Reclamation of Inactive Housing announced

[OfTheWhitewind]

500 pages wouldn't stop it. SE has finally realized that these forums aren't a useful metric for gauging what their player base actually wants. So have I, really. The people I actually play this game with, the hundreds of them I've gotten to know to some extent - they're nothing like what takes place on this forum.

So true and thank god for that. People who think not paying for months on end entitles them to limited content is pretty baffling to me.

[loreleidiangelo]

Active sub should be enough; do away with this mandatory "log in and physically enter your house" BS. If someone wants to pay $15 a month to keep a digital house in a game they don't even play then frankly that's on them. Most people who are truly done with the game will unsubscribe, not continue to pay.

I have other preferences, like the timer being extended to 90 days minimum and %100 reimbursement for the gil cost of the home (as well as preservation of normally-destroyed rare furniture and an indefinite amount of time to claim them from the housing manager), but my biggest concern is my initial point.

[Sensual]

Honestly i find this unfair. Or at least should make the time longer to 3 months. What if the person can't log in for those 45 days, due to some IRL problems or w/e.
"Oh that house you worked for so hard? Yea it's gone over to some keyboard warriors that cry on the forums."
If they wanted to do something like this, they should've thought it out a little bit better, this won't change the fact that there's not enough houses, if anything it will upset people and "Pressure" them, because if for some reason they dont want to log, taking a break or wtv, they now have the fear of losing their house and objectively "Oh i gotta resub and log once so i don't lose my house". Yea no, bad approach.

[Kayote]

My concern is less about what they are doing and more about how they are doing it. It's just a bit too much of a strong-arm tactic for the personal housing. Such a short time against how often you open the front door just doesn't sit well with me.

Exactly. Despite what some here try to argue, im sure most here are fine with the fact theyre reclaiming houses. The problem is how theyre doing it. Once the initial lots fill up again, itll be the same steady stream of new lots opening up ... 45 days is too soon. Im fine with having to go in the house, doesnt seem like a big issue despite the fact it seems excessive. The only issue is the time. Its a month and a half, or even less unless you last logged off in your house! I know im not the only one that unsubs every now and then with full intentions of coming back when a patch (or 2) adds content ... in fact id say its the norm.

I dont want to call it extortion ... but its at best extortion-like tactics. "Pay us money or we destroy your work and only give you some stuff back" There is a line between freeing up housing out of necessity and threatening players to take their housing, which they probably spent a lot of time and gil to purchase and customize. The fact this is a band-aid fix to a problem rooted in their crap design, which isnt going to fix the core issue only makes it worse.

For the record, I dont like housing, dont have housing in this game, and dont plan on ever buying a personal one in its current implementation.

[Crimsonwolf3400]

Also hi Crimsonwolf, this is kind of directed at you too, as you're calling me out for the urchin comment but ignoring the even more outlandish carrion birds bit.

I do not agree with vultures being a good analogy for:

FF14 housing in a nutshell

That is, unless we're all the vultures and only the first of us are getting to eat. It's quite similar to my own analogy, albeit more luck and nature being responsible for our meals and less controlled intent.

I however agree with this thread being an analogy for vultures:

Time to start to camp out of those abandoned houses.

FINALLY!!! i can buy a house

Finally, SE you have my full support

Thank you SE!

CELEBRATION!!!!!

Very happy with this, thank you SE!

Thank you SE! <3

The examples could keep going, and I'm not even using the rude ones, just those who are ecstatic. While I feel for them and wish everyone could have a home, I still have the distinct feeling that if something tragic were to happen to me, many of the users here would care to know exactly when only so they could buy my plot the moment it hits the market. Whatever else can be said for this decision, it seems quite clear to me that the one indisputable thing it has done is show just how little compassion most of us have for ours peers. Perhaps it has even robbed some people here of empathy and sympathy they might otherwise possess.

I also hesitated to reply at first and am only doing so now against my better judgement. I found your comparison to be more gauche, and the fact you introduced it only to try to belittle someone else for referring to all of us as vultures, to be the most insensitive thing I've read in this thread so far. Your twisting of the original reference to offend and incite your peers, escalating the tension of the debate, was deplorable. I have no trouble believing part of what you said is true though.

I'm an expert on the rude and the crude.

This thread has clearly indicated how important housing is to many users, and I hope that more get the opportunity to participate in this content. However, with the housing still being so limited, I fear most of those posting here still won't have a home, and their hopes will have been raised for naught. It seems like this decision truly hurts both current owners and those without, and that is one reason why I can not support it.

[Yeldir]

I do not agree with vultures being a good analogy...
That is, unless we're all the vultures and only the first of us are getting to eat. It's quite similar to my own analogy, albeit more luck and nature being responsible for our meals and less controlled intent.

So, you don't agree! Good! I'm glad I was wrong about you. I apolog- wait a minute...

The examples could keep going, and I'm not even using the rude ones, just those who are ecstatic. While I feel for them and wish everyone could have a home, I still have the distinct feeling that if something tragic were to happen to me, many of the users here would care to know exactly when only so they could buy my plot the moment it hits the market. Whatever else can be said for this decision, it seems quite clear to me that the one indisputable thing it has done is show just how little compassion most of us have for ours peers. Perhaps it has even robbed some people here of empathy and sympathy they might otherwise possess.

Oh. You mean like vultures, waiting for you to drop, so they can pick your carcass? That's what you see from the people who want access to housing? So you expect them to do what vultures do, but you think my comparison is gauche, terrible and putting words in your mouth?

I also hesitated to reply at first and am only doing so now against my better judgement. I found your comparison to be more gauche, and the fact you introduced it only to try to belittle someone else for referring to all of us as vultures, to be the most insensitive thing I've read in this thread so far. Your twisting of the original reference to offend and incite your peers, escalating the tension of the debate, was deplorable. I have no trouble believing part of what you said is true though.

I think your attitude is deplorable. I think you pay lip service to the ideas of compassion and harmony, but at the end of the day, the only ideas I see you get behind are the ones that preserve the estates of the haves at the expense of the have nots. Your lofty words are so much doubletalk. If you were such a nice guy, you'd be willing to accept some self-sacrifice for the good of the community.

I know you know that reclamation is only step one. I know you know there'll be more lots, after, and I know you know that there's no point in making more lots if they all degenerate into server-devouring wastelands bereft of players. You choose to step around these facts because they don't suit you. Your fine words are hot air, because your ideas are rotten, selfish, and everything you say and do in this thread is transparent. Do you believe your own hogwash?

This thread has clearly indicated how important housing is to many users, and I hope that more get the opportunity to participate in this content. However, with the housing still being so limited, I fear most of those posting here still won't have a home, and their hopes will have been raised for naught. It seems like this decision truly hurts both current owners and those without, and that is one reason why I can not support it.

Oh, yeah, the opportunity to get homes really hurts those without homes. Because they might have to give them up if they quit!!! Tragic. Whatever, dude.

[Lexia]

Active sub should be enough; do away with this mandatory "log in and physically enter your house" BS. If someone wants to pay $15 a month to keep a digital house in a game they don't even play then frankly that's on them.

No it should be how often you enter your house, someone even mentioned here on the forums that they play often (think it was everyday) but hadn't entered their house for months. So this person that plays everyday but hasn't bothered to visit their house for months which is a extended amount of time is what just using it a trophy or something? While the people that do want a house and would actually use it are left out.

[Blood-Aki]

So true and thank god for that. People who think not paying for months on end entitles them to limited content is pretty baffling to me.

You and me both, Will never understand this "i bought it once, it should be mine forever, regardless if i play or not"

[Yshnal]

No it should be how often you enter your house, someone even mentioned here on the forums that they play often (think it was everyday) but hadn't entered their house for months. So this person that plays everyday but hasn't bothered to visit their house for months which is a extended amount of time is what just using it a trophy or something? While the people that do want a house and would actually use it are left out.

"This person has this one character on this locked server, but s/he doesn't raid nor do anything; s/he just comes into the game to chat with his/her friends. I want that player's character deleted so that I can create/move mine there to actually play the game as I think that everyone should. Oh, and also delete that other player's items from his inventory, as s/he never uses them and they're just taking precious resources that could be dedicated to increase my own bag space."

What someone does with the game while they pay it is just their call. If they want to get a house and only visit it once a year they should be free to do so, as they bought it and they're still paying customers. These players aren't the ones at fault for not being houses for everyone. Square-Enix is. So stop trying to dictate how other paying customers have to play, because that's none of your business. I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but I'm tired of this truly selfish nonsense.

[Ibi]

No it should be how often you enter your house, someone even mentioned here on the forums that they play often (think it was everyday) but hadn't entered their house for months. So this person that plays everyday but hasn't bothered to visit their house for months which is a extended amount of time is what just using it a trophy or something? While the people that do want a house and would actually use it are left out.

I know I've previously said I don't recall the last time I went into my house. Here's why I, or someone else in my position, would continue to hold onto a house despite that:

Firstly, as things stand, giving up a house means either finding someone who wants to pay you to relinquish the plot or (if you can't/don't want to find someone) getting nothing in return. Since there are no negatives to having the house, the only reason to voluntarily give it up in the latter case is altruism.

Secondly, SE have added several systems to the game that require housing (gardening, chocobo dying, etc.), some of which have previously been extremely profitable, especially if you were able to jump on it immediately. I loaned someone 5 million gil to buy their house when the first round of personal houses released, and they were able to pay me back in just a couple of weeks, thanks to gardening alone.

Though they haven't announced any further systems that will require a house, there's always a chance it will happen, so it's prudent to hold onto a house you're not doing anything with just to be able to take advantage of any similar additions in the future.

Finally, the availability of a cheap teleport location adjacent to a market board and retainer bell is never something to be sneezed at. That's the main thing I use my house for lately.

The only one of these that's impacted by this change is the first point. As people have pointed out, while getting 80% of the plot's cost back is better than the total loss you'd face at present, the limited availability of plots means that finding someone to sell to is probably still the more viable option in the majority of cases.

For those people who will continue to have an active sub though, there's still no disadvantage to keeping a house they already own, even if they're not doing anything with it.

Until SE either provide a disincentive to owning a house you're not using or an incentive to vacate a house you're not using (and 80% of the plot value probably isn't enough of an incentive for the majority of people in that situation), that's not likely to change.