This Thursday Craneballs Studios is unleashing Overkill 3, the latest entry in their ultra-popular shooter series, onto the world. Overkill 3 switches up the normal Overkill formula by pulling the camera back to a third-person perspective and adding in cover mechanics. The game has been soft-launched since last September and has undergone several tweaks and balances in the time since, and generally it's been well-recieved by those who were already fans of the other free to play Overkill games. With the official worldwide launch just a couple of days away, Craneballs has prepared a new trailer for Overkill 3, and given Apple's recent crusade against weapons and violence in the front-facing parts of the App Store, the developers are erring on the side of caution with this latest video. See if you can spot what's missing.

Did you catch that? Nobody in the trailer was holding actual guns! It was like a crazy flashback to when I'd play pretend guns with my friends as a kid. Now, I'm not sure if this was an Apple-mandated change or if Craneballs is just being exceedingly cautious with its App Store media assets. Or perhaps it's Craneballs simply making their own statement on how silly the inconsistent rejections and rule enforcing can be in the App Store. Whatever the case, I think the video's pretty funny, and Overkill 3 is looking pretty darn good, so swing on buy late Wednesday or early Thursday to give the full official launch version a download for yourself.

  • Based Xatu

    Their system is inconsistent. World zombination and a few new games have guns all over their screenshots.

    • Xenomorphking

      Yeah, and GTA Chinatown Wars was just updated today and it still has people shooting at people. Do developers have to get updates approved? If they do then someone just approved something they shouldn't have. I personally think Apple is giving the big developers a break on it. I reviewers are just people and make mistakes but since Apple wants all guns pointed at people gone that should be easy to see. The only excuse a reviewer has is they are literally blind (I have nothing against blind people just fyi).

  • magmasid

    How about modern combat?

    • Xenomorphking

      Yep they still have guns in their iTunes page.

  • one.sixty.four

    Hahaha!

  • RomanReigns

    Hell,even boom beach and modern combat 5 has guns in their screemshots..well why? just because they are supercell and gameloft?!

    • Rip73

      Actually it has nothing to do with whoever the developer is but has everything to do with rule 3.6 of the App Store Guidlines.
      A rule that has always been there since the very beginning.
      "Apps with App icons, screenshots, and previews that do not adhere to the 4+ age rating will be rejected".
      Guns and violence against human characters breach the 4+ age rating. Simple as that.
      The rule was previously not as stringently enforced and generally applied in accordance with the rating of the app itself but is now being enforced across the board as the rule is written. It's not open to alternate interpretation.
      It can't be retroactively applied either even if it was only a case of it not being applied before but anything going for updates or new releases will have it applied for the time being.
      Consider its implementation at the moment as a warning that the rule exists.

      • RomanReigns

        so,does that mean these big companies are still breaching the rules? i mean im not against the developer giants but this rules apply for them too bro..just expressing an opinion 🙂

      • Rip73

        I'm pretty sure I answered that when I mentioned in the last post that it cannot be retroactively applied.
        If the app is already approved prior to this rule being enforced, it's already approved.
        Irrelevant of who the developer is.

      • Tallgeese

        OBJECTION! According to the Previous TA post about this topic (Feb. 12th), this was applied to updates for Gunslugs2, however the screenshots for Gunslugs2 were already previously approved prior to Apple's current enforcement. You did state that this rule was being enforced for updates but since these screenshots were previously approved before the update that would mean they were not allowed to keep previous ones meaning that would constitute a retroactive change to already "grandfathered in" screenshots! Aha, technicality! Apple could pull all offending material and demand the blurring of guns, but that would mean they would potentially lose a lot of money in alienating their app store developers. As it is neither side wants to make this an argument over guns, which is stupid considering................................................................................................................All Guns Blazing is all about shamelessly shooting the po po and ................................................................................................World Zombination, part of my Featured page currently has people with guns in several screenshots and it was updated recently...

      • Tallgeese

        I see someone already mentioned Zombination and you could say well that's just zombies, zombies aren't people (your post also mentions the guns have to be pointed at people, not their closest approximations that we can shoot with little remorse save nazis, terrorists, robots, aliens, and monsters, no no, not the cute pixar monsters, ones that just look uglier and probably wouldn't vote in a manner agreeable to us, especially if we gave them the ability too and they could stifle their killing frenzy long enough to register and get to the polling place if they aren't able to vote by mail). Well the "top-grossing" and recently updated Killshot (who's icon is that of a sniper looking through a scope at you, the viewer, seems about as personal and possibly panic-attack inducing to anyone who's ever been in a hostile sniperscape ever (come on iDictionary totally a real word), also that dude has some seriously scary looking eyebrows) and Underworld Empire (who actually have people (albeit one with a Jason-style mask on, and is Jason really a person, or just every child's who's every accidentally flipped channels during Halloween's unkillable ever-present nightmare?) being aimed at in its screenshots as well.) seem to have updated without having to change their screenshots. It's times like these I really wish I could just make a game quickly called battle axe where all of the screens are just a guy with a battle axe almost chopping into people (office workers I hope, no reason, I just think the non sequitur of a large burly viking running through cubicles chasing salary men deserves its own horror franchise, it practically writes itself), or he could be looking through a scope attached to his battle axe or we could just blur all of the battle axes or put up a black screen shot that says "so violent and XTREEEM that it can't be shown on the appstore!" Also maybe a guitar and flames and a "Don't Tread On Me" snake. Tribal marketing alone would eat that part up. Features should read: "Actual birthday clowns where consulted to get the blood spray just right. Viewer facing camera shots can be shared via Facebook or Twitter of either the sadistic glee or ennui experiencer is enjoying or saddled with. In-App purchases available via in-app purchase. *No ads. *Except when you're about to click through some stupidly repetitive menu choices. Warning: This game features a surprising lack of dinosaurs. And we mean surprisingly, like ----, a velociraptor mode would have totally tied this game together and suddenly the narrative would've made a lot more sense. Also we could have added a whole 'nother "E" to "XTREEEM" because of the "E" in "Velociraptor." ----. ...................................................................................................No further questions, your honor.

      • Rip73

        Updates go through the Approval process as well.
        some will apply the rule. Some won't.
        There is lots and lots of different people approving updates and new releases.
        Lots and lots of different perspectives and interpretations.
        Some will slip through. Some will not.
        It's the human element.

        They could just apply it retroactively if they chose to, it is after all their store so they can do whatever they really want to, they make the rules and can enforce them, or not, but it would be more than a bit ridiculous, and very choresome, to pull everything that breaks the rules.

        And you're really missing the point, the rule has been ignored up to this point.
        It won't be anymore. Or it'll be adjusted. Or pulled.
        But it's very clear that it's there now and that it is being enforced at the moment,
        Therefore, developers, adjust accordingly.

        As to my post and how you're interpreting it as I said guns need to be pointed at people, I actually didn't say that. I transcribed the rule as it is written in the guidelines. No more, no less.
        You're interpretation is that I said guns need to be pointed at people and that is where the human element comes in because I didn't actually say that and that is why is why there is some inconsistencies.

        Irrelevant of that though, everybody knows about the rule now. The rules are there to be read. Developers should be reading them and acting accordingly.
        Too many developers have skated by, don't familairisie themselves with the rules that are there and then complain when they are enforced when the actual fault is their own.
        So much stuff comes through for approval that people who approve get overloaded and some slips through, granted, but it's still no excuse for developers or their marketing dept not to read the rules in the first place.
        Which leads us to this situation where a blanket application of a rule is required in order to make people go back and read the rules in which they have to play by if they want something on the store.

        Can argue about it all day long but the facts are the rule is there, the rule has always been there. It's there for a reason.
        So read the rules before you submit. It's not too difficult.

      • Tallgeese

        The rule seems nonsensical and its implementation is uneven. Reading is easy, understanding is difficult. The tradeoff of blurring or removing guns to make the game seem less violent doesn't change how violent it actually is, it just misrepresents it which would make it easier for someone to unknowingly and therefore accidentally download a much more violent game than it was previously thought to be. This is most likely Apple's feeble attempt at combating the bad PR video games get every time they're said to be contributory to school shootings/shootings in general, because Apple is now a very large gateway for such things and instead of actually entering the fray and picking a side as to whether video games incite violence or not, they've mewlishly neutered some videos and screenshots to make it seem as though they actually care. This, like its "blanket" yet "not blanket" or "blanket with some holes" (because of a misunderstanding human element) approach, is why we have people running around the app store without guns today. Which is a fairly symbolic image of this whole thing. Apple doesn't wish to be the one holding the gun when the bloody day is done.

      • Rip73

        I'm not even sure what you're trying to say at this stage or whatever problem you seem have with the whole thing but if you dislike Apple and their "feeble" pr so much, you know what you can choose to do.

        I've simply explained the scenario to you and answered a question or two.
        You can take it or you can leave it, I don't particularly care as it has zero impact one way or another.

        As this is just starting to circulate down a drain of unproductive repetitiveness, meeting adjourned.

  • the_rebel14

    What purpose does Apple's crusade against guns serve? Do they think people will see a gun in a game and be terrified of it or do they think people will want to go shoot people from seeing it? I see no logical reason for this!

    • http://adamsimmersive.com Adams Immersive

      There's no crusade against guns. They still allow guns and bloody violence.

      They want parents to be able to decide when their kids are ready for guns, or blood, or whatever. And since any child can browse the entire store, they want the screenshots censored "just in case," it would seem.

      So here's an idea: if that parent doesn't allow that game to be downloaded in the first place, why show it to them? Just let the screenshots be accurate, and obey the Parental Controls setting. Simple.

      For that matter, hiding gore, guns, violence etc. in screenshots will make some parents download a game for their kids that is more violent than they realize!

      It's just not a sensible solution to anything.

  • coolpepper43

    Actually, the invisible gun is unlockable through IAP.

    • Samurix16

      Lol

  • http://adamsimmersive.com Adams Immersive

    Just let the store itself follow whatever age cutoff a parent chooses to set. Seems like much simpler and less absurd solution.

    • Xenomorphking

      I know. Their is a option in settings that allows parents to restrict what apps they can download. Even if a +4 game had guns in it would not be that bloody or violent. Removing guns just misinforms the person downloading the app.

  • bigrand1

    Just utterly ridiculous, inconsistent, and anal. What a bunch of idiots! These people at Apple are SO stupid! Adams just might be on to something there! Or maybe they should have 2 separate stores so people who aren't little children don't have to get treated like one. Then there could be some adult content in there. A big portion of users are adult believe it or not and as an adult, I don't need or appreciate some corporate bozos who think they're from Mr. Rogers neighborhood deciding what content I should or shouldn't see. They just don't get it!

    • Morgan01

      Comical and laughable. Mobile devices, including those by Apple, are made for connectivity online and all manner of content can be found on the Internet by anyone of any age. Many games promote violence to one degree or another yet Apple is concerned that game trailers show guns? If they are so against guns, why even sell games that have guns in them? They are hypocrites. They makes an enormous amount of money off games, many of which have....wait for it...guns! If they have such a strong opinion on depicting guns, then they shouldn't support the games that have them...don't sell them...don't take money from them....Even better...take any proceeds from such games and use them to support and promote anti-gun violence campaigning. Seriously, we know that will never happen. It's all about...da money!

  • RampageDeluxe

    Apple is going overkill with this.m

  • rewind

    Lol... too funny. I hope Apple continues to enforce this policy so that we get more hilarious trailers. Seriously though, I'm sure the trailer will garner some extra attention, so it might actually help the game.

  • Goggles789

    We need more trailers like this! It reminds me of when little kids play with air guns...aw how cute 🙂

  • september

    Nice idea for a bit of free pre-release promotion, good way to get the word out about the release. Didn't sound like Apple actually asked them to do it so I think it's a pretty clever bit of marketing, every gaming site and gamer will jump on it marketing the game free of charge.

    Whoever came up with idea needs a bonus.

  • Bloodangel

    Awwww naughty, the robot still had guns though! This.... Is.... Racist!! Lol
    Why can robots have guns, but humans can't? 🙂

  • AlexMilo

    Why not just add age restriction to the apps showing guns? Just like Steam does: violent games will force you to type your age. Then they could just remove the guns from the App logos. Or even easier: your AppleID should just remember your age and then not show violent apps in the App Store if you're a minor.
    Problem solved.

  • jayzilla87

    It would be better if they support a 'gun-free' America in real life. Nobody gets killed by screenshots.

    It's like pumping air in a balloon with a hole in it. This ain't solving shit.

    Greetings from Amsterdam

    • jayzilla87

      I'll gladly take that dislike. It's the truth, look up the statistics. Regarding the topic, it's hypocritical bs. Bye 🙂

  • jin choung

    what silly hypocritical shit is this? if they have a problem with images of guns on icons for games that have guns in them, they should put their fucking money where their mouth is and just ban any and all games that have guns in them.

    • Goggles789

      That's...pretty extreme.

  • zRebornX

    seriously!?!? we are going to design a gun but play it invisible? wft?

  • Stormourner

    those paranoid and overprotective parents are nothing but an infectious diseases

    apple staffs I would kindly ask you to stick the guns up to your a** and resign from the company

  • Xenomorphking

    I find this censorship stupid. GTA and other top paid games have guns in them. Why get rid of guns off the AppStore pages. The only thing it will do is have people make uninformed decisions about the games they get (I know a lot of people know GTA has guns in it but lesser known games people probably won't know they have guns in them). This censorship thing they are doing will just create more problems because people will get a game and go WTF this game has guns in it. Unfortunately I think a lot people are stupid and do not look at age ratings on the AppStore. This exact thing happens with console games. That is why we have people bitching about violent video games even though they couldn't be bothered to read that it says Rated M +17 on the back. Guns can also appear in lower rated games also, and as I stated above will just make people go WTF there are guns in this game. I see this trailer and it makes me think that the game was made to be a joke about shooters. I am not an idiot and know it has guns in it but the average person might not.

  • nonstickron

    Scanning for game related discussion in the comments I find....none. Sigh.

  • knownquantity

    I'm confused. I thought gun owners approved of concealed carry.

    • http://about.me/wondroushippo Carter Dotson

      I feel like most gun owners are fine with their weapons being in the visible spectrum of light, however.

  • H4nd0fg0d

    Already playing it and it's pretty AWESOME!

  • bigrand1

    Perhaps boycott Apple all together, just buy an android device, and be done with them! There're shooting themselves in the foot and creating their own demise. Maybe the party's over with.