New Gacha Policy Discussion

[Rei Waifu]

Good god, 77 pages later and people are still trying to find ways to sell items via gacha without calling it a gacha?

 

If you pay a vendor.. where it be a gumball machine, slot machine, or a cows head ... and it randomly drops an item out that you have zero control over ... then its a GACHA machine .... whether you call it Randys Randomiser ... Susans Suprise or whatever else people are coming up with... 

[Ron Andretti]

If this would be Marketplace i would give 5 Stars. Its really outstanding that this ripoff get removed and hopefully soon also all Gacha Items from Marketplace also. 5 Stars to Lindenlab!

Edited August 4, 2021 by Ron Andretti

[Deathly Fright]

1 hour ago, Patch Linden said:

We have been seeing a lot of good suggestions on new, interesting ways to sell content, many of which we have given to our general counsel for further legal opinion.  When we have that information back, the FAQ will be updated.

thanks for the update Patch... is this in reference to the hovertext "non-gatchas"?

[Emilie Muggins]

8 hours ago, never Franizzi said:

my post was to the fact that someone said they didnt want to pay a gacha over and over just to get all the pieces in a set... where i compared it to going to a shop and having to pay for each piece in a set one by one or end up buying a fatpack for a highly inflated price and getting about ten things in it you dont want just to be abled to get the two tops and skirts etc you do want... I am not sure why that isnt clear to you but I can't speak for your comprehension as I don't know you. 

Ok this is really hard, you just don't seem to understand the complete absurdity of your argument. I'm starting to think you are just trolling me .

no it is not the same thing going to a store and buying an outfit separated in a few pieces and getting it from a gacha because :

- In the store you get exactly what you paid for. You choose the item you want and you are sure to get it for the specified price. There is no luck involved , no frustration, you decide you want something, the price is acceptable to you, you get the item. I can hardly believe i have to try to define what buying something means but hey ......

- In the gacha you are paying over and over trying to get the item you want, you may get it in the end but there is no grarantee, you may end up with n copies of the same item and run out of money before getting exactly what you wanted. It is a game of chance (at least it is what they tell us, we have no garantee about that either since we can't check the gacha scripts). 

I understand the new policy is going to hurt your reseller business and I am sorry about that, but that's no reason to be of bad faith 

[Patch Linden]

6 minutes ago, Deathly Fright said:

thanks for the update Patch... is this in reference to the hovertext "non-gatchas"?

I wasn't referencing anything specific but one of many examples would be the conveyor belt type schemes.

[Sid Nagy]

1. Get a skill game approved that gives out credits that can be saved in inventory.
varying from 1 (poor skills) to 200 (super skills).

2. Display the merchandise next to it and call it prizes.
- dozens of different stickers, lollypops and buttons they all cost 1 credit each
- Many commons (that most not really want)  they all cost 10 game credits each
- some likable rares: cost 50 game credits each
- some desirable rares: cost 100 game credits each
- a few real desirable rares for 200 game credits each
- one super desirable rare for 400 game credits each

Put them in gaming sims.
These skill games could be combined to save points for many different prize packs.
So one player can save credits for that ultra rare pink polka dot bikini, while another saves up for that super desirable rare golden cross bike helmet with antenna.
Or me being happy with a few stickers and buttons.

I think that this could be a workable compromise.
Thoughts?

 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Sid Nagy

[Velk Kerang]

29 minutes ago, Aria Fae said:

Good god, 77 pages later and people are still trying to find ways to sell items via gacha without calling it a gacha?

 

If you pay a vendor.. where it be a gumball machine, slot machine, or a cows head ... and it randomly drops an item out that you have zero control over ... then its a GACHA machine .... whether you call it Randys Randomiser ... Susans Suprise or whatever else people are coming up with... 

Not if you have some control and chance to win the item you want like one of those toy machines you see at the store mate. Personally if it were me then I would script up a game and then let people pick their prize at the end if they win like at the fair or something. If I ever get back in to content creating then I am calling mine Chachas because I want everybody Chachaing. Lmao!!!!👍😎

 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Velk Kerang
Corrections.

[SkindoO]

gacha addicts mostly are ppl who desperately want to feel/look unique in this game of looks that they wudn't mind spending triple the price for something (fairly higher quality coz creators tend to put their best quality work in gachas) knowing that most other players can't get it with a single "buy" click 

[Fionalein]

7 minutes ago, SkindoO said:

gacha addicts mostly are ppl who desperately want to feel/look unique in this game of looks that they wudn't mind spending triple the price for something (fairly higher quality coz creators tend to put their best quality work in gachas) knowing that most other players can't get it with a single "buy" click 

Ever heared about custom content?

[Qie Niangao]

1 hour ago, Patch Linden said:

On edit:  Further in the problematic mechanics of the gacha systems, and in addition to what I said earlier, regarding the act of paying for something and in return the item/thing you receive back can not be based on chance, this includes the purchaser must know what they are purchasing in advance of the sale being made.  In other words, the purchaser must clearly see and understand what they are purchasing at the time of sale.

Thanks Patch. This part (emphasis mine) seems foundational but involves some judgment, specifically for purchased items that subsequently affect the outcome of some chance-affected process. I expect counsel will need to provide some guidance for that judgment, at least internal to the Lab.

The 7seas case is instructive: The purchased item is known at time of sale and everybody gets the same item for the same price. The complication is that it affects the outcome of later chance events ("fishing" success), but we can ignore that effect because the "fish" aren't transferable.

That's a little slippery already, though. A hypothetical vendor directly selling random non-transferable items of value unknown at time of purchase would still be a gacha. Presumably the non-transferability of the fish is relevant because those fish are the product of a subsequent random process, not the sale itself.

But a hypothetical "vendor" that sold tokens that are later subjected to a random process when "opened" might be a problem. Worst case, the token would just spin the wheel when opened and give a random number of L$s to the "buyer". That's obviously simple gambling and hasn't been allowed for years. Next case is when the token opens to randomly select a transferable "prize"—which would be the problem if 7seas fish were transferable. Finally there's the case of the token that selects a non-transferable prize, which is an abstract representation of 7seas fishing. I think we'd be uncomfortable, though, if there were a loophole for gachas to deliver non-transferable items as long as the random selection were made after a token sale.

What I think makes 7seas different is that it's the experience of opening the token—the fishing, not the fish—that's really being bought, so the duration and salience of this chance-affected process makes a difference. (Maybe counsel sees a simpler or better distinction. That would be nice.)

[Qie Niangao]

1 minute ago, Fionalein said:

9 minutes ago, SkindoO said:

gacha addicts mostly are ppl who desperately want to feel/look unique in this game of looks that they wudn't mind spending triple the price for something (fairly higher quality coz creators tend to put their best quality work in gachas) knowing that most other players can't get it with a single "buy" click 

Ever heared about custom content?

Heaven forfend our virtual tailors discover the MODIFY permission.
(See? I knew I was liking this gacha ban!)

[Yuki Suki]

4 hours ago, Master Huldschinsky said:

what about setting up a kind of a ban line around gachas as option that bans users from it if the country not allow gachas (loot boxes) ?

This thing is industry wide. it might be even beyond LL. For the beginning, messing with loop hole might complicate things. Unless you guys are prepared to pay and cover for all the fines, legal fees and damages LL sustain.

[TessaPaige Jupiter]

@PatchLinden I am not sure if this has been asked or not. What will happen with the Gacha Category on MP? Will the name change? Do existing stores, yard sale locations, on MP and inworld that have the name Gacha in them need to change the name and rebrand? Please add this to your FAQ.

Cheers,

Tess

[Rosa Hexem]

As long as the new conveyer belt style of vendor is fine, which it appears to be so far, looks like the immediate path ahead is pretty clear: start converting gacha to conveyors.

Edit: To add to that, maybe we could start talking about what could be done to build on that kind of system since it passes that first crucial hurdle. Earlier it was already discussed and for example locking the vendor to be one buyer at a time would prevent product sniping, what other features could make these more viable? I was chatting with someone yesterday who suggested having the products automatically cycle after a certain period of time so that you could hypothetically just wait until the product you like is on display OR buy every product on display until it cycles around to the one you want.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Viche Hexem

[Sukubia Scarmon]

3 minutes ago, Viche Hexem said:

As long as the new conveyer belt style of vendor is fine, which it appears to be so far, looks like the immediate path ahead is pretty clear: start converting gacha to conveyors.

I hope it's ot, since that's still gacha with extra steps. We all know that it's about the randomised chance to see what item will be next.

[Kathlen Onyx]

6 minutes ago, Viche Hexem said:

As long as the new conveyer belt style of vendor is fine, which it appears to be so far, looks like the immediate path ahead is pretty clear: start converting gacha to conveyors.

Perhaps wait for LL to come out and say what is fine and not and not assume?

[Rosa Hexem]

19 hours ago, Nadi Vemo said:

Hello. since i saw my vendor here lately, i would like to explain how it works.

Basically vendor shows one item to buy, it will only change that item when someone pays for it, and it will pick random new item from the list, vendor of course will lock to person who is currently using it so it will not allow any prize sniping. So that if a person decided to play longer next prize will always be their to pick first. it can also show what will come next, or it can be turned off to just show one item currently for sale.

i did that prototype because i would really like to know if that will be ok to use. textures in that prototype are just reused from my old vendor, they will have to be changed in the final version of course.

at the end person who pays the vendor ALWAYS know what they will get for that money. 

at the end i would like to say i'm doing gachas just cause it's a way to sell more expensive stuff for cheap, i spend 2-3 months on every gacha i do, and those items are being sold for 100L at the events. and it really brings me joy when someone who dont have a lot of money can buy my mount or avatar for that price, even if they simply didn't get the blue one they really wanted, i can see they really enjoy those items.  i value every single common item in my gachas more than it cost to pull. 

 

best regards 

Nadi Vemo

This is the "conveyor" system in question, by the by.

 

Quote

I hope it's ot, since that's still gacha with extra steps. We all know that it's about the randomised chance to see what item will be next.

Something will likely come to replace gacha, I like this system because it offers both the appeal of gacha and the transparency of traditional vending. I reckon something WILL replace gacha regardless of if people like it or not. If this is ground zero for its development it'd be better to be constructive and work towards an alternative which has less of the issues that people had with gacha and more new benefits which make it better for both the vendor and customer.

Quote

Perhaps wait for LL to come out and say what is fine and not and not assume?

That's fair, Patch's answer was a bit shaky and we wouldn't want to put all our eggs in one basket. That being said, if not this system what other ideas do we have for gacha-alike systems which fit within the rulings of the new policy?

Edited August 4, 2021 by Viche Hexem
my awful grammar lol

[Velk Kerang]

4 minutes ago, Viche Hexem said:

That's fair, Patch's answer was a bit shaky and we wouldn't want to put all our eggs in one basket. That being said, if not this system what other ideas do we have for gacha-alike systems which fit within the rulings of the new policy?

I don't know if I would say shaky. I mean you got to consider dude is working a job just like the rest of us and can only give out the information he's been given or authorized to release. So it's more of a we'll hear more when he hears more waiting game type of a situation then anything else mate.😎

Edited August 4, 2021 by Velk Kerang
Corrections.

[Marianne Little]

19 minutes ago, Viche Hexem said:

As long as the new conveyer belt style of vendor is fine, which it appears to be so far, looks like the immediate path ahead is pretty clear: start converting gacha to conveyors.

Edit: To add to that, maybe we could start talking about what could be done to build on that kind of system since it passes that first crucial hurdle. Earlier it was already discussed and for example locking the vendor to be one buyer at a time would prevent product sniping, what other features could make these more viable? I was chatting with someone yesterday who suggested having the products automatically cycle after a certain period of time so that you could hypothetically just wait until the product you like is on display OR buy every product on display until it cycles around to the one you want.

I would not bet on it as long as it is any "random" in it. Or pay money for the undesirables just to get what they want. That is gacha, no matter what those who made that script dream of. I believe LL will nap out every gacha by any name, root and stem.

And the idea that a customer should wait for it to cycle and buy... Lord have mercy upon that merchant, this customer will not stand and wait like a fool. That would have to be the most amazing thing in LL, sold for 1L.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Marianne Little
added a few words to clarify, and last sentence

[VergilISparda]

2 hours ago, Sukubia Scarmon said:

I hope it's ot, since that's still gacha with extra steps. We all know that it's about the randomised chance to see what item will be next.

Not only that, this system is everything but attractive. That's just my opinion. I talked about it to my friend who can't live without gachas and she said she will not buy any more if that's how it's supposed to work now. I'm sure opinions are all different about this, one thing is more than likely; Not going to work like a charm.

[Rosa Hexem]

3 minutes ago, Marianne Little said:

I would not bet on it as long as it is any "random" in it. Or pay money for the undesirables just to get what they want. That is gacha, no matter what those who made that script dream of. I believe LL will nap out every gacha by any name, root and stem.

And the idea that a customer should wait for it to cycle and buy... Lord have mercy upon that merchant, this customer will not stand and wait like a fool. That would have to be the most amazing thing in LL, sold for 1L.

I'd bet on it, the principle is that the randomness is exempt from the transaction. A buyer knows exactly what they're going to get when they buy the product and the machine cycling through products is incidental of that. It's clear that there's an element of randomness which stems from that as the products cycle through as they are purchased but, again, it's exempt from the transaction and so it's not like the user doesn't understand what they're getting when they make a purchase. Pair that up with the machine cycling through products over time intervals and it even makes the gacha-alike component wholly optional. Hence why I have my bets on it.

You're free to disagree though, honestly I've had pretty lengthy talks about how this might end up getting banned but I've just already made my mind up for now that it's a viable option. I'm not ignoring other options though if they're presented I'd just like to see them over discussing how this thing might not work, not like shooting down ideas will do much good if we don't have alternatives.

[Qie Niangao]

3 minutes ago, Viche Hexem said:

Something will likely come to replace gacha, I like this system because it offers both the appeal of gacha and the transparency of traditional vending. I reckon something WILL replace gacha regardless of if people like it or not. If this is ground zero for its development it'd be better to be constructive and work towards an alternative which has less of the issues that people had with gacha and more new benefits which make it better for both the vendor and customer.

Gosh, I hope whatever replaces gacha it's not this "conveyor" thing, which to me takes the worst of gacha's misfeatures and makes them even worse. I cannot imagine a more frustrating way to try to buy the thing I actually want. The only "virtue" I can see is that it preserves an element of chance in just how long the sequence of frustrating transactions will be before I can get to the actual desired product.

So to me, it's gacha, only worse. To be fair, I always avoided gacha (obviously) because of the annoyance (not because it's gambling or whatever), so I suppose real gacha aficionados might not find the conveyor system as dreadful as I do.

[Sukubia Scarmon]

16 minutes ago, Viche Hexem said:

This is the "conveyor" system in question is, by the by.

 

Something will likely come to replace gacha, I like this system because it offers both the appeal of gacha and the transparency of traditional vending. I reckon something WILL replace gacha regardless of people like it or not and if this is ground zero for its development it'd be better to be constructive and work towards an alternative which has less of the issues that people had with gacha and more new benefits which make it better for both the vendor and customer.

That's fair, Patch's answer was a bit shaky and we wouldn't want to put all our eggs in one basket. That being said, if not this system what other ideas do we have for gacha-alike systems which fit within the rulings of the new policy?

I wish it'd be something that is *fair* - but as long as the scripts inside those machines cannot be looked into, and creators trying their best to screw over their customers, I'll still be against that. The same dishonest scripts can be put into a conveyor belt style machine.
I never had something against the simple gachas. You know, where it's an item in different colors, or different items, but they all had the same chance. Nothing more. I was okay with adding fatpack rares. Heck, I was okay with having rares in general, if they're not having an abysmal low chance. But they have.
Have you read what scripters and people with extensive knowledge said about those scripts in those machines?
Abysmall low rates, ADDED in chances of getting a duplicate the next pull (wich I had assumed to be a glitch, but apparently, it's not), that you only can get a rare after so many pulls, and more dishonest, exploitative crap.

Most people who defend and want to continue gachas are creators and resellers - some users as well, but I cannot understand those at all - most consumers don't want this. I know it's more lucrative for creators - nobody would pay 5k just for a pair of horns, yet you have people putting in more than that to get them, because sunken cost fallacy, and because it'S harder to track how much you put into it if you play a bit every day/week/month.
I want creators to make money. If they need to raise their prices to better reflect the worth of their work, so be it. I am all for that. But not so much that it becomes a get rich quick scheme where the topdogs get 1000's of real life dollars because thause they sell 1 item for 20 real life dollar. That's just greedy.
I want some respect for their customers, and exploiting and using human imperfection against them isn't exactly respect.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Sukubia Scarmon
harder, not easier to track.

[Rosa Hexem]

I'll be honest and say a lot of people pushing back against the conveyor system here are, admittedly, just against the idea of gacha alltogether and honestly it's not like I don't get that. It's just are you really going to be happy with anything that replaces gacaha if the primary appeal behind gacha was something you utterly detested? As for people who think they conveyor system just isn't the same as gacha and there's hitches that just make it too annoying to engage with, we're simply not going to have the same thing as gacha again and big compromises are going to have to be made that will make it seem especially unappealing in the light of gacha being removed.

It's just with all that, what good is all of this cynicsm going to do if ultimately neither group here is going to get what they want, all gacha or no gacha? I'm not saying you can't pick holes in new ideas, you're free to express yourselves even if I think the linden's intentions for this thread were less "vent about gacha" and more "damage control the loss of gacha", but really if you're not willing to accept it's not going to leave you wholly satisfied then you're not going to be coming away with even a compromise you like? If we don't start discussing the least worst options now you'll just be left with a big fat nothing or someone else will do it anyway and that'll become the new normal.

Edit: I realize I phrase this post like it's an open question when really I should have capped it with a conclusion: if this discussion really does just remain with people unwilling to even discuss new ideas over griping that gacha is going away or even has a hope of coming back in some new incarnation I'll just shut up and keep lurking unntil something constructive does come up. I don't really want to sit here talking about how much we don't want there to be a next step when I see it as an inevitablity, I'll just stick to discussing new possibilities if and when they're brought up.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Viche Hexem

[Cinos Field]

4 minutes ago, Viche Hexem said:

I'll be honest and say a lot of people pushing back against the conveyor system here are, admittedly, just against the idea of gacha alltogether

No, I'm purely against it because if it's allowed - and it's identical in concept with the randomness just pushed a few steps ahead - then the Lindens just created a ton of extra work for merchants for no reason.

Gacha: You pay for a random item right now.

Conveyor: You pay for a random item three extra purchases later.

Yes, it's known to you by the time of purchase, but you had to pay to randomize the future opportunity to buy that item, which means it's literally just gacha again.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Cinos Field