First article about the House pricing.

[Abriael]

I didn't craft because it was fun. I crafted because I wanted to make gil. You had this option too.

So you're basically saying that it's ok for a game that requires a monthly fee to require a playstyle that many don't find fun in order to enjoy relevant and highly anticipating features.

I'm thankful for the fact you don't make games. With my luck I'd end up having to review them.

The argument here is that the prices are too high, and people can't afford it. The fact that people are expressing annoyance is not evidence of this.

The fact that most people are expressing annoyance is evidence that they find the prices too high, which in a game that requires a monthly fee, is equivalent to the fact that the prices are too high. People are not forced to play and pay, and will do so only as long as they are satisfied.

For someone that accuses others not to be familiar with concepts, you really seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of "customer satisfaction," which is at the very base of the survival of a pay to play MMORPG.

[Sunarie]

Abriael, as another mentioned, you don't have to defend your blog post. It is very evident from the community that a huge chunk (and I don't even care if it's over half, though I would put money on it being well over that) of players are unhappy with the pricing. Those defending it aren't likely to be swayed as they keep throwing up strawman arguments.

Anyone with a lot of MMO experience, and experience browsing forums and trends, knows that complaining with a patch is completely and utterly normal. However, when you have the number of threads we've seen here, and in the Japanese forum.. and then again in the media with even previous directors of very successful games tweeting articles showing the housing prices as bad... well.. That is typically a sign of a big problem in game.

Complaints with patches are completely normal, people complaining on the forums also completely normal. People complaining in the magnitude that they have been, not so normal, and I can't think of a time that the masses were so unified in being against something where that something did not turn out badly enough to make that MMO revert their policy.

[Abriael]

Abriael, as another mentioned, you don't have to defend your blog post. It is very evident from the community that a huge chunk (and I don't even care if it's over half, though I would put money on it being well over that) of players are unhappy with the pricing. Those defending it aren't likely to be swayed as they keep throwing up strawman arguments.

Oh don't worry I'm not really defending my post, as much as discussing. I don't enjoy seeing people trying to obscure reality to defend bad design and elitism.

Here's the problem. You're using really bad argumentation to support your assertion. Resorting to logical fallacies and anecdotal evidence is not the way to go.

You saying that an argumentation is a bad argumentation doesn't automatically make it so.

The voice of the customer is very relevant when talking about a product, and even more so when talking about a product that requires continued payments. The fact that a very relevant area of the playerbase is very dissatisfied by how the feature is being handled is evident to anyone that has eyes, and it goes a lot beyond this forum.

You can keep throwing around dialectical tricks for the sake of arguing as much as you want, but that doesn't change.

[Keyln]

You saying that an argumentation is a bad argumentation doesn't automatically make it so.

True, but building an argument based on anecdotal evidence and logical fallacies is a bad argument. Which is exactly what you're doing.

The voice of the customer is very relevant when talking about a product, and even more so when talking about a product that requires continued payments. The fact that a very relevant area of the playerbase is very dissatisfied by how the feature is being handled is evident to anyone that has eyes, and it goes a lot beyond this forum.

Never said it was irrelevant, but the customer isn't always right. We players have a very limited access to information, no access to the plans (other than what the devs tell us), so we can't always make good judgements. There are times when a developer has to follow his vision. There are times when it's a good idea to not listen to the .1% player base.

You can keep throwing around dialectical tricks for the sake of arguing as much as you want, but that doesn't change.

Conjure up semantics all you want, but it still doesn't change the fact that you're using bad argumentation. It also doesn't change the fact that we're dealing with extremely limited knowledge and facts, and thus, unable to come to the proper conclusions at this time.

[Abriael]

Never said it was irrelevant, but the customer isn't always right. We players have a very limited access to information, no access to the plans (other than what the devs tell us), so we can't always make good judgements. There are times when a developer has to follow his vision. There are times when it's a good idea to not listen to the .1% player base.

The customer may not always be right, but the customer pays for the servers' lights to stay on. There's an enormous difference between going against customer satisfaction when we're talking of relatively minor things like balancing a stat, or nerfing a class, and when we're talking about locking the most hyped and pubblicized feature of the very first content patch of a game that isn't exactly floating in overabundant content away from a relevant portion of the population.

The first requires a deep knowledge of the system to gauge. The second just requires eyes to see that Square Enix dangled the housing carrot in front of our nose for months (actually years) only to replace it with a big hard stick three days before patching. That is, beyond any reasonable doubt, bad business.

Conjure up semantics all you want, but it still doesn't change the fact that you're using bad argumentation. It also doesn't change the fact that we're dealing with extremely limited knowledge and facts, and thus, unable to come to the proper conclusions at this time.

The facts are that a whole lot of FC can't afford even the smallest house in the least desirable area on many servers, and that won't change unless SE suddenly pushes an inordinate amount of gil into the game (which would be bad anyway). If you're blind to the existence of many small free companies that have 10-15 members, and to that family-oriented playstyle (that should not be penalized) you're blind to facts.

The facts also are that housing prices effectively punish those that supported the game for the longest time and those that just decided to join legacy servers, even more so because the ratio of income after the patch will be the same between legacy and lon legacy servers, so those on legacy servers are evidently penalized, which is objectively unfair, as people pay a monthly fee whether they play on Balmung or on Lich (or any other server).

The facts are that in every MMORPG that offers housing, an entry level option is always offered, because housing is notoriously a high engagement feature, and it's in the interest of both the developer and the players to grant customers access to high engagement features, even just at an entry level. I shouldn't need to explain why.

The facts are that Square Enix hyped the housing feature as much as possible. As much as having their president and CEO become "uncle housing," and teasing everyone with it incessantly at every possible chance. When you hype something that much and then lock it away from a vast portion of your customers, you're not doing anyone a favor.

Oh yeah. We have plenty facts to draw conclusions.

[Keyln]

The customer may not always be right, but the customer pays for the servers' lights to stay on. There's an enormous difference between going against customer satisfaction when we're talking of relatively minor things like balancing a stat, or nerfing a class, and when we're talking about locking the most hyped and pubblicized feature of the very first content patch of a game that isn't exactly floating in overabundant content away from a relevant portion of the population.

Methinks you overstate your claim by a wee-bit. But let's not digress here. I'm not saying that customer satisfaction is unimportant, but it does have to be balanced by game balance as well as developer vision.

The first requires a deep knowledge of the system to gauge. The second just requires eyes to see that Square Enix dangled the housing carrot in front of our nose for months (actually years) only to replace it with a big hard stick three days before patching. That is, beyond any reasonable doubt, bad business.

Did not Yoshida say on numerous times that housing would be expensive? Why act so shocked when he actually keeps his word?

The facts are that a whole lot of FC can't afford even the smallest house in the least desirable area on many servers, and that won't change unless SE suddenly pushes an inordinate amount of gil into the game (which would be bad anyway). If you're blind to the existence of many small free companies that have 10-15 members, and to that family-oriented playstyle (that should not be penalized) you're blind to facts.

Anecdotal. For every story you can give of a FC not being able to afford the cheapest lot, there's a story of a FC that can, as of now, afford a first class slot.

The facts also are that housing prices effectively punish those that supported the game for the longest time and those that just decided to join legacy servers, even more so because the ratio of income after the patch will be the same between legacy and lon legacy servers, so those on legacy servers are evidently penalized, which is objectively unfair, as people pay a monthly fee whether they play on Balmung or on Lich (or any other server).

People who have been on Legacy servers and playing since 1.0 generally have more gil than those who started with the release of 2.0. Even after the number slash, players from 1.0 are still gillionaires.

The facts are that in every MMORPG that offers housing, an entry level option is always offered, because housing is notoriously a high engagement feature, and it's in the interest of both the developer and the players to grant customers access to high engagement features, even just at an entry level. I shouldn't need to explain why.

I'll admit that FFXIV is going into new territory by offering guild housing first, and then personal housing. With that said, I think calling it "high engagement" is an over-statement. Housing is a feature, but not the main point and part of the game.

The facts are that Square Enix hyped the housing feature as much as possible. As much as having their president and CEO become "uncle housing," and teasing everyone with it incessantly at every possible chance. When you hype something that much and then lock it away from a vast portion of your customers, you're not doing anyone a favor.

Hyped? Again, over-statement. A quick look at the topics on Lodestone, Housing was featured only once, along with every other main addition in 2.1. Lightning Returns got more coverage. As far as "vast portion", I think that's not taking into account that there are more gil fountains in 2.1, that prices will fall over time, and that personal housing isn't in yet.

Oh yeah. We have plenty facts to draw conclusions.

If by facts you mean over-statements and anecdotes, then sure, you have plenty of facts.

[Mogi]

I think the facepalm post was good and it be better if it were done by lvl how bout at 25 you can get a small home at 35 a med and at 50 you get the bigest it be fair fun for all and not 100% easy i mean at this point it's fair to say you will have to buy a lot for the home space as is right? most mmo games with homes sell em for cheap or go by lvl just saying

[Abriael]

Methinks you overstate your claim by a wee-bit. But let's not digress here. I'm not saying that customer satisfaction is unimportant, but it does have to be balanced by game balance as well as developer vision.

This is a vanity feature. For vanity features balance plays a much less important role than customer satisfaction, by definition.

Did not Yoshida say on numerous times that housing would be expensive? Why act so shocked when he actually keeps his word?

He also stated that it would take about the savings of three level 50 players. So again, you're wrong. Expensive and mindboggling are two different things.

Anecdotal. For every story you can give of a FC not being able to afford the cheapest lot, there's a story of a FC that can, as of now, afford a first class slot.

Keep trying with the semantic tricks without noticing how ridiculous they are. Even if some FCs can afford it, it doesn't disprove that the feature is locked out from a large part of the population. Basically you don't have a point.

People who have been on Legacy servers and playing since 1.0 generally have more gil than those who started with the release of 2.0. Even after the number slash, players from 1.0 are still gillionaires.

There's tons of players on the legacy servers that don't come from 1.0, and tons of players from 1.0 that don't even have a million, or much less.

I'll admit that FFXIV is going into new territory by offering guild housing first, and then personal housing. With that said, I think calling it "high engagement" is an over-statement. Housing is a feature, but not the main point and part of the game.

Your knowledge of the MMORPG market is obviously very limited. And you demonstrate it with every single thing you write. When any developer adds housing to its MMO it's publicized immediately as a primary feature, because they know what kind of draw it has.

Hyped? Again, over-statement. A quick look at the topics on Lodestone, Housing was featured only once, along with every other main addition in 2.1. Lightning Returns got more coverage. As far as "vast portion", I think that's not taking into account that there are more gil fountains in 2.1, that prices will fall over time, and that personal housing isn't in yet.

My, you seem to have a vested interest in stating falsehoods. Housing was hyped during *every single live letter* *personally* by the *president and CEO of Square Enix* so much that he was nicknamed "Uncle housing." There's no other feature that got a similar treatment.

Get your facts straight. You really need it, because the falsehoods permeating your posts to defend an obvious blunder are stifling.

[Keyln]

The fact that most people are expressing annoyance is evidence that they find the prices too high, which in a game that requires a monthly fee, is equivalent to the fact that the prices are too high. People are not forced to play and pay, and will do so only as long as they are satisfied.

For someone that accuses others not to be familiar with concepts, you really seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of "customer satisfaction," which is at the very base of the survival of a pay to play MMORPG.

Here's the problem. You're using really bad argumentation to support your assertion. Resorting to logical fallacies and anecdotal evidence is not the way to go.

Call me a "White Knight", "White Mage" "White Lighter" or a "White somethingoranother", I don't care. Coming up with an assertion and using bad argumentation to support it is something that should be called out.

Here's where I stand. We simply do not have enough information here. Yoshida knows how much gil is on each server, and he even knows how much each player has. He knows that players that played since 1.0 still have lots and lots of gil. He isn't blind to this at all. Housing as it stands right now was meant to be bought by FC's, meaning that people working together to gather enough gil to buy something that they all can enjoy.

Now, add in additional gil fountains that will be new in 2.1, and falling prices over time, and eventually, all FCs will be able to afford a house or plot of land (if they weren't limited in number). From what I figure, worst case scenario is that prices really ARE too high, and that would translate in plots not being bought up. This would cause Yoshida to drop the prices on the houses as necessary.

Yoshida is not doing this blind, and I think he knows what he's doing here.

[Shinebox]

So you're basically saying that it's ok for a game that requires a monthly fee to require a playstyle that many don't find fun in order to enjoy relevant and highly anticipating features.

I'm thankful for the fact you don't make games. With my luck I'd end up having to review them.

I'm thankful I don't make games too. You can't make everyone happy. I'm supporting their decision to make housing expensive to avoid land from selling out. We already have a ton of clones in the same armor, do we want everyone in the same house too? It's not bad design, it's just not for everyone and housing on my server is the most expensive of all the NA datacenters.

I will take their word for it on this one. They turned a pile of garbage into a successful MMO. You're a blogger/reviewer.