Housing plots need rent. Sound horrible? Consider these facts:

[Yeldir]

This thread has really turned into a textbook example of the have/have not aspect of human psychology.

On one end of it, you've got the haves, who will do any kind of mental gymnastics they can possibly squeeze themselves through to justify the current system.

On the other end, you've got people who want to tear it down. I suppose I'm the latter, although in a rather different sense, as the system I'd like penalizes me as much as anyone else (plot taxation).

That, and even if I had a home this very moment, I'd still want to be taxed, and I'd still want my home to be something I could lose. That does make me less selfish than a lot of you. If that makes you mad, well, maybe you should reflect on why.

[Madjames]

This thread has really turned into a textbook example of the have/have not aspect of human psychology.

On one end of it, you've got the haves, who will do any kind of mental gymnastics they can possibly squeeze themselves through to justify the current system.

On the other end, you've got people who want to tear it down. I suppose I'm the latter, although in a rather different sense, as the system I'd like penalizes me as much as anyone else (plot taxation).

That, and even if I had a home this very moment, I'd still want to be taxed, and I'd still want my home to be something I could lose. That does make me less selfish than a lot of you. If that makes you mad, well, maybe you should reflect on why.

The big problem is INACTIVE people. SE needs to combat that and give inactive people that are probably not coming back their homes to us paying subscribers.

[Yeldir]

I agree that such a system would work in place of what I've suggested, James. Mostly. SE would just have to find another targeted gil sink.

For those of you who think I'm out of my mind regarding controlled deflation, ask yourself why repair costs have existed in basically every MMO since ever. Think back on every game of a similar style, through all your years as a gamer, that had ways of destroying the currency you were magically producing. It is, almost without exception, every single one of them.

Comparisons to actual economic systems are misguided at best, and ludicrous at worst. MMO economics are their own beast, and they have one thing that makes them behave overwhelmingly different from the kinds you guys have no doubt studied in class - they give every "citizen" within them a license to print as much money as they want. MMO economies start in a state of catastrophic, ceiling-less inflation, and the only thing that keeps them from falling apart after mere weeks of operation is the relentless destruction of currency, weighted to target the top end (i.e., high levels).

So, while after some reflection, I can accept that you don't want the gil destruction attached to your homes. But you guys need to accept that it has to happen, and that it needs to hit the top end more aggressively than the low-end. So where do you want it, then? It has to be somewhere.

I have a prediction: Airships are going to be the next big gil killer. Why? Because it's something only the highest level of players are going to have a use for, and because it's a luxury good, just like housing. It's a perfect target.

[StouterTaru]

This thread has really turned into a textbook example of the have/have not aspect of human psychology.

On one end of it, you've got the haves, who will do any kind of mental gymnastics they can possibly squeeze themselves through to justify the current system.

On the other end, you've got people who want to tear it down. I suppose I'm the latter, although in a rather different sense, as the system I'd like penalizes me as much as anyone else (plot taxation).

That, and even if I had a home this very moment, I'd still want to be taxed, and I'd still want my home to be something I could lose. That does make me less selfish than a lot of you. If that makes you mad, well, maybe you should reflect on why.

I think this post is a textbook of human psychology, specifically projection. You left out the part where the system you want would also BENEFIT you greatly, but it's easy to forget that since you're not selfish.

[Yeldir]

Ah, Taru. My reading comprehension disabled friend. How can you call me selfish, when I want my gil destroyed, so that players beneath me can compete with me more effectively?

Truly, you do not deserve lengthy responses from me, unlike many other users here. You just don't seem to want to take in information that doesn't suit you.

[Voldemort]

This thread has really turned into a textbook example of the have/have not aspect of human psychology.
On one end of it, you've got the haves, who will do any kind of mental gymnastics they can possibly squeeze themselves through to justify the current system.
On the other end, you've got people who want to tear it down.

Except Housing is the only aspect of the game that is limited in content that falls into haves and have-nots.
Every single player can do quests to level up
Every single player can participate in hunts without a linkshell
Every single player can access a free company with no hurdles
Even something as arduous as getting Dreadwyrm gear or the Relic weapons can be achieved with enough time and effort, as everyone can access it.


However, Housing is nothing like the above. It wouldn't matter if everyone on the server had hundreds of millions of gil, there physically is not enough houses to go around. Which then actually limits players from experiencing content associated with housing.

This is probably why players are upset. There is actual content that is and will be missed by a vast majority of players not due to "I can't grind enough gil/am too lazy", it's the reality that having gil does not mean you get a house.

[Yeldir]

I agree with that, Voldemort, entirely. How do you think the problem would be best solved?

[StouterTaru]

Ah, Taru. My reading comprehension disabled friend.

...

You just don't seem to want to take in information that doesn't suit you.

Again, projection.

If that's truly what you want, then just destroy some of your gil. Buy a bunch of crap from NPCs, then sell it back. Then you can declare yourself the least selfish player ever.

You think things should be one way, use your mental gymnastics to not only convince yourself that it's the best way, but that anyone that doesn't have gil and agree with you is less unselfish than you.

To reiterate the points that you skipped over with your reading disability:

Excessive taxation with the money going into a hole = deflation

Deflation is bad for an economy, and the wealthy will be the only ones thriving. Small, steady inflation makes for a very healthy economy.

Handouts to the rich aren't going to trickle down substantially, but penalties to them sure will.

[Firepower]

I just want there to be a market for housing, currently people sitting on plots might be willing to get rid of them if they were able to sell them (and then subsequently move into medium or large plots) on the open market intact for fair prices for instance I would happily sell my decked out medium plot if someone offered me the right price so I could buy myself a large personal house. Secondly I would love the idea to allow access to any other people to use the plots other than yourself, I haven't used my gardening plots since the introduction of chocobo colouring and would definitely be happy to share my plot with someone who would make use of them and the chocobo stables.

People who already own property should not be penalised due to lack of supply but should be encouraged to make extra gil and move into a larger property. Currently the lack of selling intact homes and a host of furniture which is non removable makes people reluctant to sell or move properties without the huge cost of replacing non movable furniture. Some people may be bored with their houses or not use them anymore and would rather sell them intact to recoup the cost that they had invested rather than just collapse it into nothing. Allowing properties to be tradable (but restricting ownership to one personal property per person only) would help a tiny bit towards the massive undersupply until square can provide more for everyone.

[Nalien]

On one end of it, you've got the haves, who will do any kind of mental gymnastics they can possibly squeeze themselves through to justify the current system.

Hope that isn't directed at me, because I'm against both the current system and turning housing into Tenancy Simulator.

Still waiting for someone to point out the big difference between what I've suggested and Rent. The only real one seems to be that Rent favours the mega-rich, which.... lol.