuse to sign the package at all, preventing installation on most consumer iOS devices, and to refuse to re-issue certificates to specific Apple developer accounts they deem in violation of their expected behavior. I haven’t read the implementation of the DMA in detail, nor am I a lawyer, so I’m not sure if there are provisions in place that would block either of these actions from Apple, but I do expect that there will be a long game of cat and mouse here as Apple and the EU continue to try and one-up the other’s actions.

Thank you for your review, I think this is enough information for me to hold off on this game, potentially until a non-Switch release or some other updates.

I am a huge fan of the original DQM series. DQM2 (released as Dragon Warrior Monsters 2 in the West on GBC) is a game that I put in a lot of time into as a kid, and is a game I still regard today as one of the best experiences I have ever had in a monster catching game, or even most JRPGs in general. The balance between the game’s minimal-but-still-present story, the immense amount of post-game content (seemingly infinite randomly-generated worlds to explore and find new monsters in), as well as the incredibly in-depth monster breeding trees is, for me, the exact perfect balance I want out of a game and few others have really scratched that itch as well as DQM2 (mainline Dragon Quest IX is probably the closest I’ve gotten). While a lot of those mechanics, particularly the “randomly generated content” as well as the “deep” monster breeding trees, don’t really hold up to modern scrutiny and are put to shame by what hardware more powerful than the Game Boy is capable of, I haven’t yet found a more modern game that provides a better version of that specific experience.

The newer Dragon Quest Monsters games (I’ve played through Joker 1, and tried the definitive versions of Joker 2 and 3) haven’t really done it for me, and a big reason is just how “clunky” the games felt to play compared to the original. I was hoping this game going back to the “mainline” branding would also signify a return to DQM2’s seemingly infinite content, but that does not appear to be the case, and the atrocious performance of the game on Switch would probably just leave me reaching back for my GBC and DQM2 again.