What ever happened to the increase in inventory slots

[MiraKershaw]

I thought the reason before they did the UI change was because this was only the first expansion of the inventory when are we getting the second expansion or do we gotta pay for that too , for the servers to magically accept that as well

[Squintina]

We already got them.

First expansion: inventory 100->140
Second expansion: chocobo saddlebags

[Bourne_Endeavor]

Supposedly, the servers couldn't handle the second expansion hence why they released a smaller variation with the Saddlebag. Of course, if you purchase a premium subscription...

[MiraKershaw]

We already got them.

First expansion: inventory 100->140
Second expansion: chocobo saddlebags

Clearly that's not what they had in mind because when they showed it off they said those extra slots that are blocked off will be part of the second inventory expansion when we find out the servers are stable I doubt the chocobo bag was even a consideration till they focused more on the app

[Squintina]

Clearly that's not what they had in mind because when they showed it off they said those extra slots that are blocked off will be part of the second inventory expansion when we find out the servers are stable I doubt the chocobo bag was even a consideration till they focused more on the app

Maybe it's not what they had in mind, but it's what they provided. They promised more inventory, we got more inventory.
Hence why these extra slots are no longer even visible.

And geez people. I hate the idea of the premium as much as anyone else, but not everything past and new is related to it.
Stop with the melodrama.

[MiraKershaw]

It's related because the reason why we can get inventory increase is because "server stability" how does paying 5 dollars for an app magically buff servers to surpass or overcome this stability issue

[Squintina]

It's related because the reason why we can get inventory increase is because "server stability" how does paying 5 dollars for an app magically buff servers to surpass or overcome this stability issue

I get all that but you are strawmaning.

You asked about the second inventory addition.
We got the second inventory addition.

Whether or not they wanted to give a different version of the addition, or whether they should provide a 3rd sub-included addition, but somehow aren't getting them because they're going to put that behind an app - while certainly an interesting subject - is not what you originally asked nor is it particularly relevant. It is tangentially relevant, not directly.

And while I don't like the app sub either, I can actually think of a reason why it would be possible to give more space via a paywall than via the included sub because I try to think about all sides and not just live in a bubble of negative melodrama.

And that simply the majority of players, which they can see on their stats, do not make use of extra retainers at all as it is. Thus the majority of players will not be using the extra 5$ sub for more saddlebag and the ability to purchase one more retainers. Thus they can plan for space that would only for X% of players based on statistical data. If they included it in the sub, that would need 100% player coverage (regardless of whether the user uses it or not, it would need to be allocated).

Would I prefer if they upgraded their system to cover the 100% playerbase for a 3rd expansion? ABSOLUTELY
Do I think any chocobo saddlebag expansion should be accessible to players even if extra retainers remained paid? OH HELL YES
Do I think the paid retainers were BS to begin with? YOU BETCHA

But is that relevant to the chocobo saddlebag being the answer to your original question? not one bit

You also make the error of assuming that all inventory would have equal effects to server stability.

Perhaps they did want to do 2 Player Inventory expansions, but technical issues (from their obviously atrocious spaghetti code) made it impossible to stabilize. The chocobo saddlebag, being separate and having different requirements is most likely using a different form of storage that has its own code that hopefully uses a better transfer netcode to stabilize and could have been the only way to provide the promised expansion without destroying server stability.

Likewise retainers, as they've stated or hinted in the past, are stored on their own servers and that is why they have to be summoned rather than accessed at any time. Once again pointing that this is different from player storage which has to be passed at all times. Thus the server communication impact of something like a retainer would be far less than that of expanding player inventory.

So you can't point at saddlebags and retainers as them lying about stability issues regarding the normal player inventory. They are separate systems, sent separately, with different requirements and restrictions.

[Callinon]

So you can't point at saddlebags and retainers as them lying about stability issues regarding the normal player inventory. They are separate systems, sent separately, with different requirements and restrictions.

Not lying per se. I believe them when they say their servers are run by hamsters running on little wheels. But putting inventory expansions behind paywalls lets them do two things:
1: Continue to cheap out on their server infrastructure
2: Get more money from those players who will just buy anything because they have too much money and a non-functioning gag reflex

It's the best of both worlds from their perspective and the rest of us just get to live with it.

[Hasrat]

Crippled by 1.0 structure. Something about how inventory is sorted in the code, preventing them from adding much more to base inventory, so they had to go a new direction with alternative inventory solutions.

[CaptainLagbeard]

Aside from the extra space given with the new inventory slots and the Saddlebag, only extra space you get is by paying for an extra retainer.