Jump to content

New Gacha Policy Discussion


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 111 days.

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

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Sandy Schnook said:

I may be missing something, but I'm not sure this would be compliant.  You still have to pay to play before you know what you'll get, don't you?

is compliant, as when the player puts in the first pull payment they get the current displayed pay line item(s). Then it spins again, and the player can stick in another payment if they want and 'buy' the new displayed, or walk away

ps add. by compliant I mean technically compliant

Edited by Mollymews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AriaMoonlit said:

The quality was there because people had monthly events , so they at least had a month to create a gacha with Is enough time for someone that knows what they're doing to create a gacha set , especially if they go the other route  and they have  clothing they've made themselves before that was not released , that they could alter for a new look. Honestly I don't think the events will stop. People will still make smaller quality items for normal sale and most likely- like before have a month between events to make something of higher quality just now it will be a normally sold item rather than a gacha.and most events creators have to pay to get into so in a way that keeps people from overloading in work or taking spaces from newer creators etc.

But that's really not true. Few big creators, or even mid-level creators were in ONLY one event. Look at seraphsl.com and I won't have to argue and argue about this. They are completely worn out from events, sales, hunts, quests, anniversaries, which should be abolished, along with the requirement to make yet another free thing. It's not once a month which is "plenty of time" except for many some very niche types. Most have to hustle to every event or they are forgotten. There are a ton of events.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

Great question, you fear rightfully it might get lost in the confusion of the heated discussion. However there is an easy remedy: tagging the powers that be. But be aware that summoning such a mighty being without a proper reason might draw their ire (but in this case I think it's pretty warranted, as it clearly is a question that deserves an official answer)

Hey, @Patch Linden, Maike brought up a question that while not on gacha itself clearly relates to gacha as it involves payment and a possible random reward. Please see quoted post.

 

Here you go @SweetestMaike, I tagged them for you. 

My understanding is that raffles were long ago banned from SL under the gambling rules and changes to the TOS. We used to have raffles in the early days of SL that paid money but I personally haven't used my machine since like 2007 or something and I think most people haven't. My raffles that I have had are in a converted vendor that enables you to give people a gift if they win. The gift is not random, its picture is on the front. But since there is still a random factor involved, which may be enough to draw LL's fire, I personally wouldn't put out raffles now even if they are for a gift, not money. I found raffles were pointless and a big loss. To make them sensible, you need 100 players. Instead, you got 20.

I think Midnight Mania won't be touched either or Lucky Chairs because they are free. It's about paying for a random event in the hope that it will generate something more of value that they are banning. So what about Xploders at clubs and dances? You pay a tip and the combination of all the tips makes a pool and then one person is randomly picked to win it. So there's payment and randomness, but the pot is visible and you know the amount any person might win, that may change it. But these were all cleared back when there really was a real US law on online gambling you could really reference, along with court cases. We do not have those citations in the gatcha policy.

 

 

Edited by Prokofy Neva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

My understanding is that raffles were long ago banned from SL under the gambling rules and changes to the TOS. We used to have raffles in the early days of SL that paid money but I personally haven't used my machine since like 2007 or something and I think most people haven't. My raffles that I have had are in a converted vendor that enables you to give people a gift if they win. The gift is not random, its picture is on the front. But since there is still a random factor involved, which may be enough to draw LL's fire, I personally wouldn't put out raffles now even if they are for a gift, not money. I found raffles were pointless and a big loss. To make them sensible, you need 100 players. Instead, you got 20.

I think Midnight Mania won't be touched either or Lucky Chairs because they are free. It's about paying for a random event in the hope that it will generate something more of value that they are banning. So what about Xploders at clubs and dances? You pay a tip and the combination of all the tips makes a pool and then one person is randomly picked to win it. So there's payment and randomness, but the pot is visible and you know the amount any person might win, that may change it. But these were all cleared back when there really was a real US law on online gambling you could really reference, along with court cases. We do not have those citations in the gatcha policy.

 

 

At least payed item raffles are still around. I see them at charity events (even ones LL participates in) quite often. They also seem popular to some extent in vehicle stores. So yes they are indeed still a thing. Wether they actually should still be a thing is something completely different though.

Edited by Fionalein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raffle boards at Breedable auctions are extremely common.  There are about 30 Kittycat auctions/week, and they all have a raffle board.  The prize is a well bred sometimes rare kitty box, or live cat.  It the cat is worth 2000 $L, the raffle ticket would be around 100 $L, and the prize owner hopes there are 20 entries. Multiple tickets can be purchased, if you want to increase your odds of winning.

In this case you know the prize exactly, but there is only one winner randomly chosen by the board, and no consolation prize for the rest.  You get a chance of winning a 2000$L transferable cat for 100$L, or whatever amount you add to the raffle board.  They usually only run for a few hours before the auction, and end after the auction is over.  

If SL really wants to disrupt and anger another group of residents, they could question raffle boards based on a "changing  regulatory climate".  It would make zero sense, except to the guy here that wants all Breedables banned.

Edited by Jaylinbridges
Raffle board , not auction board (something different)
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10k gacha fatpacks? lol. Ok, it best be the best looking thing around with 100 colors/patterns and various style options for me to change it into. Otherwise, Blueberry has that beat at a better price.

To Gacha sellers,

Here's an actual idea you should considered: Limited Edition sales?

It doesn't have to be a box with 5,000 copies or anything. It could be a limited time sale between a few days to a week. All being no-copy/transfer items just like the usual gachas. Resellers can sell as usual.

You could try to mimicking the cash shops of Fortnite where they put stuff out for a limited time and then it could be gone forever or maybe be back next year cause it is seasonal or maybe it won't! Up to you.

This way you encourage the rush, your product is limited as per usual, no more junk items in the marketplace, and those that get one will know they will appreciate in value over time.

=========

Personally I hate this idea and won't buy Limited Edition items, but I think it is a viable alternative to the gacha system at least. You will probably retain the same resellers and buyers per usual but your audience won't grow to the rest of SL. For that you need to take on a more traditional selling method but hey, you do you and sell how you wish.

Better than a conveyor belt system at least.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Angelina Sinclair said:

10k gacha fatpacks? lol. Ok, it best be the best looking thing around with 100 colors/patterns and various style options for me to change it into. Otherwise, Blueberry has that beat at a better price.

To Gacha sellers,

Here's an actual idea you should considered: Limited Edition sales?

It doesn't have to be a box with 5,000 copies or anything. It could be a limited time sale between a few days to a week. All being no-copy/transfer items just like the usual gachas. Resellers can sell as usual.

You could try to mimicking the cash shops of Fortnite where they put stuff out for a limited time and then it could be gone forever or maybe be back next year cause it is seasonal or maybe it won't! Up to you.

This way you encourage the rush, your product is limited as per usual, no more junk items in the marketplace, and those that get one will know they will appreciate in value over time.

=========

Personally I hate this idea and won't buy Limited Edition items, but I think it is a viable alternative to the gacha system at least. You will probably retain the same resellers and buyers per usual but your audience won't grow to the rest of SL. For that you need to take on a more traditional selling method but hey, you do you and sell how you wish.

Better than a conveyor belt system at least.

 

I know of one that does this sort of thing for TMD. They release an exclusive that is only for that event and it's never made again. I think it's a good gimmick tbh. I usually buy them even though they aren't really my thing but they're made really well and usually come with a display case or some other bonus item or feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please reconsider the conveyor belt idea.

While this idea might seem fair since you see what item you currently get, it's pretty much just an advanced gacha machine. People will still pay for the chance that the rare or item they want appears on the board.

If you don't ban it, atleast make restrictions like "board gotta cycle to next item atleast once every x min" and "a min of 2 mins needs to have passed before it cycle to next item"

Reason for the first is to avoid having to play it like a gacha machine to get the item you want

Reason for the second being that if more than 1 person are paying the board at the same time for the item that is currently there, they should all get that item and not only 1 while the rest gets something random

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

The folks who make RL gaming machines would have good suggestions how to optimize a next-gen gacha-loophole device. At first I assumed long-queue conveyorpon couldn't be optimal at exploiting vulnerability to gambling addiction, but now I'm not so sure.

As a proof-of-concept I slapped together a few scripts - all based around a 10-item FIFO fed by a list of 22, items, with odds 18x5%, 1x4% 1x3%, 1x2%, 1x1%

I made one that randomly fed it with the odds alone, then I added "modifiers"

One that restricted the 4 "rarer" items to only having one in the FIFO at any time.

One that wouldn't add a "rarer" item to the list unless the last "player" had made more than 4 pulls out of the last 10.

One that had both of the above.

Then a "player" script and a "controller" script. The player script had a 50% chance of being "interested" in the next item, increased by 10% if the announced display contained a "rarer" item, increased by 10% if the display contained at least one item they hadn't already "got" from the set or by 20% if the display contained more than 4 items they hadn't "already got,"  If the display included the ONLY item they hadn't already got, "interest" was hard-jumped to 90%. If a player already had the full set, their interest was hard-jumped down to 20. The controller script registered all the "interest" from player scripts, and if the last player was "interested" gave them an 80% chance of the next pull, if the last player wasn't interested or failed the 80% check it picked one of the "interested" players and randomly assigned them the next pull to them.

I then dumped a controller, a test script and 20 "players" into a prim and let it run.

The FIFO sequence still "looked" random unless you analysed it more deeply but the modified scripts drew more pulls in a row from players with identical "interest parameters.

Now, this was simplistic and NOT a good model of the complexities of human gambling behaviour, but it illustrates the concept of a "rigged conveyor" that would be almost impossible to detect very well.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jaylinbridges said:

Your next step?  List it on Marketplace :)

F, no... I'm not sharing the code, easy as it was to write. Any competent scripter could do it and it wouldt ake longer to type than it did to create the design in their head, but if they want to be part of that that's on them. I  choose not to be.

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

A better wording for the policy would have been something along the lines of "random or pseudorandom system where the user can, or is encouraged to purchase items they do not want in order to get the item they wish to purchase. And where the total price to get a given item is either random/pseudorandom, or different from user to user or at different times"

Edited by Kyrah Abattoir
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2021 at 5:14 AM, Qie Niangao said:

There are quality items in gachas, and once in a great while a talented creator's best work is reserved for gacha "rares" as lure to get people to buy all the junk they'd never give away, lest it besmirch their brand. That's the thing, though: some real garbage gets loaded a commons, stuff nobody would buy on resale, stuff the merchant includes as tongue-in-cheek booby prizes. Which would be fine if gacha were still allowed (or if it moved to "skill gaming" regions), because it's a free market and folks can take a joke.

 

I play gachas because I can get high quality items I like at a good price, so getting the junk commons  over and over is not a funny joke to me. I have to pay for that joke. I guess  getting the "booby prize" may be funny once in while  but certainly not all the time.  That is why I prefer to get any gacha I want on the marketplace or at resale shops but again the price could be higher than if I got it directly from the gacha. Also I like to try a demo for clothing items and I have to find that at the gacha itself. 

Now that gachas have been outlawed how can we still sell and buy them ? I assume gacha resale will still be legal since it is not a game of chance anymore , you know exactly what you are buying. Will it just be in the used section on the marketplace again? That is where it used to be before they created the gacha section. I would think we could all still trade and sell our  gachas under a different name after gachas go away . Is there a new name for them yet? 

Edited by Elinah Iredell
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Elinah Iredell said:

Is there a new name for them yet? 

I was thinking Grinchas... 

After Dr. Seuss.   Gacha and Gacha's are now forbidden words in SL.

Grinch - a person or thing that spoils or dampens the pleasure of others.

Edited by Jaylinbridges
  • Like 3
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add to my "little test" reported above, I modified the "player" script to stop pulling altogether when they had the full set and the "controller" script to run the game until 50% of players had filled the entire set. 

Assuming a "somewhat fair" pricing of the individual items, say 2xpullPrice for the commons and then doubling the price for each of the four tiers of rares we get a "fatpack price" (undiscounted) of 88x the pullPrice. Even with an "unrigged" script the average number of pulls each of the players that "filled their set" in this simulation had to make in order to manage this was more than double this number.They always ended up paying close to 3x the fatpack price to fill the set from pulls alone  Each of the methods of rigging it I'd coded increased that number by close to an order of magnitude.

THIS, not any moral, religious or spuriously-other objection is why gacha (AND conveyors, since I believe I've just demonstrated that if gacha are gambling, so are conveyors) are something I object to. It gives the illusion of being cheaper, by offering a chance to get an item for cheaper than market value but the real odds actually make the set many times more expensive. This is why I describe it as a bunko game. Because that's exactly how every bunko game on every midway works.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jaylinbridges said:

I was thinking Grinchas... 

After Dr. Seuss.   Gacha and Gacha's are now forbidden words in SL.

Grinch - a person or thing that spoils or dampens the pleasure of others.

I was thinking of a new one using your Grinch comment --- GrinchVeyor!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Da5id Weatherwax said:

It gives the illusion of being cheaper, by offering a chance to get an item for cheaper than market value but the real odds actually make the set many times more expensive. This is why I describe it as a bunko game. Because that's exactly how every bunko game on every midway works.

But that is because of how you choose to look at this. As Profky already related from the Gacha creator here, the focus is about selling to resellers rather than end point consumers. A reseller likely cares less about having complete sets and is more interested in whatever is resalable whether common or rare. Undoubtedly rares would be nicer but too many of them and the value for a resale drops. Even for me as an end user consumer, I did not have to buy all the parts of a couple of outfits and was happy when the rares popped up after 5 or 6 pulls and therefore only needed a couple more pulls for a common I wanted. The rest I could just buy from a reseller if it is something I really wanted.

To me after thinking on this a few days, the Gacha's are worth quite a bit more because of their uniqueness and quality but even more so becauser they retain their value and may even be worth more then their original price depending on the demand. Fatpacks and other regular catalogue items are worthless the moment I buy them because their value is completely dependent of the value I place on them for the time I use them. I looked through my inventory this morning and it struck me how all those No Transfer items I have bought over the years were totally without worth because I would no longer be caught dead in them in public. If however they were transferrable like a Gacha, they would still have potential value to others, especially if a quality item/outfit.

What all your math is not taking into account, is this intrinsic value of an item when it is transferrable and additionally what you didn't take into account is that in a typical fatpack, 75% of the items in it are throwaways because of colors/textures I would not use and copies for bodies I do not own. When a fatpack is boiled down to it's actual usable items, it increases the cost of each dramatically and worse, in a year I would not be caught dead in the outfit because style and fashion has moved on. So the typical end user has hundreds if not thousands of worthless products in their inventory that will never again see the light of day. A Gacha on the other hand, may well still be of value to others. Unless you factor in those aspects, you cannot legitimately judge the value of one vs the other.

Edited by Arielle Popstar
spelling spelling spelling
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kyrah Abattoir said:

A better wording for the policy would have been something along the lines of "random or pseudorandom system where the user can, or is encouraged to purchase items they do not want in order to get the item they wish to purchase. And where the total price to get a given item is either random/pseudorandom, or different from user to user or at different times"

The part I bolded may have been obvious all along, but stated so concisely, it's a revelation to me: The relevant price is not that of the item being purchased at the moment, which is fixed, but the unknowable cost of the item one actually wants. With gacha, you don't even know which item you're purchasing until you've paid; with the conveyor you know what you're getting with the immediate purchase but can't necessarily know how much it will cost to even bring the desired item into view and eventually buy it.

Consider what would happen if the rules changed such that the entire set of available items were required to be displayed in the conveyor, in the order they'll need to be purchased, so the buyer could see exactly how much it would cost to get to the one they want. Now, if the conveyor system were such a good deal, that should be uniformly appealing to both seller and buyer, right? But it would be a commercial flop because fair pricing isn't what any of this is about.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

But that is because of how you choose to look at this. As Profky already related from the Gacha creator here, the focus is about selling to resellers rather than end point consumers. A reseller likely cares less about having complete sets and is more interested in whatever is resalable whether common or rare. Undoubtedly rares would be nicer but too many of them and the value for a resale drops. Even for me as an end user consumer, I did not have to buy all the parts of a couple of outfits and was happy when the rares popped up after 5 or 6 pulls and therefore only needed a couple more pulls for a common I wanted. The rest I could just buy from a reseller if it is something I really wanted.

To me after thinking on this a few days, the Gacha's are worth quite a bit more because of their uniqueness and quality but even more so becauser they retain their value and may even be worth more then their original price depending on the demand. Fatpacks and other regular catalogue items are worthless the moment I buy them because their value is completely dependent of the value I place on them for the time I use them. I looked through my inventory this morning and it struck me how all those No Transfer items I have bought over the years were totally without worth because I would no longer be caught dead in them in public. If however they were transferrable like a Gacha, they would still have potential value to others, especially if a quality item/outfit.

What all your math is not taking into account, is this intrinsic value of an item when it is transferrable and additionally what you didn't take into account is that in a typical fatpack, 75% of the items in it are throwaways because of colors/textures I would not use and copies for bodies I do not own. When a fatpack is boiled down to it's actual usable items, it increases the cost of each dramatically and worse, in a year I would not be caught dead in the outfit because style and fashion has moved on. So the typical end user has hundreds if not thousands of worthless products in their inventory that will never again see the light of day. A Gacha on the other hand, may well still be of value to others. Unless you factor in those aspects, you cannot legitimately judge the value of one vs the other.

I truly appreciate what you are saying here. I can see how the perceived value of an item to its recipient may not be reflect by the cold hard numbers. To hark back to my references to carnival midway games, I still have a prize I won on one nearly 40 years ago. It was a memorable day and one where those memories will be treasured and are revitalised every time I see that item on its shelf. In pure numbers it is next to valueless. To me it is priceless.

However, those cold unfeeling numbers and the way in which they do manipulate purchasing behaviour are a significant factor in whether - for example - conveyors should be considered no different from gacha by LL. Is it "gambling"? Is it "deceptive pricing"? These are things LL must decide, because that will determine if they allow them on the grid. To my mind they come too close to my personal line, as I believe is evident from my comments on this thread, but in the ultimate analysis it's LL's decision based on the best advice from those more expert than I. 

All that is around us in SL is, at the end of the day, numbers. It is a stream of data and it is shaped and characterised by the code that manipulates those numbers. There are ways in which LL have decided it is unacceptable to shape that reality. They have decide that gacha fall into that category.  My contention here is that they were right to do so and that conveyors fall into anathema under the same test as gacha do. I may be wrong. Heck, LL may be wrong in ascribing gacha to that category. But the reality in SL is going to change. LL need to decide the direction of that change on the basis of all the evidence, even those parts of it which you, or I, may not like.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Da5id Weatherwax said:

As a proof-of-concept I slapped together a few scripts - all based around a 10-item FIFO fed by a list of 22, items, with odds 18x5%, 1x4% 1x3%, 1x2%, 1x1%

I made one that randomly fed it with the odds alone, then I added "modifiers"

One that restricted the 4 "rarer" items to only having one in the FIFO at any time.

One that wouldn't add a "rarer" item to the list unless the last "player" had made more than 4 pulls out of the last 10.

One that had both of the above.

Then a "player" script and a "controller" script. The player script had a 50% chance of being "interested" in the next item, increased by 10% if the announced display contained a "rarer" item, increased by 10% if the display contained at least one item they hadn't already "got" from the set or by 20% if the display contained more than 4 items they hadn't "already got,"  If the display included the ONLY item they hadn't already got, "interest" was hard-jumped to 90%. If a player already had the full set, their interest was hard-jumped down to 20. The controller script registered all the "interest" from player scripts, and if the last player was "interested" gave them an 80% chance of the next pull, if the last player wasn't interested or failed the 80% check it picked one of the "interested" players and randomly assigned them the next pull to them.

I then dumped a controller, a test script and 20 "players" into a prim and let it run.

The FIFO sequence still "looked" random unless you analysed it more deeply but the modified scripts drew more pulls in a row from players with identical "interest parameters.

Now, this was simplistic and NOT a good model of the complexities of human gambling behaviour, but it illustrates the concept of a "rigged conveyor" that would be almost impossible to detect very well.

Thank you for this!

 

Those that support Gacha need to be made aware of how easy it is for the game to be rigged against the customers. It is impossible for LL to regulate this no matter what they try, SL is not build for kind of regulation. Otherwise they would've tried to keep gambling long ago. Given all the laws that are out and will be coming out in the future is just best to nix this method of selling items and try something new.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Angelina Sinclair said:

Thank you for this!

 

Those that support Gacha need to be made aware of how easy it is for the game to be rigged against the customers. It is impossible for LL to regulate this no matter what they try, SL is not build for kind of regulation. Otherwise they would've tried to keep gambling long ago. Given all the laws that are out and will be coming out in the future is just best to nix this method of selling items and try something new.

They did try gambling a long time ago. It was allowed for a bit. When I first started playing there were casinos all over the place. It was as popular if not more popular than most things in SL now. It still resides today and regulated in Skill Gaming sims. As for the rigged gachas, I think most who played them realized this. The issue was the only way to find out was the hard way since odds weren't listed. Very few actually listed the odds. I can only recall once to be honest when the odds were listed. Basic math could tell you which ones to play. I tended to play with the ones with no more than 20-25items in it and 1 or 2 rares depending on the creator. Eventually you end with a with a bunch you trusted and ones you likely wouldn't consider playing again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Da5id Weatherwax said:

Assuming a "somewhat fair" pricing of the individual items, say 2xpullPrice for the commons and then doubling the price for each of the four tiers of rares we get a "fatpack price" (undiscounted) of 88x the pullPrice. Even with an "unrigged" script the average number of pulls each of the players that "filled their set" in this simulation had to make in order to manage this was more than double this number.They always ended up paying close to 3x the fatpack price to fill the set from pulls alone

 

picking up on this. A consideration for shopkeepers

the fatpack price should be the sum of the single pull probabilities of the items in the machine

for example with the 22 item set:

18 * 5 = 90
 1 * 4 =  4
 1 * 3 =  3
 1 * 2 =  2
 1 * 1 =  1
        ---
        100

 
pull price L$20. 100 * 20 = L$2,000

when the fatpack price is greater than this then is not a good deal. Better off to play the machine

when the machine approaches infinity (as it is designed to do) then the expectation is that the return will be 90,4,3,2,1 for every 100 pulls. 100 * 20 = L$2,000

the consideration for the shopkeeper is that players will take the fatpack price as the indicator of the probability table in the machine (in the absence of any other information)

for example:  Pull price L$20. Fatpack price: $3,000. 3000 / 20 = 150. This indicates that the machine is expected to pay out the 1 rare every 150  pulls. When this is not the case in the example table above

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Angelina Sinclair said:

Thank you for this!

 

Those that support Gacha need to be made aware of how easy it is for the game to be rigged against the customers. It is impossible for LL to regulate this no matter what they try, SL is not build for kind of regulation. Otherwise they would've tried to keep gambling long ago. Given all the laws that are out and will be coming out in the future is just best to nix this method of selling items and try something new.

In some states, games of skill are against the law. But LL does allow games of skill on some islands. If you are from a state where games of skill are against the law, then you can't go to those islands. Why not have gacha islands? If you are from a state that doesn't allow playing gacha machines, then you can't go to an island that has gacha machines. This is not about regulations in other countries. This is about one of the new owners of LL. He doesn't like gacha prize machines.

There has been no communication to LL, from other countries about gacha prize machines. None what so ever. I don't blame Patch. He just works for LL. He is not going to say anything bad about his employers. I'm pretty sure that many of the Lindens are against this new policy.

This is just like the independent Linden exchange ban back in 2013. That policy was also unpopular. Many people from Europe were mad at that ban. And now they choose to ban gacha.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am highly considering poisoning the well by making a dirty, cheating, conveyor script that pulls all the nasty tricks to look random. Then releasing that script publicly for free and open source to make sure that everyone knows that the conveyor they choose to play could be using that script as its engine without any way for the vendors to prove that their script is "fair".

I feel that with proper marketing of this script this could torpedo the credibility of the scheme before it gets off the ground.

Edited by Hana Nova
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 111 days.

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

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