Jump to content

New Gacha Policy Discussion


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 164 days.

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

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, xAmbiguityx said:

 I will also cheer my heart out when we get another "Hey y'all gotta take down your predatory gambling machines again, and once more you have 30 days to do it! Good luck finding another loophole!" Let alone, watch all the same entitled creators scramble find another new cash cow.

If a new call comes it's because they didn't do what they told first.
 I honestly don't get how this newconveyer system got approved.
This new approved system is even worse as the old one. It can be tricked and gamed on more ways than the normal one arm bandit. And said it earlier...if it can be tricked, it wil.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Sukubia Scarmon said:

Well. What can we do if LL is adamant about allowing conveyorbelt-gachas? Not a rethorical question.

Avoid them as I plan to do.  I'll also be avoiding any store who chooses to use them and mentioning it to friends who probably aren't following this thread.  There's really not much anyone can do aside from that.  It's disheartening that LL doesn't see these as even worse than the previous gachas.  I'm disappointed in them.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Please explain to me why your RL progressiveness does not extend to concern for labourers making a living creatively in SL. That's the mystery to me. But then the entire leftist movement around the world cares less about workers and more about identity these days.

A book was written on this subject of addiction to virtual worlds by a professor who theorized that the government would have to send in troops to entire cities to arrest people and make them work to run electricity, food, and garbage, as they would be sitting at their desks playing video games. Presumably a Metaverse will be more addictive by its nature, and already is, and might grind society to a halt like the pandemic -- except the pandemic is what enabled more of it, and all those poor people who can't code and can't get a job at Instacart or Uber even because robots and driverless cars will take their place will just be captive in the Metaverse and sustained by stimulus checks -- or not at all, til they die.

Ultimately he admitted his own alcoholism and sought treatment and we haven't heard so much of his rather extreme thesis since then but Korea and China report these kinds of cases all the time and that's why the Chinese government was going on about "spiritual opium" recently and forcing parents to take children off computers. Now he writes this.

I don't think we are there yet, and that the average SL session is as destructive as you say.

Furthermore, I think those creators should put those fatpacks on transfer, and for $750 not $3000. They they both compete with and help the secondary market, and they need to do both.

Alia Baroque of Libertine is the only gatcha maker I have seen write about this symbiotic relationship between his own work as a creator of exquisite surprise eggs, for example, and his customers' need to have them to trade and gift in their virtual lives. They have economic and sentimental value and he undertands this.

We're about to see some very popular male designers in particular retire all their gatchas without a backward look, and not even put them in fatpacks on no transfer. How do you like them apples.

And we will see a few brave women put them on transfer but likely not make as much.

 

As I said I'm progressive, doesn't mean that I in all areas though.  I have democratic socialistic ideas in most areas but in some I think they overdo it. The same with other areas.  One doesn't necessarily need to believe everything in a political party, or in a political establishment.  That type of mentality is what creates polarity in political establishments.

That being said, I'm seeing both sides.  I see the gacha creator,  I'm seeing the gacha buyer. And the same mechanism that corporations, companies can be bad comes from the philosophy that they are comprised of said invidiuals that tend to have centralized viewpoints.  In the event of a gacha creator, they are seeing the maximum profit,  and it may be their RL livelihood.  For items they can more than likely sell for X10 the gacha value, but then no one would buy them outright.  Then there's those that abuse the gacha system because they create gachas with 100 pieces, that cannot be used individually or just are plainly mesh from other 3rd party websites.

I get the gacha buyer,  you have a 2k budget but you pass it. But here's the thing,  If I want to control the gacha seller, I must also ask the gacha buyer to also control their own instincts. Both parties are to blame.  Had gacha buyers not bought the gachas, then the need for gacha events throughout the grid would have gone down. But people went for them and flocked for them like bees on a flower.

My take:  They need to sell their gachas at reasonal prices.  Small gachas 500l - 750l. Break the market, so that sellers need to align to their cost or less to compete.  Those of us that played gachas and were reselling due to inventory, will understand. Those that played gacha as a business, will go out of business. Those,  they should have NEVER existed.  Those falsely drove up the gacha demand.

As for the creators that do that, that's probably because you will see an alt of them sell their gacha items as "no copy", "transfer" at markup value to do their sales. Those are the creators by the way, that were also driving up the cost of gacha and were not here for creative, nor for financial independence. Just to acquire maximum profit from us. Shame.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, hairtuss said:

 

Okay so. let's clear some things up then.

What is gambling?
"Gambling (also known as betting) is the wagering something of value ("the stakes") on an event with an uncertain outcome with the intent of winning something of value. Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize."


And what is a gacha/lootbox?
"A consumable virtual item which can be redeemed to receive a randomized selection of further virtual items, or loot, ranging from simple customization options for a player's avatar or character, to game-changing equipment such as weapons and armor. A loot box is typically a form of monetization, with players either buying the boxes directly or receiving the boxes during play and later buying "keys" with which to redeem them."


In Second Life, we pay Linden Dollars to receive these randomized items. Linden dollars have a real life monetary value, thus every gacha has a value.

So, to quote the text above where the definition of gambling in a legal sense is:
"Gambling thus requires three elements to be present: consideration (an amount wagered), risk (chance), and a prize."

They're all present in gachas. Consideration (the amount we pay to play), risk (the chance of us winning what we want), and the prize (often a trash item with little to no resale value, that still cost real money).

Gacha is gambling.

 

I get what you are saying but if it were gambling in a legal sense it would be legal since the countries that ban it allow gambling including online gambling. I think it's more to do with the fact countries haven't figured out how to regulate loot boxes and until they do they'll remain illegal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Finite said:

I get what you are saying but if it were gambling in a legal sense it would be legal since the countries that ban it allow gambling including online gambling. I think it's more to do with the fact countries haven't figured out how to regulate loot boxes and until they do they'll remain illegal.

Where I live (Scandinavia) there has been a new discussion about casinos and online casinos, and whether they are something we want in our society.

Just because something is legal, it doesn't mean it's right. It's up to the people to have the conversation, and to pressure those who write laws to have said laws reflect our reality and everyday life. And the reality of it is that no one except for the individual/company using these abusive, manipulative and exploitative practices, wins anything.
As a consumer you don't only have your money to lose, but also your health.

The entire business model is anti-consumer, harmful and shouldn't be tolerated by anyone tbh.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, hairtuss said:

In Second Life, we pay Linden Dollars to receive these randomized items. Linden dollars have a real life monetary value, thus every gacha has a value.

And this is incorrect. Lindens have no monetary value. It's in their on TOS. Any lindens you buy have zero value. Only net lindens you gain can be converted to real money. This is also in their TOS.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Though I can't find the article at the moment, years ago I read that Microsoft employs game psychologists on the Office design team to increase user engagement with the suite, not necessarily to improve user productivity. One would be naive, I think, to presume that there are no conflicting motivations here. LL, like any other social/gaming platform must walk a line between what's best for the customer and what's best for the business.

This isn't anything new, it's called "marketing" and I could argue that it's the world's oldest profession.

I'd say it was the ladies that created the "world's oldest" profession, that brought about the need for marketing/advertising.  That makes marketing the second oldest profession.

Well someone had to say it!

..sets you all on fire before Maddy does

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Finite said:

And this is incorrect. Lindens have no monetary value. It's in their on TOS. Any lindens you buy have zero value. Only net lindens you gain can be converted to real money. This is also in their TOS.

You keep saying this and I can't figure out why nobody has corrected it yet. It's perfectly possible to convert any part of one's L$ account balance to US$s.

The Lab does have some legalistic language about how (all) L$s have no monetary value as a means of avoiding liability for lost L$ balances (like when the whole company goes belly-up or changes all L$s to non-convertible) but that too applies to the entire L$ balance, nothing special about "net lindens you gain." There simply is no such distinction.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LL needs to be more worried about the auto clicker bots on gaming sims not gochas they are the least of anyones problems. they are quater machines simple as that, if the legal systme has a problem then they need to remove all casinos, all arcade, and all quarter machines. Otherwise this is just nothing but snowflakes crying about it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Because SL itself depends on our dopamine for its survival?

This is a brilliant comment none of us are taking into account. If anyone logs into SL past 2 hours a week, you are getting a dopamine reward for it.  Most of us that are here 24/7 have a reason for being here and it is borderline addictive at best,  fully addictive at worse.

 

You can also game that shopping in general is a dopamine releaser.  I am a shopaholic in rl, I recognized it.  If I am incredibly stressed in rl, I will not overeat, I actually eat less. But then I shop more, and before I know it at the EOM I need to pay a 1k-2k bill for clothes and kitchen items.  So if we are to start looking into all dopamine enhancers, then we'd have to change our whole human behavior.

 

That being said, when litigation, portfolio cleanup due to a new purchase or a possible future purchase comes into play clean up. Or apply casino style regulations on it, in order to control some of the scripts.  Simpler for SL is to do portfolio cleanup. Stay tuned because this is not the only thing that will eventually be targeted though.

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

3 minutes ago, Irina Forwzy said:

This is a brilliant comment none of us are taking into account. If anyone logs into SL past 2 hours a week, you are getting a dopamine reward for it.  Most of us that are here 24/7 have a reason for being here and it is borderline addictive at best,  fully addictive at worse.

 

You can also game that shopping in general is a dopamine releaser.  I am a shopaholic in rl, I recognized it. 

Just eat chocolate like the rest of us .. :|

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Irina Forwzy said:

The one I found was about Child Safety in Brazil.  If that's the one, then SL is admitting they allow children into the game that use CC.  Maybe it is another one, or maybe it's making portfolio cleanup decisions in the event, that it does come to pass. Basically a preventing that strike.

And they may not have had the financial resources to work on targeting this through headcounts, code, and potential changes.  There are multiple angles to analyze this.  I'm just used to companies doing it prior to the legislative move, as they hear through the grapevine things are not gong well for them. Or laws that give a 6 month time frame for companies to follow through. 

 

image.thumb.png.88db1edd0f65ea02bae779b5b32b0078.png

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, hairtuss said:

Where I live (Scandinavia) there has been a new discussion about casinos and online casinos, and whether they are something we want in our society.

Just because something is legal, it doesn't mean it's right. It's up to the people to have the conversation, and to pressure those who write laws to have said laws reflect our reality and everyday life. And the reality of it is that no one except for the individual/company using these abusive, manipulative and exploitative practices, wins anything.
As a consumer you don't only have your money to lose, but also your health.

The entire business model is anti-consumer, harmful and shouldn't be tolerated by anyone tbh.

Same can be said about sweets, about gaming in general, and about other aspects. So should society control everything to the point we can't do much for our own health?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

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.

To buy , or when you are cleaning a portfolio up to sell. And you already know how to do it well. You streamline processes, cut the costs as much as possible, shift the P&L around a bit so it looks better. Then sell it to the other investment partner. And if you have parts of your business you want to market more but they are dependent on others, you will clean up. But this may actually mean that eventually it will not just be gachas,  it will be gachas and the whole adult side of SL.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Irina Forwzy said:

Same can be said about sweets, about gaming in general, and about other aspects. So should society control everything to the point we can't do much for our own health?

in Europe we love rules... and prefer it to be proof.. if not we make ten more to make it :).. and after that 20 notes because it appears to be unworkable.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Irina Forwzy said:

Those were primarily from 2018-2020.  I was aiming for 2021.

2020 is still current enough to give an indication of where things are moving, in the legal arena.  If I was LL, I'd want to be very careful and minimize the chance that I'd get pulled into a lawsuit.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alwin Alcott said:

in Europe we love rules... and prefer it to be proof.. if not we make ten more to make it :).. and after that 20 notes because it appears to be unworkable.

I think we need a middle ground somewhere with countries.  I think US under protects the citizens, I think some countries in Europe overprotect. To the point their economies and their citizens are going to other European countries or the US for the entertainment aspect.   But that sweet spot is just too hard to find.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Most of them were about loot boxes anyway. 

Also noticed most tended to be geared toward lootboxes for kids. So are they saying gachas are being purchased primarily by kids using parent's CC and passing off their accounts as adults?

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

On 8/6/2021 at 7:18 PM, Leigh Tharnaby said:

Don't worry, some creators are planning to do that.

Not so funny now, is it?

Paying less* for more usefull items (usually copy instead of trans) is not funny? Explain your logic please.

*see @xAmbiguityx's list on how much the full set can end up costing you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 164 days.

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

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