Post

Replies

Boosts

Views

Activity

4.3a Refuses to appeal or seek a solution, and the game production will solve the 4.3a problem for 2 years and be revised for half a year.
Our game was written by Cocos Creator version 3.8.5 ‌TypeScript, which took the team nearly 2 years to complete. At the beginning, my application was not defined as 4.3a. The first four reviews were all normal feedback questions. We revised the questions. After the last review rejected 4.3A, we also suspected that the reasons such as game creativity, game copywriting and game art might be close to other applications. Then our team added functional innovations that other applications in the Apple Store didn't have, and the original art was original. We created new art again because of 4.3a, and also revised many places that may be similar to other developers, including that we removed all SDK modules except Apple Pay and Apple Login, and it also showed that 4.3a refused, and we have revised no less than 20 versions or failed. Our business code except the game engine code is newly developed by us and should not be duplicated with other developers' code. Is it because the JSC file and binary file output by JavaScript code are similar to those of other developers? Can we check our original code? We really want to put it on the Apple Store. We guarantee that the game was originally written. We can provide any proof, including but not limited to (GIT code submission records and codes from the beginning to today, art original proof, proof that the game mode innovation ability is not consistent with other developers' concepts, etc.) Cocos creator Engine Address: https://www.cocos.com/creator-download We have been put on the shelves in app stores such as WeChat applet and Android, and we are deeply loved by users in other channels. Dear audit, can you manually check our game code and look at the game to experience it? I believe that as the greatest technology company in the world, Apple's official staff are very professional, knowledgeable and innovative, so that Apple players can get a unique and high-quality experience. However, this repeated 4.3a refusal makes me very suspicious. So many games that use cocos game engine in the world are on the Apple store, why do we independently write the rest of the code except the game engine? Every time the reason for refusing is this passage, we have revised it for half a year, and no less than 20 game versions have been changed in half a year. Hello, The issues we previously identified still need your attention. If you have any questions, we are here to help. Reply to this message in App Store Connect and let us know. Review Environment Submission ID: 68bd1e18-6eaa-4a19-976e-c7b2e1ff0e44 Review date: June 28, 2025 Version reviewed: 2.3.0 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We noticed your app still shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps submitted to the App Store by other developers, with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps is a form of spam that creates clutter and makes it difficult for users to discover new apps. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a unique app with distinct content and functionality. Support Reply to this message in your preferred language if you need assistance. If you need additional support, use the Contact Us module. Consult with fellow developers and Apple engineers on the Apple Developer Forums. Request an App Review Appointment at Meet with Apple to discuss your app's review. Appointments subject to availability during your local business hours on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Provide feedback on this message and your review experience by completing a short survey.
1
0
630
Aug ’26
Unique application rejected due to guideline 4.3(a)-Design-Spam.
Section 1: Our game was developed using Cocos Creator 3.8.5, written in TypeScript. The team spent nearly two years completing it. Initially, our submission wasn't classified under Guideline 4.3(a). The first four reviews provided normal feedback, which we addressed. However, after a subsequent rejection citing 4.3(a), we considered whether similarities in gameplay concepts, narrative, or art assets might exist. In response, our team introduced unique features not found in other App Store applications. We completely redesigned our original art assets to ensure originality and extensively modified aspects potentially resembling other developers’ work. This included removing all third-party SDK modules except Apple Pay and Sign in with Apple. Despite these significant efforts, we still received a 4.3(a) rejection. We have now iterated over 20 versions but continue to face this issue.  Section 2: Our game’s business logic code (excluding the Cocos engine code) is entirely original and should not duplicate others' work. Could the rejection stem from similarities in compiled JSC files or binaries generated from JavaScript? Would it be possible for the review team to examine our source code for verification? We are deeply committed to launching on the App Store and can provide comprehensive proof of originality, including but not limited to: Full GIT commit history and source code from inception to present  Documentation proving original art creation  Evidence demonstrating unique gameplay mechanics distinct from other developers  Cocos Creator Engine: https://www.cocos.com/creator-download Games developed with Cocos have successfully launched on platforms like WeChat Mini Games and Android app stores in China, where they are well-received by users. Honorable Review Team, could you please conduct a manual inspection of our source code and evaluate the gameplay? We believe Apple—the world’s most innovative technology company—employs highly professional and insightful experts dedicated to delivering unique, high-quality experiences for players. However, the persistent 4.3(a) rejections are concerning, especially since numerous Cocos-based games are approved globally. We’ve revised the game over six months across 20+ versions, yet each rejection cites identical reasoning:  Apple's Rejection Message Translation: Hello, The issues we previously identified still require your attention. If you have any questions, we’re here to help. Please reply to this message in App Store Connect. Review Details Submission ID: 68 bd1e 18-6 EAA-4a 19-976 e-c 7 B2 E1 ff 0 e 44 Date Reviewed: June 28, 2025 Version Reviewed: 2.3.0 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We continue to find that your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as other apps submitted to the App Store with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps constitutes spam, creates clutter, and diminishes user discovery of genuinely new applications. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a truly original application with distinct content and functionality. Support Reply in your preferred language if you need assistance. For further support, use the Contact Us module.  Seek advice from fellow developers and Apple engineers on the Apple Developer Forums.  Request an App Review consultation via Meet with Apple (availability varies based on local hours, Tuesdays and Thursdays).  Provide feedback on this process and your review experience by completing a brief survey.
1
0
304
Jun ’25
Unique application rejected due to guideline 4.3(a)-Design-Spam.
Here is the English translation of your content:  Section 1: Our game was developed using Cocos Creator 3.8.5, written in TypeScript. The team spent nearly two years completing it. Initially, our submission wasn't classified under Guideline 4.3(a). The first four reviews provided normal feedback, which we addressed. However, after a subsequent rejection citing 4.3(a), we considered whether similarities in gameplay concepts, narrative, or art assets might exist. In response, our team introduced unique features not found in other App Store applications. We completely redesigned our original art assets to ensure originality and extensively modified aspects potentially resembling other developers’ work. This included removing all third-party SDK modules except Apple Pay and Sign in with Apple. Despite these significant efforts, we still received a 4.3(a) rejection. We have now iterated over 20 versions but continue to face this issue.  Section 2: Our game’s business logic code (excluding the Cocos engine code) is entirely original and should not duplicate others' work. Could the rejection stem from similarities in compiled JSC files or binaries generated from JavaScript? Would it be possible for the review team to examine our source code for verification? We are deeply committed to launching on the App Store and can provide comprehensive proof of originality, including but not limited to: Full GIT commit history and source code from inception to present  Documentation proving original art creation  Evidence demonstrating unique gameplay mechanics distinct from other developers  Cocos Creator Engine: https://www.cocos.com/creator-download Games developed with Cocos have successfully launched on platforms like WeChat Mini Games and Android app stores in China, where they are well-received by users. Honorable Review Team, could you please conduct a manual inspection of our source code and evaluate the gameplay? We believe Apple—the world’s most innovative technology company—employs highly professional and insightful experts dedicated to delivering unique, high-quality experiences for players. However, the persistent 4.3(a) rejections are concerning, especially since numerous Cocos-based games are approved globally. We’ve revised the game over six months across 20+ versions, yet each rejection cites identical reasoning:  Apple's Rejection Message Translation: Hello, The issues we previously identified still require your attention. If you have any questions, we’re here to help. Please reply to this message in App Store Connect. Review Details Submission ID: 68 bd1e 18-6 EAA-4a 19-976 e-c 7 B2 E1 ff 0 e 44 Date Reviewed: June 28, 2025 Version Reviewed: 2.3.0 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We continue to find that your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as other apps submitted to the App Store with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps constitutes spam, creates clutter, and diminishes user discovery of genuinely new applications. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a truly original application with distinct content and functionality. Support Reply in your preferred language if you need assistance. For further support, use the Contact Us module.  Seek advice from fellow developers and Apple engineers on the Apple Developer Forums.  Request an App Review consultation via Meet with Apple (availability varies based on local hours, Tuesdays and Thursdays).  Provide feedback on this process and your review experience by completing a brief survey.
0
0
171
Jun ’25
4.3a Refuses to appeal or seek a solution, and the game production will solve the 4.3a problem for 2 years and be revised for half a year.
Our game was written by Cocos Creator version 3.8.5 ‌TypeScript, which took the team nearly 2 years to complete. At the beginning, my application was not defined as 4.3a. The first four reviews were all normal feedback questions. We revised the questions. After the last review rejected 4.3A, we also suspected that the reasons such as game creativity, game copywriting and game art might be close to other applications. Then our team added functional innovations that other applications in the Apple Store didn't have, and the original art was original. We created new art again because of 4.3a, and also revised many places that may be similar to other developers, including that we removed all SDK modules except Apple Pay and Apple Login, and it also showed that 4.3a refused, and we have revised no less than 20 versions or failed. Our business code except the game engine code is newly developed by us and should not be duplicated with other developers' code. Is it because the JSC file and binary file output by JavaScript code are similar to those of other developers? Can we check our original code? We really want to put it on the Apple Store. We guarantee that the game was originally written. We can provide any proof, including but not limited to (GIT code submission records and codes from the beginning to today, art original proof, proof that the game mode innovation ability is not consistent with other developers' concepts, etc.) Cocos creator Engine Address: https://www.cocos.com/creator-download We have been put on the shelves in app stores such as WeChat applet and Android, and we are deeply loved by users in other channels. Dear audit, can you manually check our game code and look at the game to experience it? I believe that as the greatest technology company in the world, Apple's official staff are very professional, knowledgeable and innovative, so that Apple players can get a unique and high-quality experience. However, this repeated 4.3a refusal makes me very suspicious. So many games that use cocos game engine in the world are on the Apple store, why do we independently write the rest of the code except the game engine? Every time the reason for refusing is this passage, we have revised it for half a year, and no less than 20 game versions have been changed in half a year. Hello, The issues we previously identified still need your attention. If you have any questions, we are here to help. Reply to this message in App Store Connect and let us know. Review Environment Submission ID: 68bd1e18-6eaa-4a19-976e-c7b2e1ff0e44 Review date: June 28, 2025 Version reviewed: 2.3.0 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We noticed your app still shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as apps submitted to the App Store by other developers, with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps is a form of spam that creates clutter and makes it difficult for users to discover new apps. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a unique app with distinct content and functionality. Support Reply to this message in your preferred language if you need assistance. If you need additional support, use the Contact Us module. Consult with fellow developers and Apple engineers on the Apple Developer Forums. Request an App Review Appointment at Meet with Apple to discuss your app's review. Appointments subject to availability during your local business hours on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Provide feedback on this message and your review experience by completing a short survey.
Replies
1
Boosts
0
Views
630
Activity
Aug ’26
Unique application rejected due to guideline 4.3(a)-Design-Spam.
Section 1: Our game was developed using Cocos Creator 3.8.5, written in TypeScript. The team spent nearly two years completing it. Initially, our submission wasn't classified under Guideline 4.3(a). The first four reviews provided normal feedback, which we addressed. However, after a subsequent rejection citing 4.3(a), we considered whether similarities in gameplay concepts, narrative, or art assets might exist. In response, our team introduced unique features not found in other App Store applications. We completely redesigned our original art assets to ensure originality and extensively modified aspects potentially resembling other developers’ work. This included removing all third-party SDK modules except Apple Pay and Sign in with Apple. Despite these significant efforts, we still received a 4.3(a) rejection. We have now iterated over 20 versions but continue to face this issue.  Section 2: Our game’s business logic code (excluding the Cocos engine code) is entirely original and should not duplicate others' work. Could the rejection stem from similarities in compiled JSC files or binaries generated from JavaScript? Would it be possible for the review team to examine our source code for verification? We are deeply committed to launching on the App Store and can provide comprehensive proof of originality, including but not limited to: Full GIT commit history and source code from inception to present  Documentation proving original art creation  Evidence demonstrating unique gameplay mechanics distinct from other developers  Cocos Creator Engine: https://www.cocos.com/creator-download Games developed with Cocos have successfully launched on platforms like WeChat Mini Games and Android app stores in China, where they are well-received by users. Honorable Review Team, could you please conduct a manual inspection of our source code and evaluate the gameplay? We believe Apple—the world’s most innovative technology company—employs highly professional and insightful experts dedicated to delivering unique, high-quality experiences for players. However, the persistent 4.3(a) rejections are concerning, especially since numerous Cocos-based games are approved globally. We’ve revised the game over six months across 20+ versions, yet each rejection cites identical reasoning:  Apple's Rejection Message Translation: Hello, The issues we previously identified still require your attention. If you have any questions, we’re here to help. Please reply to this message in App Store Connect. Review Details Submission ID: 68 bd1e 18-6 EAA-4a 19-976 e-c 7 B2 E1 ff 0 e 44 Date Reviewed: June 28, 2025 Version Reviewed: 2.3.0 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We continue to find that your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as other apps submitted to the App Store with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps constitutes spam, creates clutter, and diminishes user discovery of genuinely new applications. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a truly original application with distinct content and functionality. Support Reply in your preferred language if you need assistance. For further support, use the Contact Us module.  Seek advice from fellow developers and Apple engineers on the Apple Developer Forums.  Request an App Review consultation via Meet with Apple (availability varies based on local hours, Tuesdays and Thursdays).  Provide feedback on this process and your review experience by completing a brief survey.
Replies
1
Boosts
0
Views
304
Activity
Jun ’25
Unique application rejected due to guideline 4.3(a)-Design-Spam.
Here is the English translation of your content:  Section 1: Our game was developed using Cocos Creator 3.8.5, written in TypeScript. The team spent nearly two years completing it. Initially, our submission wasn't classified under Guideline 4.3(a). The first four reviews provided normal feedback, which we addressed. However, after a subsequent rejection citing 4.3(a), we considered whether similarities in gameplay concepts, narrative, or art assets might exist. In response, our team introduced unique features not found in other App Store applications. We completely redesigned our original art assets to ensure originality and extensively modified aspects potentially resembling other developers’ work. This included removing all third-party SDK modules except Apple Pay and Sign in with Apple. Despite these significant efforts, we still received a 4.3(a) rejection. We have now iterated over 20 versions but continue to face this issue.  Section 2: Our game’s business logic code (excluding the Cocos engine code) is entirely original and should not duplicate others' work. Could the rejection stem from similarities in compiled JSC files or binaries generated from JavaScript? Would it be possible for the review team to examine our source code for verification? We are deeply committed to launching on the App Store and can provide comprehensive proof of originality, including but not limited to: Full GIT commit history and source code from inception to present  Documentation proving original art creation  Evidence demonstrating unique gameplay mechanics distinct from other developers  Cocos Creator Engine: https://www.cocos.com/creator-download Games developed with Cocos have successfully launched on platforms like WeChat Mini Games and Android app stores in China, where they are well-received by users. Honorable Review Team, could you please conduct a manual inspection of our source code and evaluate the gameplay? We believe Apple—the world’s most innovative technology company—employs highly professional and insightful experts dedicated to delivering unique, high-quality experiences for players. However, the persistent 4.3(a) rejections are concerning, especially since numerous Cocos-based games are approved globally. We’ve revised the game over six months across 20+ versions, yet each rejection cites identical reasoning:  Apple's Rejection Message Translation: Hello, The issues we previously identified still require your attention. If you have any questions, we’re here to help. Please reply to this message in App Store Connect. Review Details Submission ID: 68 bd1e 18-6 EAA-4a 19-976 e-c 7 B2 E1 ff 0 e 44 Date Reviewed: June 28, 2025 Version Reviewed: 2.3.0 Guideline 4.3(a) - Design - Spam We continue to find that your app shares a similar binary, metadata, and/or concept as other apps submitted to the App Store with only minor differences. Submitting similar or repackaged apps constitutes spam, creates clutter, and diminishes user discovery of genuinely new applications. Next Steps Since we do not accept spam apps on the App Store, we encourage you to review your app concept and submit a truly original application with distinct content and functionality. Support Reply in your preferred language if you need assistance. For further support, use the Contact Us module.  Seek advice from fellow developers and Apple engineers on the Apple Developer Forums.  Request an App Review consultation via Meet with Apple (availability varies based on local hours, Tuesdays and Thursdays).  Provide feedback on this process and your review experience by completing a brief survey.
Replies
0
Boosts
0
Views
171
Activity
Jun ’25