Fix Housing Megathread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

That's a fancy way of saying "I disagree with you"
If that's true, why have I pointed out several things that LotRO has done better than FFXIV in housing?

SE's oversight was that they didn't really take into consideration that people would have alts (which has much less need now that New Game+ is a thing) and they built the entire personal housing around the limited subscription. SE made several mistakes and I have been advocating for changes to the housing system like having all alts on a server get ports to all personal houses on the same server owned by that service account and also housing storage that will allow someone to transfer items between chars on the server. These are two things that LoTRO has had for player housing since it launched many years ago, and it's two things that are long overdue in FFXIV for housing.

While I will be (occasionally) hyperbolic, I have been consistently advocating for positive change to the system.



When Yoshi-P indicates that there are RMT issues within housing (largely because of the housing market that existed before it), and they still exist to this day... that idea was not short sighted. SE saw it as an easy way to stop the housing flipping which it does exceedingly well. If you're someone that got burned by it then (quite honestly) you deserved it.

---

Typical hyperbolic response that you often seem from twitter community. It is either you are fried or you are foe, laughable at best.

Your amazing hatred is petty and you don't even know what you are saying any more. Let's say you own a 3,000 2 floor house that you worked hard and obtained through legal mean. All of sudden one zealot comes with pitch and folk demands to torn down your house because he need it to build an apartment to house more people. Just how ridiculous your idea sound.

It is the principle I am defending. You have no right to stripped someone's property just because supply can't meet demand. Get your fact straight.

LOTR mmo? Are you refering that piece of garbage with crappy graphic, crappy game play, crappy music, crappy character models and crappy story that not many even know about it? Of course its housing system is fine because its playerbase is ridiculous small and it is not even eligible to scale with FF14. Do they even have a blizzcon or FF14 fanfest that people even cares about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

Again, I changed the quote from "Read these rules though http://www.square-enix...."

to "Read these rules though <link to rules from 2018>"

So I did not alter what you said. I have not been dishonest. Your accusations are false.

---

Like I said... you started it with the post at https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...=1#post5560600 and after I saw that and went back to each post that you had stuck <comment> into and edited what you said to better suit what the response was... then returned the favor in future responses. I see you've gotten the point on why that's bad forum etiquette.

Edit:
Or as you're showing with https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...=1#post5561412 some people just never learn....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Like I said... <link to something unrelated, comments about unrelated things>

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

Anyway back to the topic at hand....

So on top of those rules added in 2018, what changes do you think should be made to the system? Since that's sort of the purpose of this thread.

---

So on top of those rules added in 2018, what changes do you think should be made to the system? Since that's sort of the purpose of this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

Anyway back to the topic at hand....

So on top of those rules added in 2018, what changes do you think should be made to the system? Since that's sort of the purpose of this thread.

---

This is going to be a rehash of many things I have suggested before soo...

Personal House Changes:

• Make gardening available without the need for housing - hopefully this is happening with Endwalkers
• Give each character on a server on the same service account a teleport location to each personal house owned by any of those characters. So if you have one personal house on a server, all four characters on that server get a teleport location to that house. A grandfathered in account with four houses would have all four teleport locations to each house on each character.
• Give personal houses storage so players can easily transfer items, crystals, and gil between chars on the same server

FC Changes:

• Make a workshop accessible to anyone not in an FC so solo players can build an airship (or sub) and can run airship (or sub) expeditions without needing to be in an FC
• Have FCs do an active service account check and if they are less than four service accounts with active subscriptions the FC will lose the house after a grace period that allows the FC to bring the active subs above 4
• Allow the FC leader the option to transfer the FC house to their personal house through a Mogg Station purchase

Additional changes:

• Allow for a housing buyback at full sticker price for someone that wants to sell it back to the housing market
• Stop the loss of items at the Residential Caretaker, and have them all the non-bound stuff from the house there, even if it means disassembling aircraft and subs
• Allow players to mail things between characters on the same server

The main point with this is to remove the incentives for owning multiple houses. I get that it removes some of the uniqueness from housing, but it also opens up mechanics to more of the player-base (as the assumption is that the FC workshop and FC gardening are locked off to most players due to FC permissions).

And being realistic, until most of the above has been implemented, the grandfathered in personal houses should be left alone as you want to allow players to naturally divest the houses rather than forcing the issue.

That said, shell FCs need to die in a fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

LOTR mmo? Are you refering that piece of garbage with crappy graphic, crappy game play, crappy music, crappy character models and crappy story that not many even know about it? Of course its housing system is fine because its playerbase is ridiculous small and it is not even eligible to scale with FF14. Do they even have a blizzcon or FF14 fanfest that people even cares about?

---

Yes, I played a lot of that MMO, but that was like over a decade ago, so different time, different place. That said there are two things from that MMO that really belong in FFXIV:

• All characters on a server got a port to the personal house, and it was shared between them equally
• There was housing storage (and the ability to mail things between characters) so moving items around was easy

And while I would love to see this, due to the technical differences between the two games and how far advanced the FFXIV housing system is compared to the LotRO one, I doubt we'll see the ward scaling like what LotRO had, as it would spawn in additional neighborhoods if it detected that (for example) there needed to be more hobbit or human neighborhoods while the dwarven and elven ones stayed as is. I don't see how FFXIV can do that technically speaking, but it would definitely help alleviate some of the issues relating to FFXIV housing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Have FCs do an active service account check and if they are less than four service accounts with active subscriptions the FC will lose the house after a grace period that allows the FC to bring the active subs above 4.

---

Everything you suggested is decent except this. Thinking about this one for about 4 seconds will tell you that it is not a material change from what currently exists.

Current: FC house goes boom if untouched 45 days
Suggested: FC house goes boom if members list is not maintenanced for 45 days

"They're the same picture"

Literally asking SE to do a bunch of work to zero end on that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

Everything you suggested is decent except this. Thinking about this one for about 4 seconds will tell you that it is not a material change from what currently exists.

Current: FC house goes boom if untouched 45 days
Suggested: FC house goes boom if members list is not maintenanced for 45 days

"They're the same picture"

Literally asking SE to do a bunch of work to zero end on that one.

---

That is suggested specifically to address the shell FCs, since you are correct that it's completely invisible to a healthy FC. However, that's the entire point as it's a deterrent to make it harder for the shell FCs to tie up housing while not affecting the legitimate FCs.

That said, if someone is willing to fork over the money to maintain the account subscriptions needed to pass the FC check, they can keep the house as I'm not distinguishing who is controlling the subs, only stating that they should exist and it should be applied to all FC housing equally. And really, if someone has the disposable income to fund it, who am I to tell them how they should spend their money since it's more money going to FFXIV and we all benefit from that.

Running the math on this, if you have four service accounts, with 8 characters each, they would only be able to tie up 12 houses between the accounts assuming you had 32 characters rolled and ready to go. That's 8 FC houses (as IMO the FC housing restriction that SE has isn't good and it should go), plus the four personal houses from the service account as each FC would need to have a character from each service account to stay compliant, so in essence, each account could only tie up 3 houses. To own a ward, you'd need 12 service accounts (which would be a theoretical maximum of 36 houses which IIRC is slightly larger than the size of a ward allowing for some flex in the houses), and if someone is willing to pay 12*$15 USD = $180/month to keep the ward (or more realistically $150 USD * 12 = $1800/year as 2 six month subs are about $75 USD) then more power to them as they are helping fund FFXIV. However, when you start getting into that much of an annual expense, the financial cost starts to become it's own deterrent and most people would seek to divest the houses at that point... which is why everything listed needs to be present for it to work together correctly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Running the math on this, if you have four service accounts, with 8 characters each, they would only be able to tie up 12 houses between the accounts assuming you had 32 characters rolled and ready to go.

---

My math says 29 FC houses for 4 accounts. 4 accounts x 8 characters = 32, minus 3 to float from one FC to the next. You join the 3 floaters into a different FC for each day of the month, keeps the grace period rolling. This only has to be done from day 1-29, from day 30-45 you can just focus subs.

And you could always run all 32, provided you have a friend willing to run 3 alts for you.

Unless the system is sophisticated enough to avoid being exploited in this manner, it wouldnt be effective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catstab

My math says 29 FC houses for 4 accounts. 4 accounts x 8 characters = 32, minus 3 to float from one FC to the next. You join the 3 floaters into a different FC for each day of the month, keeps the grace period rolling. This only has to be done from day 1-29, from day 30-45 you can just focus subs.

And you could always run all 32, provided you have a friend willing to run 3 alts for you.

Unless the system is sophisticated enough to avoid being exploited in this manner, it wouldnt be effective.

---

It'd be a pointless system with a timer reset when they hit four subs as the system can be gamed as you're describing.

The system would need to have something like a time debt that was accrued if you were below 4 subs in the FC, and the time debt was paid off at the same rate regardless how high you were above four subs, and if the debt ever hit a specific threshold (like say, 45 days) the house was released immediately when the threshold was met. TBH, it'd make sense if the debt threshold was lower than 45 days, as a lower threshold would force players to be a bit more proactive with the FC management.

I wouldn't be opposed to just outright disbanding the FC if it was below 4 members... but there needs to be more of the above laundry list of features in play before that makes sense as a game mechanic.

Could flip the housing system from the way it originally started. Originally it was intended to be Free Company only. Change it so it's personal only.

Create a new system to serve FCs as meeting halls for their members. Keep it to the theme of what a Free Company is - a group of adventurers contracting their services to the Grand Companies. Workshops could be attached. Customization with housing furnishings could be allowed. They might lose gardening (though Island Sanctuaries suggest that they've solved the gardening in an instance problem) but if most FCs use the garden mainly to grow Thavnairian Onions for their members, those could be placed on a vendor in Thavnair (would make sense) at the approximate price that has been seen across the MBs in recent months (somewhere between 100-150k).

There's still one outstanding problem with personal ownership restrictions and that is that ownership is per world, not per service account. There are far more active players world wide than there are houses world wide. Each player with houses on multiple worlds is taking away houses from players who don't have one. I have characters on 8 different worlds. If I were to buy a house on each of those worlds, that's 7 other players that would never be able to buy a house. Quite frankly, that sucks.

No one needs a house for each of their characters even if they want it (sorry, someone's RP head canon is not a reason to deprive other players of game content). A player can pick which character gets a house and the remaining characters can get an apartment. No, I would not expect SE to take away houses from players who have already legitimately obtained them under the rules currently in effect if they were to make this change. It would only apply to future purchases.

Above all, SE needs to get its act together and make certain that every player that wants a house can get one. It is shameful that they continue to cling to a system that does not serve their players adequately when they do so well in other regards. Housing drama like this does not exist in other games. Why does SE want it to exist here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

There's still one outstanding problem with personal ownership restrictions and that is that ownership is per world, not per service account. There are far more active players world wide than there are houses world wide. Each player with houses on multiple worlds is taking away houses from players who don't have one. I have characters on 8 different worlds. If I were to buy a house on each of those worlds, that's 7 other players that would never be able to buy a house. Quite frankly, that sucks.

---

Until we've got the tech in place where I can teleport from one server to another near instantly... I don't see how this restriction could be changed reasonably. And even then, one personal house per datacenter would work assuming the teleport was reasonably fast.

But one per service account? We've got to be able to quickly hop from one datacenter to another for that to work, and we can't even see outside of our home datacenter at the moment...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

No, I would not expect SE to take away houses from players who have already legitimately obtained them under the rules currently in effect if they were to make this change.

---

The only way this would work (and IMO SE should do it) is only after they have given players several months time to divest and there have been enough other things added where there is no functional loss for the players that have more than one house. Some players need motivation, and sometimes you need to have the choice between the carrot and the stick in order to get the desired result.

Make alts tenants by default.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lezard21

Make alts tenants by default.

---

They told us 2 years ago it was something they wanted to do but they had technological hurdles to overcome. Nothing has been said since.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jojoya

They told us 2 years ago it was something they wanted to do but they had technological hurdles to overcome. Nothing has been said since.

---

It would be worth raising to the dev team again since a lot can change in two years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erinellza

It would help to lower the invisible timer. It's 24 hours now, max it at 6. It wouldn't fix the issues but it's a needed change for people's health.
I have a friend who sits & clicks every day for 10+ hours, they are exhausted, neglect their job and it just breaks my heart. I'm glad I grabbed my house in 5.35 because I would never do this to myself.

---

Sounds like your friend is suffering from a gaming addiction if they're neglecting their real life responsibilities and health for the sake of possessing virtual pixels. Encourage them to seek counseling. It may mean they need to quit playing the game for a few months while they get their life back in order.

So going through a raffle idea again (yes, one of those), here's how I think it should change to address one of the problems with housing: Relos screwing over first time buyers.

So like mentioned previously, houses will keep their random timers, but they will switch to raffle system to award the house. Here's how that works:

• Every 30 minutes after the house comes off timer, it checks if at least one person bought a ticket. If so, the new owner is chosen randomly. If no one has bought a raffle ticket, the house will refresh the raffle window. The remaining raffle window time is displayed
• Anyone new housing owner can buy a raffle ticket as long as they are compliant with the restrictions outlined at https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodes.../housing_land/
• FCs and players are in the same raffle
• A housing relo can only occur if they get a ticket (same costs as currently) and win the raffle
• Anyone who doesn't get the house gets their ticket refunded
• Players can only buy one housing ticket at a time

The main thing I'm trying to figure out a solution to is the need to first clicker, as this allows for a bit fairer way to do it and rewards those that are sticking it out. Time window may need to be adjusted as having a shorter one helps to shut out people that aren't actually there when the house comes to market. The biggest frustration I'm seeing with first time buyers is that the relos have a bit too much "power" in the current system as they are able to take priority over new buyers rather than putting both on equal footing like it is in the real world (arguably first time buyers have it a bit better as they aren't usually dependent upon selling the older property).

It probably needs work, but as Yoshi-P is considering this idea, it's probably a good idea to start figuring out how we can make it suck the least so that way we can guide the dev team with this rather than shutting down any discussion and getting something forced upon us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erinellza

lol they normally don't play excessively, they just really want a house at this point. I suggested moving to Spriggan because last time I checked it still had plenty of small plots and they are considering it. But I still think that reducing the invisible timer would be better than nothing.

---

I definitely agree the length of the current timer is excessive. A length of 2-6 hours would be more than sufficient to accomplish the purpose of the timer, which is to deter house flipping. Two hours is more than enough time for prospective buyers to find out the plot is available and be ready to compete for it, especially with all the housing discords that have been organized to scan for and share newly available plot information with their users.

If your friend wants the house that badly, I hope they do choose to move to Spriggan. Cross world linkshells provide a common chat and you can always world visit to do content together. I know a few players that spend most of their time cross world to do things with their various friends circles across our data center.

Sitting with a friend last night who had been trying to get a house plot for 12 hours+. We discussed several options that are better than the current system.

It was down to three people wanting it. The BS part of it was that one of them got their FC to show up and start trying to buy it. I assume so they could pass it off as a "tenant" thing and give them better odds. Which just seems wrong to me in so many ways.

We talked about options in my FC for this.

First, make it a silent auction. A house comes up for sale, you make a bid. One bid per service account per plot. First highest bidder gets the plot. Sure people with more gil get an advantage. But it comes down to whether they are willing to bid 10 or 20 million gil to get a small housing plot.

The second option was presented by someone in my FC. That being putting it to RNG. The house comes up for sale. Every 18 hours a player can walk up and use the Placard. If the RNG hits, and they have the gil to make the purchase, they get the opportunity to buy it. If not, they have to wait 18 hours for another chance at it.

The current system just fosters animosity between players and encourages harsh feelings when players gang up to all bid on a plot in order to give it to their friend. Or stand around the placard to try and throw off targeting on it.

Edit: As an update, my friend lost the house. The one who got her FC to come and all bid on it for her got it. So one of her friends owns it and now she's a "tenant". Which is honestly the sh******t way of doing this.

The tenant system needs to be changed to prevent stuff like this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valfreyja

Edit: As an update, my friend lost the house. The one who got her FC to come and all bid on it for her got it. So one of her friends owns it and now she's a "tenant". Which is honestly the sh******t way of doing this.
The tenant system needs to be changed to prevent stuff like this.

---

So her friends bid on it so they could own a private house and share it? The house doesn't belong to her it belongs to the person who bought it. I don't see where she needed to do that she could have simply shared another house one of her friends owned. You can't transfer ownership of a personal house.

The friends bid on it simply so one could give it to her, via the Tenant system.

The ones who don't care about owning a house step in and try to buy it, then pass it off.

So a friend bought it, made the one who actually wanted it a Tenant along with their partner, since it's now listed as "X and X's House" on the Placard, neither of which was the actual owner.

As a tenant they can do the following:
Customization - Adding / Removing / Dyeing Furnishings
Gardening - Planting / Harvesting / Crop Disposal
Stable Tending - Stabling Chocobos.
Orchestrion - Orchestrion operation

So, in short, that is what happened. She got multiple friends who came in that didn't likely care about owning their own house, instead having an Apartment and/or FC room, that stacked things in her favor, and the winner simply made her a Tenant with full access. So in essence, it's "her" house now.

It's why Housing is such a BS system right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valfreyja

The tenant system needs to be changed to prevent stuff like this.

---

Tenants don't even prevent a house from being autodemoed. They have no true ownership. If the person that owns the house quits, the person it was basically bought for is essentially back to square one. And of course, getting someone a house through the tenancy system doesn't actually give them full rights to it: if there's a falling out, bye bye house. There's nothing wrong with the tenant system in other words.

There is plenty wrong with it when it's exploited like that. It doesn't matter if it's not true ownership. And most are people who play for years, so the auto-demo thing doesn't even matter.

Again, the main issue is that it's an unfair advantage. The system needs to be fixed so that it is something fair for any player. Not simply those with a lot of friends that'd stand around to help them buy it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valfreyja

There is plenty wrong with it when it's exploited like that. It doesn't matter if it's not true ownership. And most are people who play for years, so the auto-demo thing doesn't even matter.

Again, the main issue is that it's an unfair advantage. The system needs to be fixed so that it is something fair for any player. Not simply those with a lot of friends that'd stand around to help them buy it.

---

How is it an 'unfair advantage' that you can share a house with a friend? And I seriously doubt everyone you know has never unsubbed for more than a month and a half.

You aren't paying attention.

The unfair advantage lies in 10 or 15 FC people showing up to buy a plot. Not to legitimately share it. But to just give one of their friends "Tenant" rights, and let the friend own it and do whatever they want.

You act like the one who purchased the plot was actually going to use it. And that's not the case. They only did it to give it to their FC friend to use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valfreyja

First, make it a silent auction. A house comes up for sale, you make a bid. One bid per service account per plot. First highest bidder gets the plot. Sure people with more gil get an advantage. But it comes down to whether they are willing to bid 10 or 20 million gil to get a small housing plot.

The second option was presented by someone in my FC. That being putting it to RNG. The house comes up for sale. Every 18 hours a player can walk up and use the Placard. If the RNG hits, and they have the gil to make the purchase, they get the opportunity to buy it. If not, they have to wait 18 hours for another chance at it.

---

Silent auction still doesn't solve the supply problem and encourages RMT by players desperate enough to get a house they're willing to pay any price. It could potentially give house flippers more control over the highly desirable plot locations. Wouldn't it be better to solve the supply problem?

The suggestion by your FC member is what players should already be doing. Check the placard. See if you get lucky. Go do other things and try again later if you aren't. If you can only check it once every 18 hours, kiss your chances of getting the house goodbye because someone else will have gotten it before you can check a second time.

If anyone is feeling animosity toward other players over not getting a house, that's a personal anger issue they need to learn to manage. It's a game. Feeling frustrated and disappointed because of a poorly implemented game system is normal. Feeling hatred toward other people, especially those who have nothing to do with creation and implementation of the system, is not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valfreyja

You aren't paying attention.

The unfair advantage lies in 10 or 15 FC people showing up to buy a plot. Not to legitimately share it. But to just give one of their friends "Tenant" rights, and let the friend own it and do whatever they want.

You act like the one who purchased the plot was actually going to use it. And that's not the case. They only did it to give it to their FC friend to use.

---

There is no unfair advantage.

About 2 months ago, a house near mine became available. There were 11 players camping the placard with 9 of those players representing 2 different FCs. Who got the house? One of the two solo players camping it (which I was glad to see because that player had been camping for at least an hour before the rest started showing up).

Someone in my FC was competing for a house a couple of weeks ago against 4 other players all from the same FC. Who got the house? The one in my FC. I'm sure the players from the other FC were bitching that she got the house even though they had more people camping the placard.

There is no unfair advantage when it all comes down to RNG. You still have to be the player clicking at the right moment.

As for the house that your friend didn't get, the owner will have to use it at times or the house will demo. Tenant entry does not reset the demo timer. The player who bought it can't just give it to their friend then forget about it.

It will also be actively getting used by other players who haven't gotten lucky enough to purchase their own.

I'm not seeing a problem with that.

The system definitely could stand improvement but that particular complaint you're making is just sour grapes because someone else got lucky instead of your friend.

Yeah this "megathread" did exactly what I thought it would and just created a soap box for the same four or five people to play the contrarian to anyone who dislikes the current system, patting each other on the back with every post. This exercise in consolidating peoples' thought into one area so that "the devs could more easily see it" was an exercise in futility. Honestly, hats off to the people who are at least pitching ideas, cause the rest of you who tell them they're bad ideas haven't contributed a single thing in fifteen pages besides "lol add more servers" - like that's hasn't been suggested and equally lambasted because we all know it just isn't feasible.

Que another five pages of "no you" and "bad idea hurr", please. I'm sure the devs would love to see all of it for how valuable it is.

Silent auction or people with care for others (not enough of them in an MMO) will not make a dent in the housing problem. Only fix is a revamp to all instanced. All this mega-threading with long, drawn out "Eureka's" are fine and dandy if you are bored, I suggest just short replies containing "Instanced housing" might do you one better. However, keep in mind that at the end of the day, Yochi gets what Yochi wants. Too bad it's not a new wig... :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geminipestdeath

Yeah this "megathread" did exactly what I thought it would and just created a soap box for the same four or five people to play the contrarian to anyone who dislikes the current system, patting each other on the back with every post. This exercise in consolidating peoples' thought into one area so that "the devs could more easily see it" was an exercise in futility. Honestly, hats off to the people who are at least pitching ideas, cause the rest of you who tell them they're bad ideas haven't contributed a single thing in fifteen pages besides "lol add more servers" - like that's hasn't been suggested and equally lambasted because we all know it just isn't feasible.

Que another five pages of "no you" and "bad idea hurr", please. I'm sure the devs would love to see all of it for how valuable it is.

---

Oh no Twitter is here, if you do not agree with me (even the idea is absurd) you are the enemy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geminipestdeath

"lol add more servers"

---

As much as it sucks, beyond "overhaul the housing system and make it instanced" the only solution left is indeed "add more servers/wards." And Yoshi P has said many times he wants the neighborhoods, so instances are unlikely.

The only other approach to boosting supply? Nuking demand. My suggestion is and always has been: increase house pricing by 10 times, to their original costs. 40m small, 200m med, 500m large.

Of course 5700 houses is not enough for 20,000 people on the server when you get 5 million gil for finishing the story and it only costs 3 million for a house. So either you make 4x as many houses as there are now, or you make it so 75% of people cant even consider getting houses, or it continues where only 25% of people have houses and more than that are eligible/interested.

Of course suggestions like "SE should tailor-make a feature the size of a small expansion pack to overhaul the housing system and thereby re-distribute player dissatisfaction slightly" are bad. It's a ton of work for no results, which is a bad business decision.

The game should try to advertise apartments better. It’s the instance housing that people keep asking for but many house-seekers tend to dismiss it outright. (I wonder how many people know that apartment room is bigger than the usable space on a cottage first floor? It may not be obvious if you’d only ever seen fully decorated smalls)

To help illustrate the differences and similarities between apartment/FC room and a cottage, they could add a quest, with either cutscenes or quest area, to show off an empty apartment room and an empty cottage.

And if possible, they can show off the two furnished, with vendor-sold furnishing, interactive items available at the inn (besides dresser of course), and vendor NPCs. (Both within respective item limit, of course. And no glitching allowed; that’d be false advertising). Ideally they would make it a hands-on quest to let player decorate the room(s) using a set of predetermined furnishings.

This way players can get a taste of what it actually would be like, without having to buy an apartment/house first. And maybe more people would consider getting an apartment first, so they wouldn’t feel so deprived of housing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geminipestdeath

cause the rest of you who tell them they're bad ideas haven't contributed a single thing in fifteen pages besides "lol add more servers" - like that's hasn't been suggested and equally lambasted because we all know it just isn't feasible.

---

No, really, we do need more actual servers and datacenters. The game has been getting progressively bigger for several years now and the American and EU servers are already double the load of the JP servers. If they can spare an oceania DC, surely they can find a way to sort out more EU and American servers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Besame

Silent auction or people with care for others (not enough of them in an MMO) will not make a dent in the housing problem. Only fix is a revamp to all instanced. All this mega-threading with long, drawn out "Eureka's" are fine and dandy if you are bored, I suggest just short replies containing "Instanced housing" might do you one better. :)

---

Auction idea may actually help with one of the problems facing housing: We do not have enough gil sinks, so deleting vast sums of gil from the game (by getting people at gil cap to dump it on absurd housing bid wars) may help with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arielen

No, really, we do need more actual servers and datacenters. The game has been getting progressively bigger for several years now and the American and EU servers are already double the load of the JP servers. If they can spare an oceania DC, surely they can find a way to sort out more EU and American servers.

---

I imagine a large part of that is that SE is expanding slowly, and I do not fault them for exercising extreme caution when it comes to datacenters. On the bright side, when the Oceanic DC comes into existence, it may help open up housing on the other datacenters with the transfers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

I imagine a large part of that is that SE is expanding slowly, and I do not fault them for exercising extreme caution when it comes to datacenters. On the bright side, when the Oceanic DC comes into existence, it may help open up housing on the other datacenters with the transfers.

---

Unfortunately most of that housing will be on JP, where they still have some servers that have smalls with 0 timers lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arielen

Unfortunately most of that housing will be on JP, where they still have some servers that have smalls with 0 timers lol

---

You think this issue is not going to be seriously addressed until it's a problem in JP?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

You think this issue is not going to be seriously addressed until it's a problem in JP?

---

I think it's already a substantial issue in JP; Japanese players do complain about housing availability (and also about prices, generating money on JP is difficult). I don't think it's a matter of only valuing JP voices so much as they think their marketing in EU and NA is lacking and they aren't predicting a boom in playerbase even with all evidence contrary.

The reason I say 'most of that housing will be on JP' is because a huge part of the Oceania community is based on the JP servers due to ping issues. The English speaking community in JP promotes Tonberry as their hub.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arielen

I think it's already a substantial issue in JP; Japanese players do complain about housing availability (and also about prices, generating money on JP is difficult). I don't think it's a matter of only valuing JP voices so much as they think their marketing in EU and NA is lacking and they aren't predicting a boom in playerbase even with all evidence contrary.

The reason I say 'most of that housing will be on JP' is because a huge part of the Oceania community is based on the JP servers due to ping issues. The English speaking community in JP promotes Tonberry as their hub.

---

The largest JP server (Tonberry) is has about as many players as NA's smallest server (Sargstanas).
NA has far fiercer housing problems than JP, so I really don't see why most of the housing would go to the place it is least needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ItMe

The largest JP server (Tonberry) is has about as many players as NA's smallest server (Sargstanas).
NA has far fiercer housing problems than JP, so I really don't see why most of the housing would go to the place it is least needed.

---

If you read up a few posts, the original response was made in reference to the house plots that would get opened up as Australian players move to Oceania data center. (Hence “that” housing). If the majority of the Australian players are currently playing on Japanese servers, then indeed the plots that will become open due to transfers would be on the Japanese servers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seleni

If you read up a few posts, the original response was made in reference to the house plots that would get opened up as Australian players move to Oceania data center. (Hence “that” housing). If the majority of the Australian players are currently playing on Japanese servers, then indeed the plots that will become open due to transfers would be on the Japanese servers.

---

Oh my I somehow missed that.
Thanks for the catch and the context. My bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seleni

If you read up a few posts, the original response was made in reference to the house plots that would get opened up as Australian players move to Oceania data center. (Hence “that” housing). If the majority of the Australian players are currently playing on Japanese servers, then indeed the plots that will become open due to transfers would be on the Japanese servers.

---

^ This person is correct.