you say there is fallacy but all you scream is resource usage resource usage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tandy
resources shouldn't be a problem adding something to the game that it can't handle is clearly a design flaw.
-
04-13-2014, 12:50 PMMusashidon
-
04-13-2014, 12:54 PMTandyActually I pointed out how your character and a house are totally different things and require different resources, since a character is only active when your online and using it and a house is permanently up. I didn't scream anything. You are clearly mad and not able to see that those are true statements and that they are NOT similar things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musashidon
-
04-13-2014, 12:54 PMColt47I tend to agree with you on it being wrong to have your house taken away. The proposal SE is giving for patch 2.3 is sound, but only if it is involving FCs of worthy size, and there are plenty of people in your shoes who used the system in a way they didn't intend. I'd say wait on official wording from the development team, as they might be offering something like a housing ticket to reclaim property later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musashidon
-
04-13-2014, 12:55 PMPlanckZeroTechnically speaking they're taking absolutely nothing from you. You don't own a single thing in this game. Your subscription is like rent for the server space SE uses to store your character. You have no right to the data what so ever, it isn't "your" character or "your" house.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musashidon
And to get even more technical they how are they taking something from the "player" when the "player" doesn't play? It's one thing if SE just indiscriminately decided to delete the belongs of someone that is actively playing the game but here we're talking about someone that hasn't actually "played" the game for more than a month.
And for the love of god could you please stop trying to compare this to deleting a player character already? -
04-13-2014, 12:57 PMMusashidonso it permently up and always takes up resouces there isn't enough so it has to go......hmm design flaw if you ask me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tandy
so whats the difference between a active fc house and none active fc house? they take up the same amount and if they are willing to add more where's the problem? it's taking up to much? obviously not if it can handle a ward full of active fc's it can handle none active ones.
in the end you are using a excuse that proves nothing.
no because it's the same thing if you're not using your character they should delete it like the houses because obviously you don't need it.Quote:
Originally Posted by PlanckZero
that's the whole point you say they are different because they use different resources but that point isn't resources it's the fact they are taking something away that shouldn't be taken away. -
04-13-2014, 12:59 PMMiburo
He's not wrong anyway. There is no good reason to have the FC lose everything they worked for. There is no good reason why SE can't give a voucher for a new plot of land and building permit. You don't lose anything else in-game for not playing for a while. This should be no different in that regard. And not a single person has come anywhere close to producing a logical argument against FC's at least getting a land deed and building permit back. Not a single one. No one loses, everyone wins. You should all support that.
-
04-13-2014, 01:03 PMTandyHow do you know they are NOT going to do that? All this arguing is over not knowing the plans. Think about that....we DONT KNOW THE PLANS YET. All we know is the 35 day limit...nothing else. For all we know if you log back in 5 months later and your the leader of your FC and the house is gone a golden chocobo appears and gives you a coupon for a fully furnished house of equal or lesser size with a harem of dancing girls in your yard to welcome you home. We dont know anything!Quote:
Originally Posted by Miburo
-
04-13-2014, 01:06 PMArkistaOk I have to agree with you about the Character not being on 24/7 where as the house is on 24/7. So I guess that cost SE more money. And if an inactive FC isn't paying Or at least one then they are losing money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tandy
So like I said in the OP, I don't think it would hurt SE to convert the house to a land deed and a building permit on the 35th day and mail it to the FC leader. It would be a win win win situation. SE would free up the land there for not losing any money (win), A active FC could buy it (win), And if the FC that lost the house returns they would be able to still keep their house (win). -
04-13-2014, 01:15 PMMiburoI don't. I don't think SE's PR team is so bad that they'll post only the bad part of their idea without mentioning any of the good. But you're right, they might be that bad. And that would be nice, on this occasion at least. On the off-chance that SE Devs aren't infallible and make stupid decisions sometimes, I think there is a better chance of getting something changed while it's still being worked on. Not like I lose anything by posting feedback on the official forums. But there is something to potentially gain. It's not a dumb move on my end of things, if that's what you're going for here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tandy
Since you didn't express any opposition to the voucher idea, I assume you also think it would be a good thing? Glad we could come to an agreement and I appreciate your support, good sir. = ) -
04-13-2014, 01:15 PMDyvid
Bottom line, SE has to do resource management. I played SWG and before I quit to play FFXI, abandoned house and cities littered the landscape. That consumed a lot of resources to just keep those shanties up. FPS dropped just to load those damn things. SE doesn't care why you bought a house or how you are using it but at some point they have to make a choice on when a home is considered abandon and delete it.