Elyssa Artis

Because some creators have spent so long investing mass amounts of time into gacha, doing one after the other, making quick bank, one ofter the other. Perhaps randomly trying regular releases that didn't do well right away, that they think they don't ever do well. They never spent time building up their mainstore, customer group, or had a big enough selection of regular items in their mainstore and MP to realise that it all adds up over time to some very nice passive income. love it.

No, I don't, but without giving a firm guideline (aka, not something that has the word example anywhere), you can see 3 people at least had 3 different ideas about what it meant. So if that comes down to only color being known, then say that. Color must be known, all other traits being unknown is acceptable. Sometimes the shortest answer is the clearest.

Also, for real? Is that a thing? I gotta see that if it is

That's fair. Really all traits and 2 gen genetics of the starter packs should be known. It all contributes to how 'rare' the item is. Realistically though, it's likely why color is the thing given, because it's the only common thing between all these breedables, without killing the breedables industry.

He did, but of the colors, otherwise he would be listing out every color. But again, it obviously isn't clear enough, so if they can state what traits need to be known, as a firm list. Something like: Color needs to be known Color, tails and ears need to be known Color, tails, ears and 2 generations of genetics need to be known That would be absolutely ideal, and avoid all confusion.

So you read the line specifying colors, saying that information should be known and other unknown traits are acceptable and you ended up at just knowing the animal is okay. And the other girl ended up at the color was just an example and all traits should be known. Please LL, can you clarify exactly what traits must be known, as your initial answer is not clear enough.

Agreed, I understand their legal team told them it's okay, but it's way too close and still encourages the addictive behavior that the laws are trying to prevent. It surely wouldn't be long before this is also not okay.

I agree, it does assume incorrectly that the color is the main factor, it doesn't mean that the answer they gave is just an example. They clearly stated other unknown traits are okay. They are aware of the other traits. But they are still reading this, so push that case, It totally is true, all traits, not just color contribute to a breedable being rare. As it stands, that is indeed their ruling for now, so saying other people are ignorantly misinterpreting simply because you feel it shouldn't be that way is frankly quite rude.

It's not an example when they specifically reference the other unknown traits and say that's okay. To me, I think it should be all traits being known. They all contribute towards the item being common or rare. They have clearly stated that other unknown traits, that they have or develop (presumably through breeding), is okay.

"This is acceptable at the present including the various unknown traits they may come with or develop" They are aware other traits are special, they say the color being known is acceptable. They wrote straightforward information, but I am misinterpreting it?

^ This is what was posted. Color has to be known.

1. Show friends only 2. Machine could be scripted to stay locked to the previous buyer for 30seconds to give them first option at the next up item. 3. Seems like it will change only upon buying 4. Yeah, seems like tfr will still be okay with this conveyor system 5. Yeah, always an issue with new things, thankfully there's enough people following all this, shouldn't be too difficult.

Nope, the way they say it's okay is you will have to know the color you are getting. Other things like tails and ears can be random, but color/coat will have to be known.

I am happy that gachas are going, however it doesn't feel like this is about following a law, so much as it is about getting rid of something that has caused issues and backlash on LL for a long time. The issues with copybotting gacha items has been an ongoing issue, both to combat as well as the staff to handle the extra complaints filed and backlash that 'LL is doing nothing about it'. The permissions statement about transferrable items seems to be tacked on as a way to rule out this policy covering other markets within SL from being wiped out, as there appears to be no laws that state anything about permissions of items. (I could be wrong on this, but none I have seen) Loot boxes in most games have both tfr and no tfr items included. Now the breedables are a grey area, because they need to find a way to differentiate the breedables from the gachas/loot boxes, so it is only the gachas being removed from SL. Breedables aren't an issue generally for coppybotting since they are scripted to connect to an external server to check if there is already a duplicate rezzed and delete any copies. At this point however breedable starter packs, aside from the random chance being assigned after the point of sale, are the same thing, which is why their faqs saying they are still looking into the breedables, it may still change.

I mean, it's 68 pages long, and posts are largely speculation about which laws LL may or may not be following. Citations from LL on which laws they are being held by would be ideal.

Yes, I literally quoted part of that answer. For the people who only read the first line of the answer.

Don't need to, they are already on it. "At the present we are working with external counsel on the subject of breedables." Because it's an incredibly grey area. Firm criteria really does need to be stated by LL. Even citing the specific laws they are complying by would be amazing.

I don't see how you are not understanding what I am saying. Perhaps you are invested in your side of the argument, I'm invested in neither. You are saying it doesn't matter because yours is coming from a 'normal vendor'. I get that. A normal vendor giving a nest, simply shifts the coding where the random chance is rolled from the vendor to the item received. You pay a normal vendor for a 'container'. I get that. You then get a random chance from that container to get either a boring looking breedable, or a desirable one. Whether you choose to breed it or not is irrelevant. You paid, you got a random item, perhaps common, perhaps rare. The breedable you get is transferrable. By your logic, as previously stated, I can put 'containers' in a normal vendor, and upon rezzing and clicking those 'containers' a random chance is rolled for the dress option. So the roll for chance is now after the fact, rather that at the machine.

That's exactly my point if you hadn't seen my previous posts. It doesn't matter what it's called. Breedable starter packs act like a gacha, therefore they should be considered under the same laws.

So I will now call my clothing machine a "floofy vendor" and it will give a random chance at some dresses with solid colors, or some cool less common dresses with extra ruffles and sparkles. It's not GACHA because it's a floofy vendor. Or I will set up a standard vendor that sells "clothing boxes", and when you get those clothing boxes home and click on them, they will give you a random chance at some dresses with solid colors, or some cool less common dresses with extra ruffles and sparkles. It's not gacha because it came in a 'clothing box' I was clearly buying first, knowing I was getting a 'clothing box'. That's pretty clear to me.

Yes they are. Which is why LL really needs to give firm clear criteria for what constitutes a 'gacha' and hold all markets to that criteria. If they are legitimately following the laws that are in place, or going to be in place, this should be simple. In which case, solutions are not 'loopholes', simply not illegal.

Because much like gacha, there are the more desirable items/traits (rares). People will spend more money on more starter nests/eggs/whatever for a chance to roll those desirable traits. Those rare trait items can then be resold at 3rd party markets for high prices just like gachas are. If the separating factor you are giving is the item you get being a container (egg/nest), then gachas just need to start being sold in a box where the item is randomly assigned upon opening that box?

The criteria it boils down to, from the FAQs given is: Pay money, get a random chance roll, tfr perms. Gacha fits this. Loot boxes fit this. Breedables fit this.

They don't need to be 'gacha' to fit the criteria of what a gacha system is, or else people would just call gacha machines by another name and would be golden. The criteria is that you pay money, what you get is random chance, and it has tfr perms.

It makes no sense that Breedables are excluded. When you buy a breedables starter pack you pay money. It is a random chance the trails you roll, some of them very rare. The items are transferable.