Land Needs Are Unmet on Balmung

[Reneo]

I read somewhere that someone suggestef adding balconies in the inn where we could at least have a small little garden. I mean it could be similar to condos and your friend could pay you a visit.

But the team that worked on housing is already busy as it is...

I hope they don't overwork themselves so much. They are people too.

[Kekeri]

I take it then that you didnt read what the descriptions said during the world selection part of the character creation?

I did, and nowhere did those descriptions say, "LOL, and forget about being able to buy a house. You're F'd here!"

Go make a character, go, I'll wait for you. The only thing it indicates for servers like Balmung is that they've been around since launch. That says nothing about population, housing issues, etc.

You can't infer those issues either. From experience in prior MMOs, the oldest servers aren't necessarily the most populated, nor do they have housing shortages (I'd played games with instanced housing).

You find out that you're screwed on housing when you look for housing, unless you investigated that specific aspect of gameplay prior, and it's not something that pops up in most reviews or discussions of the game either.

[Kekeri]

That's really not a pertinent point to argue about the cost of housing.. It's the availability that's the issue at hand.. Cost is perfectly fine as is. **snip**

This seems to be missing the point I think. Availability and cost are inextricably linked. If availability were improved, concerns on cost would be alleviated. There's an inherent issue with the supply where personal and company housing is apparently shared (one person takes a limited resource that could be used by 20), and the numbers are incredibly finite given the population.

An even larger issue is that it effectively locks you out from parts of the game. Want to color your bird? Too bad. You have to leave your friends and join some other group, etc. This is bad design. They need to improve supply, or provide means for those gameplay mechanisms (like Heavensward stuff) to be otherwise accessible.

[Zorlinta]

I did, and nowhere did those descriptions say, "LOL, and forget about being able to buy a house. You're F'd here!"

Im agree with that point, it should be something explicit while selecting server that indicates the population of that server, and some warnings about a mid loaded server/high load server that access to some minor game features be inavailable due high population and limited resources.

[GenJoe]

This seems to be missing the point I think. Availability and cost are inextricably linked.

It is to a degree, which is why I also mentioned that increased supply will lead to lower costs of P2P sales i.e. relinquish fee.

But if you're complaining about the cost of buying a house from the system, there's very little likelihood that price will ever be lowered. I'm just saying this because I see people complaining about paying 1 million gil for a house.. In such a case, it's not the system that is flawed, the player simply needs to lower his expectations in this regard..

For example, if you ever thought smalls for 2m, mediums for 10, mansions for 30 were expensive, just wait til SE adds more wards, new plots will be twice that amount before depreciation and there will still be enough people to snatch them all up within a few days. Mind you the price I listed are also for low pop servers.. On legacy they're even more..

SE simply failed to implement the housing as an easily affordable system for a vast majority of players (probably intentional) and it likely won't change either..

So it's really in the best interest of a perspective buyer to just get over the expectation of thinking I should be able to afford that after 3 months of playing and just look for more efficient ways of earning more gil..


The way housing was implemented and handled thereafter, it really is only for the elite. You can say what you want about elitism and what kind of toxic environment SE is fostering by these decisions, but at the end of the day it's easier to just join the ranks than waiting for SE to change their mind.


If it bothers you to the core on the matter of principle, that's too bad, but I try to leave that out the door when I play games, it's too taxing to be an upstanding citizen in a game World If you can do both, more power to ya. (No really, I'm not such a money grubbing power hungry whore in real life )

[Aeyis]

The only thing it indicates for servers like Balmung is that they've been around since launch. That says nothing about population, housing issues, etc.

It says the server is full. That says quite a lot about its population, and prospects on anything limited.

You can't infer those issues either. From experience in prior MMOs, the oldest servers aren't necessarily the most populated, nor do they have housing shortages (I'd played games with instanced housing).

This is typically nearly always the case. Not sure what MMOs you played that neither was likely to be the case in your experience.

You find out that you're screwed on housing when you look for housing, unless you investigated that specific aspect of gameplay prior, and it's not something that pops up in most reviews or discussions of the game either.

If your serious about housing then you will likely check it out as soon as you get the quest for it. Which I believe is at level 15, when you havent invested much into the game yet.

Im agree with that point, it should be something explicit while selecting server that indicates the population of that server, and some warnings about a mid loaded server/high load server that access to some minor game features be inavailable due high population and limited resources.

You mean like how it currently recommends a server and lists servers that are locked or full? The effects of a high population are kind of something you can infer yourself.


Especially in Balmungs case, since its almost always locked youd have to go out of your way to actually be able to create a character there..

This seems to be missing the point I think. Availability and cost are inextricably linked. If availability were improved, concerns on cost would be alleviated.

You have that backwards. If the cost was lowered the availability would be even more of an issue, as more people would be able to afford a house.
In contrast if the cost of houses was raised even higher, availability would go up since there would be less people able to afford one.

[Kekeri]

snip

I does NOT say the server is full. It says that nowhere in character creation. It says nothing remotely like that. The ONLY thing is says is that they've been around since launch.

As for what other MMOs I've played: UO, EQ, EQ:OA, EQ2, AC, WoW, EVE, and a couple more. Server population in UO was not an indication of housing, rather, every server had housing issues because of how the system was designed. Many of the servers in EQ were around since launch, but not all were equally populated. In EQ2, housing was instanced, and I had a house. EVE has no separate servers, but there also mechanisms in place to oust people (both bases in low-sec, and actual territory with sov). So, the only game I'd played prior where housing introduced severe issues was UO, literally one of the first MMOs ever made - 18 years ago.

For reference, I had no problems making a character either. So, I missed that "server is full" message that people can get.

[Kekeri]

If your serious about housing then you will likely check it out as soon as you get the quest for it. Which I believe is at level 15, when you havent invested much into the game yet.

This reasoning is faulty. If your prior experience is that housing isn't an issue, then you have no reason to look into housing until you need/want it. Housing in EQ2 was almost entirely cosmetic. It was only through playing FF XIV that I even found out what housing was used for. I didn't learn about coloring Chocobos or training them till well after 15. I certainly did not hear about crafting features locked to houses in Heavensward before even making a character (or at 15). As I said in the first post, I heard about features locked behind housing later.

The game does not telegraph issues about population related to housing OR that housing has purposes outside cosmetic/social ones at character creation. I don't see why that's so hard to grasp.

[GenJoe]

Server population in UO was not an indication of housing, rather, every server had housing issues because of how the system was designed.

Ehh just so you know.. Every server does/will have housing issue because of how the system is designed in this game also.. 1440 isn't enough for even the smaller servers, only reason there's still plots left there is because the entrance cost is too much for most of the player base, but they still would like to buy the house if they had the money.. Which is why I'm advocating against lowering the housing costs.. As it stands, smalls are mostly bought out from individuals and mansions are bought out from FCs.. So the only ones remaining are the mediums and it's the cost that keeps those unoccupied, not the lack of demand.

[Kekeri]

Ehh just so you know.. Every server does/will have housing issue because of how the system is designed in this game also.. 1440 isn't enough for even the smaller servers

Well, I can see that now... :/

I think I was just surprised because I hadn't seen a serious housing issue in two decades or so. It took me by surprise, and even more so with the features tied to them. I can see what you're saying about costs. I think I'm more peeved with the idea of the double-charge, (pay for release, and pay for space). It's not a direct trade, and seems sketchy for that reason (like if someone asked you to trade them money, and then they'd give you an item later). The "release" charge has no attachment to the price of the property necessarily, and can be much much higher. The price of the real estate itself already scales based on server wealth as well. It's that compounding of costs that bothers me more-so than the idea that plots alone are expensive.