The Future Of Mesh Sales (As Some Would Propose)

[Codex Alpha]

There is an opinion out there of how merchants (should) allow mod and copy permissions on their products, with the opinion that those merchants who do not are "anti-consumerist", or conducting "bad business practices", and as a result will 'fail at selling any of their products". There is also a notion that those who create products with nomod are in danger of losing their businesses, but this simply is not, and will never be the case. SL has room for all creators, and the consumers can buy or not buy, as the free market dictates by default.

I have stated many reasons why copy and mod permissions may vary from product to products, and how and why they may be used for effect in end-use, marketing or even perceived value of a product.

The other side believes the end user should be able to do whatever they want with the product, even going so far as using slogans like "If you can't mod it, you don't own it".

Creators for SL are not selling game assets, they are selling virtual copies of the art and content they create, and how the item will be used in the end, dictates a workflow.

Keep in mind, at the end of the day, there is no requirement, nor should there be, of a creator to give permissions they don't want to,nor will they lose any business doing so.

We want to encourage more creators, and encourage their choice and what is effectively a 'license' that they choose to distribute their content, and we should respect their decision.

At the same time, the free market will decide, and consumers can come and go, buy or not buy, as has always been.

The following image dictates what some propose creators do with their products...

 

 

This view could actually be a boon for creators (sarcasm);

1) No more time spent dealing with hi-poly to lo-poly meshes, or creating normal, ambient occlusion, displacement, color and specularity maps, each which must be optimized using compressed images, while maintaining the best detail possible.

If the end goal is to give the consumer 'game asset' rights, such as retexturing, re-coloring, re-sizing, re-naming and 're-whatever', this is a different workflow than creating a piece of usable content for SL.

I would have thought this was already covered by the category "Building & Object Components" of which there are currently 24,000+ items available, all with mod and copy permissions.

Yet some seem to want these permissions available for ALL products in SL, even going so far as saying "If you can't mod it, you don't own it".

You're right, you don't really own it. You're not buying a game asset, you're buying a virtual copy of an item to use as in your Barbie castle.

2) Less time spent on scaling and optimizing of UV meshes to dedicate detail to smaller parts vs larger parts, as the end user has scaling and tiling ability already in the Second Life Viewer Build tools.

3) Less time creating quality textures, or multiple textures for different models, or having to make 6 different texture designs.

After all, how can we anticipate that the customer doesn't want that chair in pine, but instead carbon steel? So why spend time with this?

3) Less or no time spent post-processing textures

Save money and time by not having to paint those details and highlights, or use expensive painting and graphical and PBR software.

4) Less or no time spent creating marketing product shots, including inworld store backgrounds, or contextual ('this is how the bar looks in your club) images to aid your sales and spark the customer's imagination.

Don't try too hard to represent your product in that fine VIctorian green floral print!

The customer wants it in yellow! So give them mod permissions and let them decide what texture to use! That way you can please everyone and save yourself workflow time!

5) Less or no need to create multiple listings of a product available in different colors, wood textures, clothing textures,, nor time spent on built-in scripting to allow customers to one-touch change textures on the fly.

Just upload the pre-unwrapped mesh, making sure there are no stretches, and that any textures the end user chooses will fit and scale efficiently. Wait.. are we making Builder's Components now? I'm confused...

6) Less or no time spent scripting the object, as there are plenty of free or purchased scripts on the Marketplace and inworld to allow the end user full control over the product as they see fit.

Also, the end user may want to drop their own script into the product, so save time scripting doors, drawers, lights, animations, movements, and other cool effects, because the end user wants to tear it apart anyway.

7) Less or not time spent inworld creating, optimizing and debugging scripts for advanced functionality on some products.

This is kind of covered with above point.

8) Less LI needed in inworld stores to display different items, as product will be a blank canvas for end user to fully customize.

Imagine the LI savings you will have in your inworld store, as you don't have to feature 15 of the same couch in different styles anymore! Just put one couch design on the sales floor, and just add "if you don't like this green Victorian floral, just apply your own texture instead". Everyone will be happy!

9) No more need to create clever model names or series, since end use and customer can rename anyways.

No more "Johnny's Rustic Country Lemonade Cart", or "Mad Cow Dentist's Table" or "Green Orb Of Destructive Destiny", when the end user can copy and simply rename it "My Cart" instead!

10) Never mind your creative vision, it's all about the money! This is the most important part. Don't ever forget to chase the money to the point where it's no fun for you to create things anymore. Always serve popular demand, what the masses want - especially if it includes popular art "Disney"-style-inspired content that just barely skirts the SL TOS.

Let's do this. Let's upload all mesh as full mod, full copy, and let the end user do it all. Hell, I know I can oblige as it will save me tons of time, I don't have to spend as much time sketching, concepting, building, optimizing, texturing, marketing, making videos and music to accompany - whatever I do in my current workflow, and just start making...

Building & Object Components...

Nah.

(edited for clarity, because I can :D )

[mikka Luik]

As always, saved before edit. Interesting.

[tabletopfreak Toocool]

no mod?? no sale.. we both lose 

[Chellynne Bailey]

I rather think you're straw-manning there a bit don't you think? Pretty sure everyone acknowledges a creator's right to choose their permissions, just like I'm sure you believe in a consumer's right to seek out items with the permissions that they desire. (At least I hope so)

What I don't understand is why you think the workflow is different. You don't need to do a dang thing differently to leave something modify. You CAN try and optimize something for customization, and many DO do that, but it is in no way implied or expected just because you check that box.  9/10 times, the reasons people want to modify are much more mundane and don't require you to do anything. 

Common Examples:

1) To rename it. Helps greatly with Fatpackitems with a texture hud. You can make yourself copies and label them (Red), (Greed), (Favorite), etc.
2) Linking together attachments.  Helps greatly with staying under the attachment limit. (Srsly LL? 38?)
3) Removing Scripts. RP Sims hate scripts. Being able to make scriptless copies of items is a must.
4) Rubberizing: There's an entire community of Rubber people who just want to rubberize everything they wear and decorate with. UVs are unneeded. They just blank everything out and turn the gloss to 255. Works perfectly well without the need for custom textures.
5) Glow/Tint/Materials/Shine: These are all things that can be easily tweaked without retexturing. And yes, I'm aware, some people think things like glow/full bright are tacky, but there are GOOD ways to use them. They are marvelous when making Fairy/Angelic/Sci-Fi and other fantastical Avis and Environments.     

Any creator is free to leave their items No-Mod, but in doing so they ARE eliminating these options for the customers, effectively lowering the value and appeal of their creation and costing themselves sales in the process. You can’t get mad at the customer for this. It’s just the market at work. 

That being said, anyone who harasses, berates or leaves bad reviews a creator for not having the perms they want needs to chill the heck out. Creators have just as much right to set their permissions how they like as the rest of us have to take or leave that product as presented. The fact that ANYONE would ***** at a creator just because the product they are selling isn't Modify is beyond isn't just ridiculous, it's counterproductive. The more hostile you are with people, the less likely they are to change their minds. It drives me batty that people don't understand this.... great.. now I'm ranting... 

Edited December 19, 2017 by Chellynne Bailey

[Codex Alpha]

On 12/18/2017 at 10:58 PM, Chellynne Bailey said:

What I don't understand is why you think the workflow is different. You don't need to do a dang thing differently to leave something modify. You CAN try and optimize something for customization, and many DO do that, but it is in no way implied or expected just because you check that box.  9/10 times, the reasons people want to modify are much more mundane and don't require you to do anything.

Any creator is free to leave their items No-Mod, but in doing so they ARE eliminating these options for the customers, effectively lowering the value and appeal of their creation and costing themselves sales in the process. You can’t get mad at the customer for this. It’s just the market at work.

To be clear, my no-mod items are on multiple-mesh items, and usually items that are presented as machines, and really have no need to be torn apart and used as spare parts - since I assume the customer bought it for what it was intended - as a work of operational art. I am not a Lego-kit creator, my intent is to create unique and original designs for people to use in SL.

If it's a simple item like a couch, or some simple replication of RL world item in 3d, then mod permission is included.

I assume  my customers are not buying my items because of their potential as Lego-kits, but rather because they appreciate the work of art itself.

In that respect, I've done quite well for the number of item submissions I have for SL - and am currently working to add more unique items to it as I RL life obligations allow me.

End use is an important distinction. A premade house design is also made up of multiple mesh parts, and the end use of the product is to be used as it was built.. Something like that may be sold for $500L. For mod permissions on the same item, which effectively turns the simple house into a Lego building kit, the end use is much different and therefore might warrant $3000L as a list price - since the customer can now create ANYTHING their heart desires.

Workflow DOES indeed change depending on the intended end use of the item. Most of my items I have created and will create will be as unique as I can make them, including scripted functionality, and an INTENDED design ( tech, hobo, rustic, etc) - where having mod permissions is not useful or would only break the item's look and functionality.

Workflow changes when providing multiple texture designs (or skins) for said item in lieu of mod permissions, which includes a few more hours of texture work, custom handpainting and baking shadows, AO, etc. -- vs simply creating UV layouts optimized for in-world texturing.

Workflow changes when intent is to create a prebuilt item like the house example, vs providing the individual, walls, doorways, windows,columns or whatever else. The workflow would effectively end once each individual mesh piece was completed, rather than extra hours spend inworld now using those pieces to create homes, shops, cathedrals, whatever.

Any perceived business loss asserted to not including mod permissions is gained back when people view and enjoy your INTACT product in-world. I'm sorry, but some garish texture applied to a mesh that I created in-world, or an object frankensteined into a new composition in world LOSES me business, because the customer won't even know WHO made it, and judgements will even be made based on how the MODDER presents your mesh... Most of my business is from people seeing my products in-world  and finding the store as a result - so I'm not too worried.

My original post on this topic was to defend a creator's choice of using non-Mod permissions on their products and give reasons WHY they might do that, and WHY customers should still seek such items, and not simply condemn (as was in original post or blog cited) creators that did so.

Edited April 6, 2018 by entity0x

[Chic Aeon]

On 12/18/2017 at 10:58 PM, Chellynne Bailey said:

That being said, anyone who harasses, berates or leaves bad reviews a creator for not having the perms they want needs to chill the heck out. Creators have just as much right to set their permissions how they like as the rest of us have to take or leave that product as presented. The fact that ANYONE would ***** at a creator just because the product they are selling isn't Modify is beyond isn't just ridiculous, it's counterproductive. The more hostile you are with people, the less likely they are to change their minds. It drives me batty that people don't understand this.... great.. now I'm ranting... 

Just wanted to note for folks that don't know (and I didn't until yesterday when Dakota pointed it out) that there is a flag category that covers that "not the right permissions" for me argument (assuming that permissions are listed of course) so any bad reviews can be flagged for removal. I had one "review" and two comments by the same person removed for a similar reason (didn't read or pay attention to the listing info) yesterday.

 

[Chellynne Bailey]

Yeah, they put this in, but I still can't report things for being Pedophilic. >.>

 

Edit: Srsly? There's no delete button?

 

Edited April 6, 2018 by Chellynne Bailey

[Fionalein]

Let the market decide =^.^=

There's always two approaches: "they butchered my art" or "look what they've come up with using my stuff" you decicde what to apply

Edited April 6, 2018 by Fionalein

[Chellynne Bailey]

1 hour ago, Chic Aeon said:

Just wanted to note for folks that don't know (and I didn't until yesterday when Dakota pointed it out) that there is a flag category that covers that "not the right permissions" for me argument (assuming that permissions are listed of course) so any bad reviews can be flagged for removal. I had one "review" and two comments by the same person removed for a similar reason (didn't read or pay attention to the listing info) yesterday.

 

Yeah, they figured how to do that, but I still can't report Pedo stuff.  

 

[Fionalein]

3 minutes ago, Chellynne Bailey said:

Yeah, they figured how to do that, but I still can't report Pedo stuff.  

 

try "Not allowed listing practices" as listing illegal stuff most likely is no allowed listing practice =^.^=

[Whirly Fizzle]

You could also abuse report it under Age -> Age..pl@y

Edited April 6, 2018 by Whirly Fizzle

[Chellynne Bailey]

19 minutes ago, Whirly Fizzle said:

You could also abuse report it under Age -> Age..pl@y

Where is that exactly? I've combed through that report drop down. >.> 

[Codex Alpha]

Good job derailing the topic, Chellyne rather than participating in the discussion, and my reply to your post.

Edited April 6, 2018 by entity0x

[Whirly Fizzle]

7 minutes ago, Chellynne Bailey said:

Where is that exactly? I've combed through that report drop down. >.> 

Top menu bar of the viewer, Help -> Report Abuse.
Under "Select Category", choose "Age -> Age.Pl@y"

[Chellynne Bailey]

1 minute ago, entity0x said:

Good job derailing the topic, Chellyne rather than participating in the discussion, and my reply to your post.

I actually didn't notice your months late reply until a couple moments ago and was just sitting here contemplating if I wanted to build a response now, or after lunch.

[Chellynne Bailey]

Quote

 

I assume  my customers are not buying my items because of their potential as Lego-kits, but rather because they appreciate the work of art itself.

In that respect, I've done quite well for the number of item submissions I have for SL - and am currently working to add more unique items to it as I RL life obligations allow me.

 

1

You assume wrong. Items in SL are rarely finished products. While alot of art goes into SL Creations, they are not just art pieces. People use them, and more importantly they combine them with other creations. You don't put out a house and neglect to fill it with furniture and surround it with landscaping. You don't put on a dress and wear it around without a body/shoes/hat/etc.  You are, whether you like it or not ARE selling legos. 

Quote

End use is an important distinction. A premade house design is also made up of multiple mesh parts, and the end use of the product is to be used as it was built.. Something like that may be sold for $500L. For mod permissions on the same item, which effectively turns the simple house into a Lego building kit, the end use is much different and therefore might warrant $3000L as a list price - since the customer can now create ANYTHING their heart desires.

If you wanna charge more for a mod version, by all means, but you just admitted you could add a TON of value to an item just by clicking a little box.
Unless you're somehow set up where MOD would let them easily recreate a bunch of your products only using one of your products, then this is really no skin off your nose.

Quote

 

Workflow DOES indeed change depending on the intended end use of the item. Most of my items I have created and will create will be as unique as I can make them, including scripted functionality, and an INTENDED design ( tech, hobo, rustic, etc) - where having mod permissions is not useful or would only break the item's look and functionality.

Workflow changes when providing multiple texture designs (or skins) for said item in lieu of mod permissions, which includes a few more hours of texture work, custom handpainting and baking shadows, AO, etc. -- vs simply creating UV layouts optimized for in-world texturing.

Workflow changes when intent is to create a prebuilt item like the house example, vs providing the individual, walls, doorways, windows,columns or whatever else. The workflow would effectively end once each individual mesh piece was completed, rather than extra hours spend inworld now using those pieces to create homes, shops, cathedrals, whatever.

 

Just because people CAN edit the textures, doesn't mean they WILL.  All that extra texture work you think is only nessessary for no-mod items, is still useful and nessessary for mod ones. Not everyone is a master texturer, and if people wanted to redo the WHOLE thing with their own textures, then yeah, they'd buy full perm items. But most of the time, that's not what people want or need to do.   Usually they just want to tint something slightly so it matches another item they have. Orrr rename it so they can keep things straight in their inventory. Or link it together with other items to save attachment space, or a million other little Quality of Life things that aren't 1/10th as extreme as you're picturing. 

 

Quote

Any perceived business loss asserted to not including mod permissions is gained back when people view and enjoy your INTACT product in-world. I'm sorry, but some garish texture applied to a mesh that I created in-world, or an object frankensteined into a new composition in world LOSES me business, because the customer won't even know WHO made it, and judgements will even be made based on how the MODDER presents your mesh... Most of my business is from people seeing my products in-world  and finding the store as a result - so I'm not too worried.

Yeah, that logic doesn't add up.  People who need to mod mesh to that extent, aren't buying your meshes if they are no-mod.  If you suddenly went mod, and they snapped up your items and did exactly as you said, it would be an advertising wash for you with that group not hurting or helping.. but you'd still have the sales and word of mouth.  

As for judging the mesh as it's been presented.. if it's actually ugly and people don't like it... no ones checking the creator. No one checks creators of items they don't like. People only check the creator if they like something and wanna figure out where to get it. 

Quote

My original post on this topic was to defend a creator's choice of using non-Mod permissions on their products and give reasons WHY they might do that, and WHY customers should still seek such items, and not simply condemn (as was in original post or blog cited) creators that did so.

Yeah, no condemnations needed,  as much as I am a proponent of Modify,  people are allowed to make decisions for their business as they see fit. But that doesn't mean what they are doing is a good idea, or that customers shouldn't avoid businesses who don't offer the features they want. 

[Lillith Hapmouche]

48 minutes ago, entity0x said:

Good job derailing the topic

Pretty big, presumptuous mouth for someone whose most recent activity consists of necro-posting rants in a small ton of last year's threads, along with a few slightly rotting ones just a few months dead...

[Codex Alpha]

33 minutes ago, Chellynne Bailey said:

You assume wrong. Items in SL are rarely finished products. While alot of art goes into SL Creations, they are not just art pieces. People use them, and more importantly they combine them with other creations. You don't put out a house and neglect to fill it with furniture and surround it with landscaping. You don't put on a dress and wear it around without a body/shoes/hat/etc.  You are, whether you like it or not ARE selling legos. 

If you wanna charge more for a mod version, by all means, but you just admitted you could add a TON of value to an item just by clicking a little box.
Unless you're somehow set up where MOD would let them easily recreate a bunch of your products only using one of your products, then this is really no skin off your nose.

Just because people CAN edit the textures, doesn't mean they WILL.  All that extra texture work you think is only nessessary for no-mod items, is still useful and nessessary for mod ones. Not everyone is a master texturer, and if people wanted to redo the WHOLE thing with their own textures, then yeah, they'd buy full perm items. But most of the time, that's not what people want or need to do.   Usually they just want to tint something slightly so it matches another item they have. Orrr rename it so they can keep things straight in their inventory. Or link it together with other items to save attachment space, or a million other little Quality of Life things that aren't 1/10th as extreme as you're picturing. 

 

Yeah, that logic doesn't add up.  People who need to mod mesh to that extent, aren't buying your meshes if they are no-mod.  If you suddenly went mod, and they snapped up your items and did exactly as you said, it would be an advertising wash for you with that group not hurting or helping.. but you'd still have the sales and word of mouth.  

As for judging the mesh as it's been presented.. if it's actually ugly and people don't like it... no ones checking the creator. No one checks creators of items they don't like. People only check the creator if they like something and wanna figure out where to get it. 

Yeah, no condemnations needed,  as much as I am a proponent of Modify,  people are allowed to make decisions for their business as they see fit. But that doesn't mean what they are doing is a good idea, or that customers shouldn't avoid businesses who don't offer the features they want. 

We agree then that every system has its pros and cons, and disagree about the validity of mod vs no-mod. As a shopper its never been a consideration for me, as I shop and buy items that I like - so my bias in providing my own items leans that way.

Each to their own, but I would stop short of calling for boycotts or other things against other stores that don't  believe as you do, or it could appear as 'anti-competitive behaviour' and break the Marketplace Guidelines.

[Chellynne Bailey]

1 hour ago, entity0x said:

We agree then that every system has its pros and cons, and disagree about the validity of mod vs no-mod. As a shopper its never been a consideration for me, as I shop and buy items that I like - so my bias in providing my own items leans that way.

Each to their own, but I would stop short of calling for boycotts or other things against other stores that don't  believe as you do, or it could appear as 'anti-competitive behaviour' and break the Marketplace Guidelines.

Yeah, it's not really a boycott? I mean technically it is, because people are refusing to make purchases. But people do that all the time. You don't buy clothes that are too small, or houses with not enough rooms.  If you game, you don't buy apple products, if you don't like burgers, you don't go to McDonald's. 

People simply don't buy products that don't meet their needs/wants**. That's perfectly natural. It's basic wallet-voting There is nothing radical about telling creators "We're not going to buy products that don't do ____". . Doesn't mean the Mesh Maker is a horrible terrible person that needs to DIE. Just means they aren't providing what customers want to buy. It's actually kinder this way. More often than not, when a customer passes over your item, you never know why.  You never get a chance to adjust. In this one instance, customers are actually telling creators what is wrong so they have a chance to adjust.

**Except for people who don't read/demo. >.>)

Edited April 7, 2018 by Chellynne Bailey