Hereâs a quick history lesson if you do want to understand, TL;DR itâs an old organically originated limit thatâs just happened to persist to present day:
Back in the day, you could only equip one of each item type.
However, there was a website bug where if you spammed the âequipâ web endpoint a ton of times in rapid succession, youâd end up with multiple items equipped beyond the limit.
At the time, hats were the only thing that it was âusefulâ to do this with, as they were the only 3d item type that existed back then.
We couldnât (and still canât) let people equip infinite items, otherwise that would create performance issues in the games they visit.
So when we fixed the bug allowing users to brute force multiple hats onto their character, we special case raised the limit on hats to 3 as a compromise due to popular demand. (3 hats is also about the number that was possible to equip with the bug, 4+ was possible but extremely hard to get)
Thanks for the reply. I was not aware of the complete history behind this. The âresourcefulnessâ of players is truly amazing. However, with the current overall limit of 10 non-layered accessories that you can equip through the advanced options in the avatar editor on the website, why arenât players allowed to choose and save their combination of 10 accessories to whatever slots they want?
I really suggest that it wouldnât remove the emotes because it will bother other people who are trying to equip accessories. Other than that, it is great!
By using the experience examples provided in the post as a template, is there a way to customize the avatar changing âroomâ? For example, replacing current blocky âvoidâ with old avatar editor room that used to be on mobile and xbox clients?
(Why was this even changed in the first place, though? I totally prefer this over some random lifeless void with cubes)
API limits on how many accessories per category is completely unacceptable and spits in the face of UGC creators and multi-part accessories and that whole âpowering imaginationâ thing. If this is the goal moving forwards with avatar limits: No. Full stop. Limits by category is quite bluntly put, pointless.
The limit rules behind the entire avatar accessory system on web is archaic and downright broken, there is no reason to continue enforcing arbitrary limits on âââcategoriesâ""; that makes no sense. The number of tris, memory impact, etc. in any particular accessory does not care whatsoever about category, so I see no reason to enforce this archaic nonsense in new API. Setting this precedent would hurt freedom of expression on this platform severely. Until justification is provided or this is changed, this is completely stupid to me.
If you want to be smart about it, you could e.g. assign accessories an auto-generated âcostâ that is proportional to their performance impact ingame, and impose a limit around that cost. This would allow people to have multi-part accessories (i.e. 2-part swordpacks, hair extensions, etc.) without making people constantly fret about an accessory limit, and without killing game performance. These accessories currently could otherwise be combined into single accessories that are more expensive ingame, but save players an accessory slot, which is not ideal from a game performance point of view. A system like this would encourage UGC developers (often non-technical people) to make low-cost accessories because players would be incentivized to buy accessories with a low cost so they can wear more of them. This leverages the economy to encourage good UGC practices.
I want to make sure that these dumb category limits are not the plan going forwards with avatars. This is not a good decision.
Repeating this here from my below post just to be clear.
Are there any plans to add a UserId parameter to the GetOutfits function so we can get the outfits of other users instead of just the LocalPlayer? Currently, the only way to do this is by using a proxy to make HTTP requests to the avatar web API.
As someone who has an avatar that directly uses multiple accessory types, these limitations are frustrating!
Limiting to 1 of each accessory type is problematic for many reasons:
First and foremost, it âsunsetsâ many avatars that people use on a daily basis, my own included! This isnât exactly in alignment with Robloxâs âidentity in the metaverseâ path! I want to be a dragon wearing a cape, crown, armor, belt & sword. This shouldnât be disallowed! Furthermore, Roblox avatars from 2010 had multiple of a single accessory type:
Secondly, this severely limits the creative possibilities for players. Robloxâs avatar teams put a heavy emphasis on making everything into accessories, to strengthen the âmix and matchâ aspects of the avatar creation process & to allow players to be creative with their digital identity. Because nearly everything is accessories, limiting to ONE of each accessory type effectively counteracts the entire purpose of having everything as accessories. For example, if I want to wear a cape and wings, or if I want to wear a belt and a sword, I canât now!
Thirdly, this has a huge negative impact on UGC. Players will be less likely to buy UGC items since they already have one worn, and it also prevents things like pauldrons, and multi-colored pigtails! Hereâs some real-world examples of UGC that is not possible with these changes:
Overall, avatars should be allowed to wear multiple of a given accessory type, on mobile, xbox, PC, and in-game. The solution here lies not in limiting accessory type, but in limiting max total accessories or max triangles.
Doing this unlocks player creativity, and doesnât sunset my dragon:
Same here. My avatar relies on many shoulder (3+ paldurons to make a nicer robot âarm prostheticâ) and torso accesories (jacket + swordpack + belt)
To be clear itâs not really a âchangeâ, the website still works the way it did, but this new API is enforcing dumb old limits that do not make any sense. This is worrying looking towards the future; these limits are harmful and not necessary in their current form. Itâs important that Roblox understands this and works towards changing them.
Back in the day these limits were dumb and still are dumb to this day. My avatar is doing fine with 10+ accesories. Let me wear whatever i want to on my avatar wihout some out-of touch decisions that nobody was told about untill now.
Heck, the reason why i wear my jacket and other âpseudo layered accessoriesâ is simple; layered clothing sucks on blocky avatars as it was tailored especially for rtho avatars. All of this could be solved with an optional original blocky base cage.
I agree with the general sentiment in this thread about the new APIs limiting accessories per category, limits should definitely be based on triangles/memory.
In regards to the API limits, and assuming these limits will be applied to the websiteâs avatar editor eventually; consumers want options. It is rare that a consumer ever wants to be limited, and in this case the APIs are limiting. Players want the ability to express themselves, to get creative, they canât do that when they are being arbitrarily limited.
Take 5 minutes of your time, join any game that allows for avatar customization, or any game centered around fashion (such as Royal High.) You will be able to find plenty of avatars that are wearing multiple accessories under the same category.
This is going to be very useful! Roblox creators can finally make more granular avatar editors in-game and provide users with much more intuitive and efficient customizability. Very happy to see this!
