
Only Select Developers Can Publish Google Daydream Apps Until 2017 - prostoalex
http://www.roadtovr.com/daydream-access-program-publish-vr-apps-google-play-store-2017-dap/
======
apatters
I encourage developers to wait for a more open platform before jumping on the
VR bandwagon.

We don't need Google to curate VR apps for us. The PC did just fine with
anyone being able to develop and distribute whatever kind of app they wanted,
in fact it created far more business opportunity for developers than mobile
ever did. We screwed up when it came to mobile by letting Google and Apple get
away with their land grabs. Now we're paying them until the end of time for
the privilege of being able to market our own software.

We don't need Google owning and taxing this space as well.

~~~
gman83
What? The PC didn't do fine with distributing software at all, at least not
before Steam came along. On Linux the situation was ok with package managers
like apt, but on Windows it was terrible. You basically couldn't buy any games
online, you'd have to install from DVD, and every game basically had to
implement an inbuilt update/patching system.

Google Play/Steam/iOS App Store may be a tax, but let's not pretend something
similar isn't necessary.

~~~
kybernetyk
I don't know. I had my little shareware programs up for download in 1998.

Software thrived on the PC since its original inception. I remember swapping
shareware diskettes with my friends back when we had no reasonable access to
the internet.

Hell, even DOOM was released as shareware.

A lack of infrastructure is not the same as a bunch of gatekeepers you have to
pay for the possibility to distribute your software. Today distributing mobile
apps would be highly trivial as every smartphone is connected to the internet.
But there are artificial limitations put in place by platform "owners" so they
can "curate" the software.

Call me dumb but from a freedom perspective I would prefer the 1998 situation
to what we have now with mobile.

~~~
Ntrails
>Call me dumb but from a freedom perspective I would prefer the 1998 situation
to what we have now with mobile.

The price of the Apple store comes in against the risk of malware downloads as
I google for "speedfan.net" and end up with 2 new shopping toolbars and a mitm
ad inserter for my browser. (I imagine there's a similar possibility when
Sideloading android apks vs getting from the play store)

Sure, freedom is great and all - but there are some gnarly consequences
(especially for non expert users) which often result in less security.

~~~
kybernetyk
>Sure, freedom is great and all - but there are some gnarly consequences
(especially for non expert users) which often result in less security.

So because some people don't know better and download suspicious-file.exe all
our freedoms should be limited?

~~~
fixermark
Because some people don't know better and download suspicious-file.exe, the
market will tend to grow curated solutions, and those solutions will draw the
finite resources in the ecosystem away from alternatives.

That's not really "your freedoms limited" except for opportunity cost---though
in the large, the difference between "It could be that way, but nobody really
wants to put the effort in besides some hardcore hobbyists" and "It is license
/ legally banned from being that way" may end up indistinguishable in result.

------
MBlume
My guess: badly done VR makes you nauseous. Humans _remember_ under what
circumstances they've become nauseous. Google does not want their platform
associated in people's minds with nausea, so they're curating.

~~~
_ZeD_
My 2c guess: porn.

~~~
markatkinson
Ha. There is already enough VR porn that out there.

------
steventhedev
This confused me until I remembered that Google is recycling the term
Daydream. Search for Android Daydream and you'll find a few results for the
old lockscreen API (after all the VR hype).

Can we get a VR added in parentheses to disambiguate the title?

~~~
elaus
This reuse of "Daydream" has been bugging me for month whenever I read about
the VR project. Seems like not many people ever took notice of (lockscreen)
Daydream or otherwise Google wouldn't just recycle the name.

------
markatkinson
Me and a partner have been developing a game for the release of Daydream this
year on Unreal. We are hobbyists who decided to take a stab at doing something
more professional. My concern is that just because we lack a track record of
game development we will get rejected from DAP.

Now there is a mad rush to get a website up, and content on the internet for
the curators. I must be honest I didn't see this one coming!

Anyway, we are excited to get our content out there and have put in a lot of
time and research into understanding what makes a good game. From consistent
and strong game thematic, to many many hours of play-ability testing. Will
definitely post a link to HN once we have our content up.

------
arpit
Honestly, I do think this is a good thing. The problem I have with VR isn't
just the number of apps but the quality and differences in experiences (I am
not much of a gamer and the stores are 90% games. Would love to see more
'apps').

DayDream could be a lot of people's first introduction to VR and so having a
smaller library of high quality content for a few months before opening the
floodgates may not be a bad idea.

------
rjknight
Why are they curating by choosing which developers to allow, rather than by
choosing which apps to allow, similar to the iOS App Store?

~~~
rspeer
I think because it's so hard to do VR well that they'd have to reject almost
all the apps.

They'd have a choice between a terrible first impression for users, or a
terrible first impression for developers.

------
Rezo
I can understand them wanting to curate at the start, first impressions are
critical and shovelware (quickly ported existing Android games and apps) could
poison the well.

I'm personally highly interested in developing for Daydream and VR in general,
I believe Google's trying to make VR affordable for the masses. Waiting a few
months isn't a big deal, if it will help establish a quality bar for what is a
good mobile VR app.

------
Shorel
Google is trying to test the 'VIP club' effect that worked so well for gmail
and facebook in the past.

However, they are not the only kids in the block this time.

------
_pmf_
Google sure is consistent in guaranteeing that their innovation projects are
dead at arrival.

~~~
msabalau
To be fair, this is _slightly_ less lame than Glass, where even the published
developers were prohibited from making money by either charging for the app or
advertising.

------
dovdov
But.. open.. and.. Apple's walled garden.. and..

~~~
detaro
What do restrictions for apps on the Play store have to do with walled garden
vs open? If the block you from loading VR apps from outside the store, _that_
would be a walled garden. The stores itself IMHO are very similar already.

