Jump to content

New Gacha Policy Discussion


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 72 days.

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

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Cancer Triellis said:

Not all of SL is "gambling", but every Linden you buy is taxed, so, they kind-of do.

There is a fee attached to Linden purchases.  There is no tax.  Some people never purchase Lindens and use Lindens they make from sales, rental or whatever to make any purchases.  Still, no tax.   The governments of some countries DO tax income from selling your Lindens. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am happy that gachas are going, however it doesn't feel like this is about following a law, so much as it is about getting rid of something that has caused issues and backlash on LL for a long time.
The issues with copybotting gacha items has been an ongoing issue, both to combat as well as the staff to handle the extra complaints filed and backlash that 'LL is doing nothing about it'.

The permissions statement about transferrable items seems to be tacked on as a way to rule out this policy covering other markets within SL from being wiped out, as there appears to be no laws that state anything about permissions of items. (I could be wrong on this, but none I have seen) Loot boxes in most games have both tfr and no tfr items included.

Now the breedables are a grey area, because they need to find a way to differentiate the breedables from the gachas/loot boxes, so it is only the gachas being removed from SL. Breedables aren't an issue generally for coppybotting since they are scripted to connect to an external server to check if there is already a duplicate rezzed and delete any copies.

At this point however breedable starter packs, aside from the random chance being assigned after the point of sale, are the same thing, which is why their faqs saying they are still looking into the breedables, it may still change.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

Um Gacha machines of all types are completely banned. 

It's not a Gacha machine if you can only buy  the item that is displayed.. or are we saying the word Gacha is banned from items... and that that is banned.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Allie Munro said:

What about raffles that many of the charities do to raise money? You are not guaranteed to win, but have a chance. Can you offer an item for the price and then a random person will win something additional?

Most raffles require the organisation (In Real Life) to have a licence to do so and be non-profit. There are some areas where this doesn't apply such as work raffles etc, however those raffles (work or private) also have strict rules governing them such as making no profit and all proceeds go to the charity.

They are entirely different to what lootboxes and gacha's are and can in no way be compared.

For instance here is the regulations regarding raffles in the UK. Not-for-profit raffles: Do you need a lottery licence? - Third Sector Protect

The link also clearly states what the UK considers gambling (a lottery) which is illegal to conduct without licensing of which the governments will not allow gaming companies like Linden Lab to obtain. You will notice that the way lotteries are defined is EXACTLY how a gacha is defined hence why Linden Lab are required by any new laws that state gacha's as the same.

From the linked article:

The Gambling Commission determines there is three essential elements to a lottery, these being:

  • Payment is required to enter the game.
  • There must be a minimum of one prize.
  • Prizes are awarded purely on chance.

People are asking why gacha's and lootboxes are being banned, it is because they fall under the terms most governments state as being a lottery, it is just that it was an unknown (to governments) until recently (2017ish).

Edited by Drayke Newall
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Lucia Nightfire said:

If adult content/behavior is banned, that will be the last nail in SL's coffin, heh.

And don't you know that would probably be one of the first things to go after gachas, breedables and fishing. 🤪

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

i think variable spot pricing could be done. Like the vendor array displays all the items in the set.  The vendor changes the price of each item according to some schedule. Right now the 'rare' is 100L, next minute it is 1000L and so on

altho this does lend itself to sniping the vendor with a bot

ps. About Transfer.  No-Copy+Transfer is what makes gacha play attractive for many players. The chance to get something of greater value that ordinarily wouldn't be the case. A chance mechanic that reinforces what is sometimes referred to as the compulsion loop, which can lead to addiction. Without getting into it to deeply here, the various legislatures that are addressing this are most concerned with the outcomes that addiction can produce within their societies

(moving this part of the discussion to the non-lsl thread)

As much as I appreciate the reasons behind the policy, reducing the risk of addiction and such, any fair policy needs to be based on implementation and not outcomes. "People get addicted to Gachas but not fish, so fish are ok" would (obviously) not be a fair policy. 

No-Copy + transfer perms are completely unrelated to the random gambling mechanics IMO. as others have pointed out, it's mostly set up that way so that people who get lots and lots of duplicates haven't completely wasted their "investment". If anything, making Gachas always no-trans would make them more addictive (higher risk, greater reward), not less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kimmi Zehetbauer said:

I wonder if some posting here saying they want the gatchas to stay are those who make them?  Hmmm....

I would bet quite a bit that the ones arguing the most are the people that play the Gachas and are resellers.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

No, I am not. I've been in SL far longer than what this account shows. I can see the writing on the wall even if you can't. LL will shut it all down if people don't cooperate. They'll start with gachas, then 7Seas and breedables, only they know what will be next until there is nothing left in SL worth logging in for. If there aren't enough regularly logging in residents spending enough money, LL won't have any choice. 

I'm looking at the big whole scene, not just those trees in front of the forest.

Are you suggesting that LL is intentionally shutting down gacha and are willingly engaging in a domino effect? In turn .. shutting down this, that and the next until no one wants to be here anymore? Why would a company knowingly self sabatoge themselves like that? This is not about some conspiracy, it's about the actual laws that we are all expected to abide by on this planet. 

The gacha machines .. NOT the gacha items are the only things being removed at this time. If other things fall into that category over time, it will also be because the law demands it. I think the entire reason for this decision is to help protect the entity that is second life .. not try to intentionally play a part in destroying it. That notion is absolutely preposterous!

You talk about how these things could kill off the active member count. But what do you think would happen if countries that banned these things in rl, knew that the people living there, were accessing it via second life instead? The service would very likely be banned ie: no longer accessible to those in said country. Now THAT would cause a huge financial loss. Never mind gacha machines or other chance games .. They would not even be able to log in to hang out or shop for any sort of regular item whatsoever. The folks who own LL now are investors. They are not in that business to lose millions ... Think about it. 

Edited by KrystalKandy
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Furstorm said:

It sucks that a few special snowflakes that can't act as responsible adults want to ruin Gachas for everyone.

What's next? no more escorting because some winey ***** gets offended. We re all adults & we have a right o gamble as we see fit & suffer the consequences as adults.

Take it up with the governments / politicians.  LL just has to abide by the laws.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely if all that's needed to make 7seas compliant is to make the prizes no-transfer, starter breedables can be dealt with in the same way? It's not as if they have any resale value anyway.

Although then of course people are going to want to know why they can't have no-transfer gachas...

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

1 hour ago, Furstorm said:

It sucks that a few special snowflakes that can't act as responsible adults want to ruin Gachas for everyone.

What's next? no more escorting because some winey ***** gets offended. We re all adults & we have a right o gamble as we see fit & suffer the consequences as adults.

Sure, you do have a right to gamble at casinos that are legal in the real world. You do not have a right to gamble in Second Life as it is forbidden to do so. That is why gambling got banned in Second Life years ago. Pretty much end of the story.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 seas is not the only fishing system in SL. If linden labs is going to mess with that, they will have to look at all of them. I know very little about breedables, I would think they would have to look at how different ones operate. Without criteria clarification, it is a lot of speculation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a breedable, a Meeroo. It was male, my friend had a female.  I was happy thinking, 'thank gawd, I won't get more of them'.  Until the day I logged in to a message, "congratulations. your meeroo just gave birth."

  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Silas Merlin said:

 

Everyone and their brother has already proposed "preview" gacha and some have already hopped on board and implemented a version with their own "gacha compliant" or "gacha legal" claim. LL has not officially said if this an acceptable alternative.

One thing many are forgetting is LL under "advise from legal" can easily claim "Any mechanism that perpetuates gacha at any portion or phase in the purchase procedure, before, after and in between each purchase, whether by one or multiple users, whether facilitated through one or multiple hosts, multiple locations, multiple pay methods such as L$ or transferable and/or redeemable goods/services/tokens, will not be allowed.".

Edited by Lucia Nightfire
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Quistess Alpha said:

(moving this part of the discussion to the non-lsl thread)

As much as I appreciate the reasons behind the policy, reducing the risk of addiction and such, any fair policy needs to be based on implementation and not outcomes.

legislators are all about outcomes on their societies. In cases like these, what they tend do is weigh up the cost of taxpayer-funded support services to treat addiction and compare this to the financial benefits that may accrue to the society from activites/behaviours that can lead to addiction

the blunt instrument of legislation is to deter outcomes that are cost/benefit detrimental overall. This is legal/permissible, and this is not

while at the same time, they look for ways to not totally outlaw all implementations that could lead to addiction.  State and national lotteries for example. licensed casinos, carnival fair games and so on.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Hanjo Harvey said:

What makes this any different from buying from a regular multi item board?

the hovertext and the buying box that both say what you're buying

Edited by Deathly Fright
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lucia Nightfire said:

Everyone and their brother has already proposed "preview" gacha and some have already hopped on board an implemented a version with their own "gacha compliant" or "gacha legal" claim. LL has not officially said if this an acceptable alternative.

One thing many are forgetting is LL under "advise from legal" can easily claim "Any mechanism that perpetuates gacha at any portion or phase in the purchase procedure, before, after and in between each purchase, whether by the one or multiple users, whether facilitated through one or multiple hosts, multiple locations, multiple pay methods such as L$ or transferable and/or redeemable goods/services/tokens, will not be allowed.".

where is that quote from? I don't doubt you but was just wondering

Edited by Deathly Fright
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hanjo Harvey said:

no i mean lol
I get the hover text part. but you are buying directly like any regular sale board.

the problem as I understand it is that gatchas don't tell you what you'll get. so you are buying blind. with the hovertext it tells you. so you know what you're buying. it seems to fulfill the rules.

I don't personally care about gatchas, but I find this fascinating from just a rules standpoint

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 72 days.

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

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