Op trying to pass it as gil sink. Which wont work as the cost would have to be affordable to all players. That affordability will kill it as a gil sink.
Printable View
Gil sinks need to target the wealthiest of players (those with 100mil+) to be able to take the most gil out of the game. Chances are, if someone’s got just an apartment, then they’re not part of that subset of wealthiest players. And if they are part of that subset and JUST have an apartment, they likely won’t want to participate in a gil sink.
Gold sinks in games in general need to be willing/tied to something NEW that players will know they’ll want.
IE a mount, or a minion, or hair, or a barding, or a subscription token. They need to be a LOT - 20mil+.
Targetting apartment owners isnt a gil sink - it’s just petty.
I really dislike the thought of punishing the players for the sins of the game maker...
Idk, first 8 years of wow were still it's glory days.
I'm still tortu... Erm. Playing it 17 years later. Yeah, beta tester. :/
Someone who quit WoW around the start of MoP would have no idea what a mess the current game is. Heck, I don't know from personal experience either and I was playing until end of Legion. I do know that one of my friends who also plays this game was a dedicated WoW fanboy (would put a WoW patch ahead of expansion release here) and about 3 months ago went "I can't take this anymore", cancelled his WoW subscription then uninstalled the game.
But then none of that has anything to do with the housing situation here.
Does the game need more gil sinks? Yes. But if the goal is to increase apartment popularity while reducing demand for houses, attaching a gil sink to apartments would be counterproductive because it would only reduce the demand for apartments. Increasing the cost of something already considered less than desirable by many does not make it more desirable.
Gil sinks are not "punishment" and it's ridiculous to refer to them as such. The game gives us gil for playing through most content. We in turn decide how we want to spend it. Either we're willing to pay the price to get the optional item being offered, or we don't. There is no punishment involved.
They're punishments when implemented poorly.
I feel rent on apartments is poorly implemented.
They'd have to start charging rent for houses too or it wouldn't be fair.
I, for one, wouldn't pay it on principle, and let my apartment lapse.
If they want to make apartments more attractive, adding balconies or terraces or even penthouses with outdoor areas would be a good start. Price accordingly. I have a ton of outdoor furniture my retainers keep bringing me that I can't use.
I haven't read all of the comments, but some people do know that not all apartments are rented right? You can own an apartment just like a house. Its actually common in many areas with limited space or for wealthy individuals.