Avatar creators can allow specific users access to private avatars
tracked
Fionna
A more customizable option than public/private. Each avatar has a whitelist of users that can access the pedestal or save to personal avatar list, maintained by the original uploader.
Log In
Invertex
People concerned about creator files not being shared or prices increasing are being quite silly and in my opinion, selfish.
Avatar creators can't just say "oh well we don't have to share the files anymore, so I'm going to charge extra for that", as people will still tend to want those files. The logical outcome will be a DISCOUNT if you don't want the source files included.
The system as it exists now is currently a HUGE BARRIER to the average user getting avatar commissions. Because it either requires them to trust you by giving you access to their account, or for them to be technical enough to upload it themselves (and then the burden of maintaining/updating that avatar if needed also becomes a bigger back-and-forth).
If all a commission required was to make the model and send them an invite to clone the avatar privately, it would make a lot more people be willing to get into it. Most people don't want their personally commissioned avatar to be public, but it has to be set public for them to clone it currently.
Flir
Invertex Would be nice if there was a way for avatar developers/modders to just export the character as some binary file that could then be sent to the consumer, who then just uploads it to their account via the web site. Saves them the effort of trying to set up CC and Unity and trying to figure out how to upload a character from there.
Invertex
Flir That's already how avatars exist once exported/uploaded, so it would make more sense to just have a whitelist entry on avatar web-data that allows it to be cloned by people in that whitelist, or an option to replace the ownership values on it. As these would require just a few hours of back-end work to implement and some interface code to facilitate it.
They could even utilize the in-game notification/invite system, so a creator could, on their own time, just send a "Invite to Take Ownership of Avatar", and whenever that user logs in, they will see that and could choose to accept it, and now the avatar is in their account account instead.
I would actually expand on this idea a bit though and have the web data contain a "maintainer" entry. The user defined in this entry would still have the power to upload changes to the avatar, but they would not have deletion permissions, and the "owner" can remove or change who the maintainer is.
RazzKDinglenut
this is a feature i've wanted for so long, especially for things like commissions
it would also prevent commissioned avatars uploaded to my account from cloning being left on by accident
in response to the unity files guy, if avatar creators choose to do something like that, it's kinda their choice, this would be extremely helpful to a lot of avatar creators and VRChat isn't really able to manage people gatekeeping unity files, so abandoning this idea just because of that would be kinda stupid.
Kannako
Yeah I do believe creating an Upload permission token That is by default set to private so that commissioners can have their avatars uploaded to their account without requesting access would be Really handy for people, Especially sense most vrchat players don't know anything about unity or game dev in general.
It wouldn't be hard to generate a one time use API token, or even a Artist Permission token, where all the avatars created by a certain artist get automatically sorted in to a folder of avatars.
But for the love of god and all that is holy, Please add a Uploaded avatars search function, I have over 300 avatars uploaded, many of my friends have close to a thousand.
For creators Adding Methods to sort who can use what avatar is great, but it will need a comprehensive overhaul for the avatar sorting system in your own personal UI, I would really like a organized hierarchy for managing my avatars, what folders they are in, And who has access to them.
Chirping_Cat
Kannako People who do 1:1 avatar commissions will see this as a poor-man's DRM and use it as such, which is bad for the VRChat community as a whole.
If this were implemented, why would a custom avatar creator give you the unity files for the work you paid for, and take the risk that you might share their work, take on the overhead of potentially supporting you, when they just upload it themselves and 'share' it with you, which forces you to come back to them and PAY them for any edits or additional work at whatever rates they charge at the time even if you can do the work yourself, and knowing that if you ever upset them, or publicly criticise their work, they can pull the rug out from under you and revoke permissions to the content and you're left with no recourse or action.
This is a feature that will be abused to reduce autonomy and property freedoms of people who pay for custom avatar work, lock those people in to paying the creator over and over every time they want an edit even if they know how to do things themselves.
Chirping_Cat
This sounds like a path to hell laid with good intentions. My concern is that people who do custom avatar work will charge extra for unity files, or just not provide them at all, once there is a secure way to share content without providing unity files, and thus VRChat content consumers will ultimately suffer as a whole.
Kannako
Chirping_Cat Eh, I wouldn't be so sure, I think it would be a great way to get rid of the nsfw public avatar issue that vrchat has.
Chirping_Cat
Kannako VRChat already have something in the works that would inherently deal with Public NSFW avatars, targeting the root cause of why it is harmful. (Exposure to minors)
A) Users really need to start uploading avatars that are correctly tagged, or fully expect to be banned/suspended for uploading incorrectly tagged content.
B) Tagged content must be restricted from being accessed or viewed by people who are not age-verified.
The above has already been earmarked in Dev blogs, and I look forward to the full implementation of it.
As an added bonus, I feel that only Trusted Users and above should be able to upload Public Avatars to increase the cost of uploading untagged content, prevent people from doing uploads on alternate accounts etc, or just making a new account when banned and immediately going back to uploading untagged NSFW material.
coval1000
Hope I won't overcomplicate things. As core I would define distribution in 3 categories with given hierarchy:
- World - a pedestal you can clone from. Who can access is defined by 2 and 3
- Group - clone from VRC group member. Optional as extra permission rule
- Person - clone from user
Every category would have separate permission setting in general concept:
- Private - available only for the uploader and those on whitelist
- Protected - available only directly but cannot be cloned further
- Protected+ - available only directly but can be spread
- Public - as it is
It may seem confusing but depending on distribution type behaviour
- World
1.1 Private - Can be cloned from pedestal if the world was uploaded by the avatar creator or person from the list. Can't be set via website if not in favourite
1.2 Public - Pedestal can be used in any world e.g. avatar search
- Group
2.1 Private - The group must be on the list but can be cloned by anyone within the group
2.2 Protected - As above but can be cloned by a person from outside of the group but can not be cloned from a person that is not in the group. So it could be used by guests on group+ events
- Person
3.1 Private - as it is now plus whitelist or group member
3.2 Friends - can be accessed by friends and shared between them
3.3 Friends+ - can be cloned friend-to-friend without limits
3.4 Protected - can be cloned directly from the uploader but not further
3.5 Public - as it is
I think it covers most possible scenarios. Maybe '+' could have internal count like TLS to limit "depth" from creator but it seems overcomplicated, unnecessary would provide many undefined edge cases
Ericbazinga
Group-only avatars too. One of my groups has a public avatar that's meant to be only for said group, and it'd be nice to be able to enforce that.
unexcept
Merged in a post:
Permanently Share Avatar Libraries
Cerzix
Either to give Users access to your Avatar library or share individual Avatars with people
unexcept
Merged in a post:
"Unlocked" Or "Shared" Avatar Type and Type Icon
Wunder Wulfe
Currently, only Public and Private exist to define the usage and spread of an avatar throughout VRChat; however, 2 issues are pretty prominent to avatar creators and contribute to unauthorized or disallowed use of their avatars (ignoring exploits).
1) Reward avatars are cloneable when set to public
If the Unlocked type was created, people could mark their avatars as this type, preventing unwanted cloning but allowing usage through a pedestal or other in-world method. This is especially great for complex puzzles and achievement avatars where it matters most.
2) Sometimes people like to share an avatar with their friends but ONLY those specific people.
This can be achieved by toggling the avatar's type from Unlocked/Private to Public, allowing the users to clone it, then switching it to Unlocked. Since this again prevents unwanted cloning, it won't matter if they have it enabled or not. They will still be able to freely use and favorite the avatar however, unlike with the Private type.
The second addition is merely a cosmetic upgrade which will help with knowing if an avatar is actually clonable or not (and seeing if it is an unlock). There needs to be a small but noticable icon on the thumbnail showing such status.
unexcept
Merged in a post:
Shared Avatars
Momofier
So Not Public Avatars. a Feature that would allow you to Share your avatars with specific people. This would be better for those doing commissions on avatars
DaisyTheCreep
As an avatar creator I think this would be incredibly useful.
Of course if the person really wanted the unity files they could ask the creator or the creator can always keep it included in a store page.
But most people don't know a thing about using unity, on top of independencies updating or just unity throwing bugs at you.
And some people like quest users might not have a PC so you'd have to have their account info and upload it for them which isn't fun or safe.
Being able to just let specific users use an avatar by whitelist or a code would be amazing and solve so much headache for both the user who wants to use an avatar and for the avatar creator.
Chirping_Cat
DaisyTheCreep What would you say to someone who is sceptical that avatar creators, especially those that do 1:1 commission work such as retextures, won't:
A) Start charging extra for unity files or outright just not supplying them following the implementation of this feature.
B) Start using avatar permissions as a poor-man's form of DRM, revoking paid content from users who have aggrieved them in some way. (There could be valid use cases for this, granted, but saying there are valid use cases only adds to the reason that artists will start charging an arm and a leg for unity files if this is ever implemented - Payment for the reduced control over the content.)
C) Start using this as a way to lock people in to paying the creator for every single edit they want, effectively turning VRChat users into cash cows in a way where VRChat's platform is directly involved, but doesn't get a cut of the transaction. (Presumably because the financial part of the transaction will occur outside VRChat)
DaisyTheCreep
Chirping_Cat
I commented on this because its one step closer to my ideal idea of what I think would be better for avatars. My ideal would be implementing an in game store as if VRChat was opening up their own Gumroad, with that being said.
A: I don't see a reason why someone would charge extra for providing a file other than the risk of it being shared, if the commissioner wants to edit the file themselves why would I charge for work being done for me? Commission someone who says they would provide the file for you.
B: It'd be up to VRChat to decide if they want the creator to have moderation control over who can access their work i suppose. Gumroad for example already allows you to revoke access from someone who has bought your stuff, personally id only revoke access if someone was caught pirating my work but if people did unfairly revoke your access especially if you paid perhaps VRChat can implement a report/support feature and maybe even refund, kinda how PayPal works.
C: Like I said before if VRChat makes it more of a store thing as they've recently created a marketplace, avatar creators can just list if the file is included for those who like to do edits in some kind of avatar bio, if the file isn't included and you don't like that then don't buy it.
Personally I wouldn't charge for a file, the only reason I want an easy transaction and sharing of an avatar in game is because unity is stinky and not everyone who buys an avatar knows what to do, for me it'd be a win win, no file for people to easily pirate and no need to help people with unity, but depending on how many people would like to do their own edits I'd probably include a file in the end anyway.
Load More
→