Reclamation of Inactive Housing announced

[FriendlyUncle]

I shared a link in my previous post to a thread where I talked about instanced housing but I'll just say it here. As it stands currently instanced housing isn't a be-all end-all solution and isn't necessarily a "fix".



I'd be willing to bet the biggest obstacle that SE is facing with housing is tied to SAN Storage; it's expensive. As seen in the above quote even in an instanced housing model all that data needs to be saved (object placement, character location, etc.). This means that SE would still need to purchase/set-up additional hardware/storage anyway; the same way they do with wards.

Again, just to reaffirm, the above means that more land for more players regardless of ward or instance = more hardware/storage = more cost. All that data has to get processed and saved somewhere.

This is the same costs as adding new wards, albeit even more resource consuming due to a wards permanent fixture in the world where instanced it does not need to be actively loaded into memory unless in use. And looking at how often housing is actively in use, an instanced solution would be more efficient. A single ward holds how many houses with their external fixtures in a permanent state? Plus all the sub wards. Multiplied by 3 for each of the city states. So yes, they have to lay down some costs for SAN or VSA solutions, or the scrap some of the existing sub wards and use those resources house instanced copies of houses only called when a player enters it, much like how interiors of houses are handled now just for the whole package.

Creation of additional wards is more expensive hardware wise, and more resource intensive on said hardware the single instances, once the player is leaves the instance makes a save of any changes to storage and closes freeing it's resources. As it stands now we currently have 25+ houses of varying sizes and configurations consistently loaded, and then additional instancing for interiors which seems horribly inefficient. Does it look nice, sure? But why not cut the number of wards down, so people who don't care for the look and just want a house can get one. Shift the resources from those retired wards to instancing new player houses, and these 'additional wards' they say they may be adding could be additional hardware for the instances which again could host many more houses with the same hardware.

[Fyce]

This is the same costs as adding new wards, albeit even more resource consuming due to a wards permanent fixture in the world where instanced it does not need to be actively loaded into memory unless in use. And looking at how often housing is actively in use, an instanced solution would be more efficient.
[...]

But that would be a completly different design. You wouldn't have a neighborhood and all the "life" coming with it. It wouldn't be some kind of hub area but just a private thing only you will see and use.
I like my ward, the neighbors habits and wandering in the place to see what new stuff the neighbors added to their plot. Or even if a new FC arrived.

Yes, the actual system is very demanding in terms of technical ressources, but it add so much more flavor and value than a poor instantiated design you're suggesting.
You'd prefer a bland housing system but for everyone, rather than a flavorful but restricted one. I get where you're coming from, but not everyone think that way. Some people like that unique aspect to the current housing, even if it has quite a lot of issues.

[FriendlyUncle]

That's fine, if you read my post I said nothing about removing wards all together. Much like Sol said, you can choose to purchase your plot in a ward, but if none are available or you have been inactive you are moved from the Ward into an instance.

If you would read the entire post you would have noted that no where in my post did I say remove ALL wards. Just cut them back until the get additional hardware in place. The additional of instance housing only adds the option for people who cannot purchase a plot due to them all being used can purchase a house in at least SOME capacity with the option to migrate their instanced home over to a ward when a plot becomes available. And vice versa for people who are in a ward, but do not care for it. So what exactly about that system lacks flavor or is bland? Nothing changes with that system aside from allowing people to get housing while not having to screw over players who have to take an extended leave of absence.

TL;DR Wards still in game but ADDITIONAL instance housing to be used based on preference/when ward plots are unavailable/house has reached inactivity timer.

[Syrehn]

That's fine, if you read my post I said nothing about removing wards all together. Much like Sol said, you can choose to purchase your plot in a ward, but if none are available or you have been inactive you are moved from the Ward into an instance.

If you would read the entire post you would have noted that no where in my post did I say remove ALL wards. Just cut them back until the get additional hardware in place. The additional of instance housing only adds the option for people who cannot purchase a plot due to them all being used can purchase a house in at least SOME capacity with the option to migrate their instanced home over to a ward when a plot becomes available. And vice versa for people who are in a ward, but do not care for it. So what exactly about that system lacks flavor or is bland? Nothing changes with that system aside from allowing people to get housing while not having to screw over players who have to take an extended leave of absence.

TL;DR Wards still in game but ADDITIONAL instance housing to be used based on preference/when ward plots are unavailable/house has reached inactivity timer.

The issue with this is then SE has to maintain 2 separate housing structures, wards & instances, which they may not have the manpower/time to do.

The reasons that we have the system that we currently do likely fall along the lines of:

1) Hardware/Storage costs - storage probably being the key (this is the same regardless of wards/instances).
2) They already had the FC housing structure in place so it's more efficient (time/money) to piggyback off it.
3) If they split FC & Personal houses into separate wards, if/when the FC housing demand dies down and individual personal housing demand increases there would be empty plots forever sitting in FC dedicated wards. This isn't an effective usage of server resources. Edit: Found the quote regarding FC/Personal houses being mixed:

Basically, the reason both personal and Free Company housing plots aren't segregated is that because it’s been a year since our official launch, the rate at which Free Companies are established will gradually decrease. If the land for personal and Free Company housing was separate, we’d have to keep supplementing both in spite of declining demand for Free Company plots. Plus, when a Free Company is dissolved, its property is relinquished. On the other hand, individual players will continue to earn gil, so the demand for personal housing plots will only increase from now on. Separating the two would result in a situation where a player can’t purchase land in crowded personal housing areas or buy an empty plot in the Free Company areas.

4) They wanted Community centred hubs.

[FriendlyUncle]

The issue with this is then SE has to maintain 2 separate housing structures, wards & instances, which they may not have the manpower/time to do.

The reasons that we have the system that we currently do likely fall along the lines of:

1) Hardware/Storage costs - storage probably being the key.
2) They already had the FC housing structure in place so it's more efficient (time/money) to piggyback off it.
3) If they split FC & Personal houses into separate wards, if/when the FC housing demand dies down and individual personal housing demand increases there would be empty plots forever sitting in FC dedicated wards. This isn't an effective usage of server resources. Edit: Found the quote regarding FC/Personal houses being mixed:



4) They wanted Community centred hubs.

I said nothing about splitting based on FC/Personal. Just flat down the line, FC or personal housing can be placed in a ward or instanced. The fact that something is easier for them to just repeat doesn't mean it is a good decision. Look at our content formula for an example of repeating formula X out of ease not always working as intended.

You can get a moderate SAN system for around 40k that's like a months base sub for around 3200 accounts or something to cover that cost. Which again, they have all ready stated they want to expand and add additional wards as is, that hardware could just as easily be allocated to instancing rather than to physical wards. Keep the inactivity system in place like Sol said, you can even keep the 45 day time frame. After 45 days rather than demolishing that FC/personal house it is instead migrated over to being its own instanced property, freeing up the ward slot for purchase buy another player/fc or for a player/fc to move their existing home from an instance to said ward.

Returning players still have their house/fc house albeit it is instanced. Keeping housing as limited as it is now is not a good solution for the long term and that is what they need to be looking at instead of incredibly short term fixes like this which will still require them to purchase additional hardware in the long run. As far as FC creation declining that depends on the type of content they create, we saw a huge drop in FCs strictly because of how raid content has been done. Strict weekly lock outs with 8 man teams meaning there is no need for large/lively FCs nor do you even need one. Should they begin transitioning towards content allowing larger pre-made groups, be it a raid or we will see how airship expeditions play out we may see FC growth up until a point.

This will fix the issue for a very short period of time, a band-aid which could cost them more money in the long run in the terms of lost subs or hardware spent on wards if this is the route they continue to take seeing how nearly everyone wants a home. Pound for pound they would get more bang for their buck hardware wise adding instances vs wards which all ready require instances with their current implementation. This means more property available albeit in not as scenic an area, which may mean increased subs from people returning having hoped to be able to purchase a house, and possible retention for people who have been trying to get a house but were unable to get a plot. There is only so long that they can keep people on the forums from banging at the door about housing with this current resolution, and will eventually need to shell out for hardware regardless.

If they are going to spend the money on hardware anyway, why fight against a mixed model between Wards and instances if it will be more efficient and beneficial for players and SE? FFXI is what, 15 years old and has player housing for every character on the server, the customization of furnishings and placement and I think with the latest expansion an instanced island for all players to gather/raise pets? I applause SE for the look and feel of the Wards, it is unique from any game I have played but adding instancing to housing would only improve upon the Ward feature that they all ready have in place. Imagine if this is the duty finder mess from ARR launch, do you think they could have delayed purchasing additional hardware for the DF instancing for 1.5 years without players rioting and leaving the game? One feature is more important than the other of course but it still stands that the lack of hardware and forethought in the design is disruptive.

[Syrehn]

Snip

I know you didn't mention splitting wards based on FC/Personal. I was just adding some general info about why we have our current mixed ward structure; that really had nothing to do with Instances vs. Wards.

Back on the topic of a Ward/Instance combo...

Again, the bottom line with that scenario is does SE want to maintain 2 separate housing structures simultaneously because that's what they would be doing. Based on what's we've seen to date I'm going to go out on a limb and say no, they don't; regardless of the reason (time/money/resources etc.).

Additionally in an instanced/ward combo scenario you also have to deal with users who have been placed into that private instance because of the inactivity timer that, when they return, want to go back to a ward. Do you say "To Bad So Sad" and they're just stuck in a private instance which they might not like? If you do allow them to move back to wards how would that be handled? Would the system need to scan all the wards/sub-wards for the availability of the exact plot location they were removed from and place them back in the first available one? That in itself could carry it's own substantial drawbacks.

At the end of the day what it really comes down to SE is taking steps to make the best out of what they have currently implemented.