House Payments

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dualgunner

The more negligible it is, the less it would affect house flippers. The less negligible it is, the more it would affect innocent players just trying to enjoy housing.

---

A valid point, and one that would require fine tuning.
Honestly, this sort of system might not effect flippers too much, bit it would still help to weed out the people that hoard houses as trophies, rather than actually doing anything with them. People that do not actively use their house, or even log on enough to avoid getting an email telling them to log in an check their house, would be the ones mostly punished by this system. And it would make many people think twice about trying to maintain a house for an alt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AriesMouse

I feel like you didn't read through my whole post, if you completely missed the point I made that not only should there methods to pay through any type of game play (so using things like Poetics, or Wolf Marks), there was also a section specifically highlighting how this could make it easier for someone to keep a house, if they are going through a hard time/facing something similar to the hurricane issue not long ago.

Also bear in mind, the monthly cost wouldn't even be something high. It should be a number that is negligible for anyone that is an active player.

Again, so long as housing is a finite resource, things should be done to discourage people from owning homes that are not doing anything with them, aside from trying to flip them, or logging in once a month just to run inside so it doesn't auto-demo.

---

There are several issues with this kind of thinking though.

First, there is a huge income disparity in this game because there are so many ways to play. Unless the fee is set to something like 10M a month, I can afford it easily and I know about a dozen crafters on my world that wouldn't notice if the fee was 50M a month. I also know many people who struggle to make 100K a month. I know some people that just log in to socialize or RP with friends and don't really care about making any kind of currency; but one of them struggled for years to save up to buy a small house and they use the house almost daily; they don't craft, they don't raid, they don't pvp, they only garden to grow pretty flowers to give away, they just enjoy their time with friends. Should this person be forced to lose their house so you can buy it? I also know a lot of raiders that make a fair amount of money but recycle all of it back into their gear, should they have to lose their house because they prefer being better raiders over something else? Should they have to choose between upgrading their gear with the token or saving their house?

Where in that spectrum of 100M to 0 would you set the fee? Unless the fee is set high enough to discourage flippers, which is your stated point, why bother with it? How many other players are you willing to alienate just for those few flippers? And when the fee is set high enough to discourage flippers, how can a normal person then afford said house?

Second, this does NOT make it easier to keep a house. By definition, adding a fee means adding something the owner has to do to maintain the house. Adding an upkeep does not make it easier, it makes it harder.

Third, auto demolition already exists. Until there is no more need for it SE wouldn't allow an in game shortcut around it because it then defeats the purpose of having it. Which means you could pay for one month at a time...so that doesn't help a house owner either. And if there's no need for an auto demolition timer then there's no need for an upkeep fee either.

Fourth, can you show me where in the TOS it says someone must do something with their house once they buy it? Or can you show me where it says other players get to dictate what you can or can't do with a house? Once a person owns a house it is theirs to do with as they please, including not decorate it. You don't get a say in it.

Your entire arguement is based on making things harder for home owners to get them to give up their plots so you can have a chance at buying one and it does nothing to stop flippers. In short, there is no upside to an upkeep fee and a whole lot of bad. I appreciate you want to contribute to the solution but upkeep fees are not a solution. The only meaningful solution is more supply.

Everyone who would support this would then immediately not support this the second they got a house. Next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alien_Gamer

There are several issues with this kind of thinking though...

---

1: The cost would be very low, and again, something that could be covered through literally anything marked under the currency tab, so literally if all someone wants to do is RP and Golden Saucer, they could easily manage to keep their house. As stated several times, it should be realistically, a negligible amount, something that shouldn't take more than two hours of play time to get the currency of your choice for (give or take depending on the currency).I said flippers were one concern, but honestly, this is mostly towards people that own houses, but do not at all use them. The people that need to be emailed and reminded to even step foot in their house at all just to keep it. If they actually have to put in some, even small, amount of effort to keep that house, would they still even have it? Or would the cost to keep it eventually become too much, since chances are, if you're getting auto-demo warnings, you're not likely playing all that much to begin with. Also keep in mind, for those having a hard time getting the gil to cover it, friends could easily help with the payment/that is why a donation box could be put in, for the people that are feeling exceptionally generous with their gil/other unused currencies.

2: It makes it easier to keep in terms of long term planning. If you save up and pay upkeep ahead of time, it pays off. A friend could give you a boost as a holiday gift or something too. It making it hard to keep a house over all, is part of the appeal, as again, it makes it so people more or less just keeping houses as unused trophies might not want to hold onto their house as badly once it starts to become a hassle to fund every month, especially if they are an inactive player.

3: Auto-Demo exists, but it's not that great of a system, since once someone gets the email warning, they just log in, run inside the house, and the timer starts over. If anything, they shouldn't even get an email about it. Maybe an in game letter, on the character that owns the house, that is it.

4: You are very right here, but honestly, so long as housing is such a finite resource, it should be one that takes some effort to keep, even if the effort is just 1 hour of time a month to get some sort of currency of your choice to pay the upkeep. idealistically, I don't think that is too much to ask. Can you honestly say that it is perfectly cool for someone to just sit on a house as a status symbol/trophy, literally just having it so say "F-you, got mine"? So many people complain about people owning more than one house across their characters, but never once bat an eye at the people that own houses and do literally nothing with them aside from say "I got a house and someone else didn't". It's just one of many, many problems that need addressed, if they are never going to address the real issue, which is that housing should not be a status symbol, and it shouldn't be such a finite resource.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chevronone

Everyone who would support this would then immediately not support this the second they got a house. Next.

---

You underestimate some players wallet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Senn

I do not support a monthly fee of any kind for housing.

---

I'm with this also.
Housing shouldn't ever, in any game, have a monthly fee (real money or in-game).

Can we stop these crazy ideas and just all agree that what SE needs to do is make enough housing for everyone to enjoy? Besides, by the way it sounds SE got a plan in motion already so let just stop and wait until closer to 4.2 when they start giving out the information. Then you all can scream and yell again because you don't like the idea they came up with. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HyoMinPark

And the best solution would be to shift to instanced housing so that the housing supply can meet the housing demand. Not implement arbitrary charges a la a mortgage in a veiled attempt to curve house-loggers or house-flippers. Because it wouldn’t stop either.

---

But as much as we'd like this, it won't happen. It would require for them to rework the whole housing system and admit they did it wrong in the first place. So all we're gonna get are more wards, which are gonna fill up within seconds yet again.

I'm not sure what this would achieve? When people have bought the plot already why'd they need to pay gil monthly for it? And those are high prices a lot of people only have money to buy the house itself and then they don't even have money for furniture lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AriesMouse

A valid point, and one that would require fine tuning.

---

I don't think any amount of fine tuning would result in a system that works better than the one we have now.

Quote:

---

Honestly, this sort of system might not effect flippers too much, bit it would still help to weed out the people that hoard houses as trophies, rather than actually doing anything with them.

---

I know you don't just mean people who own multiple houses here. Sorry, there's no reason to have a house but as a trophy, so this reasoning is flawed.

Quote:

---

People that do not actively use their house, or even log on enough to avoid getting an email telling them to log in an check their house, would be the ones mostly punished by this system.

---

Everyone is punished by this system. No matter how negligibly: you're proposing we go from a system where people pay once, then own the house so long as they log into it to a system where people have to pay multiple times over a period of time.

The only way I'd ever consider something like that to be okay is if, say, this only applied at the start of 4.2, and everybody who owned a house prior to that was grandfathered in. That way everybody who purchased a house from then on would purchase it with full knowledge that there would be more gil they'd need to pay to maintain the house.

To add, even the people who only log on when they get the email are paying a sub. Many would argue, including me, that the sub is the rent that one is paying. I don't think you have a very good argument that they're less entitled to a house due to their own inactivity: they are maintaining their commitment to the game in rent that's far more valuable than any ingame currency there is.

Quote:

---

And it would make many people think twice about trying to maintain a house for an alt.

---

Or they could just make a house bound to an account, and give every alt access to the same house owned by the player.

And this is why we can't have nice things in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AriesMouse

You clearly didn't read the whole post, where it was stated that not only were those numbers just examples, but also that there should be a method to pay that isn't just gil. People should be able to easily afford the rent just by doing what they enjoy in the game, PvE, PvP, etc. Hell, even Gold Saucer could be an option.

---

I did read it and yes I made my post with those numbers in mind. But even having to grind seals or a currency whenever its GC, FC, Tokens or MGP it so stupid to even consider it.

Edit: Would like to add this also the Dev team stance on the matter from ARR. Doubt that has changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gildrein

Q: Will there be any maintenance fees or other costs for housing, besides the cost of the land and house?

A: In older MMOs, such as Ultima Online, there was a house maintenance fee you had to pay weekly, but in FFXIV: ARR we decided against this system.

---

No additional charges. I put enough gil into constant upgrades via crafting/purchase into my medium home.

Why did you come up with such an idea in the first place? Did the community asked you to? Or is it perhaps that you are one of those that couldnt get the plot that you wanted?

My answer is No. As many already pointed out, you are already paying a monthly fee to be able to play this game, so paying a rent for your plot would "definitely" be a punishment for those who own a plot. For you to be stating that grinding gil is easy with pve, pvp, gold saucer etc. It could be possible, but you cant say that for others, as everybody has their own way of earning gil. Sure it would be easy for high level crafters, but what about those who arent dedicated? Thought about that? Also there are players who log in daily, but there are those who just log in 2 or 3 times a week, that would mean that the only thing those players will have to do is to grind gil just so that they can keep their plot, and that aint fun. Its a punishment and its a discouragement for players to keep playing this game

Your thread title is misleading, you make payments on something to eventually own it. What you are asking is for the system to be turned into a rent system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AriesMouse

stuff

---

1. So let me get this straight, your solution for trying to take away the houses of people that use it and can't afford it under this system is to have them depend on the generosity of others? And that doesn't give you a hint that this is a bad idea? The only thing an upkeep is does is make people work harder to keep what they have. You also have yet to describe any benefits to this system beyond your statement that it will be good for players....which it isn't.

2-3. Auto-demolition exists, SE will not allow an in game system to trump this because its not in anyone's best interest to allow it. Have you considered the consequences of what would happen if they did? Lets say you can pay for your house for 6 months and the demo timer doesnt take effect until then, what would happen? People would just wait 6 months to log in instead of 45 days. If SE stopped sending emails those people would just set a calendar alarm in their email client to remind them or have a tennant that still plays remind them. So no change there. What would change is the length of time an unused plot would remain un demolished. Instead of it happening at 45 days it would happen at whatever amount of time a person prepaid it. So now SE has just pissed off all the people that were in favor of the timer as their only realistic chance to get a house outside of expansions and sellers. And the people who are pissed about the timer existing in the first place? They're still pissed because not only does it exist but its less effective. Then you have the people who make less gil, the raiders and non crafters, they're upset that they don't have the chance at a house now because the gazillionaire crafters have prepaid for the next X months. Not to mention, the subs that SE would be getting every 45 days are now extended to every 180 days, thats only half the revenue stream from that audience...SE certainly won't be happy about that.

So no, this won't make it easier to keep because it will never happen. There is no reason to make it happen because it benefits nobody.

4. See my previous comment. Its their house, you have no right to dictate how they use it or don't use it. If they want to buy it and do nothing with it, then thats on them. Many people do complain about people buying houses and not decorating them and they get the same answer. If its not your house then you have no business dictating anything about that house.

Also, housing is a status symbol in every game. Even if housing was unlimited it would still be a status symbol for people to show off their design skills and trophies from EX trials/raids.

So far you've come up with 2 arguments for this, combatting flippers and you don't like how people use their house. The first this doesn't work for, the second is none of your business. I get that you want a house, but you're going at it the wrong way with this suggestion.

There are some months I play extremely small amounts of the game daily due to other games being out and can't even make the 250k you suggested for a small..... >.> While I am still very much an active player, making gil is not my number one priority and I shouldn't be penalized for that. Nor should I have to pay a rental fee on a virtual house in game.

And no this won't stop the flippers, no matter how much you charge per month.

No there shouldnt be a fee biggest reason? much like the real world the Market is killing the average player under huge prices for pretty gear they want or really need to start thier zodiac weapon quest so if they actually manage to save up the gil to get a house they frellin earned especially after spending hundreds of thousands of gil for the crafted weapon on top of the I wanna say 5 million or so for glamour gear High Allagan set is stupid high because nobody runs the bahamut coils anymore these things take months they do not need to drop more of thier actual hartd earned gil on something they bought for a huge amount of gil in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alien_Gamer

snip...

---

You and I will have to agree to disagree, which is fine. I just don't buy into the narrative that this would be a challenging thing for people to work with, since I don't believe the people that own homes are a bunch of poor beggars in potatoes sacks, with not even enough gil to repair their armor. Which realistically, is what the upkeep price should be equivalent to, keeping your armor repaired. While this system is off putting to some, I don't see anyone else making any other suggestions for what to do, any other suggestions to put into place to at least try to help with the housing dilemma. Most I see is people screeching "1 house per account per server" which is something I personally disagree with (guess I'm full of unpopular opinions).

A big reason I highlighted that this system should use all types of currency, is because maybe in time, it would open the gates to allow houses as a whole to be bought with more than just gil, so all those people that "just barely scraped by to get a house", could have an easier time through other means to get a house. There are so many unused currencies in the game, Poetics come to mind, that you end up capped with, without even trying more days, so why not find more ways to use those things?

Also, the whole "you just want a house, that's why you're saying this" argument gets so old, and honestly just feels like a last ditch effort to try to undermine the person you disagree with, rather than actually conversing about the subject.

EDIT: For the sake of conversation, let's say they do put in a system like this, going forward, grandfathering in all of the old wards/houses with the old system. How best would you say a system like this should/could be put in? While it may never happen, rather than just saying "no", why not try to work out the best case scenario for it? Theory craft what it could be, how it could work, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverlunarfox

There are some months I play extremely small amounts of the game daily due to other games being out and can't even make the 250k you suggested for a small.....

---

You're taking the example numbers to heart. I specifically said they were only examples, not even something close to what the actual numbers would be. One top of the fact, we could use any currency of our choice, not just gil.

lots of people dont have time to farm money that much. it becomes a chore, when the game can already be that.

no thanks.

not everyone has RMT'ed gil or has a good reliable way to make gil when markets go slow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AriesMouse

EDIT: For the sake of conversation, let's say they do put in a system like this, going forward, grandfathering in all of the old wards/houses with the old system. How best would you say a system like this should/could be put in? While it may never happen, rather than just saying "no", why not try to work out the best case scenario for it? Theory craft what it could be, how it could work, etc.

---

There is basicly 2 options it seems.
1- Se upgrades there server space to hold 100+ wards per city (not gonna happen)
2-instance housing (still probly not gonna happen) This would be my go to if i were them......id preffer instanced (As long as we still could have people come over)

Were just gonna get a few mroe wards here and there with rule changes so people cant run right in and buy them up. Id be willing to bet 4.2 will not solve any thing there will still be more chars/fcs then houses.

Alot of people are throwing around lotto (not to fair) and achivement points to buy houses. ID say if you wanna house cover your bases max hunt seal Gc seals and do achivements lol

I would rather it NOT be a payment plan. We as a Grand Company barely managed enough for our house and we use it constantly. We use it as a hangout for both our linkshell and our FC. We don’t need more things to overcome when it comes to housing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kisagami

I would rather it NOT be a payment plan. We as a Grand Company barely managed enough for our house and we use it constantly. We use it as a hangout for both our linkshell and our FC. We don’t need more things to overcome when it comes to housing.

---

just a friendly tip, If you can get 1 airship to open zone 6 go there belive its 6/12. you can get shrub seeds which is used in crafting yard shrubs..my fc has sold alot of shrubs for 500k each to stock our fc bank :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Siniztor

just a friendly tip, If you can get 1 airship to open zone 6 go there belive its 6/12. you can get shrub seeds which is used in crafting yard shrubs..my fc has sold alot of shrubs for 500k each to stock our fc bank :)

---

We’re working on that but most of our guild mates are trying to get through storyline first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AriesMouse

You and I will have to agree to disagree, which is fine.

EDIT: For the sake of conversation, let's say they do put in a system like this, going forward, grandfathering in all of the old wards/houses with the old system. How best would you say a system like this should/could be put in? While it may never happen, rather than just saying "no", why not try to work out the best case scenario for it? Theory craft what it could be, how it could work, etc.

---

Disagreeing is fine but you're flat out ignoring all the points I and others have made to rebute your idea. There is no best way a system like this could be put in, its all around bad; there is no point in theory crafting something that is bad for everyone. If there was some positive for someone somewhere then sure, but there isn't. We've tried asking you for what you think the positives are and you have yet to actually provide a positive. This is not agreeing to disagree, this is avoiding talking about the points you brought up.

Reducing the upkeep fee to something in line with the cost of armor repair would make it so cheap as to be worthless. At that level it wouldn't work as a disincentive to own a house but its existence as an extra step to take for owning a house would be a constant annoyance to everyone. It would not stop people from owning a house on alts, it wouldn't stop people from flipping houses, it wouldn't make people relinquish their house, it wouldn't free up the housing market, it would only annoy people. So beyond having an upkeep fee to have an upkeep fee, whats the point? It benefits nobody.

Also, you haven't done your homework. In every housing thread for the last 6 months there have been numerous suggestions, including upkeep fees, for how to handle this issue. There are some semi-acceptable ones that don't fix the issue but at least have some benefits such as the one house per server suggestion(I think its a horrible solution and not one I'd support) but most people agree the only real solution is more houses. And poetics are an unused currency? Its the most used currency besides gil and possibly crafting scrips.

As for undermining you instead of your ideas...your own arguments undermine you. Regardless of why you started the topic it doesn't change that upkeep fees aren't unpopular just because they're a fee, they're also unpopular because they don't fix anything with the housing problem. I can promise you, if you come up with that mythical solution that makes everyone happy, everyone will support it; barring that, any proposed solution needs to do two things 1) Fix part of the problem, 2) Not hurt regular players. This community loves debating the housing solutions, propose something that fixes something and people will work with you on it. The forum history has proven it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alien_Gamer

barring that, any proposed solution needs to do two things 1) Fix part of the problem, 2) Not hurt regular players. This community loves debating the housing solutions, propose something that fixes something and people will work with you on it. The forum history has proven it.

---

You whole post is wow, but this line right here make me wanna buy you a beer or drink. Well put

You keep speaking of "unused" currency. Yeah maybe YOU don't use poetics and varies currency but I don't recall requesting you to speak for rest of us. Lot of people still use poetics (trading for Topsoil is one example you can use it and obvious gearing Lv60 etc)

If the monthly fee is low enough everyone can pay, why then having a fee in the first place? :confused:
As many many many other said before: it won't stop the flippers anyways so there is no use for that except to create a -currency- sink which only hurts the players who are not able/willing to farm a lot of -currency-.

No thanks, I don't think we need that. I would like to be able to keep my house even if all I do is decorating and chilling for one month straight without earning any -currency-. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AriesMouse

I just don't buy into the narrative that this would be a challenging thing for people to work with, since I don't believe the people that own homes are a bunch of poor beggars in potatoes sacks, with not even enough gil to repair their armor. Which realistically, is what the upkeep price should be equivalent to, keeping your armor repaired.

---

The armor wear mechanic is annoying and nearly pointless, and you want to duplicate it? You're proposing nuisance as a means of punishment for owning a house. It's a game; it shouldn't feel like a chore to play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AriesMouse

You're taking the example numbers to heart. I specifically said they were only examples, not even something close to what the actual numbers would be. One top of the fact, we could use any currency of our choice, not just gil.

---

Example numbers or not the simple fact is placing a fee is unnecessary and a burden to those who don't make alot of gil in the first place. And any currency? If you're not making alot of gil, theres a good chance you're not making alot of tomes, beast tribe currency etc... What's left then is real life currency, and no that won't work either.

The simple answer is no, a fee is not necessary. It will never stop the flippers, and it will only hurt the people who own homes, many who are like me, scraped up enough to buy the house and furnish it, but wouldn't be able to maintain a fee consistently.

Your system accomplishes little except to completely circumvent the demolition timers. I could own three mansions and pay three million gil indefinitely to retain all of them. And no, I wouldn't be using RMTs. I'm an Omni-crafter and can make that amount selling maybe 2-3 current level crafting gear. Not exactly a deterring system.

I like the idea of having to maintain the house, for RP purpose, it would be really great if it was like the chocobo stable.
just for example:
you would have 3 conditions
1 - Poor, your house would look quite dusty, dirty and stuff like that
2 - Normal / Good, as we see now
3 - Excellent, windows would be sparkling..idk stuff like this
maybe add an option to keep house appaerence as normal.

I still agree with OP, have to get rid of currencies and spend gil on some way

I'm going to vote no on this.


You stated that having this 'upkeep' would help against house flippers and it's been pointed out that no, it would not. House flippers wouldn't keep the house long enough to trigger the cost of upkeep or would simply pay a large sum of upkeep up front and then add that cost to the total of sale.

You stated that the cost would be negligible, like paying for armor repairs, so that it didn't impact anyone too much. In that case it is totally worthless for the purpose of being a house flipping deterrent and it's worthless as a gil/currency sink because it wouldn't siphon enough out of the system (you're talking sub 100k per month numbers at that point).

You stated that it's good for folks who are planning trips or for whom life gets in the way. Sure, if you're planning to be gone longer than 45 days then it might be helpful to pay ahead and pause the timer but for those who find life getting in the way...chances are there was an incident that cut them off suddenly in which case oh no! Suddenly they don't have 45 days to get back online, they only have until their next payment is due. Better hope they weren't doing month to month!

You stated it would prevent house hoarding. No, not at all. You think the people who made enough money to afford multiple houses in the first place wouldn't be able to afford multiple house upkeeps (especially if they're as cheap as you say they should be)? The answer is no. They'd still have all their houses, this would stop nobody.

I'm also glad that you know that all my currencies are unused. That I don't turn any of my beast tribe currencies in for supplies. That I don't turn my GC seals in for ventures and crafting mats. That I don't turn poetics or hunt seals into various items/gear/trinkets. That I have nothing left to buy with MGP. Not everyone is sitting on this wealth of unused things because, surprise, if they don't have a use for the currency most folks stop doing the activities that give it. You're telling people to go out and do needless busywork. I'm sorry if I sound rude or harsh but I haven't seen you actually list any pros to this system beyond bypassing the demo timer, that seems to be the only benefit of an otherwise flawed, cumbersome, and unrealistic system. Thanks, I'd rather log in every 45 days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keridwyn

I'm also glad that you know that all my currencies are unused. That I don't turn any of my beast tribe currencies in for supplies. That I don't turn my GC seals in for ventures and crafting mats. That I don't turn poetics or hunt seals into various items/gear/trinkets. That I have nothing left to buy with MGP. Not everyone is sitting on this wealth of unused things because, surprise, if they don't have a use for the currency most folks stop doing the activities that give it. You're telling people to go out and do needless busywork. I'm sorry if I sound rude or harsh but I haven't seen you actually list any pros to this system beyond bypassing the demo timer, that seems to be the only benefit of an otherwise flawed, cumbersome, and unrealistic system. Thanks, I'd rather log in every 45 days.

---

I like you.

I vote no.
I think other people have covered most of the reasons why this is a bad idea, so rather than rehash the points made by Dualgunner, Keridwyn etc. I'll add another.

If the fee is not substantial enough to discourage people from owning multiple houses or buying to flip then it is pointless, but if it is substantial, then not only are you going to hurt poorer players who may be using their house every day but you are also going to encourage RMT.

I think a more positive approach would be to keep the pressure up on Square to increase supply.
Housing is a great feature and one that they advertise as part of the game (without saying how limited it is). Wouldn't it be better to work towards finding a solution that lets the majority of players have access to decent housing, instead of devising ways to punish house owners and take their houses away?

Seeing how I paid 20 mill for my plot and another 1 mill for the house itself, no I shouldnt need to pay a monthly fee to keep it.

Very well said, Keridwyn.

I'm with the "No's". I paid a lot for my lot and house to own it free and clear. As far as upkeep I do that on my real house and don't want to get into that on my virtual house which is the only way I could see anybody rationalize a fee. Nope just let me do the fun stuff like decorate and garden with the methods already provided in the game.

After forking out several million gil just to get my house and my fc's house, I have no desire to keep paying for them. I do NOT support this at all.

Well, collectively, it does seem paying anything is a no go.

But can it be said that some sort of upkeep, as Mirch stated, similar to that of a chocobo stable, would be something to consider adding?

At the end of the day, if we remove the annoyance of flippers/hoarders/etc, it would be interesting to see some sort of cause and effect of how often people actually use their houses, be it a house becoming more unkempt and disheveled looking, or just dust gathering on things.I think that is what I would most like to see. The loved and used houses remaining pristine, and those that are ignored looking the part. Might help to give an idea of how actively housing is actually used, other than just looking at plots being owned, and from there might help to look into systems to improve the housing market, with more houses, but also different ways to get them, keep them, etc.

I do genuinely thank you all for the feedback. I know this is thread was not well received, but it was nice to discuss an unpopular opinion, and hear the different perspectives on it. Given a lot to think about if nothing else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keridwyn

I'm sorry if I sound rude or harsh but I haven't seen you actually list any pros to this system beyond bypassing the demo timer, that seems to be the only benefit of an otherwise flawed, cumbersome, and unrealistic system. Thanks, I'd rather log in every 45 days.

---

this was my exact point earlier on in the thread...I was rather much ignore by the OP, but cheers for saying it again. hopefully it'll go unignored this time.

absolutely not on paying rent for something that us players spent time money and effort of acquiring a house but then turn around and make us pay rent for something that we already own, that is just messed up. This idea the op has would not work, would not stop house flippers at all