Faly Breen
-
Posts
91 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Faly Breen
-
-
41 minutes ago, Sam1 Bellisserian said:
Seriously how many clothes have you bought that you can't stand to go 3, 6, 9 months without buying another thing in SL and still have outfits you haven't worn. I would bet money 9 out of 10.
aaaaaaaactually i would say 4 out of 10. i like to use a lot clothes but also love to reuse them. a lot. ^^
42 minutes ago, Sam1 Bellisserian said:It's you that has to be realistic. LL is not going to monitor how sellers package and sell their things unless they change the whole system due to a RL law or ruling (i.e. Gatcha's) If a seller wants to charge 10,000L for a black mini dress then they can. YOU as a buyer can either choose to buy it or walk away.
What are you not understanding?
the problem is i do understand why the creators do this thing even if i and sure others (as i saw) dont like it. as i said in my real life sample if i just want ONE pair of jeans in a special color, i dont wanna only have the opinion to buy "either all or nothing" because, again, its bs to do so from the creators side. it sounds like (again~) trying to force the costumer to buy something he/she does not want in the slightest and doesnt even give the costumer a "2nd opinion" at all. So yes, i understood that the only way we have is basiclly to boycott them but it still is a fishy way to actually DO from the creators side with all this fatpack stuff and that has to be said and noticed and said.
-
26 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:
And if not, who cares? They will probably not do much business and wonder why. Businesses come and go for many reasons. I've noticed that a lot of the places that sell in this manner are using template meshes. Buy a piece, color it 12 different ways, slap it in a fatpack and try selling it for 1000L or more. Why would anyone pay for that when I can buy from a place using templates, with colors AND patterns and pay 250L or less. Like these stores...Which have been in business for years...
https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/20016
https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/80431
https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/141517
And many many more...
thanks there and yes, this basicly "sadly" the only thing we can do so it seems till they finally learn. also thanks for those links there, actually they sell some good stuff there.
24 minutes ago, Tazzie Tuque said:The bottom line here is simple: Some creators are out to make extra money on fat packs by offering certain colours they do not offer in a single, hoping folks will give in and pay for the fat pack. It is a business practice to make more Lindens for themselves. I pisses people off.. OK then just do NOT buy those fat packs or from those creators. Eventually if they don't sell any they will get the message.
53 minutes ago, Faly Breen said:- first, i did understand the thing with "you dont have to buy it". sure, right, again, noone "is" forcing me to buy anything at all but thats not the point here. The point IS that creators DO create fatpacks AND sell some solo colors but put only "some colors" out to buy solo but not all.
literally said that comments ago.
-
10 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:
Two totally different things. Very few creators OR consumers want LL to make any more unnecessary rules. We, as consumers, have the ability to make change. Not to the rules, but to the way merchants sell. I hate that merchants put basic colors in a fatpack. Guess what? I don't buy it. I have actually sent notecards telling them this. I tell my friends. If I had a blog, I'd post it there. Let the dumb a**** keep trying to sell those fatpacks. Who cares? There are 374656473 other places to buy things from merchants who threat their customers fairly.
yea i got that but than there have to be literally more people which have "the voice" for it and not just "you and me" if you know what i mean...
-
4 hours ago, Sam1 Bellisserian said:
I think what @Rowan Amorepoint is that you don't have to buy it. If more people passed up buying the fatpacks just to get one color then creators would have to rethink their marketing strategy. The problem is as much with the buyers as the sellers. As long as people keep buying, then sellers will continue to sell that way. Can you blame them?
3 hours ago, Alwin Alcott said:indeed, that's the problem.
You seem not to be able to accept you'r not the ruling one, but the seller is.
Walking away and let it slide off is such good thing in this world.
3 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:Not sure how many other ways to say it. DON'T BUY FROM THESE MERCHANTS. There IS NO PROBLEM. it's called boycotting. It's what people do. It's what encourages merchants to change their selling practices. It's the ONLY thing you can do.
Lordy
I quote you all 3 here because there might be missunderstanding here:
- first, i did understand the thing with "you dont have to buy it". sure, right, again, noone "is" forcing me to buy anything at all but thats not the point here. The point IS that creators DO create fatpacks AND sell some solo colors but put only "some colors" out to buy solo but not all.
- No, as for Alwin there, the sellers doesnt write the rules, the costumers does. if im not buying wilingly the fatpack "only" because it has the color in it i might want, its not my lose. SUre, i dont have the dress but than again, i can look for alternatives and MOSTLY they are some other good ones. the one who loses is the creator, not me.
- Boycotting is a harsh word and sounds like creating a "angry mob" against one/some creators...Isnt that basicly what i want? that i want LL to put up an actual "rule" against this "sheat"? Srsly, think about it, boycotting sounds like creating a flash mob and tell a/the creator/s to literally "f off" and change their thing. And as i said: Im just ONE person, with just ONE voice and im sure that will not change something in the slightest. Yes, i made a topic and thread here in this forum but how many creators will look up here and take my vent/rent even "for real"? Noone will. It sounds hard but lets be at least somewhat realistic here.
-
50 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:
This is where your argument falls apart. You are not forced to buy anything, ever. Walk away.
again, only to stay with the sample here, if i want THIS "one dress" in "this one color i want" than there is no other opinion to buy the fatpack because its (the color you want) not sold alone. This is the problem.
-
1
-
1
-
-
37 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:
Gachas weren't banned because 'creators got out of hand'. I have every right to sell my creations for whatever price I would like and in any configuration as long as the buyer knows what they get.
I can make a dress and put it out for sale at 1,000,000L. No mod, no copy. Copy, no mod. No copy, no transfer. All kinds of ways because IT'S ALLOWED.
You, as consumer have the right NOT to purchase it. No one is being forced to purchase a fatpack...of anything...period.
of course not but as i said and as it is right now, creators sell just some colors solo and put the ones which "most people want" into a fatpack and ONLY in a fatpack which is the stupid thing to do with literally no other excuse than "being that kind of creator".
I dont "have to" buy the pack if i go with an alternative but if i want "just this one color", i basicly get forced to take the fatpack or nothing (and this is the problem). as said in my main post i can show a lot samples here but it wuld be nameshaming.
-
4 hours ago, Alwin Alcott said:
they are FREE to do so, as you are FREE to NOT buy it that way. There is no need at all to make such things regulated by official rules.
solved.
of course, right now, they are free to do so because there is nothing which holds them of this limit. as i said, and you said, i dont need to buy their product if i want only a black one out of a full pack but getting forced to buy all or nothing - and, again, this is my problem i have: this "all or nothing" and the fact that they are just color differances. I cant say, as i said in my rl sample, be like "i sell the colors red, blue and green solo and if you want another color you have to buy them all". Sure i can look for alternatives (and srsly mostly do) but that "mostly" will not change the mind of the said creator because, think, we are talking about the human mind here, do you really think everyone "cares" about this "problem"? i mean look at you as sample, you think its srsly solved if ONE (me) of how many people would not buy the creators product? As if, man, as if.
3 hours ago, Aiyumei said:That is why the term exclusive exists. You pay extra but you get something special for it. If you don't like it simply skip and go ahead. Every creator is free to determine the business model of their products, that's standard for any business regardless of it's type.
As for why many creators choose to make their products unmodifiable is pretty clear. No one enjoys other tampering with their creations after they put in hours of work to make them. Not to mention how many outfits out there get ripped off, if you tend to keep close eye on the regular sales events, you will notice as the time goes by that there are one and the same outfits sold by dozen of different creators that are just retextured.
and in that case you go for "color" excusives? I mean im glad already gachas doesnt exist, just to leave the hint on the road here but again, we are still talking about simple textured colors and not any sprinkly sparkly effect. And than again: even if you go with the therm exclusive, said products doesnt have anything special or different OTHER than the color from the ones which get sold solo and you be like now "black has to be exclusive"? Kinda still a dickish move to make and literally doesnt add any kind of work from the creators side if they either go with a "either sell all or only fatpack" system. There is also a reason why "exclusives" are hated in a lot areas anyways (RL and SL wise) because of that but thats not the point here. As i said, the point is putting 2-5 colors on sale solo and putting the colors people really want behind a paylock, into a fatpack.
33 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:No, LL should say out of it. WE has consumers could prevent this if no one purchased from these stores and dropped a notecard on the owner explaining why.
Sorry but we saw how far creators go. As i hinted, just remember how far gachas got out of hand and right now people use the fatpack excuse as...well, excuse to sell something "exclusive". I think LL should srsly put a rule up for that, as i already said some comments before and, again, we are still talking about the human mind and one guy will sadly not change a thing...sad but true.
-
3 hours ago, animats said:
There are a few simple templates for standard items.
There's Robin Wood's free T-shirt template. This gives you a blank T-shirt you can texture. You need Photoshop or GIMP to do this, because you start from a multi-layered image and change one or two of the layers. Most avatars can wear these T-shirts. Get that and practice a bit.
There are other places which sell templates for more complex garments. Search for "second life clothing templates".
In Second Life, there is ready to wear clothing, often not too expensive and often not copyable or not transferable. Then there are kits for creators. Those usually cost more, but usually come with permissions that let you copy and resell items built with the kit. You're looking for a product aimed at creators.
This works kind of like real life.
im not looking for alternatives here. Its the fact that creators do this on a regular base and this should not be defended in any kind. as i already said in my other comment, if i wanna buy myself a black shirt, i only wanna buy myself a black shirt and wanna also be able to buy said black shirt, not getting forced to buy a fatpack.
-
the problem is just basicly as i said already
If i as creator offer an item with "just" different colors, i should sell all colors solo and not just "some" and make the rest of them available in a fatpack.
Important here is: im talking only about color texture differances - not special textures like pictures or motives which i can see can sure still be used in a fatpack.
I mean think about that for a moment if someone would do that in real life - it would be a rip off.
like, if i want just ONE black jeans and only a black jeans the creator tells me "oh you can buy them but you have to literally buy all other 20+ different colors as well"... Just why? I just wanted ONE freaking black jeans, not 20+ other different colors i literally just have to buy with them which i will never ever use in the first place nor wanted anyway.
Again, its costumer unfriendly and makes no sense to do that other than creating a virtual lock with the knowledge that people exactly want this colors the most and, again, basically forcing them to buy a fatpack they dont want to buy in the first place but HAVE to because you can ONLY get those colors in said fatpack.
this is something LL should prevent. If the quallity is literally equal but "just" a different color, the creators should have 2 opinions: either sell them all solo AND a fatpack or JUST in a fatpack. everything else feels like, as i said, an unfair and unfriendly thing to use or do (as it was seen in my RL sample).
-
1
-
-
42 minutes ago, Tazzie Tuque said:
I think there is a difference between a Fat Pack and an item which comes with a texture/colour hud for basically the same price you would pay for one item. I agree it is annoying to have to buy a full fat pack to get one colour you want that is not offered separately. Personally I do not think that is fair but a lot of creators do that. Fat packs as a rule are expensive, can be upwards of 500 L or more. As a shopper I will usually pass on those. That is one of the reasons as a creator I include many textures or colour change choices on a hud and sell it for somewhere between 250 L and 350 L because I would pay that much to get the option of more choices. I do not sell separates anymore (some of my older stuff I did) because I feel to pay for a single would cost almost as much as the item with a hud,
But there are many opinions about this. That is mine. I guess I am trying to work on some sort of middle ground.
this is something i agree there as well. if you make a hud already with "all" the colors its ok if the item is already a bit more expensive because you put even more work behind it for said color hud - but if i sell already, to go back to my sample, color variations of said dress then why not all OR a full fatpack. As i said, it basicly feels like youre getting forced if you want a color which a creator doesnt sell by itself to buy the fatpack...which is just unfair to do and not really costumer friendly.
-
1
-
-
(JUST a small word before, i duno if im "right" to put such topic in this channel since i duno, this is my first post here so im sorry if im wrong in this channel!)
I dont wanna begin to talk around to long about the topic but go with a sample and try to make it understandable:
Since some years, it feels like creators create X variations from one dress and, to keep the sample simple, it mostly is just the color.
To STAY simple, lets go with a full dress for females here. Said dress can be bought in red, blue, green and yellow - at least if you want one of those colors.
BUT what if you want, as sample, the dress in black or white..or both? Than, you mostly end up that you have to pay for a fatpack because the creator doesnt sell those alone.
I know this might sound like nitpicking but nowadays a lot people dont sell their stuff moddable anymore and to already high prices and than "basically" forcing you to buy a fatpack for the "color" you want seems like an very unfair play here. Im not talking about "special color/textures only made for me", im mean plain simple textured color differances. I mean, again, why do i need to pay for the fatpack if i only wanted the color BLACK/WHITE and no other? I dont want violet, i dont want dark green, i dont want the fatpack but just the Black/White version, thats all.
Here a small last addition. I could proof a lot samples here viva pictures but i dont think i wanna nameshame people here so i sure cant show pictures of stores/creators without basicly "shaming" them, i guess its understandable somewhat but even without pictures im sure people understand what im talking about...
EDIT: i made this a bit more clear in a sample in a later comment you can read here:
-
2
-
-
Ok, today i was actively checking places for gachas since i was on a Sim and they linked to an event calling "goodbye gacha" in which some people sell now all their gacha stuff for a super low price of ~25L$ for each role.
if you wanna know more about it, check it here https://www.theepiphanysl.com/goodbyegacha
But im actually not here to make advertising for that...
I was more someone who, so i thought, saw a lot gachas already and went for the "human mind" thing - thats also a reason why i complained first and formost about the smaller gachas like collecting cards, bubblegum gachas or similar since im sure those would not be a reason that LL "suddendly" creates such harsh rule...
But after just exploring the list i liked there from top down to the letter "B" by now...
I mean NOW i can totally understand why people dislike gachas and im really with them. I mean, as i said before, it is a dang shame that such smaller gachas LIKE bubblegum gachas, collecting cards AND similar suffer such fate only coz of people which literally put dress ups - PIECE BY PIECE -, HAIRCUTS and freaking POSES into a gacha!
No im srs, i totally understand the people which hated gachas coz THIS is really something i thought i will not see. Pose gachas? HAIRcut gachas?? Seriously???
Again, If such stuff is gone, i dont cry after them but its again a shame for collecting cards and like. LL should maybe overthink their rules there coz those sure doesnt hurt anyone but THOSE others? Nope. Glad they are gone soon. SUCH stuff C-A-N at least be sold without a random system behind, for real, you dont need to sell "haircuts or poses at RANDOM". Collecting- & Trading cards in the other hand will still be hard to sell if they are not random.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:
You're basically describing a casino chip.
i literally called it token so guess what i was using as sample in mind...
-
9 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:
In the future, whatever they catch Fishing must be a No Transfer item - so no value outside of whatever the winner deems it worth to them.
I suppose you can create a token for a chance at a random item and as long as that random item is also No Transfer, you might be okay.
23 minutes ago, Mollymews said:yes that's correct
the random item given by your vendor in exchange for the token has to be No-Transfer going forward. Same as the fish have to be No-Transfer going forward
and when the random item is a card then the card will be a collectible. What it won't be is a tradeable collectible
Im a bit confused now. So basicly everything which will be "sold random" is forbidden as long as its tradeable.
This makes no sense.
And yea, as i said, gacha creators could do such system i said with an ease. They dont even have to do much but just creating an object which reacts with their vendors, setting all their stuff on not tradeable and done. The only "idiot" at the end will be actually the costumer now since you cant resell them if you have like doubles. Tradeables cant exist at all, erasing trading cards from its total existance if the creators wanna at least earn money with them, giving them out for free as random gift, i think, should be ok since people dont pay for that at all and can get those gifts ones pay day, hourly or weekly (or similar).
So yea, i think the token idea sounds for me the best and easier way than the actual conveyor belt system people talk about since that basicly is a lot work and has nothing to do anymore with the random factor. The token idea leaves at least room for the random sales and brings again back the "droprate" system wile the conveyor belt system leaves that behind and actually people would sure rise their prices if they can, simply put, "wait" for their object they wanna buy.
I will have to think about that but @Patch Linden should actually check the idea i have in mind with the token.
In case i didnt explain it already, ones again in short:
Costumer goes and buys a "Token" like item for X L$. Said Token item is build to react as currency/key item for your vendors. Costumer can use said token on such vendors to still get a random item out of it (100% chance or like 7seas basicly with rarety system, up to the creator). So it would still count that the costumer actually pays for a non random item which is the said token but uses those to actually GET a random item.
Srsly, i would like to hear if that idea could be actually used legit. IF so, well then...
-
5 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:
You buy bait. Not a chance to buy bait. Anything after that is irrelevant. You KNOW what you are buying. You aren't paying for some unknown fish. You might catch an unknown item but you haven't paid for an unknown item. Get it?
so you buy a key item, bait in this case, to have a chance to catch a fish. *cough* lootboxes *cough*
again, i did read the new rules, i do understand them, no need to point me 5 times on it for everyone who just did but again - this is literally hypocritcal and kinda unfair for everyone who did similar. I mean as i said so often, i just could create a token people can buy (not random) and use a token on a vendor than FOR a CHANCE of a random item. it would be the same as 7seas.
-
1
-
2
-
-
31 minutes ago, Marianne Little said:
It is allowed because all get the same content.
i ment random in everyone gets a random reward. if everyone gets literally "the same", its ok but not if one gets a chair, the other one gets a table and so on (as sample).
-
6 minutes ago, Leannyn said:
Are blind loot boxes like Powder Pack going to be banned as well? They're the same thing. You play x amount of Lindens and you have no idea what's inside until you open it. You only know which creators made the things for the month. Same thing? Or not?
if the item/reward is random, it is banned i guess.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Komarimono said:
Correct. To get "Everything" You'll need level 5 and a Pro Pole. But that's like... uhhh... $3 USD investment? Bait to get XP and get to level 5, 250L I believe for the Pro Pole. Once level 5, can catch it all, just like Pokemon. Any XP after that just grants Titles for the game.
it is still luck based. i ones casted 20 times in the row and got nothing - yes it might was bad luck, of course but again: 7sea IS based on a luck system and droprates so yea...about that.
-
3 minutes ago, Tori Nova said:
I just went 7seas fishing, without bait, ( I never buy it) and got a rare fish on my third cast, so yes, you can get rare fish without bait
you still have to use bait to get all fishes/stuff. here, the official rules.
-
25 minutes ago, Angelina Sinclair said:
No laws would bother with this given there is zero monetary value with the game's products.
hold it. people can use prize giver-boxes and use this system and put the droprates of the items people could cast for extremly low and the rarety extremly high - yes prize boxes are a thing you can set up within the 7seas system so about that.
25 minutes ago, Angelina Sinclair said:Trading cards
- Pay cash to receive a random set of cards.
- Rarity and market value varies depending on brand and poularity
- Original sellers are big cooperations and rarity of cards is regulated by laws.
- Some have actual game elements (Pokemon, Yugioh, Magic the gathering, etc)
- Rare cards are not needed to play the game and sometimes not compete but do help.
well i wouldnt call people in sl which sell such cards grown big. i know some which sell them for, again, like 5-25L$ and never saw them on the marketplace, again they got traded between the people but really selling those? not really. In RL of course thats a different story where rare cards can coz thousends of real life dollars...
-
1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:
Then find some way of monetizing them that doesn't involve paying for an unknown result.
ok, make a sample which involves that without breaking the gacha law of LL now which still involves the random fun of buying booster packs with random cards in it and we are golden.
Also small edit:
1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:Provide the random packs of "cards" for free
You do know people which create such cards wanna earn at least a bit of money right? Im not talking about "100L$ for a random card", the prices are so minimal like maybe 5-25L$ for a random card, noone can complain about that tbh.
2 hours ago, Dutch Mainsail said:I think the rules are really simple. If an item is transferable, you can make money of the resale of an item. If you can make money from winnings it's gambling and gambling isn't legal in a lot of places. That's my 10 bouncy balls
i think transferable is the literal meaning of trading. if you cant transfer items than you cant trade them as well.
I mean, ok, if (and i duno if this would break the new gacha law) such cards would be sold no-trans but still can be sold random, guess what other gacha creators have to do now...
-
1 minute ago, LittleMe Jewell said:
Possibly this view is valid - there are all sorts of lawyer specialties, so only one that specializes in gambling law is probably fully qualified to answer -- though all that really matters is LL's final stance on whatever various people come up with.
yea coz by their rule, paying a bubblegum machine and getting one of 10 different bouncy ball toys means its gambling.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:
People can have all the fun with trading cards that they like. Unless, of course, you're counting the person providing the random cards being paid as "fun."
how else do wanna sell "trading cards" if everyone can literally "buy" the cards they want? Isnt the "thing" of trading cards the actually trading part? Think about pokemon, yu-gi-ho or magic card booster packs. if you know already what cards will be inside, where is the logic behind this if you get already what you want anyway? Ever thought about that? Ever thought about how this fishing game will end if you literally know which fish you will cast for next? Some people never thought logical behind this system coz some stuff literally is "based" on the random factor. It has nothing to do with buying on a vendor x version of a dress to finally get the one you want, its based on the trading part and not on the "you sell only x version and add a droprate to it so you make money" part coz THOSE should be the ones which get forbidden - not trading cards, fishing games or simple bubblegum toys or kinder surprise eggs god dang it. As i said already in my text there, a fishing game where you exactly know what you catch next misses the fun. opening card booster packs in which you know which cards are inside misses the fun.
1 hour ago, Komarimono said:For fun, and mostly curiosity, I showed this "conveyor" system to someone at work. I work for a cloud computing company called (removed!), so we tend to have to have a legal team on standby for reasons I can't really say.
Their response... Was oddly humorous. "If randomness is what needs to be removed, why was it made worse with requiring an initial purchase to then get random results after? Hopefully these items cannot be re-sold since this would be gambling."
This. @Patch Linden
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:
It does seem like differing solutions for what amounts to the same sort of marketing. Can the conveyor solution being proposed for the former Gotcha's also work for the fishing?
i cant tell but for actuall TRADING cards it seems like impossible without leaving the actual "trading" part out of it, making nearly impossible to sell anymore without the "random" factor in mind.
Thats why i said it feels hypocritical if a fishing game in which you "Have" to buy an actual "key" item to get a CHANCE (droprate) to catch a higher rarety fish and card game vendors which actually gives you 100% a random card are suddendly forbidden?
I mean i hope someone sees why i call it hypocritical there since if you look deeper into this fishing games, you can even go and call them close to "lootboxes" if you call the bait actual "keys"...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
This "fatpack" madness should be stopped...
in Fashion
Posted
i know and its bs to do. i mean my rl sample i brought often was a sample bbuuuuuuttt i saw already "similar" things where i just had to shake my head about.