Why Removing Houses from inactive is NOT a solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Naunet

It's pure numbers. Compare how many theoretical housing plots there are versus how many players there are. Yes, I suppose if SE doesn't do any other change to their housing system, freeing up inactive plots will... do slightly more than zero. But why the heck continue to defend their cruddy housing system? We should be pushing them to improve it in far better ways.

---

Looking at it practically, we're 2 years into FC housing and a year into personal housing, so the likelihood of your efforts at pushing them to improve a.k.a "change to an entirely different housing structure where it's all instanced and everyone gets as many houses as they want" is zero.

As previously stated, they're going to work with the current structure and attempt to provide solutions for said structure regardless of how some individuals feel about it or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Syrehn

As previously stated, they're going to work with the current structure and attempt to provide solutions for said structure regardless of how some individuals feel about it or not.

---

Unless you work for SE directly, this is a pretty definitive statement. They could very well tack on instanced housing to the current housing, similar to how they added other/new features to current housing (airships, private rooms, etc).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titor

Unless you work for SE directly, this is a pretty definitive statement. They could very well tack on instanced housing to the current housing, similar to how they added other/new features to current housing (airships, private rooms, etc).

---

It's a definitive statement because SE is already making steps in the direction that will continue to support their current model. These steps are the inactivity timer, house sharing, and that they'll be adding more wards once they iron out their housing transfer system.

No I don't work for SE but, but as mentioned in my previous post, considering that we're 2 years into FC housing (released in 2.1) and 1 year into personal housing (released in 2.38) it's highly unlikely any instanced housing changes will be made (who knows though I could be wrong). IMO, if they had any intentions of altering their system to incorporate instanced housing it would have been done already.

Jubs is still waiting on the answer to the question of why some of you are defending removing inactive accounts that hit a certain timer of being unsubbed. Cause right now it... it looks like a couple of you are just simply going to drop a deuce all over any suggestion and/or change that doesn't follow your own 'personal' system idea. Doesn't matter if it is beneficial or good or not, just going to throw a tantrum when it doesn't fellow your own xyz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Syrehn

IMO, if they had any intentions of altering their system to incorporate instanced housing it would have been done already.

---

They were not even sure the game was going to succeed in the reboot, so they were probably just using what resources they had to see if there was enough interest to continue with it. Heck, we are /just now/ getting the ability to try on multiple items. Or get a proper EU datacenter. I think we are just beginning to see proper structual revamps and system/QoL changes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BunnyChain

I've started to check up on plots. Went through 180 of them (Lavender Beds, Ward 1, 8, 3 [1-30], 6 [31-60]) and found 22 more likely to be inactive or 39 less likely to be inactive. If you only take the more likely inactive plots you have about 12%, let's say 10% are inactive - that would make about 144 from the total of 1440 plots. However my sample is somewhat small (12.5%) and there might be a few people who don't play but still pay a subscription.

---

I've checked a few more wards across the 3 housing areas on my server.

Sample size 90; Goblet, Lavender Beds, Mist; Ward 3 1-30

Likely to be inactive: 14 (Goblet 6, Lavender Beds 5-7, Mist 3-5)
Less likely to be inactive: 4 (2 of those are likely to be dummy characters kept in FCs with housing)

Taking only the more likely inactive characters/FCs into account = 12.6%.
Seems like my estimated number before is likely to be correct. c:

If it's right, you can expect about 181 plots to open up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BunnyChain

If it's right, you can expect about 181 plots to open up.

---

I dug through the lodestone for the FCs with houses on my server, looked at the membership and previous week/month ranking for about half of the ~600 FCs with houses. About 20% of them had more than 1 member and nobody leveled past 50.

Since that leaves ~850 personal houses, and guessing that the abandon rate is higher for personal houses, I'm betting 25% reclaim rate on my server if they use 90 days, which would be about twice your number.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BunnyChain

Sample size 90; Goblet, Lavender Beds, Mist; Ward 3 1-30.

---

This is extreme extrapolation/data bias. If you only took 1-30 from from ward 3, then yes, you are sampling the most likely to be inactive wards (ward 3 non subdivision is one of the oldest wards, which seems to be your sample)

By sure subscription decay, wards 1-6 non subdivision are most likely to have the largest number of 'inactive' players. Since wards 7-8 and all the subdivisions came out more recently, one would expect the number of inactive players to go down. Plus you did not state your criteria for judging 'inactive'. If you just started observing recently, within the past month, that is not even within the proper time range for housing relinquishment anyway.

Even if your number is correct-- Great! 181 plots open up.

They fill with new active players (probably within the first week!)

Now pretty much all the housing is active players, and everyone knows if they unsubscribe for a bit they lose their house, which means housing owners are going to continue remaining active to keep their house, and fewer will be lost due to inactive relinquishment.

What now!?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titor

Now pretty much all the housing is active players, and everyone knows if they unsubscribe for a bit they lose their house, which means housing owners are going to continue remaining active to keep their house, and fewer will be lost due to inactive relinquishment.

---

We don't actually know yet if the inactivity timer is going to be based off of unsubscribed players; that's pure speculation so far. SE very well might include players who haven't logged into the game (even if they are subbed) for x amount of days as inactive as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titor

This is extreme extrapolation/data bias. If you only took 1-30 from from ward 3, then yes, you are sampling the most likely to be inactive wards (ward 3 non subdivision is one of the oldest wards, which seems to be your sample)

Even if your number is correct-- Great! 181 plots open up.

They fill with new active players (probably within the first week!)

Now pretty much all the housing is active players, and everyone knows if they unsubscribe for a bit they lose their house, which means housing owners are going to continue remaining active to keep their house, and fewer will be lost due to inactive relinquishment.

What now!?

---

new wards are added, that's what. Population of a city increases? You expand housing. changing housing to instanced now would piss people off to no end and I wouldn't blame them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayerinn

new wards are added, that's what. Population of a city increases? You expand housing. changing housing to instanced now would piss people off to no end and I wouldn't blame them.

---

That is what I/we are mostly pushing for. Why would you be so opposed for having warded zones for active players but moving inactive players to instances? It is better to have any house than no house. If the inactives come back they get their house, but in an instance to themselves until a spot opens in a ward. This is not a high server cost since it is just data storage which is really really cheap nowadays.

But it would not be nice to lose your house entirely. Especially if your house is a large on a high population server and costs 90m gil.

The people opposed simply should just admit that they have a fear and are afraid of leaving the game one day and knowing that 'their' 0101101 items that SE actually owns will be destroyed. Jubs believes not a single one of you against the removal of inactive account houses has any care in the world about what those people who don't play anymore think. It is all personal, it is all selfish... whether it be preserving thy self or a means to yell that their system is better than.

Jubs has made about 8 or so friends from simply walking around Jubs ward during the boom of lowered costs + PS4 release. Friends Jubs wouldn't have made otherwise. Thus getting involved with LSs likely wouldn't have gotten involved with otherwise... and making more friends from those LSs.

Con of instanced housing - You isolate yourself from everyone you don't know and all you have are your close friends. The avenues to make new friends close up while playing, wait for it... a freaking MMO. derpderp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titor

That is what I/we are mostly pushing for. Why would you be so opposed for having warded zones for active players but moving inactive players to instances? It is better to have any house than no house. If the inactives come back they get their house, but in an instance to themselves until a spot opens in a ward. This is not a high server cost since it is just data storage which is really really cheap nowadays.

But it would not be nice to lose your house entirely. Especially if your house is a large on a high population server and costs 90m gil.

---

Because then money has to be taken away for new content to put new servers in for this so no yes they messed up on housing I say get rid of private housing disband all the 1 player fc. Other wise just stop because people care more about new content than housing and if they say different their lieing.

Neira got it partially right. My previous FC bought a house in a desired area on a desired plot a few weeks after housing was added (on a not hugely populated server at that time). Our FC only EVER met people from other FCs who had houses near to the summoning bell nearest to our house. I will admit that I made some long term friends from having a house in that area, but that was sheer chance. I've made other long-term game friends from waiting on a relic FATE (and I don't think anyone thinks those were a good idea).

The FC that was friendliest with my old FC, because we shared a summoning bell (this was before they could be put in the house), left the server, and sold to another. They weren't particularly friendly to people outside of their FC, so it died off.

Just putting more people into the current housing areas isn't going to make them more community minded. I wandered into Idyllshire tonight to show off a glamour to a friend, and the /sh chat there was just nasty. Someone asked in shout what pentamelding was and got told to "google it", and "How did you get this far without knowing?". There is no community in the housing areas because there is very little community in the game outside of linkshells and FCs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yeldir

But I will ask you anyway - what are you a proponent of, in terms of solving the housing problem? Purely instanced housing? That would remedy the problem, at the cost of nuking any semblance of community.

Alternatively, if you're one of those build more ward types, what would you say when those wards filled up with dead houses, too? How far do you think that could go, exactly? SE obviously wants to build more wards, but it appears they've asked themselves this same question, and decided quite understandably that the costs of paying for non-instanced housing that players are not using are unjustifiable.

---

I'm a proponent of SE fixing their system, whatever system they use, to make it functional. If they have to go instanced, then they have to go instanced. If they have to build more wards, then they have to build more wards. If they have to remove truly dead lots(purchased for months without a building placed or the owner is a deleted account), then they have to remove dead lots.

But there needs to be a -drastic- overhaul to their current system that they are simply not addressing. There are only enough homes for less than 2% of their subscribers, FCs excluded, and considering that it's an advertised game feature(which is hard to proclaim since the vast majority can't participate), they need to do something to fix it. Their current plan is preposterous, and even assuming there was 100% eviction, which we all know won't occur, you will still only have enough homes for less than 2% of their subscribers and you could generously claim the previous 2% had their fill at best, leaving 96% of the subscribers out.

On top of that, from the sound of it, their criteria isn't to remove houses that are truly dead, but houses that belong to inactive users, which reeks of having the ulterior motive of forcing players to renew their subscriptions more often just to keep the property they earned. That isn't even anywhere close to a fix, and while I am not against deleted users losing their homes or lots that are vacant for a period of time being retrieved, it's ludicrous to think that they should take away a home that someone earned in their game due to a period of absence. The fact that the system is so cutthroat that they would even propose the idea, and worse, many of us are already turning on each other over the idea, should be nothing more than an indicator of how little thought and development went into personal housing.

My only desire at this point is to see SE use their resources wisely to find practical solutions to earn ALL of our subscription fees. Because in free enterprise, businesses are regulated by the CONSUMERS, us, and since we are all currently the ones getting the shaft, I would like to see us stop fighting amongst ourselves and let SE know that our funding of their business comes with expectations. And among those expectations is that whatever systems they introduce for content be accessible by all users who subscribe, not just the lucky 2% who made it there first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JubjubTubs

The avenues to make new friends close up while playing, wait for it... a freaking MMO. derpderp

---

Ok, riddle me this. In my housing ward there are some really trolly/rude people that have caused me to have to keep my house locked since they would constantly troll it. I was trying to be nice, extending welcomes and even gifts to them when they had joined the neighborhood, but they refused to reciprocate or even appreciate the kindness. I really wish that I could move wards, and plan to if they ever allow us to move housing.

I have made plenty of friends due to other resources in game, but my housing 'neighbors' have been quite unpleasant, much to my chagrin.

Would I rather have instanced housing shared with my friends rather than those I am near now? Well, yeah. There are no opportunities for friendships around me in my ward, I tried.

If they start with the awful idea of removing inactive players' housing, i hope they apply it equally to inactive FC houses. Set a threshold for the number of players an FC has for the size of the house it can buy, etc.

If private house owners are to be punished, punish FCs as well!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neira

the ulterior motive of forcing players to renew their subscriptions more often just to keep the property they earned.

---

Bingo, we have a winner!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neira

On top of that, from the sound of it, their criteria isn't to remove houses that are truly dead, but houses that belong to inactive users, which reeks of having the ulterior motive of forcing players to renew their subscriptions more often just to keep the property they earned.

---

This, so much this. Nearly everything they have done in HW so far feels like a subscription grab. Timer, upon timer, upon timer for everything, and now "keep subbing or lose your house(s)".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoolzS

This, so much this. Nearly everything they have done in HW so far feels like a subscription grab. Timer, upon timer, upon timer for everything, and now "keep subbing or lose your house(s)".

---

Indeed. And the "Oh no, our servers would crash if we gave everyone more inventory slots. But we have additional retainer service available in our cash shop to help with your inventory issues now that you have a zillion more new items to carry around after the addition of Inventory Management Fantasy XIV: Heavensward™ expansion."

Why don't they just make the housing system purchasable/rentable via Mog Station. They probably will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoolzS

This, so much this. Nearly everything they have done in HW so far feels like a subscription grab. Timer, upon timer, upon timer for everything, and now "keep subbing or lose your house(s)".

---

Not that I'm agreeing with the method, but to be honest it does make some sence on a financhial level at the verry least.

No Subscription means that they aren't making money off of that player and that means nothing to compensate for rge resorces they're using.

All I really hope is that it's judicial in practice targeting even Larger FC's that meet eviction criteria and not just smaller guilds and solo players who are on break too long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titor

This is extreme extrapolation/data bias. If you only took 1-30 from from ward 3, then yes, you are sampling the most likely to be inactive wards (ward 3 non subdivision is one of the oldest wards, which seems to be your sample)

By sure subscription decay, wards 1-6 non subdivision are most likely to have the largest number of 'inactive' players. Since wards 7-8 and all the subdivisions came out more recently, one would expect the number of inactive players to go down. Plus you did not state your criteria for judging 'inactive'. If you just started observing recently, within the past month, that is not even within the proper time range for housing relinquishment anyway.

Even if your number is correct-- Great! 181 plots open up.

---

If you want to know I've checked a couple more, in the new Ward as you proposed.

Judgement criteria:

• no class above 50
• not unlocked any of the 3 new jobs
• no HW minions

Sample size 90; Lavender Beds, Mist and Goblet; Ward 8 31-60

Likely to be inactive: 17 (Lavender Beds 7-8, Mist 4 and Goblet 6-10) [fulfilling all 3 criteria]
Less likely to be inactive: 5 (some seem to have quit shortly after HW, e.g. having any of the above criteria but not much progress after that)

Taking only the more likely inactive characters/FCs into account = 15.3%

Reason for the increased number is likely to be the higher amount of personal houses in the new wards.

Wards checked and date:
180 @ 06-03-2015
90 @ 24-08-2015 (30 in ward 3 were checked earlier @ 06-03-2015, number increased)
90 @ 25-08-2015 (30 in ward 8 were checked earlier @ 06-03-2015, number increased)
Total sample size 300.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JubjubTubs

Jubs is still waiting on the answer to the question of why some of you are defending removing inactive accounts that hit a certain timer of being unsubbed.

---

I have already explained why. At length. But since you apparently don't read, here it is in short:

1. With how much of an investment housing is, I cannot support removing that from players, no matter how long they are unsubbed. You don't take things away from your players.
2. The effect on housing availability will be miniscule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JubjubTubs

Con of instanced housing - You isolate yourself from everyone you don't know and all you have are your close friends. The avenues to make new friends close up while playing, wait for it... a freaking MMO. derpderp

---

I have already explained why instanced housing does not isolate you from a community. There are multiple examples of instanced housing in MMOs where the community flourishes. Why? Because resources are freed up to provide even more of a creative outlet in the form of higher item limits and greater control over customization. When you encourage creativity in your housing system, it lures in creative people, and by nature, creative people want to connect with other creatives. A community blossoms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BunnyChain

stats

---

This is a sample set I can more adeptly understand using, so I appreciate you going back through newer wards as well.
I do agree there may be some inactive, but even if we completely remove the unoccupied houses, it will not solve the greater problem, they will fill in a week or two and we will be back to where we are now, without relying on the fragile crutch of removing from current inactives.

I still firmly stand by my prior idea of evicting inactive players to their own instanced plot (The house size/layout/items will remain the same) and freeing up the visible wards to active players. If the inactive player returns they can access their instanced house as much as they want (have friends over even) and have the option to place it down in a ward if a warded plot opens. If having the ward/community feel is very important to them, they can focus on getting their house back down. But a lot of players, myself included, would be perfectly fine with and happy with an instanced house.

I do not believe that the house should be completely removed and inaccessible to them due to RL situations. The houses are a huge Gil/Time investment to both obtain and decorate it, up to 90m for the raw plot, and likely 110m+ with furnishings and the like.

No matter the amount of time someone goes inactive, I do not think that this time and effort should be completely removed from them. A housing voucher for a plot is not a solution either as that just drives up demand for plots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

Not that I'm agreeing with the method, but to be honest it does make some sence on a financhial level at the verry least.

No Subscription means that they aren't making money off of that player and that means nothing to compensate for rge resorces they're using.

---

I'm with Ace on this one. Everyone demonizes SE for trying to make their game more profitable by ensuring you need to pay them to use their servers? Those brigands!

I wish personal housing was instanced. That'd solve most of the problems - but it seems like SE is explicitly not moving in that direction. I don't think their game plan can solve the current shortage, unless they intend to add wards at a dramatically increased rate, relative to what we saw in ARR, once they have the means in place to ensure the homes are actually used and enjoyed by paying customers.

Make it fair....

Personal House Owner is now named [Deleted]..... Pop it.
Absolutely no one in the FC has logged and/or entered the home in say 90 days?..... pop it.
Personal House owner hasn't entered in 90 days....pop it.

To keep it fair if the character still exist SE should deposit the cost of the plot in their account so they dont lose their gil and can buy a new house when they get back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yeldir

Everyone demonizes SE for trying to make their game more profitable by ensuring you need to pay them to use their servers? Those brigands!

---

The system would only punish the very small number of housing owners and essentially make them slaves to their subscriptions. It is not a good system to inflict on a small minority of players alone, for a system that many other games can handle flawlessly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titor

The system would only punish the very small number of housing owners and essentially make them slaves to their subscriptions. It is not a good system to inflict on a small minority of players alone, for a system that many other games can handle flawlessly.

---

Or it would be the real players who would be owning houses. The ones who play every day or 3 4 days out of the week. If they unsubscribed they have no reason to have it no matter how long and how much hard work they went threw to get it keep housing for the people who are playing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dererk

Or it would be the real players who would be owning houses. The ones who play every day or 3 4 days out of the week. If they unsubscribed they have no reason to have it no matter how long and how much hard work they went threw to get it keep housing for the people who are playing.

---

SE should just start taking away your gil when you unsubscribe. Minions? What good are they when you're unsubscribed? Gone. All that space your retainers (not just the additional ones, but the default ones too) and their inventory take up would be better put to use elsewhere, so yeah we'll take that as well. Maybe reset your chocobo to default color. Oh and you're not using your GC or PvP ranks anymore, so let's just wipe those out while we're at it.

It's really not the same thing Naunet.

The systems you just brought up are localized to the specific character and all data is equally alloted to ALL playera in those systems unless some one pays into the extra systems such as extra retainers for a premium on top of the sub.

In the case of housing how ever, both the avalable locations as well as the server bandwidth used to add to the housing systems are finite and there is by far no where near enough to go around. By my estimate (based on no solid data tbh, just a rough guess) there are easily more than 20 times the amount of players as plots. Even if all players were in the existing FCs on Balmung with out founding more there is still more than 10 FCs for every plot.

Player housing is also a significantly greater investment on the part of the player than almost all of the things I listed.

Fix the system. Bandaids on a broken system will do nothing but punish players for SE's mistakes.

Well,I'm sure a 300 milliin USD donation could probably modivate them to invest in new hard ware and the extra bandwidth to add a few thousand plots per server... but short of that there are really only two options. Weed out players that likly arent coming back (lapses of over 6 months in my oppinion are most likly not coming back.) or abandon housing development all togeather like the lost cause it seems to be because of the "Bart Simpson Paradox" player base.

In all things, both online and IRL, sacrifices have to be made. And I'd personally rather solo players, dead FCs, and especially large FCs who own multiple abandoned plots to loose them in favor of people who will use and apreciate them than for paying players to loose out because of a few [Kupo]ers that buy up all the land then never log in again.

As far as SE goes, if its a Lose Lose situation with the fan base they're going where the cash flow is. And I cant blame them for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser-Ace

Well,I'm sure a 300 milliin USD donation could probably modivate them to invest in new hard ware and the extra bandwidth to add a few thousand plots per server...

---

I am not sure if you know how much servers cost or that it is possible to pull off a good housing system on lesser hardware.

Also I use and appreciate my house a ton, it is my pride and joy in the game. If something came up IRL though and it caused me to be away from the game out of my control but I had every intent on returning I would be devastated if it was gone. I poured my heart and soul into gathering the funds for the house so I would have enough to get it. It was not just a trivial task I got in a day or so. I worked at that for /months/.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Titor

snip

---

Well, tbh I pulled the numbers out of my arse. And I do sympathise. It'd be no different then unsubbing for a few months and log on to see all my levels have been reset and my items deleted but something MUST be done. We all agree on that. A way I see it being a solution, is after a time the degradation puts the plot up for auction. The Gil goes to the owner of the plot and the items to the Residential Reclaimer NPC (Same NPC as if you had a personal room and got booted for your FC) then Only the Plot and Building would be gone and the evicted player would be compensated. But all in all there is a very short list of things that can be done and most are just as bad as the last.

What ever is done, I just hope it doesn't turn into a disaster of its own.

If they really want to make players happy and make it truly available to everyone they need to scrap the current system. Leave the wards for FC's only if they must keep them. Refund the private owners and set up a system that is an amalgam of the Mog room and Wildstar's instanced housing systems, hell even if you make it an entrance in the wards themselves where you port to you're own private plot it would still work. Just make a gate right off the main market in a ward next to the merchants. Give us the ability to build truly unique homes freely and give us some incentive to even want the house outside of our egos. A daily buff or an overall buff on crafting while we're at our house. More people would use the houses if there was a real reason to do so. I'm just wondering why we're still going along with the ward system, especially after they made it so individuals have to compete with FCs for housing plots. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nymeria2x

Snip

---

More like so FC's have to compete with individuals XD But yeah exactly the point.

Jub, if you ever saw the Wildstar housing system you'd see how wrong you are. Wildstar has an instanced system. Every player is given an impressively sized plot with a shack in the middle and a community board at the entrance. The board allowed you to pick 1 of 3 24hr buffs as well as giving you access to your closest neighbors, everyone's house on your friends list or in your guild, allows a separate list for people you designate as favorite neighbors, you also can use the board to shuffle through random plots to visit. The customization is amazing. You can paint items, resize, completely rotate, sink items into the ground or make them float. You can work your way to upgrading your house from the shack to a mansion. They allowed you to pick a node for each gathering class. For houses they had challenge courses you could buy and set up in your yard for other players to come try which drove the community to grow. Housing in Wildstar was superb and SE could really learn from it.

Turn inn rooms into mini housing, giving the buffs, maybe a small garden and yeah!

About housing:

Quote:

---

Q: I can’t buy a house! Yoshida, please do something!
A: I’d like to address this first since there are people saying plots are unavailable and prices are just too high. First off, I owe you an apology for my subpar explanation of why personal and Free Company housing cost the same amount. The prices were determined after extensively reviewing the game’s economy, and they won’t go higher than they are now.

Basically, the reason both personal and Free Company housing plots aren’t segregated is that because it’s been a year since our official launch, the rate at which Free Companies are established will gradually decrease. If the land for personal and Free Company housing was separate, we’d have to keep supplementing both in spite of declining demand for Free Company plots. Plus, when a Free Company is dissolved, its property is relinquished. On the other hand, individual players will continue to earn gil, so the demand for personal housing plots will only increase from now on. Separating the two would result in a situation where a player can’t purchase land in crowded personal housing areas or buy an empty plot in the Free Company areas. So, while I do understand that people want to buy a house right away, we have decided to proceed with a system that won’t keep players from building houses in the long run.

We’re planning on doubling the number of plots in Patch 2.4, and we’re aiming to add even more land in later updates. At the moment, though, we don’t have a good handle on how many players are trying to buy personal plots worldwide, so just sit tight─more is on the way.

Finally, I’ve seen a few posts on the forums saying housing would be better if it was instanced like inn rooms are, so I want to point out that instances aren’t saved. Nothing in an inn room needs to be saved; player housing, on the other hand, necessitates personal save data for things like furniture placement and character location. So, it would really amount to adding more land anyway. During a previous Letter from the Producer LIVE, I mentioned that we would make it possible for players who don’t belong to a Free Company to have a house with a yard so they can garden and raise chocobos, and the current system is designed to do this. We will be doing our best to provide more land as soon as possible, so please bear with us a little longer.

---

Source

• separate personal and Free Company housing plots would require the supplementation of both
• declining demand for Free Company plots
• increased demand for personal housing plots
• unused plots in both areas

• player housing necessitates personal save data
• [instanced housing] would amount to adding more land

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BunnyChain

About housing:
Source

---

The quote and source you posted clearly show that SE is highly unlikely to ever separate personal/FC houses. It also shows their reasons why they likely have no intentions in the future, even if some players think it's a good idea, to convert to an instanced system.

It basically reaffirms that they'll move forward as best they can with their current model. This includes: decay timer, adding land periodically, and house sharing options. Please look forward to it.