Kitsune Shan

Once your body has been set to system default skins, you change skins just wearing them, or layer clothing, or alphas. You don't need to use any HUD everytime. You would just need to use a HUD to change between regular appliers or system skin but once you are on system skin you just wear them to change. Think on it as a HUD that makes your avatar to act like the SL default one and once it's set you don't need a HUD to set new skins or alphas or clothing (unless they are only appliers of course). You can combine system skins with clothing appliers and tattoos but not system clothing and tattoos with skins appliers because every time you use any of the system features (skin, clothing or tattoo, etc) you will be forced to use a system skin too. And about the mod that you mentioned, bodies are all no mod so far so the only way to apply bake mesh textures to them it's through HUD to change the textures to be the system ones. I guess we will see soon the option included directly on the mesh bodies HUDs itself once bake mesh it's out of beta viewer. So, basically, now it's just there for you to test and once it's live mesh bodies will be updated.

Not sure if I understand you. So you were complaining because you couldn't try bake mesh on your no mod body and I am giving you a solution so you can test and you do not find it helpful? Isn't that what you wanted to do by yourself but couldn't? It doesn't matter if you use belleza, you can turn on omega easily as a far I know you don't even need the omega HUD. Once you tested and are OK with it, you can go back to your regular skin if you want. If what you want is to use a regular skin applier with a system layer tattoo, that's not possible and will never happen unless they add some kind of advanced material system with layering support like for example unreal engine 4. Bakemesh works good for skins just not as useful for clothing layers which doesn't bothers me anyway as I prefer mesh one and once it's set to higher r it will be better. The main issue now it's dividing those people who use skins and those that uses appliers because, as clothing creator, you can't simply include system alpha. Bodies will need to keep their onion layers and annoying alpha groups because not everybody may have a system skin. Luckily some creators still include system skins too with their appliers. The problem is that with those they are highly risking their jobs giving away their skins as it is so easy to steal. Appliers now are the safest way of making skins.

Exactly, mod avatars. You could use with mesh clothing (not layer one) but I don't see a good reason to do so. Keep in mind that to use tattoos, you also need to use the skin. You can't use a skin applier and then a system layer tattoo. From tomorrow (probably) you will be able to find a completely free HUD at Cute or Die store that will let you enable bakes on mesh on maitreya, Catwa and all other omega compatible bodies. We will try to also to update later so you can change other bodies than maitreya without using omega but so far we only got maitreya and Catwa without omega. It will be a good opportunity for all you to test freely without limits. You will be able to go back to your non bake mesh skins just applying any other common applier or saved skin on HUD.

That's what I have been saying lol. My first question was regarding how to set scripts to use bake mesh you just gave me a wrong answer which it's OK if you didn't know the real answer. You just should have said that there are specific UUIDs to use for each body part. Easy, right? Instead you mentioned about UUIDs not being exposed which were easy to assume you were talking about system UUIDs. Then my other comment regarding security still there and as I mentioned never been so easy to steal a skin before. If you think that things didn't change much then ask to skin makers who used to do skins for kemono body. Since the body it's mod, it was pretty easy to get the script into a prim for later screenshot. Most of them just stopped making skins for such body. And going back to my second comment asking for help about scripts, I had figure out before you replied, I just never would guess that it would be so easy to get these UUIDs.

You first mention that these UUIDs wont be exposed then you say you can send an UUID through whatever applier. You can set appliers easily through the UUIDs because they are indeed exposed. I guess skin makers will keep using regular appliers instead of bakes on mesh for obvious reasons.

BTW it's only me the one concerned about the huge amount of security flaws on this? Wear a box as HUD, set it to whatever skin flag, screenshot your skin and upload again. As if werent easier enough to steal skins already you guys just made skins full perm lol...

That doesn't solve my issue. I am asking how you setup the bake textures through script. Obviously it has to be a way through scripts if the meshes aren't mod otherwise it would totally break old content which uses appliers.

Where can we get info about the script commands that triggers the different skins slots? Or we just use the flags to read UUIDs? Because then they would be exposed so can't be this way. Couldn't find anything on the wiki

Just read about no materials support. I guess that expecting a feature to be fully implemented for once was too much from me. Basically this means that most bodies will keep using onion layers as well as huds. Welp, at least we can still use the alphas which was my main concern. It's something.

While summarizing would make everything more clear, you should still include every feature details. Believe me, we are talking about LL, if you make it so simple we will get half implemented features if any. So dividing them into groups it's nice as long as you add later every single feature and a brief explanation. LL needs everything detailed. You did an awesome job tho ;).

Sometimes it's simpler than that. People just can try to harm you, steal your stuff (ask to skins store owners) or simply buy every single demo to leave a bad review for whatever weird reasson. The thing is that if you can ban someone from your SIM and groups, you should be able to do the same from your MP store. Maybe simply because they have been griefing in other ways around you so you just dont want to let them buy your stuff. Having the option there isn't harmful even if most people wont use it.

Since when having different prices in world vs marketplace it's not allowed? Just asking because lot of stores does this. Either way, not sure if we are thinking about SL in the same way that we do with other platforms. SL shouldn't charge the same kind of fees to customers that, let's say, platforms like Turbosquid because there is a huge difference here. Those platforms offers you a "free" service in exchange of some fees while SL has no free service at all. Oh sure you can connect and play SL for free but EVERYTHING in SL it's made by creators and not LL. I have to pay for a land or sim, I have to pay for every upload, I have to pay for everything I want to own and on top of that I pay a premium membership with little benefits (I used to get 24 to 48 hours response on tickets with free account while now I have to wait more than a week with premium). So, I don't think it's really the same as others platforms. We will be charged extra but we aren't getting anything extra at all. Cheaper Sims? OK, that's cool but why would I want Sims to be 10$ cheaper if I will get charged 200$ more on fees? And why charging more to creators who keeps alive SL so common users can get cheaper land? Instead make L$ more expensive to buy adding extra fees and ask customers if they like to pay more for less L$ in exchange of having cheaper lands (which at the end won't go down in price as people that owns and rents Sims will keep their price). What would appeal for people to buy more land could be increasing the number of players and to do so you have to give more freedom and powerful features to creators because if the diversity of items lowers due stores closing, people won't feel attracted to play more. I really don't know why taking these measures now that SL isn't even as popular as used to be. Yeah we will get new features but isn't creator's fault that in the past 15 years the most important features has been mono, sculpts, materials, meshes and bento. Most of these features should have been there 10 years ago. Maybe if LL could stop wasting money on unsuccessful side projects we wouldn't need to pay extra. LL it's a big enough company and it's clear that SL it's their main income source so maybe they should invest deeply on totally updating it so more people could join in, don't you think? New windlight options will be cool but it really means an extra cost for LL? We could share windlights in the past with Emerald viewer and it surely wasn't a huge deal. And yes, animesh it's exciting but actually it ads 200LI extra to the LI of the mesh just for being animesh. I know this is temporary and it will be less LI but it already indicates that will be a too high cost to use freely so again we get our hands tied with more and more limitations. I know some of you don't care paying extra but me, as profesional 3D and FX professional for more than a decade, have never been heard by LL when I tried to suggest really useful features for creators so I hope you understand that isn't fair to pay extra in exchange of nothing.

You are right and we all know that whatever change they make it won't ever compensate such measures. Marketplace can be more friendly, be a better user experience and easier to setup but none of those added new features will increase the number of sales at all. At the end of the day, small to medium stores will just see the huge lose and pretty sure lots of them will just close. That's the reality.

You just show how little experience you have as creator. The marketplace used to ask for reviews on a non intrusive way. It used to ask right after you made a purchase on the "thanks for your purchase" page which you could still ignore and close. It wasn't annoying at all. Today it could work on the same way or people could also get a single reminder email about bought items. Up to people to ignore or dedicate some time to do it. Several sites uses this system and it works. About your comment about bad reviews. We do not get bad reviews at all, you are just trying to hurt with your comment. But just so you can add to your knowledge, even the best store can tell you about an unfair review. They all have been reported and deleted for a reason but it still shows that the review system needs a rework and some incentive for customers to leave sincere reviews. I don't know which kind of practices you use but we, gladly, never had the necessity of buying good reviews. The thread it's about adding suggestions, not about debating which one you like or not. It's up to LL to decide which ones may be more necessary and which doesn't and how they should be implemented and how they should be improved or modified. Not complaining about reviews but about the review system and how could it be improved :).

So here it is the list of what I think it could surely be very useful. 1. Possibility of having two or more stores at the same time. 2. Possibility of adding all the items colors, variations, fatpacks and demos to the same listing item to avoid the cluster of repetitive items on searchs. 3. Shareable wishlists and favorite stores. 4. Stores subscriptions to be able to follow stores and receive notifications either inworld or through emails of updates and new releases. 5. Being able send updates of items easily and automatically and also through redelivery manually from customers. 6. Being able to sort items by different range of times. Seeing the best selling items from the past 15 years it's tiresome and not so useful. Options to see the most popular and filter a range of time by day, week, month and year would help to locate those popular items from new releases without seeing that freebie flexy dress from 2008 or demos (demos shouldn't appear anymore if the point 1 it's done). 7. While I understand that changing the inworld vendor system could be a different project, it would be great if at least we could simply link an inworld vendor with a marketplace listing so we can have everything in a single place and send updates or check transactions through marketplace. 8. Full statistics view. We really need to see all the statistics of our listing. Number of sales per day, week, moth, etc. graphics, percents, demography, number of views, clicks, etc. all this it's very important to study which items sells more, what customers really like, which ads seems more effective, which season of the year people are more prone to buy and a whole lot more data. 9. Better interface for mobile devices like smartphones or tablets. We all often likes to check marketplace on our smartphone and check what's new or if there is any new release of our favorite stores. This it's very annoying if you try to do it on a smartphone or tablet since the interface isn't good to read on them. While an APP would be the ideal case, an adapted website would be enough just like most websites nowday do. 10. Improved ratings. Creators often gets a bad review for a single feature that usually does not implies a faulty or wrong item and it always leads to a permanent wrong review. For example, rating bad an item for the simple fact of being "no mod" while it's already stated on the item description or a negative review for being only for certain mesh body, something that it's also already stated on the item description. A more advanced rating item coud include different aspects to rate depending of the category: -Rate the fitting. -Rate the number of texture quality and options. -Rate the number of animations/pose options. -Rate the LI cost. -etc..... -A sepcial section to list the pros and other for the cons so people can better explain what they do like the most and what doesn't. Aditionally a comment box would be included. It would be similar to how people can rate items on eBay, Amazon or GooglePlay. 11. Bulk upload of pics. 12. Possibility of configuring a landmark per store so items always include them automatically without having to edit every single listed item. 13. Aditional managers with customizable rights so you can choose who can manage your store and to which degree will be able to do it. 14. Some formatting text on descriptions. Being able to format text on a simple way like italic, bold, list, etc. could help to organize and make the descriptions more visible and easy to read to customers. This was an old feature that was removed and, while I do agree that shouldn't be so much customization, some basic ones can help on clear descriptions. 15. Disccount and fidelity programs. Being able to setup disccounts, temporary sales (so you can set a time and day in which the item will switch to a certain % of it's price, new tittle, new image and even a category for sale items and going back to regular price automatically once the scheduled offer ends), coupon codes, etc. to appeal customers to return to your store. Aditionally, automatic rewards for reviews would lead to a more active comunity which actually only rate the items when negative feedback it's left. 16. Adding to the the reviews system, I really miss when marketplace (before being named marketplace) asked sometimes to leave a review in past items. Everytime that the user logs, should see a small reminder to review items. This it's very important as, I mentioned several times, only bad reviews are left and isn't fair that an item that has been sold thousands of times but not reviewed gets a single bad review and gets marked forever. And right now I can't remember any more features that I would like to be added but I am sure there are more. If I can think on something else I will write them :). Let's hope we get some luck on this.

Where can we download the latest version of the skeleton?

So if "isn't likely to be officially supported", that means that the "official" way will be through BVH files meaning that they will be totally unlocked when Bento its released?

Every project that a creator does will be focussed, at the end, to common users which are more likely to wear different shapes. Dealing with people saying things like "omg your mesh head doesnt look like in the photo, its a scam and Ill rate you one star only on MKP" its really something to take into account. And, as I mentioned before, I dont think its really something we can choose to. Have been proved that modifying the shape of whatever mesh with sliders will isntantly break most of animations made for that part.. There arent too much sense on keeping all the sliders configuration. We surely could have some of them but right now its a breaker. And this is something that people will realize right when they start releasing projects with Bento. And then will be late to fix all the mess done.

To be honest, we should just keep the bones for animations purpose. It was the main objetive of this project and we should keep as it is. It would be nice to have deformations on mesh heads but that wont work and we all that did some works already know. Meshes heads and faces in general, never have been modifiable through bones but morphers. We should stop trying to reinvent the wheel. It happened before when at the begining we tried to get Bento without bones translations. Lets not try to make something that never have been possible and that others had though on it before all us. In all game engines you modify the shape of the head and avatars through morphers for this exact same reasson. Not to mention that if you modify the shape of a face through bones, whatever animation you make it wont match anymore. Someone who I cant remember (sorry) even showed an example here on how an eyelid goes all wrong after editing the position of the eyes through sliders. It simply cant work. So I really propose to keep Bento for what its made and hope for a improbable future where we will be able to upload meshes with different morphers and blend them through scripts. Having facial animations will be something really great and Im sure that creators will make a huge use of it. But if we have to renunce them for the sole purpose of having mesh heads that can deform in similar (bad) ways than SL default avatar then we will be really limited again. I know someone suggested to "attach" those bones to certain sliders and we tried but doesnt work. Lets just make it pretty solid for animation purposes which will bring more life to SL than deforming a mesh head. We have static mesh heads and no one complains about it and they sells pretty well.

But we do still have those alt eyes right? Because, even if they dont deform with sliders like default ones, we may still need them for sure. Would be a total error to remove them. As for Teager solution, I am totally with him. I think its better to have a good working skeleton than one that deforms within SL avatar sliders. If fitted mesh doesnt even deforms with the sliders as the avatar does, there arent too much sense on trying to acomplish that now that its too late. Thats something that had to be fixed before fitted mesh comes out all wrong deforming bones in different ways than the avatar itself. So we can just leave the new bones for "new purposes" rather than trying to emulate what SL already does by default even if that would mean to get avatars heads without any customization which may be ok because I really doubt we will get any good use of it seeing how weirdly they deform shapes. And people may use bones for animations puposes which means that if you have to use bones for proper deformations on faces, these mesh heads may not be even usable for animations at all due weird weighting. Im not sure if my explanation its easy to understand but people used to skin may get the point.

Could we get some way to debug if joints offset are being detected and where? A simple info window that lists all the bones with joints offset detected would be a must have. Otherwise we may not be able to, later on, find wether certain bone have been locked or not. This is specially important as working with different softwares and exporters often gives different measures. The change on the UI would be totally minimal and could be added to Advanced or Develop menus as a setting called something similar to "joints check" where, after loading a mesh on the uploader and checking joints offset, would display a simple list of all bones displaying in green those with the default original offset and in red those that have been modified and joints offset will be locked and applied.

The suggestion I did some time ago was directed to how bones with different offsets behave with animations. It was only aimed to translation and was a simple math form. I am not programmer but you can do similar math forms inside of 3D Max through script commands to allow wider rig customization and different effects which make me guess that should work on any environment like in SL. That suggestion only would fix certain animations. Right now, face animations cant work with deforming bones. There is simply no way to do so. We may have to renunce to bones deforming mesh shape. It would be nice top have both but right now seems impossible. I cant think in any way of having animations behave different depending of the offset in something so complex as a face because you wont only animation with translations but with rotations too. And I dont think there is any method to make SL predict certain animation based in certain offset to apply the proper scale. We can only do that through translations but not all together. If bones could deform the mesh shapes only through bone scale then we may have a chance but then the deformations wouldnt be any good at all. So, basically, we may want to discard bones deforming face shapes in favor of being able to animate them. The most we can keep its the three base bones for each face bone group that act as root and allow for small adjustments which to me would be nearly the same as not being able to change anything at all. Another solution could be to allow the creator to choose wether their mesh should deform or not at time to upload but I dont see this implemented by LL at all.

I had mention this before and even proposed some solutions that could help to solve this. This isnt something related to mesh head only, it will happen with everything really even more on things using custom joints. Im sure people though my comment wasnt interesting or accurate and people choosed to ignore it or maybe they werent even able to draw on their mind this kind of problems. Im glad to see that Im not the only one that sees some serious issues here. All we can hope its for a fix before they release something broken like happend with fitted mesh .

That what you mention about mesh bodies are the results of some people uploading some parts with joints offsets when they arent even required. I can confirm to you that none of them (except Kemono) uses joints offset. I own all the kits and been working with all of them throughly. They all have the bones in the same place just like the default avatar. I have compared them. But leaving aside that subject, thats it. As you just mentioned, isnt just that Blender doesnt allow you to export the mesh because it lacks one bone. I can do this easily using Max. The problem comes within SL itself which requires every default (old ones) bones to have information on the mesh. Even if it just at zero weights. Otherwise your mesh will appear on the uploader as non skinned one. It was supossed to be fixed long ago on the Mesh Uploader Project but it never was. I may be wrong as Im not Blender user but I guess Avastar its made in that way so you dont export your mesh wrong which would lead to not having weights later on. About joints offsets. I think you missunderstood my comment. I wasnt trying to say that you were wrong, right the opossite. I was saying that the good way its indeed joints offset. Animations are useful for some things but they arent a total fix and more like a workaround to evade using joints offsets. Believe me that using animations to change permanents bone positions will lead to some big deformations. Im not saying either that bone translation its bad, its nice we have it. But using it to put in place a whole avatar isnt the best solution. So basically we would need first SL to accept weighted meshes without containing all the bones. Just like it was right at the begining. If thats something fixed already on Bento then nice. I didnt test since long time when the first versions comes out so didnt pay attention if they added that possibility.

While your suggestion makes sense at time of wearing parts with different joints offsets, you should know that those mentioned mesh bodies havent custom joints at all. But leaving that aside, the main point now is not using joints offset at all but animations. Thats why we asked so much for being able to animate the position of bones. So in theory all you need to do its upload the mesh without custom joints and apply an animation to only the bones that should move to fit the desired shape. This is far from a good solution as I can already see animations that, due priority or creator not knowing how exactly has to do them, will break your whole joints offset because he probably added the whole bunch of bones to them. Your solution would be the more viable and profesional one. The problem right now its that, with every new feature, we are carrying all the bad decisions taken in the past. I highly doubt they will add your request to Bento but you may agree with me that few months after its release we will see a nice show of deformed meshes. Not to mention those people that, since the animation havent been played for them because they entered later after the trigger, will see us all wrong till the animation decides to play again.