Surely, the housing mess can be laid squarely at SE's feet, but those who abuse the system so heavily and without remorse or consequences are not blameless. FC standards need redoing to prevent "fake" FC house hoarding and the grandfathering system is pointless, because having more than just a few houses is just superfluous.
In-depth analysis of the housing situation.
Printable View
-
05-18-2020, 07:30 PMDrkdays
-
05-18-2020, 09:11 PMKytrinI would agree on the seeming superfluous bit, but the argument made was that those guys didn't actually break the rules as they were written back then and square doesn't want to punish them for it by taking their extra houses away. Which I can understand. It'd be kind of like being wealthy enough to build a second or summer vacation home irl and then being told you had to sell it because other people are homeless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drkdays
Admittedly, I can't grasp why someone would want the stress of logging into multiple houses regularly to make sure they're not demolished, but that's how they want to play and Square sided with them when they set up the current system. -
05-18-2020, 09:38 PMDrkdaysWould it really be a punishment though? It's about accountability. SE should step up and confront individuals about the lack of spacing, not just let it slide with passivity. Sure, they'd lose homes, but that would mean equality. Ultimately, they wouldn't lose more than anyone else. Sure, it would suck-a lot, I'll admit-but it's a decision SE made that became an instant double standard. *Housing is super limited, so getting one will be a struggle. You're gonna lose sleep over this.* *You have 20 houses already, so you get to keep them, and there are even ways for you to get more.* We can't really have things both ways...Quote:
Originally Posted by Kytrin
The only changes the players with tons of homes would experience differently is the amount of space they have to accomplish what they can already do with just one space. And don't even get started on multiple crafting/workshop spaces. Money is not an issue for players with this many houses, and frankly what else requires a lot of money apart from...houses...
The first-come-first-served idea is the same as dog-eat-dog. I thought this was supposed to be a community game, not an episode of The Walking Dead. We should not have to suffer resource hoarding real estate giants in a fantasy RPG fighting game. -
05-18-2020, 10:16 PMKytrinYeah that was essentially the argument back in 4.1 and 4.2 as well. I remember the forums were on fire over it as that was also about the same time people started discovering some folks had bought out entire wards with alts, spouses and their alts, and secondary accounts. The rage was real at the time, and the debate on both sides got fairly heated. Square elected to go in favor of the grandfathering though, and I very much doubt they're going to change their minds anytime soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drkdays
Personally, I'm holding out hope that one of these days they'll revamp the apartments into something equally appealing as houses in terms of size, scenery, and amenities. As much as I love my house, and I love it tremendously, I would just as gladly sink my gil into fully upgrading my apartment if it had the right features and a nice view. -
05-18-2020, 11:50 PMAwha
Can we truly say it would be fair to take something away from someone retroactively due to a rule change? In the end everyone knew the FC rule would not last due to how GM leadership transfers work. One should not have something taken away which they obtained well within the rules of the game because demand suddenly does not meet supply or because SE quietly removed a rule without telling anyone.
SE has really only has a few options make instancing house by either expanding apartments or make a ward that is instanced. Figure out a way to add extra wards on a server bases. Or come out and tell people housing is not meant for everyone, and that is the way the like it. If they go that route they should add a public garden, workshop based within the GC things like that.
I do not think the community should feel the need to take away from those that have to give scraps to those that do not. Since that is what retroactivly taking plots away would amount to giving people that do not have a plot scraps. -
05-18-2020, 11:53 PMLaylaTsarra
Alts still can't share a MAINS house... use the mender, any amenities or even **gasp** easily teleport to it. This take away mentality from people who played by the rules is not something SE is going to cater to and hasn't.
-
05-19-2020, 01:06 AMAwhaThat would be helpful, would also be nice if SE added a means to have characters on the same account have access to a account storage like chest akin to what an FC bank is without having an FC. That is why I first started personal FC's for the storage and traceability between characters. The housing aspect game after the fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by LaylaTsarra
-
05-19-2020, 01:34 AMKytrinYes, well according to this thread here... https://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/...having-alts... it will break the game and cause chaos and madness for us to have ANY consideration for alts implemented. Also, we're apparently not supposed to even HAVE alts because 'you know the game was made to do everything on one character and anyone who has more than one is obviously cheating/exploiting the system!'. <.<Quote:
Originally Posted by Awha
-
05-19-2020, 01:38 AMAwhaThose blasted hamsters cannot keep up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kytrin
-
05-31-2020, 10:27 AMWaffles298
something i feel that can't be reasonably measured by the data presented by the OP is, of the total number of players/active players in ffxiv, how many actively want to own a house in game. because not every player wants to own a house in game. other than that i'd like to see instanced housing for personal housing, but with the option of sinking material resources in addition to gil to help expand and customize your house (picture: firmament/fc crafting but it's just you donating materials to build and upgrade your house)