Just Another Housing Complaint

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

Perhaps SE shouldn't refund all of the losing bidder's money. Perhaps they should only refund, say, 95% of it. Anyone who can afford to put down 5, 20, or 50 million for a chance at a house can afford to lose 5% of it.

Because right now, people bid on house knowing they have nothing to lose by doing so.
Imposing a small fee on the losing bidders might reduce the number of people bidding to those that really want a house, and discourage people from creating multiple accounts just so they can take more no-risk attempts to get a house.

Plus, removing gil from the game is never a bad thing.

---

Yes, punish the poor! Let those peasants feel the pressure of the elite upper class rich players. They should just stick to their apartments if they want to dabble in home owning

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibi

To be fair that's a medium.

You can also enter - on Siren - for a Goblet 20/31 (16 entries), Goblet 21/31 (16 entries), Goblet 23/10 (16 Entries), Goblet 19/39 (17 Entries) and so on.

All of those are clearly better odds than FCFS.

---

Your information source is faulty, the numbers you're claiming aren't even close to the actual numbers.
You should really check the facts for yourself, rather than taking someone else's word for it.
This pic was taken one full hour before your post.
https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...ot_(1152)a.png

You would think they make sure everyone thats wants a house can get one. Your the warrior of light and have saved the world but your homeless with no place to call your own. Sure doesn't make you want save the world when they can't even give you a home. Even FFXI you got your own room for free could decorate and add storage items to it.

Lottery is bad hopefully they come up better way lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lazuliann

Your information source is faulty, the numbers you're claiming aren't even close to the actual numbers.
You should really check the facts for yourself, rather than taking someone else's word for it.
This pic was taken one full hour before your post.
https://hosting.photobucket.com/imag...ot_(1152)a.png

---

Yes, I htink we agree there. That's a medium as I said, but my point, it's not the only house on Siren at the time. I gave you just 4 of the houses that were under 20 bids each. There were more too over 20 bids, but I didn't think you would be interested in those. Less bids = more chance after all.


Not to you, but in general; It somewhat surprises me that people are jumping up and down about not being able to get from nothing into a medium or large rather than aim for a small, as if they expected lottery to make it any easier to get a medium. Anyone doing housing for the last few years should know that mediums and larges have always been nigh on impossible to obtain because SE simply can't (or won't) meet the demand.

Lottery doesn't improve the number of mediums, just makes it fairer for everyone who wants to jump to that stage.

It's up to SE to see the problem lottery has exposed, and work to fix it.

I can't honestly see a purpose for having medium and large houses at all if they were going to be so impossible to get.

I can't imagine that the way this worked out could have been the developers' intentions. While I think it's a failed system that needs change, I don't believe SE is doing this intentionally. They gain nothing out of false rarity for houses in the game, and it's completely against their design philosophy in several ways:

1. Almost every system in the game is designed to reward you in some way. You gain totems for beating a boss, to ensure you always get the piece of gear you're looking for even if you have bad luck with the RNG.

2. Literally everything else is designed to be accessible for everyone. I mean, it's a single-player MMO for crying out loud. As an example of their "everyone should be able to do everything" philosophy, they came out and said that the way they did endgame raiding in 2.0 was a mistake, in that they put in effort to produce content that most players didn't get to see and that was a mistake. Since then, in every aspect of the game, they've taken clear steps to make it easier and more streamlined to participate in all the content the game has to offer.

3. I think it's pretty clear the developers want only timed, limited rarity for most things in the market. Look at minions for example - they'll be exceedingly rare for a time, and then they'll start turning up as venture rewards, treasure chest rewards and accursed horde rewards. They release more and more of a rare thing the older it gets, until it's not so rare anymore (remember fat cat's?) Almost everything difficult about the game gets its own version of "the echo buff" after a few patches. Even housing! Paradoxically, they reduced the price for plots just to make it more affordable - which all demonstrates that they don't want houses to be rare, or exclusively for those who "work for it", else they wouldn't have made the prerequisites for getting one so insignificant. Housing is exclusively the only exclusivist thing in the game - which would connote that it's just not working as intended.

And, that's my point. I don't think the devs meant for housing to turn out like this. I think they're just either too idealistic ("we're going to fix it one day") or too cowardly to step up and say: "Alright, this is a failed system. We made a mistake. The Neighborhood system just doesn't work because we can't fulfill our end of the promise and buy enough servers to make it work. So, here's your in-game refund. Housing is instanced now, as it probably always should have been. Our bad."

Either way, after 8 years of this BS, it's time for them to focus on the problem and fix it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

Perhaps SE shouldn't refund all of the losing bidder's money. Perhaps they should only refund, say, 95% of it. Anyone who can afford to put down 5, 20, or 50 million for a chance at a house can afford to lose 5% of it.

Because right now, people bid on house knowing they have nothing to lose by doing so.
Imposing a small fee on the losing bidders might reduce the number of people bidding to those that really want a house, and discourage people from creating multiple accounts just so they can take more no-risk attempts to get a house.

Plus, removing gil from the game is never a bad thing.

---

Why are people so insistent on coming up with ideas that punish players like this.

5% is nothing to rich players. I'm gil capped. I can bid on houses till the cows come home. I make way more than that 5% back in a single day selling things on the marketboard.

For something that should be open to everyone anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fybrile

....
I do want a house, and I have been prepared to sink countless hours into sign clicking. Early on, I even had fun pulling a 3-day, double all-nighter camping a sign, clicking it once every fifteen seconds. But, after growing up and experiencing a bit more of life, after having a child and generally being better able to appreciate better priorities, I came to realize that what SE is asking IS NOT worth the reward in question.....

---

So i'm going to stop the quote there, because you've given the answer.

YOU YOURSELF STATE, IT'S NOT WORTH THE TIME. ...so why are you complaining. you say you want a house at first, and then in the same paragraph turn your decision around and say you dont. ...problem solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

Housing as it is now isn't an auction, it's a lottery drawing, where the price of entry is refunded if you lose.

This isn't the best way IMO: a sealed-bid auction with a minimum bid based on lot size would have been better.

The amount of gil such a house-sale system would have removed from the game would have been staggering; there are plenty of people who could bid 200 million or more on house without breaking a sweat. And removing gil from the game results in deflation, which lowers prices of everything, and that benefits us all.

---

And thus begins the new era of RMT where anyone who wants a large house and hasn't played marketboard simulator would need to just buy gil to compete. And many absolutely would, one fc member in my old fc admitted she bought gil to afford her SMALL plot. Why you admit that in discord to everyone idk.. Like cmon getting 3mill gil isn't that hard x.x

Anyway, your idea is another bandaid and it won't make players happy at all imo. You gna get people salty over all the people who currently own a house having paid a fraction of what new homeowners are paying. Others who refuse RMT angry that the large house they could barely afford and had SOME hope of having is now out of reach due to gil capped players and gil buyers. And more angry because some people cannot help but be dumb enough to talk about how they RMT for a house (like that old fc member) and that will rightfully tilt people too.

And at the end of it all there still won't be enough houses for people. So someone else will come along with another suggestion to make getting a house even harder and harder. All while the core issue, supply, never changes.

Why are so many players trying to work out shoddy bandaids for the devs instead of asking that their sub be the same value as every player who has a house? Even if Yoshi P turned around and said hey to give every player their own home it will take us 2 years to sort out the infrastructure, at least we have an idea of when the housing hell will end and can relax until it is resolved. I am still huffing hopium that island sanctuary will have some small aspect of player housing.

It's really amusing how everybody that screams about rmt doesn't even understand that gil can be removed permanently. It's as if they are so far gone with JojoBa's Koolaid that they convinced themselves into thinking gil miraculously appears out of thin air for gil sellers.

Same thing for the big meanies with one or multiple gil caps. Nobody can sustain buying houses at gil cap endlessly, but somehow, you people convinced yourselves that its possible. Drop the Koolaid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XiaoShengwu

So i'm going to stop the quote there, because you've given the answer.

YOU YOURSELF STATE, IT'S NOT WORTH THE TIME. ...so why are you complaining. you say you want a house at first, and then in the same paragraph turn your decision around and say you dont. ...problem solved.

---

I've seen you burning through the threads about housing the past day posting these drive-by rants, and was really hoping you wouldn't start in mine as well. I'm not looking for rude people or a flame war. TBH, I'm not even really looking for differing opinions. This is my complaint to SE, made in the manner they've insisted I make it. That's all. For any other product, this probably would have been an email.

If you disagree with the OP, the best thing you can do is not post at all, and let this thread become buried and insignificant so that the developers never see it.

But, I've a feeling you don't care about the OP or anything anyone says here. I think you just like finding something you can use as a catalyst to be rude or abrasive.

The simple response to your dismissive comment is this:

If a Nintendo Switch cost one billion dollars, I could say that it's not worth the price. That doesn't mean I don't want one.

Big brains recognize that wanting something and acknowledging that the prerequisites to get it are too ridiculous aren't mutually exclusive concepts. By providing feedback in the manner developers have asked for it, one might convince them to lower those prerequisites, thus achieving what one set out to do.

I think anyone who has read my posts and reads your comment claiming I ever said I DON'T want a house would laugh out loud. So, thanks for the chuckle I guess. If you could move on elsewhere, that would go a long way towards proving this isn't just a troll account.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yshtola_Cat

It's really amusing how everybody that screams about rmt doesn't even understand that gil can be removed permanently. It's as if they are so far gone with JojoBa's Koolaid that they convinced themselves into thinking gil miraculously appears out of thin air for gil sellers.

Same thing for the big meanies with one or multiple gil caps. Nobody can sustain buying houses at gil cap endlessly, but somehow, you people convinced yourselves that its possible. Drop the Koolaid.

---

As someone brand new to the forum, I don't understand this post. What's JojoBa's Kooldaid?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fybrile

I can't honestly see a purpose for having medium and large houses at all if they were going to be so impossible to get.

---

Housing was originally designed ONLY for free company use. It was never meant for individuals.

https://i.gyazo.com/839fb483f0efd9f3...45b01d6dc5.jpg

While smaller FCs of 2 or 3 people can manage admirably in a small, groups of 20, 30, 40 people need a larger space, it's nigh on impossible to fit that many into the basement of a small.

A year later, they added free company rooms for people, and later again they allowed people to buy houses for themselves without the FC requirement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fybrile

...What's JojoBa's Kooldaid?

---

Crustacean flavoured, I think. (Shell FCs and all).

And therein lies the genesis of the problem. If houses had been restricted to FCs, much fewer people would be complaining. The moment they opened that Pandora's box and allowed private ownership, everything changed. There is no way backwards for SE at this point without tanking their game. They HAVE to move forward in some way to provide more housing. The question is how?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XiaoShengwu

YOU YOURSELF STATE, IT'S NOT WORTH THE TIME.

---

Maybe... they wish it wasn't so? Because houses are nice. Your own house is even nicer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eraden

And therein lies the genesis of the problem. If houses had been restricted to FCs, much fewer people would be complaining. The moment they opened that Pandora's box and allowed private ownership, everything changed. There is no way backwards for SE at this point without tanking their game. They HAVE to move forward in some way to provide more housing. The question is how?

---

It wouldn't be fewer players complaining. It would be more players complaining.

Players are not happy when other players are given the power to gatekeep their content access. FC members have access to the FC house and its features at the whim of the FC Master and officers. Access can be denied to them at any time. Be removed from the FC and they lose their private chambers they had purchased.

Players want to control their own access to the content features, and thus the demand for personal houses.

What other MMO with housing restricts it to solely to free company/guild/clan ownership? None of that I've heard of (though it's always possible there's one out there).

What crazy developer thought that players would be happy if the system was limited to FCs?

The problem wasn't allowing private ownership. The problem was thinking that limiting it to FCs would work. Private ownership should have been included in the design from the start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibi

Housing was originally designed ONLY for free company use. It was never meant for individuals.

---

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what the original intentions were. You don't let a bank robber go who thought to himself beforehand: "I'm not going to rob that bank." Ultimately, it's only their decisions and actions that are relevant.

And, early on, private housing was promised. If they weren't sure if they could meet that promise for even half of the player base, they really shouldn't have done it.

There is no excuse. Just apologists. That's why Yoshi-P's had nothing to say since 2014 but: "We apologize"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

What other MMO with housing restricts it to solely to free company/guild/clan ownership? None of that I've heard of (though it's always possible there's one out there).

---

GW2 with some important differences. Disclaimer it's been a few years since I've played that game seriously.

Players get access to a static "Home Instance" which allows them to add some (all?) of the gameplay features that the guild halls get. I forget if there's anything missing that isn't directly tied to a guild function. There was no way to provide any other sort of decoration which was a minor bone of contention.

Guild Halls can be decorated freely and had a huge amount of space, roughly the size of a dungeon here (because that's what they are). You needed a team of players to clear it out to claim the space. IIRC there was a minimum Guild Level (or you had to spend guild credits). The only way to earn those is to do guild missions which really require a team.

Both Home Instances and Guild Halls are fully instanced. There's no competition with other guilds for space. The reason why ANet doesn't catch as much flak about the static Home Instances is that GW2 lets you be part of five guilds. If you really wanted space to decorate you'd get some friends together to help grind it out. The five guild limit is across the entire account so all your alts have access to all of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fybrile

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what the original intentions were. You don't let a bank robber go who thought to himself beforehand: "I'm not going to rob that bank." Ultimately, it's only their decisions and actions that are relevant.

---

Come on dude. You said...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fybrile

I can't honestly see a purpose for having medium and large houses at all if they were going to be so impossible to get.

---

And I replied...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibi

Housing was originally designed ONLY for free company use. It was never meant for individuals.

---

You asked the question and I replied with the reason. Nothing more than this. See? ^ It's not hard to understand that.

We don't need to talk about bank robbers or other irrelevant crap here.

I mean especially as I want housing to improve, BUT two times now you have misrepresented me. Once by replacing my words with something totally false and the second by claiming I am a yoshi-P apologist. Both times you are wrong.

You really need to sit back and look what people's opinions are before you start kicking them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibi

Insert quote here.

---

Honestly man, I think you're just being just a bit too sensitive and are taking my soapboxing personally. I'll admit I'm not in tune with the social etiquettes of a forum, that sometimes the way I write is like the stream of consciousness of an idiot, or that there's probably some social nuance I'm missing here... but haven't you ever had someone quote you in order to make a general point before? You know... those types of people that hear your question or statement and then respond to the whole room?

That's me. I'm that guy.

See, I didn't ask a question at all. No question mark. Just a rhetorical statement. It's meant to confer: "They shouldn't implement stuff that is impossible to get." And, not to harp on the point, but it still rings true regardless of whether housing is intended just for FCs or not.

I used your response as a catalyst to reiterate my message, not to attack you. A lot of people may read a sentence like that and think "Oh, FC only? Well, I guess we should feel lucky that we are even given this pittance of personal housing plots to begin with." It's to those people my response was intended. It's those people I'm calling apologists. If that's not you, great! In my head, we were tag-teaming the apologists.

It's truly tragic. You and I agree seem to agree on just about everything, but you misinterpret or just straight up dislike the way I write. I'll give you that the analogy was a bit patronizing for most people - I was thinking that as I was writing it. But, frankly, it seemed apt at the time to be patronizing to anyone who chooses to stick their head in the sand about this problem. I honestly thought my post was in addition to yours, not in contrast. To be straight up honest, I didn't even see that you were the one making the post, or I would have avoided quoting you in the first place since we have already been down this road.

I truly apologize for provoking you again. For what it's worth, I didn't mean to. I will pay closer attention to how I use quotes in the future. I've appreciated each of your posts in this thread, acknowledge that the first time I was likely putting words in your mouth, and think you have done nothing but bring well-thought-out posts and valuable insight to this thread. In parallel universes, we're probably best friends.

If you're ever on Siren, hit me up and I'll buy you a chai.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fybrile

Honestly man, I think you're just being just a bit too sensitive and are taking my soapboxing personally. I'll admit I'm not in tune with the social etiquettes of a forum, that sometimes the way I write is like the stream of consciousness of an idiot, or that there's probably some social nuance I'm missing here... but haven't you ever had someone quote you in order to make a general point before? You know... those types of people that hear your question or statement and then respond to the whole room?

That's me. I'm that guy.

See, I didn't ask a question at all. No question mark. Just a rhetorical statement. It's meant to confer: "They shouldn't implement stuff that is impossible to get." And, not to harp on the point, but it still rings true regardless of whether housing is intended just for FCs or not.

I used your response as a catalyst to reiterate my message, not to attack you. A lot of people may read a sentence like that and think "Oh, FC only? Well, I guess we should feel lucky that we are even given this pittance of personal housing plots to begin with." It's to those people my response was intended. It's those people I'm calling apologists. If that's not you, great! In my head, we were tag-teaming the apologists.

It's truly tragic. You and I agree seem to agree on just about everything, but you misinterpret or just straight up dislike the way I write. I'll give you that the analogy was a bit patronizing for most people - I was thinking that as I was writing it. But, frankly, it seemed apt at the time to be patronizing to anyone who chooses to stick their head in the sand about this problem. I honestly thought my post was in addition to yours, not in contrast. To be straight up honest, I didn't even see that you were the one making the post, or I would have avoided quoting you in the first place since we have already been down this road.

I truly apologize for provoking you again. For what it's worth, I didn't mean to. I will pay closer attention to how I use quotes in the future. I've appreciated each of your posts in this thread, acknowledge that the first time I was likely putting words in your mouth, and think you have done nothing but bring well-thought-out posts and valuable insight to this thread. In parallel universes, we're probably best friends.

If you're ever on Siren, hit me up and I'll buy you a chai.

---

Some people come to the forum specifically looking for a fight. Just forget about it and move on. Make your statement and defend it nonspecifically. You don't have to explain your feelings to anyone, just pose a belief and provide context for debate. If anyone wants to brawl it's because of their feelings, not yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fybrile

3/3

At the very least, allow us to purchase a house for real money. We can purchase a high level character with all jobs nearly-maxed for money. We can purchase weddings. I can expand my inventory space with real money. I can buy the rewards from one-time festivals I've missed with real money. Why can't I buy a house with money? If you're saying we can't have a house because of server costs, why not let the whales in this game offset those costs by making housing available for real money? Or, larger plots available for real money? You don't seem to have a problem taking my money to solve your other problems? Why's this one special?

As you can tell, I'm frustrated. I'm sure no one even read to this part of the post anyways, so I'll just step off my soapbox now. I just needed to say what I wanted to say. I just wanted to put my hand up and say that this isn't right.

---

I have bought all the Store items that came with in-game items (even some that haven't), bought at least 3/4 of the items in the cash shop - not counting housing items since I have nowhere to put them. I regularly subscribe to all the extras - saddles, retainers, etc. I just scraped the housing districts and there are, assuming the houses available today aren't claimed by the current claim cycle, 11 houses left (all small). I'd happily pay for a medium and maybe even a large house. SquareEnix hasn't even said they'd address other considerations to fix the housing problem; they don't see it as a problem and even doubling down on the "neighborhoods" thing despite the only people I see running around here are people looking for and bidding on open plots, people running to laim their money from losses, and people running to vendors to buy stuff for their newly acquired houses.

I wonder how many of the "I have a house already because some arbitrary luck or condition (such as more available plots, lower player base, etc) that doesn't exist now so f--- your complaint" people would feel if SquareEnix demolished every house in the game, refunded everyone the money they spent to buy it and gave everyone back the items inside their house, then made everyone play the current system to re-acquire their houses.

As someone who is also has legacy characters, it is rather difficult to believe for someone who claims to be legacy will missing every plot release because of "insufficient fund"
For someone who want a house so bad will missing every single one of these plot release dates, it is rather hard to believe?
Especially every single legacy players either sitting on gils or already have a craft to making gils from 1.0

Patch Date Districts Wards Divisions Total Plots
2.1 14 Dec 2013 3 5 1 450
2.3 7 Jul 2014 3 6 1 540
2.38 16 Sep 2014 3 8 1 720
2.4 27 Oct 2014 3 8 2 1440
3.3 6 Jun 2016 3 12 2 2160
4.1 10 Oct 2017 4 12 2 2880
4.2 5 Feb 2018 4 18 2 4320

I didn't even count wards 19 - 24 that add after 5.0
I will give it to you that you don't have gils at 2.0, but after you miss 4 releases in 2.0, you would start to save some gils and I am sure by 3.0 you will be sitting on 5 to 6 mils for a small.
This is also a period will relocation is fairly easy.
If you grab a Goblet small and you are free to move anywhere else at later release.
Getting house before 5.0 population spike was pretty easy if you set your alarm clock on release date, especially your target is a goblet small.
Why you didn't do that?

It is fair for new players to complain because they didn't have same change because of the lol lottery, but a legacy player?
If it is your decision not to put into effort of getting a house, at least be responsible for your own decision

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ijuakos_xqwzts

I just scraped the housing districts and there are, assuming the houses available today aren't claimed by the current claim cycle, 11 houses left (all small).

---

Go back and check Mist, Ward 22, Plot 2 which is a large that will be available on your server in the next round.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ijuakos_xqwzts

I wonder how many of the "I have a house already because some arbitrary luck or condition (such as more available plots, lower player base, etc) that doesn't exist now so f--- your complaint" people would feel if SquareEnix demolished every house in the game, refunded everyone the money they spent to buy it and gave everyone back the items inside their house, then made everyone play the current system to re-acquire their houses.

---

I wonder why people keep wanting to punish other players to increase the odds to get their own house instead of directing that energy at SE instead to look at what players want and address it?

Why does the first choice always have to be "let's demolish someone else home so I can have it" instead of "SE YOUR SYSTEM IS REALLY BROKEN, FIX IT!"

It's really time to stop this wrongthink of demolishing other people's homes, and instead direct that energy at SE. Because the system clearly ain't working - lottery being so effortless has really exposed the wart that placard clickers have known about for years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibi

Why does the first choice always have to be "let's demolish someone else home so I can have it" instead of "SE YOUR SYSTEM IS REALLY BROKEN, FIX IT!"

---

Imagine how angry they'll be when the house is demolished and another player ends up winning the lottery because they had only one out of 300 entries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibi

Why does the first choice always have to be "let's demolish someone else home so I can have it" instead of "SE YOUR SYSTEM IS REALLY BROKEN, FIX IT!"

---

Demolitions are already in-game and proven to work. We could dream about there being enough plots for everyone, but that's at the moment just day-dreaming. Yoshida is adding more wards, more housing zones, slowly increasing supply, which helps but clearly it's not enough on its own, so additional systems are needed to redistribute the limited supply. Removing houses from inactive players is the first partial solution in the line. Losing a plot is not end of the world, you can always get a new plot eventually - as long as there are features like the demolition. It seems harsh that inactive players lose their houses, but that also makes it easier for them to replace said houses if they decide to return to the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

As someone who is also has legacy characters,

---

I've already covered the myopic points in this post. Please feel encouraged to read a thread before jumping in on page 7.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Archaell

Demolitions are already in-game and proven to work.

---

I think you missed my point, as in I wasn't talking about the demolition system, but instead about players wanting to take away other people's things so they can have it instead.

We shouldn't direct our frustrations at other players and think up plans to take their stuff. We should be lobbying SE with requests to improve the system, and that doesn't mean lobbying SE to make it harder to get and keep a house.

I 100% agree.

If another player wins a house over me, I don't feel frustrated at that player for getting lucky. I feel frustrated at Yoshi-P and team for making housing a cutthroat PVP event in the first place by being too stubborn to let a bad idea (personal housing neighborhoods) die. If I don't see the plot I want available during a lottery period, I don't think some players should lose what they have. I think the developers should add a reasonable amount of houses.

SE brought a Halloween toddler-sized bag of chips to the party, and our anger should be focused on them for not doing their fair share, not on the few players that got a chip.

I see 3 main problems:

Sunk cost fallacy (and the risk of angry in-game landlords) means they can't just scrap everything and start again.

Instanced Housing is already in-game and unpopular as is (apartments), so the devs won't see it as a viable answer, as much as people complain that it's the 'perfect solution with absolutely zero flaws'. (This is why I encourage and celebrate apartments).

Issues with the Ward System mean that adding more wards/districts is likely to become increasingly difficult going forwards, and adding more players servers, whilst a good idea, would also only mitigate the current issues, not undo past failures.


Realistically, this is what I'd do:

Open up a LOT more player servers/data centres, and offer far bigger incentives for people to move servers.

Demolish any homes currently owned by low-level (sub 50) characters, an d give no notice of this policy coming into effect (clears out the shell FC's and what's left of the RMT'ers).

Change FC requirements to 4 characters of Level 50 or above with ARR completion up to 2.55, not 4 characters of any level.

Permanently enable the demolition timer, and promise never to disable it again, no matter the circumstance.

Implement apartment and FC room upgrade options, and overall make them a more attractive housing option for players.

Increasing the item limit for furnishings in every type of house, 50 at a time.

(likely already a thing) Have Island Sanctuary function as personal gardening and a place to put outdoor furnishings.

Add in a workshop facility for EVERY FC that can meet requirements, regardless of home ownership or not.

Make Level 3 FC buffs vastly easier to obtain, and simplify the systems behind this.

(big-brain idea) Lock Large plots behind sealed-bid auctions, with the explicit intention of extracting as much gil from the economy as possible.

(bigger brain idea) Personal Workshops for players, that allow them to craft fancy versions of existing weapons (maybe even armor), could become a long-term gil sink if updated regularly, an idea in progress)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Imagine how angry they'll be when the house is demolished ...

---

Every player that acquired a house agreed to it being demolished if it wasn't being used.
So no one has any reason to be angry over it.

I certainly wasn't angry when they demolished mine, when I took a break from the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

Every player that acquired a house agreed to it being demolished if it wasn't being used.
So no one has any reason to be angry over it.

I certainly wasn't angry when they demolished mine, when I took a break from the game.

---

That's not what I was referring to.

I was talking about players who are asking for the houses of other players to be demolished so they have a chance to get the house themselves - then they still don't have the house because someone else wins it in the lottery. Are they going to be angry that houses being demolished didn't result in their getting a house? Of course they will be.

I've had a house demolished in the past as well (start of Stormblood). My break from the game was not planned but I knew what the result would be. I was fine with someone else getting a chance at a house while I was unable to play. I didn't enjoy having to wait 5 months after I returned to get another house but that wasn't the fault of the player who got my house.

That was SE's fault for designing a bad system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

That's not what I was referring to. I was talking about players who are asking for the houses of other players to be demolished so they have a chance to get the house themselves - then they still don't have the house because someone else wins it in the lottery. Are they going to be angry that houses being demolished didn't result in their getting a house? Of course they will be.

---

There is no "of course" about it. You're just slandering people you disagree with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

That was SE's fault for designing a bad system.

---

Feel free to not play.

Personal housing is a glamour mini-game with no impact on the rest of the game.
People who want instanced housing should realize almost no one will ever see your house in such a system.
That's how it was with SWTOR instanced housing.
BTDT, didn't seem worth the effort.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fybrile

I've already covered the myopic points in this post. Please feel encouraged to read a thread before jumping in on page 7.

---

Yes, the reason you gave doesn't change the fact you didn't put in effort and just blankly saying you have tried it.
I help my friend who joined 3.0 (who genuinely start fresh) obtained a goblet small then later move to Shirogane with me as neighbors.
If my friends who joined 5.0 is able to obtain plots during last Shirogane (who are also start fresh and Shirogane was the only option)
I don't see why your complaint has any solid ground as a "legacy player"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

you didn't put in effort

---

To repeat myself:

1. You don't know me. You have no idea how much effort I've put into getting a house. This makes your accusations based on pretentiousness or ignorance. Perhaps both.
2. Who crowned you judge and jury about how much effort is required to get some pixels in a video game I've sunk over a thousand dollars into? Get off that high horse.
3. You - and people like you - keep using your own experiences as evidence of how I'm wrong. That's a fallacy. It's pretty small brain to assume everyone's experiences are the same.
4. In a zero-sum system like this, you and your friends having a house isn't proof of how I should have a house. It's part of the reason I don't. Thus, it's a pretty bad example to use.
5. My complaint is based on a veritable mountain of solid ground. You can tell by the fact nearly every single thread in this subforum is repeating it. Since 2014. If you want to plug your ears and stick your head in the sand about this clear problem with the game, I'd suggest avoiding the Housing subforum altogether, cuz that's just about all you're going to read here.

What your posts seek to do is delegitimize or silence me because you don't like what I have to say. You apparently can't imagine how someone could play this game from 1.0 and not have a house. You can't imagine it, because you either don't have the correct information or refuse to acknowledge it. That lack of imagination and information is called ignorance. You shouldn't base opinions on ignorance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

Feel free to not play.

---

This is the quintessential dismissive response. I get that you're frustrated by posts you disagree with, but you could just elect to not respond rather than degrade the discussion to back-and-forth vitriol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

Personal housing is a glamour mini-game with no impact on the rest of the game.

---

Well, that's not exactly true. There's having a chocobo stable, a garden, and a cheap teleport point close to one of the major cities. These have an impact upon the rest of the game. Not to mention the fact that having an impact on the rest of the game isn't a prerequisite for importance to players. I mean, aesthetics and displaying your loot and achievements are a known and popular part of playing an MMORPG. Just because it's decorative in nature, doesn't make it of lesser importance.

PVP has minimal impact on the rest of the game beyond farming tokens in the DF and some glamour gear, but I don't think one would try to make the claim not every player is entitled to access it. That's a strange double standard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

People who want instanced housing should realize almost no one will ever see your house in such a system.

---

I don't think most of us care about this. If I want you to check out my house, I'm more than happy to post pics on Discord.


It's just so strange to me how some vocal minority of players want to act as gatekeepers for this supposedly tertiary content. They're so desperate to protect it's irrational, indefensible rarity, while at the same time trying to convince those who can't participate that the content is unimportant or insignificant. It's as if the cost of the extra servers is going to come out of their pockets.

At least have the balls to be honest and say how you really feel - that you appreciate your house more because of its artificial rarity, and want to pay forward all the difficulty you experienced in order to get it. Or, that you got your house super easy, and can't relate. Either position sounds a lot of "Nya nana nana naaa!" to me.

To slightly modify the very motto of this game:
"To ignore the plight of those one might conceivably help is not wisdom - it's indolence."

You should be standing with us on this. All players should have a reasonable chance to access all the content of this game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

There is no "of course" about it. You're just slandering people you disagree with.

---

Where's the slander?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

Feel free to not play.

---

Why would I stop playing when I have a house and I'm enjoying the game?

What I'm looking for is SE to fix the system so one player owning a house, or even multiple houses, will not prevent other players who want a house from getting one. I want everyone to be able to enjoy housing to its fullest extent if that is what they want without being subject to gatekeeping by other players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

Personal housing is a glamour mini-game with no impact on the rest of the game.

---

What does that have to do with anything? It's still game content that player would like to enjoy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

People who want instanced housing should realize almost no one will ever see your house in such a system.
That's how it was with SWTOR instanced housing.
BTDT, didn't seem worth the effort.

---

So your entire experience with instanced housing was SWTOR?

Try RIFT and experience their Dimensions. That's a fully instanced housing system. How do we know that other players are frequently seeing housing? Because there is a Like system for Dimensions. If you enable your Dimension for public viewing, the number of likes it has will appear in the search listing. There are Dimensions with hundreds or even thousands of likes. It had a lot of other features that players ask for here but this game lacks. Just a shame the rest of the game isn't on the same level as the housing.

What's not worth the effort to you may very much be worth the effort to others.

I am unable to see any reason to bring up system from dead mmorpg.
The games didn’t survive because of its housing system only shows housing system is a flavor to have but not a necessity.
Even Skyrim Online is still alive, it’s so called housing system got nothing to attract me to play the game.
Every game has their own signature feature and this Ward system is rightly FF14’s

If everyone is going to design a system same way, didn’t we also how that idea failed miserably.
Elden ring slapped, spitted, and stomped every single rpg maker’s face is the best proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

Try RIFT and experience their Dimensions. That's a fully instanced housing system. How do we know that other players are frequently seeing housing? Because there is a Like system for Dimensions. If you enable your Dimension for public viewing, the number of likes it has will appear in the search listing. There are Dimensions with hundreds or even thousands of likes.

---

Is there also non-instanced neighborhood housing like here in Rift?

I ask because I see no chance at all of SE getting rid of the current (non-instanced) neighborhood houses .

Rare mounts are desired for only one reason: they are hard to get.
Housing is no different, and easy-to-get houses will always be devalued as long as hard-to-get neighborhood houses are in the game. As a result, the continued existence of the neighborhood houses will make instanced housis seem second-rate by comparison -- just like apartments seem to be viewed now.

They gave us apartments, and the housing malcontents spurned the apartments. Instanced houses are not much more than bigger apartments; there is no reason to think the malcontents won't spurn them, too, once they realize how much more prestigious and desirable the neighborhood houses are. Many will just declare "I don't want it" and demand more neighborhood houses.

Therefore, instanced houses will not end the salt, and I think SE understand that.
If they do, they won't waste resources implementing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silverbane

Quote goes here.

---

Why do you willfully ignore what people are saying?

Is it because you don't have a good retort?

You keep shifting the goalposts in your argument every time your points are dismantled rather than acknowledging your bias.

Most of your arguments are based on the logic that simply because you proclaim something as imperatively and abrasively as you can, that makes it true. It doesn't.

For example, housing is a system. Not a thing. So, in this case, having a house is not comparable to having a rare mount. That's a false equivalency. As a system, it would have to be compared to a mount system in general.

Mounts in general are not desirable because of their rarity. They're common, expected features of a modern MMO. Especially one that is making obscene amounts of money, veritable bucketloads of cash, from their playerbase monthly. Perhaps having a large house is comparable to having a rare mount. Okay. But, that makes having a small house comparable to having a mount at all.

Why apartments aren't the same as a house has been covered ad nauseum in this and other threads. You are blatantly ignoring those valid points, likely because you don't any way to invalidate them.

To label everyone who complains about the woefully inadequate housing in FFXIV as "malcontents" is dismissive and, frankly, your posts and your points seem to suggest you're smarter than to stoop to such base prejudice and namecalling. I, for example, complain about housing vocally, but am certainly not a malcontent. I've fanboyed this game for over a decade now. Even flew to Japan to check out the Eorzea Cafe. Twice. Not the actions of a malcontent my friend.

When it comes to housing, I'm just telling it like it is. Most players, even ones who have a house, genuinely think the system sucks. But, more importantly, you shouldn't be trying to gatekeep what is and isn't a problem for people. While Jojoya often corrects the factual inaccuracies in a post, you seem to be mad just because people don't value things the way you think they should. That's what we would call "pedantic". It's not cool to be pedantic.

You're not going to change minds by beating the apartments dead horse. We've explained how they're inadequate ad nauseum. And you're certainly not going to change minds by being rude and pretentious. That's just going to entrench people and make this a toxic environment, which hopefully you don't want either.

A good place to start would be to read the points against apartments, trying to understand them, and then explaining why you think having them precludes SE from adding more houses. Why there's even a relationship there. To use your own rarity examples, just because SE adds a bunch of grey weapons to the game, that doesn't mean we're good. We all expect to get green, blue and purples. So why, in this instance, is it enough for SE to add greys only?

And, most importantly, why do you think everyone but you and your small clique should be happy with greys?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fybrile

Ranting and personal attacks deleted

---

What a bunch of BS.

Fybrile entire post is just insult, rants, and cloaked references to supposed arguments he can't make himself and can't provide links to.
I'm always amused when people claim "we refuted that argument" but never provide a pointer to when or where.

And Fybrile is apparently too ignorant of how software is developed and works to realize that adding multiple different housing systems is far more difficult than having weapons be different colors.

The fact the FC housing didn't make the current housing malcontents happy, adding personal houses didn't make them happy, and then adding apartments didn't make them happy should give SE pause before thinking adding yet another version of housing will make the malcontents happy.

In the end, if SE even bothers to consider yet-another-kind-of-housing in the face of this history, SE will do what any profit-oriented company would do: estimate how many new subscribers they would gain as a result of adding a feature, estimate how many they will lose as a result of not adding it, estimate the cost in terms of software development, software maintenance, and additional hardware required, and then decide whether the feature is worth the effort.

In that analysis, anything but incremental changes (like adding a Thavnarian housing district) are unlikely to happen.