Jump to content

New Gacha Policy Discussion


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 64 days.

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

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, Faly Breen said:

 

Costumer goes and buys a "Token" like item for X L$. Said Token item is build to react as currency/key item for your vendors. Costumer can use said token on such vendors to still get a random item out of it (100% chance or like 7seas basicly with rarety system, up to the creator). So it would still count that the costumer actually pays for a non random item which is the said token but uses those to actually GET a random item.

Srsly, i would like to hear if that idea could be actually used legit. IF so, well then...

You're basically describing a casino chip.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Experimental Scientist said:

Depends what kind of SL work we're talking. If someone does something completely custom for me I always insist on paying an hourly rate that's in line with a RL wage, even if they gave me a lower price quote before. Unless of course it's a close friend who insists they're doing it as a gift for me, I'm not gonna stop them from doing that.

Completely custom work would not fall into the same category as a handful of gacha items or even regular items sold in a conventional manner.  People ask in the wanted section for custom items all the time and are usually advised it could cost quite a bit.  I know @Quistess Alphahas quoted prices for custom scripting per RL hours worked.   You're making a one of item.  One sale.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Faly Breen said:

Costumer goes and buys a "Token" like item for X L$. Said Token item is build to react as currency/key item for your vendors. Costumer can use said token on such vendors to still get a random item out of it (100% chance or like 7seas basicly with rarety system, up to the creator). So it would still count that the costumer actually pays for a non random item which is the said token but uses those to actually GET a random item.

Srsly, i would like to hear if that idea could be actually used legit. IF so, well then...

As long as that item purchased is NOT transfer.  A transfer item would be able to be converted back to Ls if sold therefore making it exactly like a casino chip as @Theresa Tennysonsaid.   A token for a no transfer, unknown item doesn't seem like.a big seller to me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yhishara Cerise said:

I suppose the good thing is that I am probably not in danger of being addicted to gambling because I know when to just walk away lol 

So did I. So does LL ( for their very OWN undisclosed reason ; I do not know why this befell gachas aside other business or gaming systems requiring input of L$ ). It's the only right left for any consumer.

No matter what preffered capitalistic exploitation any stuckup McCarthyist might press on you.

Gacha vendors do not have unalienable rights.

Edited by TDD123
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Yhishara Cerise said:

I have to admit your post confuses me. 

When Purplemoon was open Poulet  released fantasy items as well as regular releases and people raved about all of it.   the same goes for Izzie's who released fun little items along with the skins, makeups and cosmetic enhancements. I guess it just confuses me that if someone likes a creators work and the creator wants to branch out a bit, I think their customers would look at it as a bit of fun and be into it.   If they really don't like it they won't buy but that shouldn't stop a creator from building and releasing what they want.   That's just sad.  They have to have fun in SL too.  

I do agree with the sentiment about people putting things into gachas that shouldn't be gachas.  I hated the hair ones.  Or the ones where it was one item but 15 colors.  Just release one item and have a texture change HUD.  Or release items that go with that one item (like if it was a car release other stuff to go with it).  

Wow, Purplemoon. I miss that place!

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Irina Forwzy said:

You put your time, your creativity, your effort on a product. Why can't you equate that with an RL Income? 

Simply because SL economics do not equate to RL economics when you're talking about price of product.  If I buy a cheap watch in RL, I might spend $20 which would be 5000L in SL.  I sure wouldn't spend 5000L on a watch in SL.  I might spend 300L which is about $1.25.  

As I mentioned above, custom. One of a kind work is different.

Edited by Rowan Amore
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rowan Amore said:

Completely custom work would not fall into the same category as a handful of gacha items or even regular items sold in a conventional manner.  People ask in the wanted section for custom items all the time and are usually advised it could cost quite a bit.  I know @Quistess Alphahas quoted prices for custom scripting per RL hours worked.   You're making a one of item.  One sale.

Since it's been brought up by others and I've referred to it in the past my own position as a "creator" might be worth elaborating here- I do, after all, often make "custom stuff" for folks...  Yes I  used to sell popular kink gear, pre-mesh. There, I've said it. I made bank, ok? The primary selling point was the scripting making it more visually interactive than most with the users RP and a few clubs in particular loved it. That was the business that I closed around the time mesh hit the grid - I just wasn't good enough at making mesh back then to build products to the standard I was prepared to sell. Looking at some of my earlier products rezzed inworld for nostalgias sake that was probably a pretty low bar but my mesh skills didnt cut it at the time. My skills have improved since then.

These days, I make custom meshes for myself and for other musicians. Primarily duplicating RL instruments inworld at an efficient complexity level and that LOD gracefully. The ones I make for other musicians are always gifts. I do it out of respect for their art and recognising that sometimes it makes a difference to see yourself playing the SAME instrument on-screen as you have in your hands IRL adds to the experience as a performer. I know it does for me and it's a "because I can" thing.

I have also stepped up to make custom meshes and scripts for other folks if I became aware of a need on their part that I could address. I never set a price, I say "here's the finished product, check it out and if you feel some payment is in order, just pay me what you feel it's worth and can afford" - MY time on it is for the love of the grid. but I have to say my faith in human nature has been bolstered by the generosity of SL residents I've made stuff for in that way.

In that regard, I'm still a "merchant" in SL but I've tried, in recent years, to approach it more as an artist than a salesman.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Irina Forwzy said:

US hasn't moved to create this law in a Federal level. And if it's a state, it can be quickly overturned with Federal Judges if need be.  Which were packed up with pro-business judges by the previous Congress. That's why I have a hard time believing it's due to US legislation.

Biden and Congress will not be able to do that much through Congress since the Senate is essentially at a stalemate. Mind you, this being said sometimes the Republicans shock me.  But right now it seems our Fed level is too into Covid-19, and infrastructure (which are our more pressing issues).

https://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2021/06/expect-a-real-life-crack-down-on-second-life-gachas-says-lawyer.html

They were trying to pass legislature back in 2019.

https://nintendowire.com/news/2019/05/08/us-senator-introduces-bill-designed-to-ban-loot-boxes-and-pay-to-win-microtransactions/

https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/8/18536806/game-studios-banned-loot-boxes-minors-bill-hawley-josh-blizzard-ea

Don't count your chickens before the eggs hatch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Once again, I challenge you to show me WHERE AND HOW any of these other countries enforced, or notified of intent to enforce, any relevant law.

They did not.

Your notion that they imply is just that, your notion, based on forums mongering. This idea that because SL is accessed in foreign jurisdictions, that therefore the laws of those countries "apply" is one of the biggest illusions that people like you labour under. It's simply not the case, as much as you wish it to be so. Have you ever looked at all the cases of the EU against Google? Of Russia against Twitter? Sometimes they succeed, sometimes not. Sometimes Twitter pays a fine of...US $87. You really need to show your work here, Innula. Law is not code and does not self-execute.

There has to be a process, a procedure, notifications, etc. 

It's not that they are "contemplating flouting the law".

There is no law because there are no cases. Law may seem to you like code, an abstract indifferent force that enacts its muonic will on people across thee ocean. 

There's no country that held any fines, threatened to hold fines, barred any person from SL or threatened to bar any person.

You really need more citations here. A general feeling of the "climate" is not enough. Oh, I totally get it that LL's new owner make take a star turn here and posture about consumer protection and abiding by laws. That's not law. That's politics. 

Mastercard and Visa come in at a later stage WHEN there are successful lawsuits and actual judicial decisions that show lootbots=gatchas.

They don't exist.

And it is worth saying this over and over to people like you, regardless of what LL does or doesn't do, because it shapes the future of the Metaverse, and your beliefs around this subject are ungrounded. Note that WHEN there is an EU overreach or a Russian security police grab, companies respond. They do try to predict them. But we have nothing to show here.

Your smug "it's a done deal" rests ONLY on the ability of a private company to do what it wants. It does not rest on any actual rational analysis of any legal action anywhere. And that is highly important to point out. Or then next thing will be that you, a scripter, are told you need a license to script or sell your products. Will you care then?

https://screenrant.com/lootbox-gambling-microtransactions-illegal-japan-china-belgium-netherlands/

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

3 hours ago, Xiija said:

I'm sure this has been asked, but i'm not reading 130 pages of posts :P

will 7seas be ending too?.. or is this a "skilled game" ?.. i didn't see them listed there.

you pay , you get a random prize, seems like they are getting special  treatment?

 

No. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Da5id Weatherwax said:

You do you, I'll do me and at the end of the day LL will do what LL do without either of our opinions counting for much.

Can we make this a sticky ? :|

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Da5id Weatherwax said:

In that regard, I'm still a "merchant" in SL but I've tried, in recent years, to approach it more as an artist than a salesman.

Similarly, I'm in SL to do what I enjoy doing.   If I can make a bit of money doing it (and I do), that's great, but there are plenty of ways I can make a lot more money doing stuff in First Life, too, so that's not the main consideration.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TDD123 said:

Interesting and they even mentioned SL.  I found the following seemed to describe gachas perfectly.

Another psychological aspect that is used to get players to continue playing and buying microtransactions is called loss aversion.[6] When a player continues to lose over and over again, they begin to crave the dopamine-filled, positive feelings that they feel when they win.[6] As such, they become more inclined to spend money for items that will help them achieve that elusive win.[6] Then when they do win, the player attributes their win with the item that they just bought, making it more likely that they will spend money whenever the player gets on a losing streak, and so the cycle continues on.[6]

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/2/2021 at 8:51 PM, Jaiya Cloud said:

Claw machines require skill. Sticker machines have listed what you will get and even most of those are now gone because they are considered gambling if each ball doesn't have the same items.

You've never opened a claw machine I guess.

The claw will only hold the item hard enough when the configured machine win rate has been met.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Irina Forwzy said:

I believe it is probably because they've had a change of Upper Management and Board of Directors.  I do not necessarily see laws coming into play in the US on a National Level against gachas. Considering Democrats whom usually are the ones that engage in this style of governance have two Democrat senators to centralize them; that is if they get around the infrastructure bill and Covid-19. And either way, if there are interests from larger corporations such as Apple, and Google. Chances are that the pockets will be lined so to speak.  And only specific states will have these cases. Only to then go through the legislative channels toward the Supreme Court if need be, and if seeked.  Unless, and here's where things can be alter,  unless they are rethinking relocating their corporate office to a country that DOES have these laws in place.  So either they are being proactive in the event that next year there's a win in the US Congress that will eventually change our Federal policies; or something else. 

 

But this is me analyzing this at a rather late time. I may be missing an angle I did not think about.

 

Google "class action lawsuit gacha loot box" for some insight into the current environment and possible coming problems.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Xiija said:

The LL blog seems very iffy, i think i will just skip doing anything but a normal vendor heh...

 

https://community.secondlife.com/blogs/entry/8586-policy-change-regarding-gacha/

Quote

7seas : 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.

are these fish random?.. or  buying one type of bait Always gets you one type of fish? (guaranteed catch?)

it seems LL is giving them special preference ?

anyhoo, ... oh well :)

 

I thing LL (and their lawyers) are just out of touch and I kind of have to infer that their current policy is leaning towards: "If it it imitates a Real-life benign thing, it's probably good." and totally ignores the ways that things could possibly use a benign veneer (fishing, animal husbandry etc.) to mask predatory marketing behavior. (Fishing for fancy footwear, gacha goose, gift-horse. . .)

If the fish are just no-transfer fish, It seems fairly straight forward that they have minimal tangible "value". When you replace fish with fancy cosmetic wearables though, even if no-transfer, I think a hypothetical "no-transfer means no value" argument sinks like a stone. If it gets to be a problem my opinion is that LL may backtrack from "must be no-trans" to "must not be in-world rezzable"(would have to be a picture of a fish).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Quistess Alpha said:

I thing LL (and their lawyers) are just out of touch and I kind of have to infer that their current policy is leaning towards: "If it it imitates a Real-life benign thing, it's probably good." and totally ignores the ways that things could possibly use a benign veneer (fishing, animal husbandry etc.) to mask predatory marketing behavior. (Fishing for fancy footwear, gacha goose, gift-horse. . .)

If the fish are just no-transfer fish, It seems fairly straight forward that they have minimal tangible "value". When you replace fish with fancy cosmetic wearables though, even if no-transfer, I think a hypothetical "no-transfer means no value" argument sinks like a stone. If it gets to be a problem my opinion is that LL may backtrack from "must be no-trans" to "must not be in-world rezzable"(would have to be a picture of a fish).

In 7Seas, the original fish, not the ones added by vendor owners, are attachable pets. Wearables.

Yes, the stone that was tossed into the pond sunk but look at all the ripples, too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripple_effect

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is all pretty obvious I suppose, but I'm a visual thinker compelled to foist my visualizations on the world:

382282780_GachaValueContributors.png.006abd1a6bf7404a0960c30b8a53ae7b.png

Don't take literally the specific relative sizes of the pie slices in any of these charts, particularly this one. Indeed, the point is that this particular pie would be sliced very differently for different buyers (and sellers?) depending on their interests. For example, some folks buy a gacha item despite the randomness and theoretical resale value because what they really want is a simple copiable object, something like:

1514893399_CopiableProductValue.png.5865ff1cad895c067c8d1222d81ab06d.png

In passing: "Exclusivity" may be vastly enhanced if the object also has Modify permission and/or is issued as a limited edition.

1924102323_TransferableProductValue.png.eed6dffd2a77ff000fbc0d04e3aac580.png

Of course not everybody who buys a transferable item cares about resale, but it's a theoretical contributor to the product's value, lacking for Copy/No-Transfer items.

1191989776_RandomNon-Transferable(7Seas)Value.png.7e84ce4c0245ff3376c860fcf0f35470.png

Some products are almost purely about experiencing the randomness, which is what I've always considered "fishing" in SL as well as RL sport fishing.

A pie chart for copiable gacha would have the same colored slices, but presumably the "Product Quality" would outweigh the "Enchantment of Chance" in such a case.

I think the trouble really comes when combining "Resale Value" and "Enchantment of Chance", which is pretty close to an operational definition of gambling. (The "conveyor" systems kinda smuggle in the Chance element;  i.e., Chance is the distinction between the conveyor system and a regular vendor, right? One may get what one pays for, but the "game" is all about what random thing gets revealed next.) But it's not only "gambling" that's a potential problem with lootboxes/gacha: Combining chance with anything of value—any positive reinforcement—is how addictive behaviors form.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I think what probably happened is that, possibly as part of the due diligence phase while the sale of LL was going through, someone asked their legal advisors to take a look at any possible present or impending legal issues that might affect SL, and this new ban is one of the results.

I'm pretty sure that's how the question was raised in the first place.  Certainly, if I were about to buy a company (not likely to happen, but if ... ), I would get a team of lawyers looking at all the possible ways that I could lose my investment or end up in court because of looming issues. I'd have accountants digging through the books to find funny-looking accounts, and I'd be looking at any other potential liabilities that I might be inheriting.  Especially if I were buying a company with a big international market, I'd want to be very sure that I knew what legal and political issues abroad were likely to be future worry spots, even if they weren't on the front burner in the U.S.  As part of all this fact-finding, I would want to look at current or pending court cases and proposed legislation anywhere that the company does business.  New CEOs and directors don't like surprises.  If there's a chance they'll get burned by some hidden problems, they'll shine a light into all corners of the business before they take over and they'll get rid of the problems as a top priority once they're in.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question about this conveyor belt type machine.
It allows the buyer to see what will be available next, but it does not allow him to choose what to buy.
The buyer has to keep buying one item after another that he does not want until it is his turn to get the item he wants.
If the buyer doesn't buy the next item within 10 seconds, he or she will give up the right to purchase the item to someone else.

Question 1: Isn't this system of not letting the buyer choose the product and making them feel rushed by setting a time limit on their decision to buy the product they don't want, gambling?

The creator also claims that the machine has been approved by Linden Lab, the lawyers hired by Linden Lab, and the Vice President of Product Operations for Second Life.

Question 2, is this true?

To anyone who disagrees with the creator, he says, "If you claim to be illegal, dispute Linden in court.

Question 3, Does Linden have a special agreement to protect him?
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, xAmbiguityx said:

@Patch Linden

My apologies for @ing you but I feel like this new Gacha System needs to be re-reviewed, please review my text above and I will elaborate further below. Creators have a vested interested in retaining predative ways to generate profits, I am guilty of this as well, but I am also a strong advocate against predatory practices. Since gachas have been deemed illegal, our customers are not stupid and can clearly see this is yet another crash grab, leaving a horrible impression not only of those advocating for it - but Linden Labs as well for allowing/approving this new predatory tactic.  My confusion  with this whole ordeal comes from this idea that randomization has been "removed" from the conveyer system - when it hasn't. Instead, our userbase will be not buying a product that they want or ever intended to purchase, but instead a chance to pay for the item they wanted, via a system that is randomly generated to work against the buyer.

For regular residents/non-creators I am going to include a brief example of my most recent Gacha.  This infographic attached below is a single user, but there were several others who paid over L$3,000 Linden Dollars - roughly $15.00 USD for a chance to pull one of the items they were hoping to win.  With my most recent gachas I generally include a version that's 15$-25% off the price you'd pay if you got "lucky" enough to pull all of the items in the machine just once (which is very rare and will also be just as rare in the "new" conveyer system).

In summary the image below, setting a USD - L$ Ratio of  $1.00 per L$250, one customer spent $4,700 to play my gacha a total of Forty-Seven (47); a little under $20.00 USD.  The fatpack for this gacha was L$3,000, or about $15.00 USD. The average number of duplicates being around 3 for this customer.  With the conveyer system, this would be the same apart from a customer knows what they are getting. Even so, customers will STILL try to get the item when they know what they can/could get.  There have been plenty of studies on gambling mechanics and consumers continuously choose the most easily perceived route to their goal - in this case another chance at winning the big one.  Additionally, please note that it took five (5) minutes for this customer to spend $30.00 USD; for non-creators these points should illustrate just why some creators are trying to fight this ban so hard. It's not about the fun, it's not about creating better experiences - it's about generating a cash flow. Creators are aware of how profitable these machines are, but I don't think the public knows just how much.

*EDIT

For clarity, this customer ended up purchasing the fatpack after 47 attempts, thus they spent $4,700 + L$3,000 for the fatpack - a grand total of L$7,700 ($30.00 USD).

GACHA STATS.png

I honestly don't think there's anything else that needs to be said after this.
Incoming long post, sorry in advance and thank you if you read it.

Gacha, games of chance, whatever you might want to call it, is gambling.
These activities are designed to take advantage of the brain's reward system, releasing dopamine every time we partake in the triggering activity. If it's a slot machine it's pulling the lever, when it's gacha it's paying to play.

Dopamine is the key player in our brain's reward system. The reason we have it is because it is needed to evolve and survive as a species. It's nature's version of "the carrot on a stick" that it is dangling in front of us to condition us to do the things we need to do in order to survive. Its primary purpose is to facilitate the survival of the individual/the self and our offspring, but also to network and connect with other humans, and learn new things to do these three things (survive, multiply and connect) more efficiently. Every time we do something that will help us survive or procreate, like eating food, having sex or meeting people we enjoy, we get rewarded with dopamine. It also happens when we engage in activities where we might meet someone, learn something or simply feel positive things such as pleasure or happiness, as these feelings increase the chance of us staying healthy and surviving.

Just like when you're training your puppy; it does something the way you want it to - you give them a treat.
We are constantly conditioning ourselves to learn certain behaviors and to seek out new things that will improve our situation/our chance of survival. Dopamine is the reward.

So now think about all this, and then turn your attention back to gambling.
Gambling usually comes in a happy, cheerful package that tricks us into believing it a fun, playful activity. Casinos tend to be grand, flashy and colorful, they sell you the idea of a fun time when you might just end up winning something big.
This all triggers our reward system; the chance of winning assets that will improve our life or increase the probability of our own/our offspring's survival, a feeling of excitement and the happiness when you win something (and the promise that this might be the reward if you play). All you have to do in turn is pay.

There's a saying that "the house always wins", and as we can see in @xAmbiguityx's post, this is most definitely the truth.
The individual playing the gacha could have bought the fatpack twice with the amount they spent on single plays.
"Why would they do this instead of simply buying the fatpack?", you might ask. Because there is a chance they might win.
Countless studies show that human beings are most likely to take the route which they perceive to be the easiest, in order to get what they want. Paying L$3000 up front doesn't feel like the easy route when each play is L$50-100 and there's a chance of you getting lucky and getting what you want on the first play, and thus saving money. That's very rarely the case though, we all know that.

We all know that, so why are we even having this discussion?
We should not allow any game/device that use these predatory practices to be allowed on Second Life, or anywhere else for that matter. These "games" are harmful to our brains. They tap into our reward system, simulate an important activity in order to trick the brain into releasing dopamine when it's not needed, all in order to condition us to adopt a behavior where the casino/gacha seller makes a profit. That is abuse. Furthermore, these "games" can trigger a dopamine deficit state, where your body doesn't have enough dopamine for the things it's intended for.

Why should we care about this?
Well, for starters, dopamine doesn't only interact with the reward system. It's a neurotransmitter which means it relays information between the body and the brain. Vital brain functions that affect mood, sleep, memory, learning, concentration, and motor control are influenced by the levels of dopamine in our bodies. It controls our movements and emotions, thus it's important to maintain a healthy level of dopamine in your body at all times.

A dopamine deficiency is very serious. It can cause muscle cramps, stiffness, spasms, tremors, aches and pains.
It can also cause a loss of balance, fatigue, low libido and low energy.
Furthermore, it can cause insomnia, and a general inability to focus.
If you don't think any of that is bad enough, it can also directly cause demotivation, mood swings and feelings of inexplicable sadness, hopelessness, low self-esteem and guilt.
Still not convinced? How about the fact that it can directly cause anxiety, thoughts of self-harm and at its worst, suicide.

Rather than trying to find a legal or "safe" way to put ourselves or others at risk for developing a dopamine deficiency, we should collectively push back against it. This is wrong, harmful and shouldn't be accepted in a civilized society. Do the right thing.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 64 days.

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...