Forcing players to pay to keep housing is unfair.

The whole having to "enter" your house to reset the timer is really just a nuisance. An active sub is all you should need. The "walk through the door once a month" system that's in place doesn't alleviate the issue of people buying a house and not using them. There are still plenty of near-empty yards around my house that have barely been touched since the wards opened.

I mean, is the timer of "walking through the front door" actually preventing people from owning a house and not using it? Not really.. Walking in your front door once every month isn't using it. It's just purely an inconvenience to those that do need a short time away from the game or cannot login for a short time.

I am fine with an auto-demolish after a number of unsubbed days to keep the market churning over when people quit on a more long term level.. However going away on vacation for a month shouldn't put you at risk of your house getting demolished.


Unfortunately this will get little to no support because the number of people that don't own a house far outweigh those that do (not saying that every non-home owner is like this but).. Especially considering people use their own sour sauce for not having the opportunity to buy a house to penalize those that do own one, and are quick to jump on the train that is "I don't have a house so others should have to jump through hoops to keep it!"

Blame SE for the terrible housing availability, not those that did buy a house. Because I am sure in time, you will be one of the people that own one, and you will likely be crying out for a bit more leniency on the demolish timer..

What if you share your estate with a friend? Is your friend entering the state in your place resets the timer?

I can see the reasoning behind the timer tho, as it'll be way too much work to rework the entire system to make it instance. I mean that'll be the perfect plan, to rework everything so it works and everyone gets a place, but sadly I don't see that happening. Tho on the other hand I can also the other view of the timer needing to be shorter. Cause fact of the matter is it'll make the people who have them log back in faster to keep their house cause it's all about that sub. In the end, there's no winners here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yeol

What if you share your estate with a friend? Is your friend entering the state in your place resets the timer?

---

Nope, sadly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LadyKairi

Their main concern is the MAJORITY.

---

I mean, we get a bazillion threads every other week on here and other sites complaining about how crappy the housing in FFXIV is. I think that would mean the issue is significant enough that the devs need to look further into it, and do something about it. Something more than just the bread crumbs they've given us. (Just can't with those apartments... step in the right direction, but they're basically an FC room...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicKirby

And?

---

Why are you asking for an "and" after the statement of "That's all."?

There is no "and". There's an "end". With E. That's the meaning of "That's all.". That is all there is. I understand you're really insecure and take anyone quoting you as a direct attack, but please, show some reading comprehension.

Sometimes a humorous comment is just a humorous comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akira_Tenshi

. I could be hospital dying.

---

Bruh. If you're dying in the hospital, a digital house is the least of your problems

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aquaslash

Bruh. If you're dying in the hospital, a digital house is the least of your problems

---

So you want to take away people's homes just because they got sick??? That's the very definition of discrimination... bruh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahd_Monkey

So you want to take away people's homes just because they got sick??? That's the very definition of discrimination... bruh.

---

Did we read the same post? I didn't see him write anything even approaching that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zojha

Why are you asking for an "and" after the statement of "That's all."?

There is no "and". There's an "end". With E. That's the meaning of "That's all.". That is all there is. I understand you're really insecure and take anyone quoting you as a direct attack, but please, show some reading comprehension.

Sometimes a humorous comment is just a humorous comment.

---

Adding a 'that's all' is pretty typical of a parting shot you'd see in any passive aggressive conversation you'd have in the real world.
The only other posts I've responded to in this thread was one wherein they questioned if I read something in a condescending way and 'eyerolled'. (Their following post was far more neutral in decorum.) Both of which were obviously meant to be taken in a slightly antagonistic tone, likewise with the underlined part of your post.

If people hold opinions differing from mine, that's great. I legitimately enjoy having conversations like that, me simply responding to the comments isn't indicative of feeling attacked, even if there's clearly some intention within the post. This is entirely separate from having a conversation with a point.

I find it oddly humorous that you tell someone to not read into things like there was an intended insult, and then go on to insult them.