Actually, someone who is so likely to unsubscribe for over two months is most certainly NOT the future of this game. This game needs revenue, which it's not receiving from players who aren't paying.Quote:
Originally Posted by kamikrazy
I'm going to have to be cruel to be kind here. Stop whining. No, seriously. If you're logged off long enough to lose your house, then you aren't enjoying the game anyway and there's no real reason to continue playing. Stop making yourself out to be a martyr for a greater cause, because all you're really doing is denying an actual PAYING customer from chasing that same dream. We paying customers are the future of this game, since our revenue goes towards creating new content, new expansions and keeping these servers in good condition for everyone else.
So for the love of Hydaelyn, will everyone STOP pretending like they're the victims when they're the antagonists.
Thinking this game is a bad investment
Printable View
-
10-22-2015, 03:13 PMLemuria
-
10-22-2015, 03:16 PMLaylaTsarraBecause housing is the latest hot topic and if you have to go with the flow. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex_Lenderson
-
10-22-2015, 03:18 PMSho86Actually, that's SE's doing, not an un-subbed gamer. The only thing an un-subbed gamer is doing in this specific housing scenario is making it look a little less 'active' within the community instance. The one denying housing to all players is currently SE since they do not have enough housing for anyone who wants to get one on the spot. If they want to scrap current personal housing, and make it instanced, giving current owners free instanced housing, it would be a fair trade, minus the destructible items that we would lose. This problem was brought on by SE, not by gamers who wait for patches or who actually quit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemuria
-
10-22-2015, 03:22 PMLemuriaNow you're just arguing semantics. This is the system we currently have, and we all know what this system is. Therefore, if a player is complaining that they can't keep their house indefinitely, despite not paying a dime towards the maintenance of that house, then they are fully aware that they are denying that house to another paying player.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sho86
And if they're not aware? Well, historically, ignorance has never been a good excuse. -
10-22-2015, 03:22 PMkamikrazyI think anyone who reads your post can see that its clearly just a petty and snide remark to make me sound childish. I posted my points, and your point of "It sucks seeing all those houses sitting there been unused for so long." can be rebuttled quite easily in my very first post, where I stated that the only reason there's a limit on housing is because of SE's own design. They could have done instanced housing, or they could have done a dynamic system like LOTRO did, but they chose neither. They opted for what we have without any kind of plan to make it sustainable, and now they are punishing the players who have paid and who will pay in the future for their mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elim
If there were houses for everyone, houses that remain empty would be irrelevant. Or at the very least, they should have a system that makes housing available to everyone, if only to consolidate the number of wards. That isn't what's happening. What's happening is that if you invest in this game, your ultimate reward is to be a "sub slave" as someone else put it, or else you will lose your reward, with virtually a 0% chance to ever regain it. So again I ask you, for those of us who see attaining the largest and most expensive item in the game as our ultimate reward, is a system to strip that reward from you anything more than a repellent for future players who may see housing as an attraction?
And if this is an acceptable evil in this system, then why would SE have even implemented housing if it was not meant to attract players/add value to the game? Is the threat of stripping that achievement not by itself making that achievement meaningless?
If you are going to try to get technical with your suggestions, at least have an argument and not a passive aggressive middle finger. It makes you look like either you don't understand my point of view, you are refusing to acknowledge that point of view, or you are just being spiteful about it and your responses are summing up to, "well just LEAVE if you don't like it! You don't belong here!"
You clearly didn't understand my argument. My argument is that players who are new who may be interested in this game because of housing will no longer be attracted when they learn that housing is something of a temporary and fleeting reward. These types of players are longterm investments. What logic you are arguing is no better than arguing for yearly expansions and cash shop heavy f2p games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemuria
Sure it makes money in the short term, but players looking to make the game a longterm game are going to be repelled by that. They are going to see the game's rewards as fleeting and meaningless, and not worth longterm investment. -
10-22-2015, 03:28 PMErcapotecompletelyQuote:
Originally Posted by kamikrazy
-
10-22-2015, 03:28 PMAnemone_ValestiThis guy gets it, and for that you get my Like.Quote:
Originally Posted by AskaRay
Soooo many things can happen to this game, whether its by the Devs, or some other source that can stop it right in it's Tracks for any individual or the game itself. I walked into this game knowing this, and with every action that occurs I weight it's worth vs 27 Bucks(6 Additional Retainers xD) a Month + Time Dedicated. "When" I eventually determine that I no longer find it worth it (And it will happen at some point), I'll stop outright and move to something else simple as that...and whatever cause it to not be worth it any longer doesn't erase the Time that I dedicated that I actually enjoyed it. That's a time of your limited Life that you can enjoy even though the end result may not be what you hoped for...Something you have to establish before you began pursuing a goal. If you're not willing to accept the possibility of it not working out, then don't go for it.
Things can also happen at any point in time to shift the worth of goals, and it probably will suck. Which is why I stress to people that they should enjoy their time in pursuit of Things/Goals even if it includes a great deal of effort. Shit Happens, which happens to be something that people don't like accepting. I own a House, though one long term goal (Not Ultimate) for me is to get a Large. In between now and whenever that is, I know that a lot stuff can happen to either make it not possible or not worth it, and me continuing is me accepting that. Hell I may lose the Large if I ever get it 3 months after due to this same thing...and I accept that as a Possibility and am still going for it.
That is my 2cents though, and you can feel however you want on it. To Answer your question OP, I don't feel the same way, nor remotely close to it. Im gonna select my next goal, which is to Max DRK so I can Wipe my Static in Savage constantly, and go for it while enjoying my time along the way. Something may happen to change it's worth but Imma roll the dice and go for it...Ho Awaaaaaaaaaaay! -
10-22-2015, 03:29 PMSho86Semantics? The current system was not the originally intended system for personal housing, we all know this, and is currently very flawed. The players did not do this. By your analogy/example/etc, our gear, or mounts, hell even characters should be deleted within 45 days because we're not paying a dime to keep those active when we take a break or quit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemuria
Edit: I suppose a more realistic example would be our retainers, which is currently having 'server issues' itself. -
10-22-2015, 03:30 PMLemuriaLet's talk brass tacks, shall we?Quote:
Originally Posted by kamikrazy
If you want the community style of the housing districts, complete with an actual neighborhood, then you're going to have a limited number of houses. Sorry, that's just a fact of life. If you want an instanced house, ala the Mog House from FFXI, you're not going to have the neighborhood, nor are you likely to have an exterior to your home.
I don't think people understand just how much traffic each neighborhood could receive. That's going to require a lot more server power than a four or eight-man or even a 24-man instanced dungeon, so it would be unrealistic to try and instance every single one. Even IF they somehow figured it out, how would you choose which ward to visit? Would they list an infinite number of wards in the selection screen? How would you go about selecting infinity from that list?
So, yeah, SE's responsible for the restrictions but let's be realistic here. It's restricted because it's more than just your little instance. The neighborhoods are what makes housing more appealing, and we can't have both. So before you bemoan the fact there's not an infinite number of houses just to back up a weak argument for letting you keep yours indefinitely, at least look at the facts first.Cute. But considering that information is just stored, and not accessed on a regular basis, your argument fails miserably. Housing data would be regularly accessed, depending on the house. Firstly, because anyone can walk the wards and see your home, and secondly because players can open their homes for anyone to visit, so the interior would also be accessed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sho86
Storage costs a lot less than the traffic does. This aren't the days when 100Mb hard drives were considered top-tier. -
10-22-2015, 03:31 PMElim
I suggest cooling down. :) You read my post as snide because you seem to be very emotional over the subject. Remember this conversation is about a fake house in a video game.
And you're assuming if they change their system (perhaps by making houses only instanced) that they wont run out of space and that everyone will have access. There may not be a better way -- or a much better way -- to solve the space issue besides what they're already planning to do.
Either way I wouldn't be against a new system. Just like I'm not against the reclamation system.