SL Gacha Creators Scramble to Create Gacha-Like Systems Without a Gambling Mechanic Before Linden Lab's September 1 Deadline

Image/system by dazai voom

With Linden Lab banning Gachas in Second Life at the end of this month, " irihapeti" and others have noted the rise of Gacha-ish systems like the one above:

Many professional gacha machine makers have developed conveyor machines ready for the 1 September rollout date.

Those that haven't will have to close down their gacha operations.

The basic conveyor machine will display an item from the set. When the customer purchases the displayed item, the machine will 'randomly choose' the next item to be displayed. Customers can buy it or not as they please.

The items in the conveyor machine can be NoCopy Transfer.

So basically systems like this are Gacha-like, except without a completely randomized reward aspect that made Gachas so popular, and also a form of gambling. (And also, for many, so fun.) It also looks like a direct response to a question fielded by Linden Lab in its original announcement banning gachas:

Q:  Could a “conveyor belt” system work?  

Example:  The vendor board selects an item at random and displays it for purchase.  That item remains on display and available for purchase until a buyer touches the vendor which locks it to them for purchase.  This allowed the buyer to purchase the item and deliver it.  The vendor unlocks and then selects another item at random and displays it for purchase and the cycle repeats.

Example image here and credit to Nadi Vemo for the approved vendor design.

A:  Yes, as long as the item currently being purchased is known. Note however that you should discontinue the use of the “gacha” term for these sales. 

If I'm understanding the new system processes right, there still seems to be an element of chance at work, with a "bet" to win a highly desired item on display. The mere fact that customers can choose to walk away at any time doesn't strike me as a get of jail free card from gambling regulations -- after all, people can also walk away from gachas as any time too.

However, I'm Not a Lawyer And Don't Play One On The Internet (IANAL ADPOOTI), so I'm reaching out to my favorite IRL lawyer for more clarity.

Comments

[Adeon Writer]

What exactly just happened, and who said exactly what happened would happen exactly how it happened? https://i.imgur.com/x966olT.png

<3

[Wagner James Au]

Well good call!

[Robin Lobo]

Imagines soon seeing long lines of machines all 'stuck' on that item nobody wants
:)

[Bia]

Would the items still be transfer though? Because it’d suck to buy items you don’t want just to get to the one you want and be stuck with a load of crappy items you couldn’t resell..

[Sanny Yoshikawa]

I simply don't understand why Second Life needs to have strict gacha regulations. I grew up in the land of gacha and have been playing it since I was a child. In Japan, even ice cream and vending machines come with raffles. The Japanese company Bandai has capsule toy shops in the US. Is that regulated too?

[Mush]

I'd have probably bought one too but the fatpack is L$1000. How about setting one up so we can choose the colour we'd like. The irony.

[Chic Aeon]

I am not sure that I have this in my mind correctly but it SOUNDS like if someone was trying for a certain RARE say and was willing to keep buying the things that they don't want in hopes that their item of choice shows up in the list EVENTUALLY (note this is VERY much like a traditional gacha) ....

it seems like another person could easily buy the item out from under the person who had been giving up lindens in hopes of getting to that item that they SIMPLY MUST HAVE. Someone could even be hiding in the wings so an unsuspecting (insert name of new game here) wouldn't know they had to be lickety split in their buying.

It appears very much to me like a gacha machine and a lucky board were getting it on in a bad dream and produced "the new non-gacha but pretty much acts LIKE a gacha" baby . Certainly not my thing; even worse than the gacha machines in my mind . I do think it sounds like it would get past the gambling police though :D.

And to Hamlet this sentence isn't all that clear for folks that haven't been following along: Those that haven't [developed conveyer machines] will have to close down their gacha operations.

EVERYONE has to close down their gacha op0erations :D. It is what happens to the goods that were previously in the gacha machines that is in question and whether creators will "repurpose" (LL's term) the items in some way or retire them.

Some creators are simply planning on selling them as regular no copy - transfer items or in copy fatpacks.

Oh the things we do to keep our additions.

[Adeon Writer]

@Chic

These machines typically have a lockout after buying to give you an exclusive chance to buy whatever is shown next. Though this isn't a very long window, in order to pressure you into an impulse buy if someone else is around.

And yeah, it's gacha in all but name, as I said it would be.

Is it different enough? Yes. This is exactly what Valve did when French banned lootboxes. By showing players what was in the next box if they bought it, French law was 100% ok with it.

[Fionalein]

No Adeon, you didn't predict it, you encouraged them. You posted this idea everywhere...

[sirhc desantis]

Fionalein is right* young Writer. You have been whoring this idea for weeks over at the official (including noting that you will make anything anyone asks for) =^^=
Should note I have a cunning plan for something that I may even get off my furry bottom to release

*they often are.

[Chic Aeon]

That is a little bit better scenario than what I understood from the post.

So whoever is playing can KEEP playing without anyone elbowing in on their "run" as long as they do it immediately? The question is -- are ALL machines going to be that way are are some going to let anyone in? And would / will folks know which kind of machine they are playing?

And even if someone (anyone or ones) were touting the idea around, it isn't all that original an idea. I think it is a fair guess that a LOT of people thought of the same type of thing all on their own. It does seem to satisfy LL's criteria, so we'll see. Not going to be MY thing though.

On the sorta if we've gotta really find a silver lining thing, showing the upcoming products will expose some of the gacha makers who had their rares SO VERY RARE that I never ever got one. Some gacha machines you can see the chances of rares, others not. So perhaps they will be "encouraged" to change their business plan :D.

I am happy to be retiring my gachas. I have made a really pretty Fall park to take up the space where the gacha building WAS - LOL.

[Adeon Writer]

> No Adeon, you didn't predict it, you encouraged them. You posted this idea everywhere...

While I'd love to take credit for it, I had nothing to do with it. It was inevitable, to anyone who's been following lootboxes from before SL was involved. (Yes, Gachas/Lootboxes are synonymous). I was just doing Linden a favor giving them a month in advance to say it wasn't allowed, if that's what they wanted.

Would suck if they'd only found out about it with the public announcement and didn't actually want it.

But now everyone can rest assured: If Linden didn't want it, they'd have said so a nearly a month ago.

[sirhc desantis]

Ser little Writer - care to discuss inworld? As would be interesting to see how - interpretation - matches reality. You know how to find me.
As always outside is easy - inworld it is a little more true. Oddly. Asking for someone I never thought I might agree on things but we all grow.

[Stella Gotcha]

This is still a gambling system only difference is you know the first 11 numbers. It's still a gamble to get that rare to fall into the queue of 11 numbers you're still taking a chance on that rare showing up so you're still gambling.

[_MochaTheDog_]

The fact that there's even a rarity shows that there's still a chance-based probability behind them.

[cakey]

this is so stupid from a seller standpoint so now only one person can buy from your machine at a time not multiple people meaning you make less money. If a machine is on something nobody wants its gonna be stuck like that until someone has the money to waste. why not just sell the damn items all seperately it doesnt make sense lol