Another definite "no" on glamour log.

[Imoen]

snip

Ya, I didn't really understand the glamor log response, unless it is just the "list" itself that is too much. Which I wouldn't think would require tooo much since it would just be an Item ID or name reference. Which I mean could add up if you had tons of IDs referenced, but It would only apply when you actually glamoured it to something, the list itself wouldn't need to be called until you opened it, which who cares if there is a delay on that. Honestly I think they could tie this to desynthesis or something, but w/e

As far as the idea behind it, it is just an item ID reference to apply a Mesh&Materials overwrite on an item, so I was confused .

But /shrug I dunno how they have it set up.

[Ultimatecalibur]

"Expanding your inventory would put too much strain on the servers!"

"Rent retainers from us, please."

Doesn't really take conspiracy to see the connection there.

Retainers are not constantly tracked and updated unlike the Armory Chest, Action List (Which is divided up in to a bunch of different menus), and Inventory.

Also I expect most people just do not known how many data points a glamour log would need to track currently: 3.1 will put us over 7000 different pieces.

[Jijifli]

"Expanding your inventory would put too much strain on the servers!"

"Rent retainers from us, please."

Doesn't really take conspiracy to see the connection there.

There's a difference though. Retainers aren't 100% tracked on the character. The inventory data can be brought out when you summon them, since it takes a short bit of time before you can access it and gives the server time. When you're playing your character however, it has to keep data running on the inventory unless you want a nice delay every time you open it up.

[Rose-Wild]

No to glamour log but. Yes to selling more glamour in the cash shop......... After 5 months without new content and how they seem to care about it i think i'm really starting to consider to quit the game and i'm not the only one in my circle of friends.

[DarkDedede]

Then they can give us a solution that isn't immediately accessible. Make it an inn/housing feature like the Aesthetician, and perhaps only have it so we can "log" complete sets, as opposed to individual gear pieces. There should be a viable solution in the works, even if it's not a "glamour log." Telling your players "Nope. I don't wanna" probably wasn't the best way to go about dealing with the situation.

[Eidolon]

Then they can give us a solution that isn't immediately accessible. Make it an inn/housing feature like the Aesthetician, and perhaps only have it so we can "log" complete sets, as opposed to individual gear pieces. There should be a viable solution in the works, even if it's not a "glamour log." Telling your players "Nope. I don't wanna" probably wasn't the best way to go about dealing with the situation.

This is a great idea. Make it so the "Glamor Log" is opened via the Retainer Bell. Then there's even LESS of an excuse not to have such a thing (The current excuse being flimsy at best - seriously. When are the white knights going to stop pretending SE can do no wrong.)

[Loki]

Instead of wasting their time and our money in content like pet fights, they could focus on this kind of trouble we met since 1.0..... Inventory space!

[Jijifli]

This is a great idea. Make it so the "Glamor Log" is opened via the Retainer Bell. Then there's even LESS of an excuse not to have such a thing (The current excuse being flimsy at best - seriously. When are the white knights going to stop pretending SE can do no wrong.)

I'm not saying that SE can do no wrong. I'm saying that thanks to limitations, they cannot have an inventory increase for a character who's inventory will constantly be updated while they are logged in. Retainers, as you've used for you example here, run off of a different kind of character and don't have their inventory loaded when the bell isn't rung for them.

I would rather, when they finally do it, that they do it right where a problem won't occur. I have seen other games literally destroy their inventory system and force rollback to fix it, making people lose out on what they've done. Imagine if they expanded it and it broke the inventory and caused everything you didn't have equipped to just vanish. You'd be upset, right?

As a nice little example, as much as I'm disagreeing with the company, Blizzard has stated why they aren't boosting their 16 slot starting bag. It's because they can't get it to where it won't break the inventory. They can make bigger bags to create and purchase since those aren't built into the character, but because it is built into the character, it's more difficult without destroying it completely.

[Naunet]

Then they can give us a solution that isn't immediately accessible. Make it an inn/housing feature like the Aesthetician, and perhaps only have it so we can "log" complete sets, as opposed to individual gear pieces. There should be a viable solution in the works, even if it's not a "glamour log." Telling your players "Nope. I don't wanna" probably wasn't the best way to go about dealing with the situation.

I'd be fine with having to visit an NPC (though that'd be annoying... but so many things in this game are designed in an annoying way so I guess at least it'd be consistent), but no - definitely would not want to only be able to save complete sets. That would great limit customization.

[Gardes]

Didn't they say that retainers are basically another full character (just like your on controllable character) stored on the server? If this is true, I would like to point out that a 1 character slot (per server) sub is 13 dollars while an 8 character slot is 15 dollars. You pay an extra 2 dollars for 7 character slot. 1 retainer is 2 dollars. Plus, you can only control your character 1 at a time. If you have 8 characters on one server and are playing 1 character, the other 7 isn't being accessed and updated either.

Even if we drop this inventory issue and just let it be duct taped with retainer, are the prices really fair?