back to article Apple KILLS SUPER MARIO. And Zelda. And Sonic

Certain slab-fondling fanbois will soon be forced to cough up for a Wii U wave goodbye to their childhoods following Apple's decision to close a loophole in the next version of iOS 8 that allowed console emulators to run on iPhones and iPads. A fresh beta version of iOS 8.1 landed in developers' laps on Tuesday, and it was …

  1. Christian Berger

    What did people expect?

    I mean it's a walled garden, you don't get to decide its rules. And those rules are made by the owner, Apple. If you don't like that, don't buy Apple, and buy devices with unlocked/easy to unlock boot loaders, and publicise the fact as the top reason why you bought that particular device.

    The mobile world really needs more FOSS. Just look at what it did on the desktop and the server. It even scared Microsoft into looking at security.

    And no, Android is not really Free and Open Source Software. Yes you can download the source code and compile it yourself, but it's to complex to do any meaningful changes, and even if you can make any changes, many devices will have locked boot loaders or require binary blobs to work.

    So in short, if you don't like the proprietary game, either play it by the rules of the owner, in this case Apple, or don't play it at all. In this case the "no emulator" rule was kinda predictable as they already had a "no interpreter" rule.

    1. Law

      Re: What did people expect?

      "And no, Android is not really Free and Open Source Software. Yes you can download the source code and compile it yourself"

      That sounds free to me.... ?

      "but it's to complex to do any meaningful changes"

      Software is hard for most people?? Who knew!

      "and even if you can make any changes, many devices will have locked boot loaders or require binary blobs to work."

      Agree with that one... and that's where I get annoyed with android - the OS itself is free (if you don't want the Google services - which you don't need for an emulator specific device). It's the networks, phone manufacturers and the chip makers.

      - Chip makers release proprietary drivers, locked down, no source code available. Once that driver isn't supported in a later version of android, your buggered. Only happens on big architectual changes though, like from Gingerbread to ICS.

      - Phone manufacturers lock the phone down for most normal people, basically so they don't screw the thing up, but also occasionally to lock in their own services/apps which are really just bloaty crap.

      - Then you get some which let you unlock it, under the proviso that doing so will void your warranty. Great, I bought a phone under the assumption I could do this, because the phone manufacturer said I could.

      - I found out that while my phone manufacturer allowed bootloader unlocking, my network had decided to lock it down with no chance of unlocking it. The manufacturer wouldn't comply, because as far as they were concerned, it was the networks phone forever - they were not legally allowed to unlock it. The network refused to unlock it, when I eventually found somebody who understood what I was asking, they revealed don't provide that service. They made a business decision to lock the thing down with no hope of unlocking it... so no security updates after however long they chose to support the device (less than a year). Arses!!

      The main problem with android is that while it's free (and open) - there are just a lot of companies and people involved in getting a device built - and most companies/people either don't understand FOSS or care that some people actually enjoy having open devices.

      1. dogged

        Re: What did people expect?

        > That sounds free to me.... ?

        It's free but it's not FOSS. You can't submit code to Android. You can look at it but that's pretty much all you can do.

        1. Stretch

          Re: What did people expect?

          "You can't submit code..."

          This is true of a lot of FOSS unless you are accepted as a contributor

          1. dogged

            Re: What did people expect?

            > This is true of a lot of FOSS unless you are accepted as a contributor

            But at least you can be accepted as a contributor. The only way to be accepted as an Android contributor is to work for Google on the Android team.

            Stop obfuscating the issue.

            Also...

            > I'm pretty sure if you fixed a bug someone on the android team would take it and merge it.

            Having done exactly this, I'm absolutely certain they won't.

            1. DrXym

              Re: What did people expect?

              "But at least you can be accepted as a contributor. The only way to be accepted as an Android contributor is to work for Google on the Android team."

              Go join Cyanogenmod then or some other fork which tracks the mainline.

              "Having done exactly this, I'm absolutely certain they won't."

              Of course they would assuming the bug fix was straightforward, fixed the issue, had no side effects and followed whatever other criteria they had for acceptance.

            2. Anonymous Bullard

              Re: What did people expect?

              But at least you can be accepted as a contributor. The only way to be accepted as an Android contributor is to work for Google on the Android team.

              That's quite a bold statement. However...

              For a start, just because a project doesn't accept code from the public, does not mean it's not open source.

              Secondly, read this: https://source.android.com/source/contributing.html. So they do accept code from the outside.

              That could just be PR, though. But look at this: https://android-review.googlesource.com. There are quite a few merges from non-Google staff (click on the 'Merged' link, hover over the "owner" names).

              Having done exactly this, I'm absolutely certain they won't.

              Do you have a patch submission that they rejected, based on the fact that you're not an employee of Google, that you could provide a link to? I'm curious.

              1. dogged

                Re: What did people expect?

                > Do you have a patch submission that they rejected, based on the fact that you're not an employee of Google, that you could provide a link to? I'm curious.

                You don't get reasons for patch refusals. Just refusals if you're lucky or, more usually, absolutely nothing.

                1. Anonymous Bullard

                  Re: What did people expect?

                  I think you're bullshitting about the whole thing, and perhaps did not expect someone who's contributed to Android to be on this forum.

                2. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

                  Re: What did people expect?

                  A few reasons your patch may have been rejected:

                  - Is the issue it addresses recognised as a bug, or is it a subjective assessment? Is the thing your 'bug fix' fixes actually working as specified, but you disagree with the specification?

                  - Did your 'bug fix' meet the required coding standards, such as comments, variable name conventions.

                  - Is the fix self-contained, without any side-effects? In other words, does it change an interface, or affect outputs that another part of the software relies on?

                  - Is your code testable? Is it written with an interface and an implementation so that the implementation can be mocked out using the interface and tested using automated testing tools?

                  - Did you submit your patch via an official route, or just email it randomly to someone at Google?

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: What did people expect?

            The difference is, you can't contribute code and fixes to development versions of Android. You can't be part of its creation unless you're a big established company like Samsung, HTC etc.

        2. wikkity

          Re: What did people expect?

          I'm pretty sure if you fixed a bug someone on the android team would take it and merge it. You think that is any diufferent to any sigifcant OS project, you think Linus lets anyone push their changes into the kernal, what about Apache, GNU etc... I don't beleive that they is anything in the definition of FOSS that requires contributions to be accpeted.

          Adding new features to any open source project is likely to fall on edaf ears unless it is on their road map. You can however create your own fork. Creating your own fork of Android is probably not that useful, you are either likely to be a hardware manufacturer or someone prepared to spend a lot of time and resources shaping it to something people want. For a successful example of the later look at Cyanogen, there is no way they could have done what they did if android was not open source.

        3. Law

          Re: What did people expect?

          "> That sounds free to me.... ?

          It's free but it's not FOSS."

          It is free, and open source. What does Foss stand for again?

          "You can't submit code to Android. You can look at it but that's pretty much all you can do."

          Yes you can submit code. You can also fork it and go it alone. Amazon and a ton of other vendors do this happily. Cyanogen mod also track aosp easy enough.

          I used oxygen ROM on my desire at one point, pure aosp except for the driver binaries lifted from stock ROMs. Nobody building that worked for Google. They also hacked it about a bit with custom kernels etc.

          Code is hard, if its beyond you to fork it and build for a device then that's okay, but don't claim it's the projects not being open enough.

          There is also a distinction between android the aosp and android the brand. In that regard you have to be sanctioned by Google to get android branded device with play services. In assuming that is confusing some on here.

      2. James 51

        Re: What did people expect?

        BB10 or Jolla might solve most of those issues. Would probably mean writing everything in Qt and C++ though.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What did people expect?

        You can get the code and build the OS, but it's an incomplete system without any applications.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: What did people expect?

          You can get the code and build the OS, but it's an incomplete system without any applications.

          That hasn't stopped some people buying a Windows phone.

    2. nematoad

      Re: What did people expect?

      I agree. Buy an Apple Ithing and you buy into Apple's way of working, whether it suits you, the consumer, or not. Apple's interest is solely Apple, not you.

      In a way the current situation resembles the way things were about 25 years ago, Then we had the likes of Commodore with the Amiga and Atari with the ST. Both aimed at the same market and both closed and proprietary. In the end of course Microsoft came along and killed both of them off, not because MS's stuff was better, it most certainly wasn't, but because of the network effect spilling over from the business sector. Whether anyone can give the punters a better deal than Apple or Google remains to be seen.

      It might be good for consumers if it happened though.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Paris Hilton

        Re: What did people expect?

        Since when were the ST and Amiga locked down? Anyone could code for them and loads did. And there were loads of 3rd party books, tools and compilers to help you do it. PC gaming then took off as 3D graphics cards came of age, which was simply the one bit of the ST/Amiga you couldn't easily replace.

        Anyway, you'll find that legitimate emulators such as Spectaculator are still going strong on iOS with full permission of the hardware and software copyright holders. This is merely a final lock-out of piracy-based emulation.

        1. Random Q Hacker

          "Piracy based emulation"

          That's an awful big assumption to make, considering how many people own stacks of NES games. The idea that the company you pay $700 to for a 'premium' experience is the one that doesn't trust it's own users is repulsive to me. I have more than enough big brother in my oligarchy as it is...

          1. tlhonmey

            Re: "Piracy based emulation"

            "Piracy-based emulation" would be an emulator which uses a pirated copy of the original console's internal ROM. Such emulators do exist.

            However, it is the position of most console manufacturers that *any* emulation without an official license is piracy, even if it uses a "clean room rewrite" of their ROM. This assertion doesn't stand up in court as it's exactly what all the IBM-PC clone makers did back in the 80s and 90s; but it doesn't have to if Apple is willing to simply ban all such emulators from their devices.

            The moral? Buy an Open Phoenux and run whatever you darn well please.

  2. Suricou Raven

    Easy solution.

    Buy something android.

    It's hardly a an ideal solution for those who value personal control and flexibility in their devices, but it's a lot better than iOS.

    1. Bloodbeastterror

      Re: Easy solution.

      Have I misread this? Apple provide more personal control and flexibility than Android...?

      1. John Bailey

        Re: Easy solution.

        "Have I misread this? Apple provide more personal control and flexibility than Android...?"

        Well.. Not sure about the personal control.. But some models do apparently bend rather easily.

  3. Dave 126 Silver badge

    External controllers

    Apple have been in a better position than most to create an add-on games controller for their devices (because there are more iphones of a certain model sold than any one Android phone) but they have never bothered. They have sold plenty of phones without needing to so sweeten the deal for gamers... though they make a song and dance about their graphics API 'Metal'.

    You'd be better off with an Android device that can support PlayStation 3/4 BT controllers, if you really want to play old Nintendo titles.

    1. KroSha

      Re: External controllers

      iCade? http://www.ionaudio.com/products/details/icade

    2. RNixon

      Re: External controllers

      If you really want to run emulators, get an nVidia Shield. Not the new Shield tablet - last year's Shield handheld.

      It's basically a Tegra 4 stuffed into an Xbox controller, and it works wonderfully for emulators. All the emulators I use support it well, and while the GameCube/Wii emulator sucks (which it does on Windows, too), pretty much everything else runs well. Even Dreamcast emulation is playable, though admittedly I've only tried it with a game or two.

      Sure it's a bit bulky, but so is a phone-plus-PS3-controller.

  4. D@v3

    Nintendo

    I wonder if the bean counters at nintendo have any idea how much money they could rake in if they ported a load of games iOS (maybe they do and dont want to give apple 30% of it..)

    I can't be the only person that grew up on a steady diet of ever 'improving' game boys, that now, doesn't have the inclination for a dedicated hand held console, and less and less time for the one parked under the tv, but would gladly throw a few quid here and there for iphone ports of my old favourites to play on the bus, or train, or whatever...

    1. Vimes

      Re: Nintendo

      Never mind iOS - I'm still waiting for GBA/SNES titles to appear on Nintendo's own 3DS.

      Their obsession with Wii/Wii U really needs to stop if they want to survive in the long term...

    2. PaulR79

      Re: Nintendo

      A quick look on the Play Store and Final Fantasy VI shows that it has over 100,000 downloads at £10.99 making £1,099,000 at the bare minimum 100,000 downloads. Take out Google's 30% and that's still a big chunk of change for what must be very little work. The game is already there they just have to get it working on the hardware which is pretty standard Qualcomm CPUs. That's just one title for Square Enix as well so you can easily imagine the money waiting to flow with Nintendo's titles.

    3. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Nintendo

      I wonder if the bean counters at nintendo have any idea how much money they could rake in if they ported a load of games iOS

      Why bother porting? They can make money simply selling ROMs for the emulators.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @D@v3

      Unless Nintendo has a particular reason to not want to do business with Apple, I don't know why they'd care about Apple collecting 30%. That's smaller than the retailer markup when Gamestop or whoever sells Nintendo console games.

  5. Daz555

    Anyone wanting retro/emulation gaming on the move should just pick up an old PSP on ebay.

  6. A Non e-mouse Silver badge
    FAIL

    Misleading Sub-Head

    I think El Reg's headline & sub-head for the article are, at best, misleading. Apple are not going to introduce a new ban emulators, which is implied by the sub-head. Emulators, et al, have been banned since day one. All Apple are doing, is closing a loophole people used to side step the original ban.

  7. Archaon

    Welcome to Apple

    After all this time how have people still not realised that Apple products aren't open?

    I'm not saying the alternatives are perfect by any means but if you want to run something that's potentially a bit dodgy then an Apple product isn't the place to do it.

  8. Anonymous Custard
    Joke

    Retro

    Kinda ironically symmetric that you're now going to need to use a retro version of iOS to play retro games...

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Retro

      I wonder if the Apple ][ emulator will pass muster?

      1. RNixon

        Re: Retro

        It's not specifically a ban on emulators - it's a ban on anything that can run code that's not included in the app.

        There's a C-64 emulator on the app store, but it comes with some games preinstalled, and cannot run any games that are not purchased through the App Store - and it won't let you drop into BASIC.

        The Apple Newton emulator isn't allowed, either. My understanding is that it actually works pretty well, but it falls under that 'no running arbitrary code' clause.

        So presumably you could do an Apple II emulator if you locked it to only run included diskette images. Of course, you'd need to negotiate rights to the ROM with Apple...

        1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

          Re: Retro

          There's a C-64 emulator on the app store, but it comes with some games preinstalled, and cannot run any games that are not purchased through the App Store - and it won't let you drop into BASIC.

          Then technically, it's not a C-64 emulator.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Games Nowadays

    While there are lots of new and innovative games coming out on mobile devices (just take a look at the Humble Bundle offers!) I still like the idea of playing my old retro games on my phone but there is one issue for me. Trying to play with a touchscreen is a real turn off so while I can play the likes of Shining Force and the Phantasy Stars, Sonic is a damn sight harder to play due to the precision required.

    I could buy a controller but I only really tend to play on the bus or on holiday and it;s another thing to pack/carry with me. As a result it's got to be turn based for me.

    On that note, does anyone know of any games available similar to Shining Force or Phantasy Star on Android? (even though I've got the ROMS and Sega Megadrive Collection on my 360)

  10. Crisp

    Fiddlers who weren't too fussed about the copyrights of Nintendo

    If I already own the cartridge, then don't I already have a licence to play the game? If I want to play Pokémon LeafGreen on my phone, I'm not depriving anyone of their money if I've already bought the game.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This may be a dumb question, but why are emulators banned?

    None of these people are supplying roms so the only arguament I can see is the idea that emulators may encourage copyright infringement, but if you go far enough down that train of thought you'd end up banning web pages for the same reason.

    You could argue that emulators require you to pirate roms as you can't buy them any more (and roms by their nature are in a format shifted grey area), but the ban presumably also includes things like Dosbox and Scumvm for which you can buy games for legally.

    1. PaulR79

      "None of these people are supplying roms so the only arguament I can see is the idea that emulators may encourage copyright infringement, but if you go far enough down that train of thought you'd end up banning web pages for the same reason."

      You mean like Virgin Media, BT, Sky et al being required to block access to The Pirate Bay because it can be used to pirate illegal content? Unfortunately we're beyond that point already. I'm surprised you forgot about that happening really since it wasn't a small thing even if all it did was prevent very casual users from accessing the site.

    2. Sandtitz Silver badge

      @AC

      "This may be a dumb question, but why are emulators banned?"

      It's simple. Apple wants a cut of every sale on IOS. Since the emulators are free and the ROMs are freely downloaded there is zero income for Apple.

      Without emulators the end-users have only the option of buying the game from App Store thus providing income for Apple.

      1. Frankee Llonnygog

        Re: @AC

        Apple also don't want to be sued by Nintendo

        1. Observer1959

          Re: @AC

          I have a feeling we might soon see the AppleTV/Mac mini all-in-one box showing up soon that will play games on the TV. You will be able to buy games from the ATV and use iPhones with controller housings to play them.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @Sandtitz

        You're an idiot. If Apple was trying to cut out stuff that doesn't make them any money, they wouldn't allow free apps on the App Store at all. They make a tiny fraction of their overall income from the App Store, and Google Play charges the same 30% Apple does, so complaining about Apple "wanting their cut" is just plain ignorant.

        The problem is that these games are not available at all on either iOS or Android, you can only legally play them if you have a Wii or old console. You can only play them in an emulator using a ROM that copyright law doesn't allow anyone to legally use. The fault is as much copyright law and Nintendo's refusal to port the games to iOS/Android as it is Apple for cracking down on emulators.

        The main difference is that if Google was forced to remove the emulator from the Play store, it could be added to alternative app stores, whereas with Apple you only have their app store unless you jailbreak.

    3. Anonymous Bullard

      This may be a dumb question, but why are emulators banned?

      It can be argued that the machine instructions they are trying to emulate is the original company's IP.

      Personally, if the company of an old system were to release an "official" emulator, I would gladly buy it and some games.

    4. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

      This may be a dumb question, but why are emulators banned?

      I think the reasoning goes something like this: Apple wants to have total control over the software which can be run on their devices. This is so that all purchases have to be through their store, and they get a cut. If they were to allow emulators, then this gives a route for arbitrary code to be run on the device. This includes both the ROMs for the original software on the emulated device, and also anything that can be compiled into that ROM format. Developers could then sell their software in ROM format, say, "run it though XYZ emulator" and avoid the Apple Tax.

      And for those who are commenting that Android is the same; it is perfectly possible to load nay arbitrary app onto an Android device, without going through the Android store, it simply requires changing the setting to allow it, which is off by default. This is why Android tablets are used in business, for running bespoke software, and Apple devices are not (except by sales droids), because no software house in their right mind is going to let Apple have their source code, and a cut of their profits.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @Loyal Commenter

        You're partially right. Apple does want to have control over the software that runs on their devices. If they supported Java, for instance, and Android did, developers may write Java apps to be able to catch both platforms at once. The reason Apple doesn't want that is not really because they're worried about "their cut" (remember, App Store revenue is a fraction of Apple's income - they make almost all their money on selling hardware) They're worried about the user experience, having apps that have a consistent UI is what they're selling. Using some cross platform solution that has its own GUI toolkit subverts that model.

        Running only code that Apple has signed also enhances security. It isn't a guarantee of security, and allowing unsigned code doesn't mean you will be hacked, but only a fool would argue that signed code doesn't help. There are tradeoffs for that enhanced security, however. You can choose which model you wish by choosing either iOS or Android.

        It is pretty well documented that iOS devices are used more than Android in business, at least in the US. It may be different in Europe. You're simply wrong that you have to submit source code to Apple. You submit binaries to Apple, not source code. Nor would you give them any cut since you wouldn't charging your employees for internal applications! If Apple insisted on having a cut for everything they wouldn't allow free apps.

        Anyway, the process for internal applications is quite different, I don't know all the details but Apple has a page that describes what they do for corporate managed and BYOD devices under MDM, and a lot of whitepapers for developer resources for creating those internal applications. https://www.apple.com/ipad/business/it/management.html

        IBM wouldn't be partnering with Apple in the corporate market if iOS worked the way you think, because providing IBM applications and their help in creating bespoke applications is one of the major things they bring.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I think you should familiarise yourself with Apple Enterprise Deployment. You're completely wrong with your assertions at the end there. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried ;)

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Also Apple never request anyone's source code. Where did you get that bizarre idea from?

  12. Ian Bush
    Headmaster

    "One emulatrix tweeted:"

    ...

    "He later added:"

    Sigh...

    1. Kristian Walsh Silver badge

      Indeed (and upvoted). From a site that once employed a comment moderatrix, I would have expected better...

  13. Ross K Silver badge

    Certain slab-fondling fanbois will soon be forced to cough up for a Wii U wave goodbye to their childhoods following Apple's decision to close a loophole in the next version of iOS 8 that allowed console emulators to run on iPhones and iPads.

    In your rush to pick on the Wii U you appear to have forgotten that Nintendo already have a mobile gaming platform called the DS, which sells quite well...

    I've never studied business but I would assume that Nintendo would prefer to make money out of selling games to DS owners rather than having their IP pirated by Apple owners.

    1. Sooty

      except, they have some old emulated snes games that they only sell for the wii-u, you cant get them on a DS or a Wii.

      I never thought I'd say this, but at least with Apple you can buy it once on your account and download it to all of your devices

  14. Amorous Cowherder

    Simple arse-covering by Apple

    If emulators are running there is a chance you could be naughty boys and girls and download the copyrighted ROMS you need to play the games. Nintendo for example, are notorously litigious and Apple probably doesn't want Nintendo banging in their door demanding financial recompense because Apple's systems allowed people to rip off Nintendo games when Apple could have easily prevented it.

    1. Hilibnist
      Thumb Up

      Re: Simple arse-covering by Apple

      Agreed - Apple allow emulators but require clear proof that the app publisher is licensed to distribute the content.

      For Speccy fans, Spectaculator is good but only offers a limited number of games for that very reason. The Elite bundles (backed by Steve Wilcox of iOS Bluetooth Spectrum Keyboard Kickstarter notoriety) appears to have been ejected from Apple's Appstore because of content licensing disputes.

      Sounds fair to me... And if you're an Apple hater, why would Apple want to compromise its 30% App Tax to compensate a litigious developer whose code has been unfairly sold with a knock-off emulator?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Simple arse-covering by Apple

        It would be nice if Apple does succeed in closing off this last method for people to run the emulator that Nintendo would finally port the games to iOS.

        I'm sure many people would pay for them if given a chance, people aren't using the emulators because they're cheapstakes, they're using them because it is the only way to play the games.

        1. FrankAlphaXII

          Re: Simple arse-covering by Apple

          Unless it winds up being a Nintendo iPhone, don't hold your breath. Nintendo does not do third party licensing, and if you have ever had the misfortune of playing the CD-i Zelda and Mario games, you know why that is. Thank the Dutch for fucking that one up for everyone else.

  15. Gis Bun

    Typical Apple

    Wrecking more than fixing.

  16. David Nash Silver badge

    Isn't it less a case of copyright re. old ROMS and so on, more a case that they don't want you running a VM, eg. Java, or game emulators, etc. that could open the way to non app store-approved software.

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    LOL. Apple knows what's best for you.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I know they won't miss me because I don't spend enough in Genius Bars

    but after being on the iPhone train since the iPhone 2, I'm out of the Walled Garden when my contract is up in January. Plenty of other reasons similar to the emulator ban though. I'd already made the decision 3 months ago and this just reinforces it.

    I have an old Droid Razr acting as a bluetooth terminal for an auto diagnostic tool, and a Nvidia Shield as a game device. Android has me hooked.

    Apple won't miss me anyway, I don't queue up to spend $300 on launch day for every device - I skip every other one, only buy the S model anyway since the 3Gs, and don't care to own an iMac, iPad, iPad Mini or Macbook. Since I'm not a wealthy or trust fund spender, they won't miss my tiny contribution anyway.

    The nerds involved in Android already welcome me as one of their own.

  19. Toastan Buttar
    Stop

    Zed Ex

    I've got 3D Monster Maze running on my Android using Zed Ex from the Play Store.

    I feel like I have been posthumously awarded 500 points.

  20. Henry Wertz 1 Gold badge

    Apple blocks software because they feel like it...

    Apple blocks software because they feel like it... film at 11.

    Time for y'all to get Android kit. I can stick on whatever emulators I want.

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It only comes to prove...

    ...old school games were leaps and bounds ahead of today high-res garbage gameplay. Remove the graphics, and the games are utter fail.

    People are searching for 15, 20 years old Nintendo games and playing them in whatever new hardware they can. Screw the graphics, they want the old IP.

    How about EMBRACING these old IPs from Nintendo, and release them all, officially? They were cash cows back then, they remain cash cows to those that played them on the original platforms.

    Playstation 3 still lets you play Playstation 1 games, if you buy them off the Playstation Store™. There were even some Sega Genesis / Mega Drive games, emulated straight off the install disks suited for the PS3.

    Apple should learn to make money selling IPs people want, not blocking them. This time, all of the games are Nintendo IP.

  22. Dana W

    I saw that. I sold my iPad and bought an Android tablet. It runs emulators just fine. I'm tired of being force fed junk app versions of classic games, usually with LOTS of in App purchases.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like