New Gacha Policy Discussion

[Faly Breen]

11 hours ago, Mollymews said:

the FAQ has been updated, and Linden have given a definitive answer

for collectible cards then the best way to sell these is with a conveyor type vendor

from the updated FAQ
 

what Linden have done with allowing conveyor systems is to make the selling of collectibles as permissive as possible within the regulations as Linden understand the regulations to be

and for this approach, Linden deserve quite a bit of credit

so basicly what i said, i cant sell them random no more which takes the system behind collecting and trading cards and booster packs totally away - even more if i actually have to "show" the cards they are getting since it should be have a "surprise effect" if you get the card the first time. I can see making myself a vendor system where the "items" circle random but only displays the name of it, not the picture and it will change every 20 seconds (a bit like the luck chairs). This would kinda work around the gacha system but it will still be a big lose after all since people will sure wait till the card pops up they need and dont actually trade anymore for them since they basicly just wait.

 

I think opinion b would be to create "token" like items FOR "your" gacha than since, as i said before, people which "pay" them know they are getting the token 100% but they can use this tokens "for" your gacha to get a random item, basicly like 7seas.

 

TBH: i dont really understand why 7seas (or any fishing game) doesnt count. it basicly has all the syste behind a gacha a gacha can have:

- you have to pay for a item (bait) to grain the possibility to get all items.

- the items you get (fishes, fish related items, clothes) are random - even more is the chance that you get one random (since you can also catch nothing)

- the fishes you "can" get are build up on a rarety system (aka droprate)

- you can actually trade the items (fishes, blueprints and its materials, clothes, etc)

 

So why this doesnt count as gacha, i duno coz this feels really hypocritical but keeping that in mind makes it perfect as base to create such "token" gachas...

Edited August 6, 2021 by Faly Breen

[Mollymews]

17 minutes ago, Da5id Weatherwax said:

The essence of a bunko game is that it looks "fairer" than it is

this is why I don't play gacha myself as a thing.  Random-looking games are the worst ever

ages ago now over the street in the scripting forum there was a long conversation about random-looking games - gachas, gumballs, dice, cards, etc. How to write 'random' and how to write 'random-looking' with code snippet examples

crafted algorithms can make 'random-looking' appear to be a whole lot 'fairer-looking' when they aren't, to the casual player

[Qie Niangao]

47 minutes ago, Cinos Field said:

Well, it is very easy to script.

I'm not sure it would be that easy. I have no interest in writing such a script myself, both because the fiddly parts are so intricate and tedious, but also because the very best possible version will still be a blight on the land.

Tablestakes, the thing must:

1. have all the logic of a gacha script including all the per-item probabilities to produce "rares",
2. by some means reveal the current offering (I saw mention of hovertext but that's too primitive to consider),
3. "lock out other users for a period", where correctly setting that lockout period is way more complicated than adjusting a constant. How should it adjust for sim lag? Should it depend on how many transactions are in this user's current buying run?Should it vary with the item being displayed, or anything the vendor may learn about the conditional probability of buying a new offer given a past purchase in the run?

I don't see anything in the FAQ to suggest the scripts need to be "fair" in offering reasonable probabilities for commons vs rares, nor a requirement to disclose those probabilities, nor even to keep those probabilities consistent. So I'd expect some scripts to pay close attention to the rate of purchases within a run: if they're quick, pile on every common in inventory because this buyer is a reseller whale who will take all the garbage items the machine can throw at them. And of course there are all the usual Partial Reinforcement Extinction Effect tricks to make sure the users get addicted, where the reinforcement is the reveal of a desired item available for sale.

[Mollymews]

5 minutes ago, Faly Breen said:

fishing game

the updated FAQ says that the fish have to be No-Transfer. So the fish can't be traded with other players

if you want your cards to be tradeable then they have to be Transfer yes, so they can be given to other collectors.  And the only method for Transfer items is a conveyor system as allowed in the updated FAQ

[Mollymews]

17 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

of course there are all the usual Partial Reinforcement Extinction Effect tricks to make sure the users get addicted

nuuu! you cynical person ?!!?!

i would never think a game operator would let the new blood win more games than they would normally to hook them in, and when they show themselves to be a player who keeps turning up time after time shoving money into the machine hoping that their lucky will return, then letting the operator game edge bleed them out

oh! wait !! i don't have to never think that !!  😸

 

Edited August 6, 2021 by Mollymews
edge

[Shuichi Shinji]

1 hour ago, Alwin Alcott said:

the problem is... if sellers (some or more) are able to go around restrictions, they will.
LL needs to have a control option. Permission for only their script would be one.

That's the same with pretty much everything inworld. Better to just put up rules and react to violations. And the downside for an LL-made script would be "liability" for bugs, malfunctions etc. An open source example, as suggested too, is a nice idea, but there is also no control over changes. So better to clarify the requirements and then let creators do their job...

[Faly Breen]

16 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

the updated FAQ says that the fish have to be No-Transfer. So the fish can't be traded with other players

if you want your cards to be tradeable then they have to be Transfer yes, so they can be given to other collectors.  And the only method for Transfer items is a conveyor system as allowed in the updated FAQ

please follow my comments/ its answers back since something similar got already said. and the fishes from 7seas -are- tradeable and ONLY tradable. Look at the picture there. (its german so it says its "kein kopieren" (no copy) and "kein Bearbeiten" (no mod) but still transfarable)

 

[Mollymews]

6 minutes ago, Faly Breen said:

please follow my comments/ its answers back since something similar got already said. and the fishes from 7seas -are- tradeable and ONLY tradable. Look at the picture there. (its german so it says its "kein kopieren" (no copy) and "kein Bearbeiten" (no mod) but still transfarable)

 

is best that you read the updated FAQ. Is here:

about the fish I quote the relevant Q&A
 

Quote

 

Q:  Will popular games like 7seas be impacted by this policy change?

A:  No, because the purchase of bait to go “fishing” is a purchase being made of a known item, and also the fish you catch while playing the game are non-transferable.  To be clear, if they are not currently, they must be going forward.

 

from the 1st of September, the fish have to be No-Transfer

[Alwin Alcott]

16 minutes ago, Shuichi Shinji said:

So better to clarify the requirements and then let creators do their job...

it's exactly that what needs control.
Both showed clear that greed is a bad factor.

from 40 commons  20 rares, 4 extra rare and 1 super rare ..and 75 pulls for the last...
or worthless badly made commons, to just a color difference with the rares with the same template ( sometimes clearly from a 3rd party 3d site.... )

Regulating by profession groups works seldom well... there needs to be one above. And not with the hardly working report by resident system.
 

[Shuichi Shinji]

12 minutes ago, Alwin Alcott said:

it's exactly that what needs control.
Both showed clear that greed is a bad factor.

from 40 commons  20 rares, 4 extra rare and 1 super rare ..and 75 pulls for the last...
or worthless badly made commons, to just a color difference with the rares with the same template ( sometimes clearly from a 3rd party 3d site.... )

Regulating by profession groups works seldom well... there needs to be one above. And not with the hardly working report by resident system.
 

I agree with you that some get greedy and don't act responsibly, but I don't think that is true for the majority. Control can still be executed by reacting to (reported) violations.

[Arielle Popstar]

Really think @Patch Linden may want to change the FAQ to reflect that there has been changes to the 7seas fish since someone could easily get no further than the No and not bother to read the rest and miss the "No Transfer" stipulation.

Quote

 

Q:  Will popular games like 7seas be impacted by this policy change?

A:  No, because the purchase of bait to go “fishing” is a purchase being made of a known item, and also the fish you catch while playing the game are non-transferable.  To be clear, if they are not currently, they must be going forward.

 

 

[Mollymews]

1 hour ago, Stella Davros said:

If the hud will be same of pocket gacha could be locked on you also by necessity i think cause was like personal hud where u can buy even from your home you needed to go trought the event to buy the hud and charge tokens (equivalent of linden) and once u open the hud u can see each vendor and start play just who will script have to put that once you open the hud the current item have to be stacked till you buy that item i mean have to be related to your UUID 

yes that could work

the player prepays the instore terminal for X number of pulls. The terminal gives a HUD. The player can top up their X pulls anytime

using the HUD to play the game, when click Next/Pull a message is sent to the game server, the pull amount is deducted from the X total on the server and the prize currently displayed on the HUD is delivered

to secure the communication channel then either the game server is on own website, or it could be done via Experience KVP, the delivery terminal polling the KVP on a regular interval and delivering any items in the queue

edit add: to be able to play the game from our home with KVP, we would have to enable the Experience on our parcel

Edited August 6, 2021 by Mollymews

[Faly Breen]

40 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

is best that you read the updated FAQ. Is here:

about the fish I quote the relevant Q&A
 

from the 1st of September, the fish have to be No-Transfer

i did read it. and yea. this basicly ruins every trading part a "game" could have. it was part of the fun of the fishing game or TRADING cards to actually TRADE the stuff/cards you might need with others. this basicly limit this down to ZERO EXISTANCE. As i said in one of my super earlier comments, i understand that gachas which have different items inside or work with actual droprates should be gone but actual collectables which have no other purpose than getting collected should still ok. Again: clothes or dress sets (or similar) doesnt count as collectables. Simple fishes, collecting cards or "bubblegum toys" should still be ok, those exist in real life as well and if 7seas fishing system is ok if you simply change the things into "not tradeable" should nearly make every gacha ok if they simply make them not tradeable - which doesnt change a thing since 7seas system is still build up on random dropchances and a "key" item you have to buy - the only thing you cant do anymore is the "trading part" which isnt part of a gacha, its its the random item you pay for, simply as that.

So sorry again but it just feels hypocritical to "let the fishing games be but collecting cards are a no-go". I dont wanna be that girl but than, i have to say, if i put down rules than equal rights for all with no exception.

Edited August 6, 2021 by Faly Breen

[Mollymews]

2 minutes ago, Faly Breen said:

i did read it

ah! ok. I thought that you were looking for a way to continue making and selling tradeable cards under the new policy

i get tho that you would prefer to continue under the old policy, but when the world changes then we do as best we can to adapt to the changes

[Faly Breen]

1 minute ago, Mollymews said:

ah! ok. I thought that you were looking for a way to continue making and selling tradeable cards under the new policy

i get tho that you would prefer to continue under the old policy, but when the world changes then we do as best we can to adapt to the changes

pls read my latest comment again. it pretty much explains what im trying to go on about.

8 minutes ago, Faly Breen said:

As i said in one of my super earlier comments, i understand that gachas which have different items inside or work with actual droprates should be gone but actual collectables which have no other purpose than getting collected should still ok. Again: clothes or dress sets (or similar) doesnt count as collectables. Simple fishes, collecting cards or "bubblegum toys" should still be ok, those exist in real life as well and if 7seas fishing system is ok if you simply change the things into "not tradeable" should nearly make every gacha ok if they simply make them not tradeable - which doesnt change a thing since 7seas system is still build up on random dropchances and a "key" item you have to buy - the only thing you cant do anymore is the "trading part" which isnt part of a gacha, its its the random item you pay for, simply as that.

So sorry again but it just feels hypocritical to "let the fishing games be but collecting cards are a no-go". I dont wanna be that girl but than, i have to say, if i put down rules than equal rights for all with no exception.

 

[Mollymews]

1 minute ago, Faly Breen said:

pls read my latest comment again. it pretty much explains what im trying to go on about.

 

i do get what you are saying

what I am saying is what we think about the policy, what is/isnt unfair, hypocritical or not, doesn't change our current reality. It may be that Linden will change the policy again. And should they do this then that will be our new current reality

given a current reality then from my pov I think about what can/could be done within that reality and be compliant with the current policy

[Arielle Popstar]

13 minutes ago, Faly Breen said:

pls read my latest comment again. it pretty much explains what im trying to go on about.

 

It does seem like differing solutions for what amounts to the same sort of marketing. Can the conveyor solution being proposed for the former Gotcha's also work for the fishing?

[Pixieplumb Flanagan]

So, I haven't read the whole thread, but mainly what I'm getting is no one is all that bothered.  So, excellent, that's all cool.

[Faly Breen]

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

It does seem like differing solutions for what amounts to the same sort of marketing. Can the conveyor solution being proposed for the former Gotcha's also work for the fishing?

i cant tell but for actuall TRADING cards it seems like impossible without leaving the actual "trading" part out of it, making nearly impossible to sell anymore without the "random" factor in mind.

 

Thats why i said it feels hypocritical if a fishing game in which you "Have" to buy an actual "key" item to get a CHANCE (droprate) to catch a higher rarety fish and card game vendors which actually gives you 100% a random card are suddendly forbidden?

I mean i hope someone sees why i call it hypocritical there since if you look deeper into this fishing games, you can even go and call them close to "lootboxes" if you call the bait actual "keys"...

[sirhc DeSantis]

1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

I'm not sure it would be that easy. I have no interest in writing such a script myself, both because the fiddly parts are so intricate and tedious, but also because the very best possible version will still be a blight on the land.

Tablestakes, the thing must:

1. have all the logic of a gacha script including all the per-item probabilities to produce "rares",
2. by some means reveal the current offering (I saw mention of hovertext but that's too primitive to consider),
3. "lock out other users for a period", where correctly setting that lockout period is way more complicated than adjusting a constant. How should it adjust for sim lag? Should it depend on how many transactions are in this user's current buying run?Should it vary with the item being displayed, or anything the vendor may learn about the conditional probability of buying a new offer given a past purchase in the run?

I don't see anything in the FAQ to suggest the scripts need to be "fair" in offering reasonable probabilities for commons vs rares, nor a requirement to disclose those probabilities, nor even to keep those probabilities consistent. So I'd expect some scripts to pay close attention to the rate of purchases within a run: if they're quick, pile on every common in inventory because this buyer is a reseller whale who will take all the garbage items the machine can throw at them. And of course there are all the usual Partial Reinforcement Extinction Effect tricks to make sure the users get addicted, where the reinforcement is the reveal of a desired item available for sale.

All of the above. Plus - boring.

Like someone suggested a Lab approved script for (some daft idea) that could be written by a user.. it did say it knew nothing about scripting to be fair. My initial was - lump sum, cut per deploy or cut per 'pull' equiv. ?

They expect us to script stuff for free ('it don't cost u nuffink also found one on blah blah') which is why I stopped doing custom apart from close and interesting. And any Gack word what ever its called now work around is not interesting

[Silent Mistwalker]

6 hours ago, Dorientje Woller said:

Isn't it possible that after the click a timer pops up, giving the "player" a certain amount of time to make the transaction? Once the time is up ... bad luck ... next.

Sounds like a gamble to me.

[Silent Mistwalker]

6 hours ago, So Whimsy said:

Good morning, just got up, did I miss anything?

Just the rooster crowing that will be on my dinner table tonight. 

[Love Zhaoying]

13 hours ago, Kyle Beckett said:

Q:  Could a “conveyor belt” system work?  

Ooh, like a "sushi boat" restaurant! 

[Komarimono]

3 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Ooh, like a "sushi boat" restaurant! 

Nope, since you can pick what you want there.  Here, you have to buy something to then get a random roll of what's next.

[Fionalein]

30 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Ooh, like a "sushi boat" restaurant! 

No, like a sushi belt restauraunt with only one suhsi on the belt and the only way to change it is if the current sushi gets eaten. 

LL is free to decide what they want to do but IMHO by allowing this type of non-gacha they seem to have entered the world of gambling themselves - their current bet is on not getting sued for this stunt by the regulatory entities that be. 

Edited August 6, 2021 by Fionalein
clarifications, rearranging a sentence for better understanding