Jump to content

Cinos Field

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cinos Field

  1. Average Jane might not care about optimization, but the fact that it has mod permissions alone is definitely going to be enough to at least keep Belleza well in the black. It's the only moddable mainstream body!
  2. This is totally awesome. If you strip the body down to just what a furry might use as a base (i.e. no hands or feet) it's only 42k polygons. Even for humans, stripping the onion layers and the boob options nobody uses should do wonders. Now if only TMP and Maitreya would do the same... then again, if they don't, Belleza should rapidly recover a lot of market share.
  3. What, you thought you all looked bad? Try having a non-standard SL texture for your body. That gaping void of horror on my cheek is actually an eye socket. But where we're going, we don't need eyes.
  4. This is currently happening to me on Firefox. Clearing the cookies helps, but only for a day or so, and then it starts getting stuck at "The page isn’t redirecting properly" It's really irritating.
  5. Yeah, but the stipulations for which it'd be allowed specifically mentioned that it needs to unlock between plays. So would the hud one that stays locked to you by necessity be allowed, then?
  6. Well, it is very easy to script. I'd make one but I'm still not convinced that there wasn't some kind of miscommunication between the lindens and the lawyers...
  7. The idea is clearly to keep paying the machine until you, by random chance, get the rare, as it was before. Imagine a slot machine where you know if your next few plays will win or not, but in order to see if the fourth or fifth play will finally be the jackpot, you'll just have to keep playing. That would instantly be torn apart by hordes of hungry lawyers. Why this one is okay, only the Lindens really know.
  8. I am also noticing that the conveyor system must unlock between buyers which means sniping will be possible. The ways of the lindens truly are mysterious.
  9. I seriously have to imagine the lawyers misunderstood the question.
  10. Ah, brilliant. So gachas were banned but actually gachas are allowed if we call them conveyors instead. What was the point of this whole thing again? A very niche wording of a law somewhere? Was it the word that got banned, specifically, then? The blog post definitely needs updating on what mechanic exactly is banned, because it clearly wasn't the randomness as a result of payment.
  11. Your daily reminder that the blog post defines gachas as "a chance-based outcome as a result of a payment." which the conveyor fits to the very letter.
  12. What "vitriol"? It'd seem to be like most are just immediately recognizing that it's practically identical to the thing being banned, and questioning why it'd be allowed given that the original was banned. There's no real emotion involved here, just pattern recognition.
  13. Generally, laws are enforced according to the spirit, not the letter. And all I can say is I'm pretty thankful for that.
  14. 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.
  15. Have LL said that this is okay? Because it still has a random outcome and item as a result of spending money, just a few steps in the future.
  16. All I can say is if LL allows these barely-even-loopholes there was no point in banning gachas to begin with.
  17. That is categorically what the blog post mentions, namely "a random outcome as the result of paying money", just that the random outcome is "item you can buy a few purchases later" rather than "item you'll get right now". If the Lindens make an exception for it... well, then they do. But right now it sure doesn't look like it.
  18. Yeah, I'd have to see LL confirm that the system complies with the new rules. Because it clearly violates what the blog post described with the random outcomes. Said random outcomes are just a few steps away in the future.
  19. Glitches have more than once spirited no copy items away into the void from sims where I had them rezzed. It's just the nature of SL.
  20. Limited edition items do kinda scratch the same itch as gachas do. Though they would have to be transferrable too... which is always a tricky thing on SL.
  21. In short, basically LL calls it "skill gaming" if skill can increase the payout or reduce losses to any significant degree. Of course, the house always wins still. Can't be that skilled with the current iterations.
  22. And I dunno about anyone else here but I've found tons of mod/copy unique and quirky decor items on SL. Lots of creators have plenty of creativity outside of the gacha sphere. The whole notion, as in that linked blog post, that "a lot of gacha is far more unique and interesting than non-transferable objects that can be purchased in SL" is totally alien to me.
  23. I don't know about you, but I know a ton of high-profile creators on SL who refused to implement the gacha model to begin with. Did you consider those people?
  24. So you'd argue that a slot machine that always returns at least one coin is not gambling because you always guaranteed a "win"?
  25. Yes, and that's not the height of scummy scripting either. I had an acquintance who made gacha scripts. These included features such as "make it impossible to get the ultra rare before X number of rolls" to guarantee a definite minimum payout, said bias towards duplicates, and features such as getting a guaranteed early but low desirability rare to get the buyer to spend more trying to get the one they actually want later... which wouldn't appear for quite a while because the odds lower after the first one. And so on. It's all black box scripts, nobody knows what they do. We can probably assume most sellers were honest, though... I hope.
  • Create New...