HOUSING NEEDS TO CHANGE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

Yep, you really must not care when you can't help but complain about how it would be unfair to you when anyone asks for housing in the game to be expanded and more accessible to all players. ;)

---

Nystra was right, yall really can't admit to the unfairness it creates lol. You guys really will do not handle inconvenience truths, you'll simply ignore it and just press through it anyway.

"How do ya make a decision thats fair?"

"Ya cant, somebody always feels like its not fair to them, and the fairest decisions, those are the ones where everybody feels screwed."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solowing

In any financial transaction there is one question both parties have to ask themselves, what leverage do I have in this transaction? (in regards to a plot) and the answer in your case is none. "~2 and a half men"

You keep subbing until you get a plot (not housing because you already have access to it via apartments), and if you have to keep using it or you lose it, indirectly tied you to sub a few times a year. It's a game where the house always wins. And you're asking the house to give up leverage. An they arnt going to.

---

Players always have a form of leverage (you mention it yourself) but for most it's also tied to things outside of housing so they don't make use of it.

If they're not willing to use their leverage, then housing isn't as important to them as they try to make it sound.

I won't say you're arguing in bad faith. We've argued for years and I have no reason to think you don't believe what you say (unless you start off with saying it's hypothetical or similar). But I frequently disagree with much of what you say.

It's not a matter of what SE can do with housing. It's what SE should do with housing for player satisfaction and retention. There's clearly dissatisfaction with the housing system but as that doesn't seem to be having much impact on player retention, SE has no pressure on them to make changes.

Players have to decide if they can live with that or if they're going to start using their leverage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solowing

"How do ya make a decision thats fair?"

"Ya cant, somebody always feels like its not fair to them, and the fairest decisions, those are the ones where everybody feels screwed."

---

And that's also how life is in general. But that doesn't mean you should just throw your hands up and give up because a very vocal and unreasonable minority of people are going to endlessly whine about how their special little privilege was made a little less special if more people have access to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

And that's also how life is in general. But that doesn't mean you should just throw your hands up and give up because a very vocal and unreasonable minority of people are going to endlessly whine about how their special little privilege was made a little less special if more people have access to it.

---

Everything is never going to be completely fair and equitable for everybody, and I'm aware of that. You have some fairy dust and unicorn kisses idea that that world can be made truly fair for everyone, and the fairness line keeps getting redrawn in different locations. And you're like "So what?"

You're not willing to address that issue, but want your own issue addressed. How is that fair?

Does any of it even matter when the housing system is already developed though? They literally can’t just delete them all and start again with instances or the like; it would be too massive an undertaking for poor indie company SE to redo the entire housing system. They don’t even have enough devs for the amount of combat classes they have, never mind something like a housing overhaul.

That said, none of that is a barrier to ‘making housing more accessible to general players’ in whatever way. I really don’t see any downside to that; it’s perfectly doable and benefits the greatest amount of players, so why not? The only issue there is technical limitations, I.E server memory at capacity meaning no space to add new wards etc. But putting that aside I can’t see how it would be detrimental in any way if housing was made more available so everyone could have one (however they managed to do it)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solowing

Everything is never going to be completely fair and equitable for everybody, and I'm aware of that. You have some fairy dust and unicorn kisses idea that that world can be made truly fair for everyone. There are other posters telling that and you ignore it and push on anyway like it is possible without pissing anyone off

---

It's literally only you that's getting 'pissed off', and it seems entirely based upon your entitlement that your house isn't perceived as being diminished in any way.

And there is a way to address the issue of having both instanced housing and ward housing fairly.

Separate the idea of a ward plot and a house. Your current ward plot is your ward plot, the house on it is a separate entity. The demo timer is for the ward plot and only the plot. If the demo timer expires, you lose the plot, but your house gets transferred from the ward plot into a solo instance with all of it's furniture and decorations left as they presently are. Conversely, an instanced home could be seamlessly transferred from a solo instance onto a ward plot, if said ward plot is won through the current lottery system.

That's how you can have instanced housing available to all players and also actually improve the ward system, because then you wouldn't actually lose your house if the demo timer expires, only the plot it's on. If you want to maintain a ward plot then you have to contend with the demo timer system, so that all players who specifically want their house to be in a ward still have the opportunity to access the system. If you don't, you get to keep your house, but you only give up the ward plot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

It's literally only you that's getting 'pissed off', and it seems entirely based upon your entitlement that your house isn't perceived as being diminished in any way.

And there is a way to address the issue of having both instanced housing and ward housing fairly.

Separate the idea of a ward plot and a house. Your current ward plot is your ward plot, the house on it is a separate entity. The demo timer is for the ward plot and only the plot. If the demo timer expires, you lose the plot, but your house gets transferred from the ward plot into a solo instance with all of it's furniture and decorations left as they presently are. Conversely, an instanced home could be seamlessly transferred from a solo instance onto a ward plot, if said ward plot is won through the current lottery system.

That's how you can have instanced housing available to all players and also actually improve the ward system, because then you wouldn't actually lose your house if the demo timer expires, only the plot it's on. If you want to maintain a ward plot then you have to contend with the demo timer system, so that all players who specifically want their house to be in a ward still have the opportunity to access the system. If you don't, you get to keep your house, but you only give up the ward plot.

---

I didn't ask you to move it and I don't want to move. I like it right where I am. But because I already have a plot, you're punishing me for lapsing a sub when someone else who just started wont forcibly be moved out of their location if they were gone for 6 months?

You are wanting to experience the ward plot, by holding me to its rules to kick me out of my ward location for being inactive so someone can take it. But themselves aren't inherently subjected to that rule because they don't already have a plot subjected to the demo timer.

You're unknowingly punishing those who already have by holding them to rules that others are exempt from their later join date.

If you want fair. Allow already established players the choice to turn off the demo timer to their plot. So I'm not punished for already having it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solowing

I didn't ask you to move it and I don't want to move. I like it right where I am. But because I already have a plot, you're punishing me for lapsing a sub when someone else who just started wont have that problem?

---

And there's that entitlement I was talking about.

You want to both keep your ward plot and not have to deal with the demo timer system. You also don't want players to be able to have access to housing unless they have to suffer with demo timers as well, even if they don't have a home within a ward and all of the benefits that come with being in a ward that you're so adamant you don't want to give up. All of this is despite the fact that the only reason why demo timers exist is purely due to the finite nature of ward plots due to technical limitation of their flawed design.

Your perspective on the issue is incredibly selfish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

And there's that entitlement I was talking about.

You want to both keep your ward plot and not have to deal with the demo timer system. You also don't want players to be able to have access to housing unless they have to suffer with demo timers as well, even if they don't have a home within a ward and all of the benefits that come with being in a ward that you're so adamant you don't want to give up. All of this is despite the fact that the only reason why demo timers exist is purely due to the finite nature of ward plots due to technical limitation of their flawed design.

Your perspective on the issue is incredibly selfish.

---

And we are circling back to that same argument. Equality vs Equity. Why are you holding players to different rulesets for the same functioning housing system? Its more fair to hold everyone to the same system and rules

Like I said, we all have the same opportunity for a Plot, you're seeking equal outcome

Im simply asking turn the demo timer off for everyone, or turn it on for everyone.

Not "this group can deal with it, and this group doesn't have to"

I think I'm being rather fair.


Equality ensures identical rights, opportunities, and treatment, but it does not guarantee universal happiness, as individual satisfaction is driven by diverse needs, preferences, and personal circumstances

(I disagree with you, but I'm having fun with the thoughts that go into it, people go to college for deeper subject matter like this.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solowing

And we are circling back to that same argument. Equality vs Equity. Why are you holding players to different rulesets for the same functioning housing system?

---

Nope, my proposal holds everyone to the same rules; if you hold a ward plot you have a demo timer for that plot. It doesn't matter if you currently have one or get one later, you have to reset the demo timer or you lose the plot. That's the current rules, and that's what I'm suggesting the rules continue to be, that's the cost of having the privilege of having a home in a ward. I'm suggesting that players get to keep their home in a solo instance if they lose their ward plot, which is a vast improvement for everyone over the current system.

You keep crying about fairness, equality, equity, or whatever other emotionally charged words to try to gain sympathy, but it's all just a mask for your selfishness and entitlement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

Nope, my proposal holds everyone to the same rules; if you hold a ward plot you have a demo timer for that plot. It doesn't matter if you currently have one or get one later, you have to reset the demo timer or you lose the plot. That's the current rules, and that's what I'm suggesting the rules continue to be, that's the cost of having the privilege of having a home in a ward. I'm suggesting that players get to keep their home in a solo instance if they lose their ward plot, which is a vast improvement for everyone over the current system.

You keep crying about fairness, equality, equity, or whatever other emotionally charged words to try to gain sympathy, but it's all just a mask for your selfishness and entitlement.

---

Sympathy? You think I jumped into a forum where you guys all pat each other on the back for the "right" opinions for sympathy? I jumped into this knowing the community doesn't take kindly to anyone with a deviating opinion. Because maybe you guys need a lil more of an honest take. Rather than being told what you want to hear.

The only one crying here is you.... Crying for Equity in a system that offers equality in opportunity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solowing

Sympathy? You think I jumped into a forum where you guys all pat each other on the back for the "right" opinions for sympathy? I jumped into this knowing the community doesn't take kindly to anyone with a deviating opinion. Because maybe you guys need a lil more of an honest take. Rather than being told what you want to hear.

The only one crying here is you.... Crying for Equity in a system that offers equality in opportunity.

---

Strange thing to say you're for equality and fairness when you want to force players to lose their home after auto demo rather than have it moved into a solo instance. Seems pretty vindictive if you ask me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

It's literally only you that's getting 'pissed off', and it seems entirely based upon your entitlement that your house isn't perceived as being diminished in any way.

And there is a way to address the issue of having both instanced housing and ward housing fairly.

Separate the idea of a ward plot and a house. Your current ward plot is your ward plot, the house on it is a separate entity. The demo timer is for the ward plot and only the plot. If the demo timer expires, you lose the plot, but your house gets transferred from the ward plot into a solo instance with all of it's furniture and decorations left as they presently are. Conversely, an instanced home could be seamlessly transferred from a solo instance onto a ward plot, if said ward plot is won through the current lottery system.

That's how you can have instanced housing available to all players and also actually improve the ward system, because then you wouldn't actually lose your house if the demo timer expires, only the plot it's on. If you want to maintain a ward plot then you have to contend with the demo timer system, so that all players who specifically want their house to be in a ward still have the opportunity to access the system. If you don't, you get to keep your house, but you only give up the ward plot.

---

No offense, I am not trying to be rude but your suggestion feels like solving the wrong problem.
Your suggestion is pointless. (like taking off your pant before farting)
The demolition timer exists for a technical reason.
Square Enix simply does not have the same server architecture or instancing capability that Blizzard uses.
And to be clear, this isn’t unique to them as most Japanese game companies, including Nintendo and Capcom are way behind compared to most of Western developers.
If Square Enix had the capability to seamlessly convert every existing house into an instance, they likely would have already implemented full instanced housing or made ward plots universally available.
The fact that they haven’t strongly suggests it isn’t that simple.

A lot of players assume the solution is easy: "just instance it” or “just let everyone keep their plot”, but those ideas ignore the technical limitations with SE games.
Housing isn’t restricted because the developers want it to be, it’s restricted because of how the game’s architecture was built.
It’s also worth remembering that both the demolition timer and the housing lottery were introduced largely in response to player feedback.
Ironically, many “player suggestion” on this forum tend to be short sighted and often create new problems that eventually affect the entire community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xylira

Strange thing to say you're for equality and fairness when you want to force players to lose their home after auto demo rather than have it moved into a solo instance. Seems pretty vindictive if you ask me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solowing

"How do ya make a decision thats fair?"

"Ya cant, somebody always feels like its not fair to them, and the fairest decisions, those are the ones where everybody feels screwed."

---

I thought this made a lot of sense. So I leave it for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinemights

Square Enix simply does not have the same server architecture or instancing capability that Blizzard uses.
And to be clear, this isn’t unique to them as most Japanese game companies, including Nintendo and Capcom are way behind compared to most of Western developers.
If Square Enix had the capability to seamlessly convert every existing house into an instance, they likely would have already implemented full instanced housing or made ward plots universally available.
The fact that they haven’t strongly suggests it isn’t that simple.

A lot of players assume the solution is easy: "just instance it” or “just let everyone keep their plot”, but those ideas ignore the technical limitations with SE games.
Housing isn’t restricted because the developers want it to be, it’s restricted because of how the game’s architecture was built.
It’s also worth remembering that both the demolition timer and the housing lottery were introduced largely in response to player feedback.
Ironically, many “player suggestion” on this forum tend to be short sighted and often create new problems that eventually affect the entire community.

---

Housing is already instanced from a technical perspective. Housing interiors aren't loaded until a player attempts to access them, which was provably seen when Island sanctuaries came out. They shared resources with the housing server, and the popularity of Island Sanctuaries at the time had players having difficulty entering their houses and apartments as the servers struggled to keep up with demand to spin up new instances. This is actually part of why wards are flawed from a technical design perspective, as it's also been observed that wards remain loaded in as an active instance 24/7/365 regardless of whether a player is even in the ward or not. This means server resources are being wasted to keep instances loaded with everyone's housing exteriors even if no one is there to interact with them. Consequently, adding new housing wards has a cumulative drain on server resources regardless of how much they're actively being accessed.

And absolutely, I don't know the internal workings of however SE has setup their code. But we can see through observation what SE has managed currently within their own system. As previously mentioned housing interiors are already instanced. How you enter those interiors varies from either entering through a ward plot home, a ward apartment, through a FC home room, etc, but they all load into instances. Island Sanctuary was also proof of concept that large player specific instances can be spun up on demand, and even contain outdoor decorations as placed by the player. That's some pretty compelling proof of concept that doesn't make for a large leap for SE to place a house within an island sanctuary type instance, and have an entrance within that instance to enter an interior home instance.

People comparing WoW housing to XIV forget that WoW gets 10x + the budget that XIV does.