"Lack of content"... Minor housing rant

Poor multi billionaire Square Enix who can't afford more server space for housing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seger

Poor multi billionaire Square Enix who can't afford more server space for housing.

---

99.999999% of the time it's not the company not being able to afford it, it's the people who approve the financial decisions to purchase things like this that don't get why it is a good idea to do it(happier players spreading word, potentially bringing in more and more players who will sub thus giving more money to the big wigs). And for that, it falls on multiple layers of people to get it TO those people who make the decision to approve or not, and if the pitch it properly worded to get the request approved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ket-Xil

I have no idea what investment you think I've made and what Icemage means.

---

Oh honey, if you don't know who Icemage is in this forum, then clearly you haven't been paying attention. Lurkmoar.

It's not always Umbral Ice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shibi

Housing is a shackle.

---

People say this all the time but if you're only paying to maintain a house in a game you don't want to play anymore, then why are you even worried about keeping the house?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ket-Xil

so do people think in game instances are magical no-cost "things"? No, instances like EVERYTHING ELSE IN A PROGRAM has a size, a space it takes up. Please stop talking about instanced housing as if it's something that can easily be implemented without a hardware cost associated with it. (Yes I do have a technical background)

---

Do you really have a techincal background? Are you aware that the bits that make up your forum avatar's thumbnail is likely larger than the file size of a large plot?

A datafile containing a manifest of items and their associated properties (coordinates, dye, on/off, etc) would be tiny, no matter your housing size.

Instanced housing is an architecture issue, not a storage issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SieyaM

People say this all the time but if you're only paying to maintain a house in a game you don't want to play anymore, then why are you even worried about keeping the house?

---

It's not because the game is currently boring for me that i don't want to come back when contents will be released and i certainly won't lose my house which was an investment of multiple dozens of million gils just because of that stupid system so yeah i alternate between sub and unsub from one month to another, luckily my latest resub was last week so i have the new dailies to do for now.

I love my house and i spend a lot of time and gils on it so i won't let it go so easily even though it's frustrating to sub to something i don't feel like playing.

Is there one example of people treating instanced housing as something that doesn't consume resources? I've never seen it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arcadious

Do you really have a techincal background? Are you aware that the bits that make up your forum avatar's thumbnail is likely larger than the file size of a large plot?

A datafile containing a manifest of items and their associated properties (coordinates, dye, on/off, etc) would be tiny, no matter your housing size.

Instanced housing is an architecture issue, not a storage issue.

---

Yes and I'm sure you're right because I'm not a network engineer, I'm electrical. My point is that there is a technical cost to making instancing. Whether it's storage or architecture, there is a technical challenge. People seem to think they can push a button and magically make instance housing which isn't the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midareyukki

Oh honey, if you don't know who Icemage is in this forum, then clearly you haven't been paying attention. Lurkmoar.

It's not always Umbral Ice.

---

Yea I'll pass. Imagine telling someone who just joined "you haven't been paying attention". Umm, no shit?