Reclamation of Inactive Housing announced

[loreleidiangelo]

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.

...oh my god, you honestly believe that someone logging in once every 45 days and entering their house and then immediately logging out is somehow "using" it more than someone who pays their sub but, for whatever reason, can't or chooses not to login for those 45 days? Because by SE's rules that's their current definition of "use" that you are so furiously defending.

Look past your self-righteous keyboard rage to realize that the only difference between what I suggested and what SE wants is two minutes of login time; an inconvenience for the sake of being inconvenient. It in no way encourages or forces players to actively use and appreciate the functions of their house any more than they already do or do not do. Use logic, please; don't just arbitrary bang your hands on your keyboard and yell about how people need to be "using their house or losing it" when SE's defined concept of "use" doesn't actually require you to interact with any housing function beyond the front door.

[Lexia]

...oh my god, you honestly believe that someone logging in once every 45 days and entering their house and then immediately logging out is somehow "using" it more than someone who pays their sub but, for whatever reason, can't or chooses not to login for those 45 days? Because by SE's rules that's their current definition of "use" that you are so furiously defending.

Look past your self-righteous keyboard rage to realize that the only difference between what I suggested and what SE wants is two minutes of login time; an inconvenience for the sake of being inconvenient. It in no way encourages or forces players to actively use and appreciate the functions of their house any more than they already do or do not do. Use logic, please; don't just arbitrary bang your hands on your keyboard and yell about how people need to be "using their house or losing it" when SE's defined concept of "use" doesn't actually require you to interact with any housing function beyond the front door.

For one I did not say entering it once and logging off is "using it" I said if they care so much for their house they can enter it least once in those 45 days to keep their trophy house get your stuff straight.

[Niwashi]

If they're using the chocobo stables right in front of their house, is it really too much to ask that the they enter it once every 45 days? I don't believe so, and if their only desire is the chocobo housing, then FC housing is perfect for that and there's no real need to occupy a house.

It's not a matter of whether it's easy or not. It's the fact that it's being used to measure whether you're using the property or not, when in fact for many people it's not the normal use of their property. If you dare let yourself forget about this system for a brief period and just use your estate the way you want to use it, then it will suddenly just disappear on you. Actively playing the game should identify us as actively playing the game, without having to keep calling out "HEY, I'M STILL HERE" every few days.

I think it should (at least for personal houses) be based on whether you're still paying your subscription or not. Having it be based on when you last logged into the game or even when you last went to your housing plot would work too, if they want to make sure it's reserved for people using the housing system. But it shouldn't be based on when we last used just that one particular piece of the estate (the interior of the house), when there's other parts of it as well that aren't being counted.

(And as to FC housing being perfect if you just want the chocobo stable, that FC housing is subject to the same rule. If you just use it for its chocobo stable, then you'll lose the whole estate in 45 days, including that stable.)

[OfTheWhitewind]

If you dare let yourself forget about this system for a brief period and just use your estate the way you want to use it, then it will suddenly just disappear on you.

Just an FYI that they will send the player emails before they demolish their house. It will not just suddenly be gone one day. You will get a few warnings first.

[Catwho]

Just an FYI that they will send the player emails before they demolish their house. It will not just suddenly be gone one day. You will get a few warnings first.

Won't they also send an in-game notice for the "oops I forgot to go into my house last month" crowd?

SE's track record with not getting mistaken for spam has improved over the years, but most people get flooded with so much junk may that a notice may still get lost in the press.

The two main groups I see affected by it are 1. The inactive players with a house on long break now who aren't even paying attention since they're not playing 2. Current subbed players with a house who had planned on un-subbing in the future. #2 is the only one we're really hearing from because, again, #1 doesn't hang out on forums. But #1 is the one who'll get hit with a nasty surprise if SE's emails get marked as spam.

In the same sense that "2 minute inconvenience" is somehow deemed enough of a commitment to keep one's home by those who are in favor of it. What is YOUR actual point? I was pointing out that it's an arbitrary decision that has no impact on a.) how much a player actually uses the functions of their home, and b.) SE's bottom line, which is 100% guaranteed what they care the most about with this change. It seems like a restriction solely for the sake of placing a restriction.

It's a decision made from a database standpoint. Educated guess: The neighborhood is an "object" with data (as in it in object oriented programming.) Anyone can go onto anyone's lawns, since the object is public to all accounts. Attempts to alter a lawn if you don't have permissions are denied at the time of the request to the server, and those probably aren't logged for more than a few days because it's useless noise data. The inside of the house is a separate object. When a character enters the house, it does a permission check at the zone entrance and grants permission access based on the house settings and assigns privileges at the time of access (rather at the time of request like the lawns.) This leaves a date/time stamp on the interior of the house object, unlike when someone steps onto your lawn and may or may not attempt to modify the settings.

Could they design it better? Absolutely. But it's not an arbitrary decision. It was the decision based on the easiest call to the database - when was the last time someone with privileges associated with the house object stepped inside it?

[Seryl199]

2. Current subbed players with a house who had planned on un-subbing in the future.

2. is more of any player who thought they might ever take more than a short term break at any point in the future. That dynamic has now changed for those that own an estate, as they'll forfeit their lot and potentially lose any permanent place-able items, and that destruction happens after the first month and a half of inactivity that player ever experiences, from 3.1 until an indefinite point (months? years?) in the future when/if housing accommodates enough players to ease back on restrictions. If a player wants to break into the housing market now, they have to know they're making a long term commitment. That wasn't necessarily the case for everyone who bought a house the first time around.

[Catwho]

2. is more of any player who thought they might ever take more than a short term break at any point in the future. That dynamic has now changed for those that own an estate, as they'll forfeit their lot and potentially lose any permanent place-able items, and that destruction happens after the first month and a half of inactivity that player ever experiences, from 3.1 until an indefinite point (months? years?) in the future when/if housing accommodates enough players to ease back on restrictions.

I know I'm a weirdo that doesn't actually un-sub when I stop playing for a while. Money is tighter for others and that $15/month could make a difference. I keep paying with the intention of hopping on, and having to walk into my house would be a big motivation to do so.

[Seryl199]

I know I'm a weirdo that doesn't actually un-sub when I stop playing for a while. Money is tighter for others and that $15/month could make a difference. I keep paying with the intention of hopping on, and having to walk into my house would be a big motivation to do so.

That's all well and good, I see both sides of the argument here. I want everyone to have access to housing, but not everyone can have access to housing, which means it must be exclusive and limited in a way, which takes away from another player's potential to enjoy the experience because they don't pay a sub the same way. It's frustrating how housing is meant to be a community experience, yet the system is so flawed that it splits the community into warring factions.