[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

I think it is necessary to find a solution that does more than adhering to the new rule and the existing or future laws that are hypothetically at the root of the decision. 
That is, design a system that would be acceptable to the most dedicated oponent.

To establish stricter rules than necessary to comply.
In other words, regulate the new collectibles system.

Regulating the new system obviously has a cost in manpower.
However, if one of the rules were that a given percentage of all sales through the new system was to be given to a charity, then, maybe... there would be volunteers to undertake the task of moderating/approving new collectible series.

Here are examples of What I mean by stricter rules
(a list that will probably end up being so long and restrictive, should it come to be, that I will regret having suggested it) :
-Regulating the content, so that each item is a unique design, rather than a different colour.
-Deciding how many items are to be shown ahead of  time (only the current one ? the current one plus the next one ? the current one and the two items coming up ?)
-regulating what vendor script can be used (for example a script is being designed that is locked in such a way that the creator has no way to alter the order in which items will be chosen by the script)
-Restricting where such machines can be rezzed (to make the role of the volunteers easier)

etc...

That said, the two aspects that are absolutely necessary to retain in the new system to perpetuate the spirit of the old one are :
-The resident's choice is limited to buying or not buying the item that is being offered.
-the items have to be transferable.

Furthermore, the creators should retain the choice as to which (approved) script they are going to use, as well as the possibility to choose or design their own machine. How (or even whether) to display the charity should also remain their choice so as to be in total control of the look of their vendor.
 

TLDR : What I am proposing is going futher than complying with the rule in the hope that it will not be abused and will not draw new complaints and regulations that would result in the new system being banned as well.

EDIT: Removed redundant text.

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

6 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I'm not a Gacha creator or a Gacha collector, so my opinion matters little on the issue.  I have heard both sides of the issue argued here and I can fully understand both sides.  

I hear more people saying they want a way to still get the gachas, even if they are sold as regular store items.  I've heard very few argue the other side of it -- at least here in the forums.

That is precisely the problem in this thread. the actual gacha players are underrepresented if at all. Maybe some are reading, but I doubt it, because they are being repeatedly stigmatized with numerous pejorative attributes (and creators too for that matter).

The voices being heard (hammered would be a better word) are a handful of gacha haters who are delighted to see the gacha gone because they think this means they are finally going to be able to get their hands on the goods easily for the same price (being under the wrong impression that the true price of the item is that of the pull on the machine).

 

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

33 minutes ago, Rathgrith027 said:

If creating your art relies on some sort of rarity that isn't covered by limited releases, than I and others don't know what to tell you.

Gachas were perfect in that respect :

If it turns out noone wants the items, then no new copy is created, because noone plays the machine.
The possibility remains.

With a limited release you decide ahead of time how many copies can possibly exist.
If noone wants it, all the possible copies will not be created.
But, if it turns out to be something people want, all the possible copies do get created, and then that's it, no more ? why do that ?
 

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

16 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

I think it would be nice.to hear from one of these events to know how they stand on continuing to not allow you to sell your own products now that they can't be sold as gachas.  I, for one, would look down on any event that held any creator to the no sale clause as the new rule seems to make it null and void.

It is not the events. there is noone to enforce a rule, it is just what a gacha is.

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

2 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Someone else brought up the fact that for some of the Gacha events, creators had to agree to never sell the items as regular store items - and I mentioned all of that also, early in this thread.   

However, given that the original creators will no longer be allowed to sell the items as Gachas, I think that invalidates any specific or perceived agreement about not selling them as non-Gachas.  

Thus, I say "Go for it" and the heck with anyone that reams you about it.

It is not "some of the gacha events", it is the intrinsic characteristic of a gacha item, the understanding that it will never be made available for sale directly by the creator in Second Life.

The new policy does not suddenly make it alright to break that rule.
It would make the millions(?) of gacha items out there worthless.

The only way that I can continue to sell my gacha items after the end of this month is if a new system to make the items difficult to get is approved by Linden Lab.


EDIT : added "in Second Life" to the first paragraph.

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

I have been visited in my dreams by a mystical bird with magnificient plumage of impossible colours.
The bird spoke inside my head and said that the name for whatever comes next to replace gachas shall be....

PATCHAS (any resemblance with existing or fictional characters is totally fortuitous).

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

1 hour ago, Finite said:

What's preventing GACHA creators from using a 3rd party to continue making their GACHA? The site could be based where GACHA is legal or unregulated. Someone could purchase a bunch of tickets or "turns" from the site and use those turns on in-world vendor that only excepts these tickets. There's already a lot of 3rd party mesh in SL from sites like Turbosquid and CGtrader. I've used these a few times for personal items if I don't like what's available in SL if looking for something very specific or just don't like the quality and feel I could render it better with better textures. Seems it would be a lot more worrisome than playing in-world with Lindens. But it would be off the grid and SL's hands would be clean of anything.

AFAIK We are not allowed under any circumstances to upload anything bought or downloaded from Turbosquid and the like, unless the items are distributed under CC0 (public domain), because you have to own all the rights to content you upload to Second Life.

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

19 minutes ago, Yhishara Cerise said:

You mean like joining a group for $250 L with the promise of group gifts only to find the next group gift something you don't like or want?  You might like every other gift except that one.  

Ah, no I don't mean a group, because that is a one time payment, yes ?
I mean an actual subscription as in you pay a fee every month to get every single item produced until the end of the month by the brand. (or maybe would work better if you pay one month for the next, so that you can't join in on a month that has already started?)
legal question : can the items issued from a subscription be transfer (convertible for copy/mod) ?

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

34 minutes ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

Aren't you an artist though? I am.

Though subscriptions are interesting in some ways (my daughter subscribed to knitting patterns once, and got a package of 10 new patterns each month), that model could never work for me as an artist because each of my paintings? There is only one of them. That's what gives them value (besides a person's judgement of the beauty of the piece), IRL and here in SL.

I set my model up in SL to mimic RL, not selling prints/copies but one of a kind. So subscriptions do make sense for some sellers, I'd wager, very thoughtful idea.  Just as long as everyone subscribing gets exactly the same things.

[I just saw this has been addressed multiple times. Everyone needs to get the same stuff. hey, I got something right today!!!]

To me:
-Artificial scarcity = yes
-unique item = no
the reason is that you can never be sure that there is only one of your items out there : There is what is probably wrongly called copybotting (ripping would be a better, more generic term) : your item could be ripped in SL and reuploaded on some private region you will never know of, or reuploaded on opensim.
there are also god powers (a feature, not a hack) that allow such a power user to take a copy of any mesh. (not that they do, but they can).
Unique does not make sense to me for virtual goods, and if you are selling your item no-copy, there is always the chance that it vanishes in a rip of virtual space and time.
If you sell it with copy permissions, the buyer can rez as many copy as they like, therefore it is not unique.
you could of course sell it as an NFT and deliver the inworld copy of the artwork to the owner of the NFT token. but then what happens when that person sells the NFT ? you have to kindly ask the previous owner to please delete your copy ?
It does not work.


 

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

Another alternative to gachas would be.... subscription.
Paying a subscription to a given creator would give you all the items they produce that month, or the next, and there would be no other way to acquire those items at any time in the future.

Would that be illegal because you would not know what you will get when you pay the subscription ?

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

37 minutes ago, Deathly Fright said:

less new items is a better way to put it, yes.

thank you for taking the time to type that long explanation, but for me I would want to make clothes as I used to, just this time with mesh. pushing prims around was easy, as was texturing. getting everything for a dress I have in mind and then rigging it etc is so complicated now. I don't have time to learn the whole new skill of 3d modeling. I have looked into doing it and have even tried my hand at blender but it's such a giant learning curve.

you obviously love SL as much as many people here, including me. yes the number of people still active is very important to keeping this thing we all like alive.

 

the first step (designing your dress) is something that can be done in Marvelous Designer, which is totally unlike any modeling software out there. It does not feel like working with mesh at all. Look for tutorials on youtube by Daisy Winthrope.
Of coure the problem is that this is a very expensive software, but luckily they have a trial period you can make good use of.

The second task is optimizing the resulting mesh, which is indeed a daunting task. That said :
-having designed the dress of your dreams in the first place will give you incentive to continue on the journey.
-as long as you are not selling it (plaguing Second life with yet more unoptimized mesh), you could very well skip that step (for now)

the third step is rigging, which can be done relatively easily with acceptable result using Avastar, which is affordable and has a discord were you will find a lot of helpful people to guide you (provided you take the time to watch the tutorials first at least).

EDIT :
There is a problem though... the dress has to be rigged specifically for the body you use inworld.
For that you need the files called "devkit" which creators often make difficult to acquire for some mysterious reasons.

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

Item #4 is the only one that is being offered for purchase.

In my experience, it is mostly resellers that actually played the gacha machines.
When they decide to play on a machine they do not even wait to see what they are getting. They simply play the machine a given number of times that they know will statistically give them the whole set.
They do not resell the items "at a highly inflated price". They got it wholesale so to speak, and they are reselling it at what they deem is their actual value.
It makes more sense for the "end user" to stay away from gacha machines entirely. when you want a specific item only from a series, it is up to you to first look for it on Marketplace, and if that fails, go to yard sales and look for it.
I am not interested in selling the item directly to you, thank you.
When you do get the item, come to me to trade it in for mod/copy if you want.

 

As stated above, in my view, as the creator, I am not interested in selling the item directly to you :
I want to spend my short time on this earth making things. Not in marketing (finding ways to reach out to the general population in numbers, in hope to reach the few people who will want my item).
Resellers are willing to do that work (find the buyer who will actually pay a "fair price"). Resellers will buy my items in quantities that will make up for the low cost.

 

 

This is correct, it makes absolutely no sense for you to buy this item you do not want.

The point of this new vendor is to make the items artificially scarce, so that resellers can do their thing, and so that collectors feel (rightly imho) that they own treasures.


to recap :
-If I sell items mod/copy myself, I have to stop creating to spend energy and time reaching buyers, which in itself requires skills that I do not have in the first place.
-If I sell the items mod/trans directly from a vendor, the supply becomes unlimited and resellers will have no interest in them whatsoever, and collectors will have trinkets instead of treasures.

The only two viable alternatives I see for myself are :
-To sell the items mod/trans in limited quantity with a total value that represents what I want from my work. In this scenario I still have to find the buyers myself, and the resellers vanish along with the yard sales.
Yard sales both in SL and in real life are something that make life more interesting, imho.

-To use second life only for the pleasure of seeing my creations inworld. That is, to keep them to myself, take pictures, make exhibits where you can't buy, etc...
And to sell the mesh on external online stores only, which means that should you buy them there, you would not be allowed to upload them to Second Life, because you didn't make them.

Part of the issue here is that we are putting very different things under the same label "gacha".
In order to explain, Ihave to make the same mistake, and create categories that are bound to not encompass everything, but I do not see how to say this any other way :
-There are series that contain a single item in different colours, one of which has a texture that is actually different from the others and has more work put into it and it is the rare. (many "duds")
-series with a myriad items in slightly different variations of colour. Everything might be interesting in itself, but the sheer number of them and the fact that they come in variants make it so that you are bound to end up with very many semi-duplicate, which also effectively makes them "duds".
-series with a quantity of absolutely unique items, without variants (or the variants are a single item with a texture changer). This type of series often contains one or more items that are marked "rare" and may or may not be more elaborate than the commons.
This last type is what I am personally talking about.

Were gachas not going to be banned entirely I would like a label to be created by some authority, and you would have to adhere to certain standards in order to use the label, much lke it is done for things like "organic food" in the real world.

"Less content" ? I doubt it, there is already so much content in SL that no single person will ever see it all, I think.
"less new content" ? Definitely.

For creating content, start with a tool like Sculptris or sculpt GL, it is very much fun, you don't really need to know much at this point. Once hooked, you will gradually learn all you need to know.
(Just very basic concept you need to know : mesh is made up of vertices (points in space), edges (that connect the vertices), and faces (when three points are connected by edges you get a triangle). A mesh can be coloured, or it can be textured. in order to be textured, it needs to be "uv-mapped", that is, make each spot on the mesh correspond to coordinates on a flat texture).

The problem here in my opinion is that what is being taken away is one of several intangible concepts that makes Second Life so special for all of us, whether we are aware of them or not. They are characteristics that, put together, make the virtual space very real in our mind. Real in the sense that they make for a space that we want to live in.
Some of those things we take for granted, yet they are lacking in other virtual worlds, because people tend to just fail to grasp their importance, and simply discard them when designing a new world, albeit for good reasons (performance, feasibility, scalability, whatever..).

Some of them that come to mind :
The feeling of interconnectedness the world map provides : despite regions and clusters of regions being totally disconnected from each other, the world map gives that wonderful feeling of being part of a larger world.
The ability to see accross region borders, and even cross the borders !
"live editing" : the mere ability to rez a cube...
The myriad of ways in which you can customize your look (in some worlds you would have to commission an immutable avatar with clothes that will never change, for a fee of 1000 real dollars).
....And gachas, items that are scarce, can't be copied legally, and that can be traded, gifted, and resold, along with the fear of losing them through some mishap. This makes for a wonderful, very real feeling. This goes away ?

Opensim ? naaaah, it just doesn't have the numbers that Second Life has, which is also one of those essential intangible treasures that make SL so special.

Yes, that, exactly that.
 

If you play a machine put out by the creator, the quantities are unlimited.

It is only if a reseller chooses to sell their items in a machine that items will run out.

 

 

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

2 minutes ago, Romy Writer said:

Silas, why not sell the items singly or as a set or groups? It is almost the same as what you have here if you sell them singly. Your art and creativity are amazing and inspiring. Some of the most unique and best art I have seen in virtual. I do hope you can find a solution you are comfortable with going forward.

Romy, I did try all sorts of things. It just doesn't do.
I stopped making gachas for a very long time, because of all the whining, hate, insults, begging (generally in that order in a single conversation).
It turned out that all those people who said "I would buy your items individually at a fair price" suddenly vanished, poof! gone! when I stopped making gachas.
This month I decided to make one and I am glad I did, because it turns out it was my last opportunity to do so, and it confirmed the difference : for me this mechanism is the only one that makes creating these statues even remotely worthwhile.

[New Gacha Policy Discussion]

 

[Farewell... (soon)]

Retirement is the worst idea mankind ever had.
Stay as a consultant ?

[Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread]

25 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

The alpha that creates individual lashes for the system eyelashes is built into the head bake - you can't define a different pattern in that area.

Instead of using an aux channel you might try using an unused portion of one of the main bakes.

Thank you Theresa. Is there already a jira for that ?

[Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread]

Hello is there a bug with eyelashes or what am I doing wrong, if I try to place eyelashes where they are supposed to be at the top right corner of the head texture, they just don't show up with bakes on mesh ?

I made sure to create new body parts items, no old or default texture is worn... yet default eyelashes show up instead of the ones on my texture.

In the end I gave up and moved the eyelashes to a separate material and set it to aux1
On the head slot I just can't get it to work. Is that expected ? Thanks.

[Environmental Enhancement Project (aka EEP!) Feedback Thread]

EEP works fine and is very nice

 

[Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread]

1 hour ago, Drayke Newall said:

I can just see the headlines and then the aftermath... "Linden Lab caught creating tool for copy botting or the potential of its use as such".

You have to realise, in the world of SL, you don't own anything only the licence to use the skin or item for its intended purpose.

LL owns the textures "as much as" the original creator. What I am suggesting is that the skin object be converted to a universal that serves the same purpose, except only for the left arm and left leg.
It is the same intended purpose i.e. use as skin.

 

1 hour ago, Blush Bravin said:

The best solution I can see is for skinners to start including a universal wearable for both left arm and left leg in their skin packages that have system layers. I've started another thread specifically about this problem.

The problem is that people's favourite skin textures can be 15 years old and the original creator is not around anymore to create the universal.

[Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread]

19 minutes ago, PenGemini said:

yes with a skin it can be done, but than BoM is unusable for changing skin and baking it, not to mention that not many do have textures of actual favorite skin to make universal, so for now there is no way that we can make standalone universal tattoo and expect to work as intended, to have 2 different patterns on right and left arms or legs

And LL called it in universal "tattoo's" slots

Since this onion skin layer for left arm and left foot seems to be the only viable solution, I wonder if it would be possible for LL to create a tool allowing people to convert a skin they own to a universal for left arm and left foot ? It would solve this problem.
 

[Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread]

10 minutes ago, PenGemini said:

I made my body and made onion layer for left arm and leg and there is 0 glitching, underlying skin layer is mask mode and onion for left is blend mode

Basically only possible way to make left arm/leg is to have dedicated face for it, and onion is the only solution for a tattoo, but there is a bug in there since you can't have regular tattoo than since it will show it on left arm as baked on skin layer. Does not matter if it is universal applied to upper and left, or universal only to left and regular tattoo layer

 

So basically LL gave us something that is called in universal layer Left arm Tattoo and Left leg tattoo that actually can't support tattoo's to be separate on left and right

I can see a way PanGemini.
However, it would have to be prepared by the creator of the skin, unless they sell the textures along with the skin.

First let's see if I understand the problem correctly.
You have the system uv on the mesh at bottom, and on top of that you have an onion skin layer that is set to left arm and left leg.
You can use system skin, but if you put a tattoo on your (right) arm, it also appears on the left arm, because they are mirrored overlapping islands.
However, you can add a tattoo to left arm only, since that will go on the onion skin layer, and not interfere with the system skin underneath.

Now if you want a tattoo on the right arm only, here is the solution I can think of :
Make a universal with the skin for the left arm slot.
This will go on the onion skin and hide the tattoo that is meant for the right arm only.
On top of that universal, you can add other left arm-specific tattoos.
 

[Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread]

11 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

The HUGE problem with doing it this way is that then you once again have alpha glitching. IMO that's no solution at all.

I only set the eyelashes to alpha blending. alpha masking for everything else. No glitching.

[Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread]

7 minutes ago, Tazzie Tuque said:

Not if you want to hide like one arm and leave the other visible .. the old system alphas were always totally symetrical and clothing in mesh is not always so.  and we have seen this debate here before..  and I agree with those who do NOT want to be wasting time making alphas that probably won't serve the purpose I want it to anyhow.  I am capable of it I just don't think I should have to when a properly made hud for the specific body could be done to eliminate that need to go backwards to system alphas.

Just thinking aloud here :

If you make it so that you can hide only your left arm with an alpha on a BOM body, that will mean that you can't use system skin at all, which makes BOM much less attractive.
As I stated above, to me it makes sense to use the left arm only as an onion skin that is invisible most of the time, you would use is only to add tattoos.

In that scenario, if you want to hide only the left arm you would have to use some other medhod with a BOM body, not an alpha, which can only hide both arms at the same time.
 

[Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread]

2 hours ago, Tazzie Tuque said:

I for one am not in a huge rush to get the Maitreya BOM body..  I would much rather the creator take all the time needed to get it right, take into consideration all the comments that have been made in here thus far, and come up with something everyone can be happy with.. including an alpha hud pretty much as it is now only that will work with BOM.. I cannot see functioning with mesh clothing without one and I rather doubt that folks are ready to give up mesh clothing lol.

The thing is, with BOM, any programmer could make your alpha HUD that will be compatible with all bodies (except for any extra mesh part that does not correspond to the system uv's)

anyway, you can use old system clothing alphas to hide parts of your BOM body.

 

[Bakes on Mesh Feedback Thread]

There is something I don't get, can someone explain ?

The left leg and left arm slots are apparently regular auxiliary slots,  which means if you use them on your body, then the system skin doesn't come through if you remove your universals.
I thought one of the aims of BOM was so that people could use their old skins ?

Anyway, I was wondering what was preferable.
1. To have a body that can show the system skin, but then you can't have "tattoos" on your left arm and left foot.
2. To be able to have "tattoos" on your left arm and left foot, but then you can't use your system skin at all because it wouldn't bake to the arm and foot.

I believe that none of the two is acceptable.

So, the only solution I see is to take option one and add an onion skin layer that uses the left arm and left leg slots......

I think this is very wrong, but it's the only solution I see. And it works.