Jump to content

Custom AUX channels or no AUX channels?


Ample Clarity
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 894 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

If creator A makes wings with BOM on AUX_3 channel and creator B makes a tail on AUX_3 channel, and a customer buys both and wears a BOM applier for the wings, will it also be applied to the tail?

Yes, the answer is yes!

What's the point of these aux channels if we can't make a custom channel for our products?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I considered that but then I'd have to educate the customer about the potential of conflicting AUX channels. Most likely, the customer would never read the info about that and when the issue arises, they would rate the product poorly. The poorly rated product would stop selling. Then I'd smack myself for not making high complexity onion layers in the first place.

Edited by Ample Clarity
nonya
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ample Clarity said:

I considered that but then I'd have to educate the customer about the potential of conflicting AUX channels. Most likely, the customer would never read the info about that and when the issue arises, they would rate the product poorly. The poorly rated product would stop selling. Then I smack myself for not making high complexity onion layers in the first place.

The solution can be explained in very simple layman's terms to the ones with no idea about how BOM works.

"If this slot doesn't look right on you, please try one of the other two."

You can add additional details like "it's conflicting with other BOM slots," but that's up to you and less is probably better. They don't care as long as it works. I would also avoid calling them "channels" because that's a technical term that will inevitably just confuse the people who don't understand BOM.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ample Clarity said:

I considered that but then I'd have to educate the customer about the potential of conflicting AUX channels. Most likely, the customer would never read the info about that and when the issue arises, they would rate the product poorly. The poorly rated product would stop selling. Then I'd smack myself for not making high complexity onion layers in the first place.

Because consumers just can't understand complicated concepts. They'd never buy, say, makeup appliers that would only work with a specific brand of head or tolerate figuring out which of several different sets of clothing items they bought will work with their particular body. A business model like that would be dead in the water.

 

Oh, wait...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Because consumers just can't understand complicated concepts. They'd never buy, say, makeup appliers that would only work with a specific brand of head or tolerate figuring out which of several different sets of clothing items they bought will work with their particular body. A business model like that would be dead in the water.

 

Oh, wait...

This has become normal in SL but SL has become overly complicated. At the end of the day, I want the customer to have a seamless experience. I believe in the future of SL and the future I envision doesn't involve a mess of technical hurdles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ample Clarity said:

This has become normal in SL but SL has become overly complicated. At the end of the day, I want the customer to have a seamless experience. I believe in the future of SL and the future I envision doesn't involve a mess of technical hurdles.

A simple solution would be for makers of add-ons for avatars based on the default skin layout to work out a standardized protocol for using AUX channels - for instance, using AUX 1 for head items like ears, AUX 2 for mid-body items like wings, and AUX 3 for lower body items like tails or legs. Mesh clothing never took off until a group clothing makers came up with the "standard sizing" initiative.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 894 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...