Estate Sharing an inactive work around?

Printable View

11-10-2015, 04:42 AM
Thorium

Estate Sharing an inactive work around?

I FARTED! WOOPS!
11-10-2015, 04:43 AM
Limecat

There was already a mention in the notes that only the owner of the house counts, not shared people.
11-10-2015, 04:45 AM
Thorium

Quote:

Originally Posted by Limecat

There was already a mention in the notes that only the owner of the house counts, not shared people.

Ah ok must have missed that bit. Thanks for clearing that up i was just wondering is all.
11-10-2015, 04:51 AM
SendohJin

directly from the notes

Quote:

Halting Demolition
Any free company member or private housing owner entering the estate at any time prior to demolition will cancel the demolition process.
* A tenant entering a shared estate will not cancel the demolition process.
11-10-2015, 05:16 AM
TouchandFeel

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thorium

I FARTED! WOOPS!

I was wondering what that smell was ...
11-10-2015, 05:37 AM
Voltyblast

A tenant entering a shared estate will not cancel the demolition process? Then what the heck was the point of sharing a house? It could've been a nice thing to at least allow the others to reset the counter, but not even that? I fail to see a point of this sharing estate feature...except for the sake of sharing, I guess.

I'm just ranting at this point....
11-10-2015, 05:50 AM
Lexia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voltyblast

A tenant entering a shared estate will not cancel the demolition process? Then what the heck was the point of sharing a house? It could've been a nice thing to at least allow the others to reset the counter, but not even that? I fail to see a point of this sharing estate feature...except for the sake of sharing, I guess.

I'm just ranting at this point....

You hear that sound? Yes the room mate feature is for the sole purpose of sharing house with others.
11-10-2015, 05:52 AM
Krokov

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voltyblast

A tenant entering a shared estate will not cancel the demolition process? Then what the heck was the point of sharing a house? It could've been a nice thing to at least allow the others to reset the counter, but not even that? I fail to see a point of this sharing estate feature...except for the sake of sharing, I guess.

I'm just ranting at this point....

No you make a good point. Why not have shared tenants reset the demolition though so I can see why they did it because then you could just have shared tenant and you would never have a fear of losing your house or property as long as there was at least one tenant visiting it. It just sucks that they force the owners in essence visit their properties if they don't want to lose them.
11-10-2015, 05:54 AM
Anova

So your husband can own the house. But if he ever dies, you and your kid don't have any rights to inherit his property. Great.

Yes, it's a game. Still sucks for the cities to treat adventurers like 3rd class citizens though. I'm half-convinced it's just some money scheme to fund the wars and adventurer guilds.
11-10-2015, 05:57 AM
Lexia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anova

So your husband can own the house. But if he ever dies, you and your kid don't have any rights to inherit his property. Great.

Yes, it's a game. Still sucks for the cities to treat adventurers like 3rd class citizens though. I'm half-convinced it's just some money scheme to fund the wars and adventurer guilds.

You can just log onto their account sell the house to your character... oops I'm being insensitive there, my bad.
11-10-2015, 06:00 AM
Voltyblast

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lexia

You hear that sound? Yes the room mate feature is for the sole purpose of sharing house with others.

That's all good and dandy, but there's no practical use aside for being a pointless addition. Is it supposed to be a pointless addition? Okay, all I can say is "what a waste of potential"
I'm not saying "don't put it in" but at least make it somewhat useful, ESPECIALLY because of that broken 45 reclaiming system and I was HOPING this would allow us owners some more time, in case I take a break for more than 45 days.

Again, I'm ranting. Just feels like a wasted potential.
11-10-2015, 06:04 AM
Lexia

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voltyblast

That's all good and dandy, but there's no practical use aside for being a pointless addition. Is it supposed to be a pointless addition? Okay, all I can say is "what a waste of potential"
I'm not saying "don't put it in" but at least make it somewhat useful, ESPECIALLY since they're adding that broken 45 reclaiming system and I was hoping this would allow us owners some more time, in case I take a break for more than 45 days.

Pointless to who? Pointless to you? I'm sure there plenty of people that will be able to enjoy features of a house with a friend since they can't own their own.
11-10-2015, 06:12 AM
LaylaTsarra

I see nothing here about sharing estate features like NPC vendors such as the mender, or FC chests (if in same FC), an Armoire, Retainer Call Bells and the like. I hope this is something that will happen and is part of this patch but I don't see it in the access preferences. I really wish my two alts could also share these features given they can't even use the mender, let alone interact with other housing items. Tenants should have all those access rights if they are to truly share a house.

http://img.finalfantasyxiv.com/t/cc5...8e7308e_12.png
11-10-2015, 06:14 AM
Anova

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voltyblast

That's all good and dandy, but there's no practical use aside for being a pointless addition.

It makes sense for those player couples in the game (irl or whatever) with a private house. Of course, you could just memorize the address and spend 2 minutes running to the house every time you go there... or you could have your friends meet you somewhere easier to access (like the city state aetheryte) but then you never use the house except as vanity.

Anything that makes it easier to socialize with the house is a good thing. I do wish a marriage partner could reset the house (if they're married to the owner). There are some worries about RMT and housing fraud for that of course, but there's no getting around that when handling something worth 20 million gil or more.
11-10-2015, 06:23 AM
Krokov

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaylaTsarra

I see nothing here about sharing estate features like NPC vendors such as the mender, or FC chests (if in same FC), an Armoire, Retainer Call Bells and the like. I hope this is something that will happen but I don't see it in the access preferences. I really wish my two alts could also share these features given they can't even use the mender, let alone interact with other housing items. Tenants should have all those access rights if they are to truly share a house.

http://img.finalfantasyxiv.com/t/cc5...8e7308e_12.png

I'm not sure myself but I think they'll be granted access to those features because it's just being a part of the house as it were for example in an FC house you can't be locked out from using the retainer bell, or npc vendors as long as your part of your FC. As for the FC chest that most likely depends on your privileges within the FC.
11-10-2015, 06:43 AM
HaelseMikiro

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voltyblast

That's all good and dandy, but there's no practical use aside for being a pointless addition. Is it supposed to be a pointless addition? Okay, all I can say is "what a waste of potential"
I'm not saying "don't put it in" but at least make it somewhat useful, ESPECIALLY because of that broken 45 reclaiming system and I was HOPING this would allow us owners some more time, in case I take a break for more than 45 days.
Again, I'm ranting. Just feels like a wasted potential.

Wasted potential = all the lots that have unused houses on them while thousands of other people/FCs wish that they could buy a house