My absence and return - thoughts on demolished houses

[Masekase_Hurricane]

I can't believe you've harbored this anger for 2 yrs lol. 45 days is too short but it is what it is. Housing is limited so if you don't sub you don't keep simple as that I don't feel bad for you. Someone who stays active deserves it not someone who doesn't play.

That's the thing I don't think it did. If this issue p***ed him off as much as he said it did then he would of complained via email or letter.

[silverlunarfox]

So many people are missing the point here. Oh well, my message is for Square Enix and I think they understand what I'm saying.

What so many of you don't understand is the disaster of a design that housing is that requires the deletion of inactive houses to begin with. My original post clearly notes that I understand the need for house deletions in the current model, and that apartments are a decent compromise.

What I'm telling Square, is that deleting 90% of my gil and investment of the game - something I spent hours organizing and making my own - makes it really hard to ever want to play again. They are turning players away that may have otherwise come back.

In a nutshell, they have a badly designed housing system with some of the most severely punishing consequences I've ever seen a game developer inflict on their player-base trying to take a break from their game.

I don't think anyone is missing the point persay....

So you understand about the housing model as it is, yet because it happened to you and your house youre upset..........

I'm pretty sure on a whole Square doesn't care, since someone else will happily take up the plot you are not using. Esp on the busier servers, you just made someones day for not playing! So no, they are not turning players away. Old and new players rotate in and out on their own. If someone is letting a house in a game be the reason they quit, so be it. Someone else will benefit.

In a nutshell, it's basically badly designed for someone like you who decided to make a huge fuss...over a tiny part of the game *(unless you have an FC)*

Plenty of FC's have no house. Just consider your house demo a contribution for the greater good and move on. It sounds like you already have.

Even when taking a break from the game, I can manage to find a minute to log in, walk in my house, and walk out.

[LineageRazor]

So many people are missing the point here. Oh well, my message is for Square Enix and I think they understand what I'm saying.

I don't think as many people misunderstand you as you seem to think. While there's no doubt that housing has many problems associated with it in this game, even looking at ideal cases there's really no good reason to allow players to keep their property indefinitely while unsubscribed.

Under the current (non-ideal) situation, housing is extremely limited. Allowing inactive players to keep their houses when there are so many active players who'd actually USE their houses is silly. Demolition is definitely needed.

Under an ideal situation, with unlimited housing available for all, allowing inactive players to keep their houses is still silly, because many players who quit the game AREN'T planning on coming back (or may have planned to, but decide not to after all). Their houses become empty mausoleums, turning wards into ghost towns. Demolition is still needed, to prevent this from happening.

A lack of demolitions only makes sense if housing is instanced - but instanced housing comes with its own heap of drawbacks, such as the lack of community and inability to show off your stuff to your neighbors. It wouldn't be bad for players who decorate solely for their own enjoyment, or who want a house for purely mechanical reasons (such as gardening), but those are hardly the only reasons that should be taken into consideration.

Arguments can be made for whether the duration is too short (45 days until demolition, 35 after that to reclaim gil and items), and whether the mechanisms for keeping a house active are to fiddly (really, you have to walk into the house? Why isn't an active subscription enough?), but the need for demolition of some kind is real. Basically, the assumption that the housing system is a disaster because demolitions are necessary is false to begin with: any housing system that has no demolitions is a disaster itself. A housing system cannot be ideal without demolitions. What makes it ideal is under what circumstances those demoltions occur.

[Geryth]

I don't think anyone is missing the point persay....

So you understand about the housing model as it is, yet because it happened to you and your house youre upset..........

No. I LET it happen to my house, to let my money do the talking. I won't financially support their terrible design decisions. This whole post is me simply finally being able to tell them why I stopped giving them my money. Apartments might be enough to get me back, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm out millions of gil and worse, the house I meticulously created and loved. You can blame that on me all you want but it was SE's decision to put terrible limits on housing and SE's decision to punish players for taking breaks and SE who deleted my stuff.

I'm pretty sure on a whole Square doesn't care

Maybe, maybe not. The least I could do is tell them why I stopped giving them my business. Whether or not it changes the way they feel about how they've designed housing I'm sure it's something they desire to know.

...since someone else will happily take up the plot you are not using. Esp on the busier servers, you just made someones day for not playing! So no, they are not turning players away. Old and new players rotate in and out on their own. If someone is letting a house in a game be the reason they quit, so be it. Someone else will benefit.

And there you are again, missing the point of my post. People keep saying "well on the other end someone gets to have a house now, someone benefited from your leaving." It's terrible design to have someone who can't take a break or risk losing countless hours of their work, at the expense of someone else not having access to content they would like to acquire. That's where people miss the point of my post - they fail to see what the system could have been, and that no one should have had to have such severe negative consequences inflicted on them. They are only looking at my post within the walls that SE placed around housing, that don't have to be there (and should never have been there).

In a nutshell, it's basically badly designed for someone like you who decided to make a huge fuss...over a tiny part of the game *(unless you have an FC)*

Umm no, housing is NOT a "tiny part of the game". My house was one of the main things that I enjoyed most about the game. A solid percentage of my time was spent farming gil to buy, build, and furnish that house.

Plenty of FC's have no house. Just consider your house demo a contribution for the greater good and move on. It sounds like you already have.

The fact that I had to lose my house so a FC could get one is a huge clue as to how bad the system is.

Even when taking a break from the game, I can manage to find a minute to log in, walk in my house, and walk out.

How can you walk in your house if you're taking a break (ie not subbed)?

[Dark-Saviour]

Pros: house for everyone
Cons: lifeless, no interest if it's to be alone

How much life do any of the neighborhoods actually have right now?
On my server, I can go to any ward and see, maybe, one person standing next to a marketboard or running back to their house if I'm lucky.
There don't seem to ever be neighborhood get-togethers, nor is there any meaningful amount of foot-traffic in general.

Hence why I said neighborhoods were conceptually something that had merit, but in execution failed to be better than instancing.
Plus, some of the housing areas just look tacky with how clustered the lots and shops are. So much hope for Shirogane. Such a failure... :-(

[Averax]

"I understand why you demolish houses, but why does it have to happen to MY house"

Is what i'm reading.

There's a limited number of houses out there, and if someone who's holding one all to himself decides that they aren't going to pay their subscription, why should they be allowed to hang onto it? It's like not paying your mortgage while you aren't actively living in your home.

"Oh but i was only going to be gone for a few months"

They don't know that. For all SE knows, you're gone forever, and there are people who are actively paying who would love a home.

[LaylaTsarra]

If you're not paying a sub I have no problem with housing demolition. On the other hand if you are you shouldn't lose your house. This entering it every 45 days doesn't sit well with me, but then, that's my opinion.

[Geryth]

"I understand why you demolish houses, but why does it have to happen to MY house"

Is what i'm reading.

Then what have you been reading? I explicitly refused to resub and let my house get demolished. No where in any of my posts have I sat here and lamented about "poor me and my house". I'm simply telling SE they created a bad system and because of that I withheld my money from them. And when I was thinking about wanting to come back, my demolished house is major deterrent.

There's a limited number of houses out there, and if someone who's holding one all to himself decides that they aren't going to pay their subscription, why should they be allowed to hang onto it? It's like not paying your mortgage while you aren't actively living in your home.

Here's another post, thinking inside the box that SE created in their housing system, and missing the point. Let's try to explain this another way, that perhaps more people might understand.

Originally:
Player A has a house, and takes a break for a while.
Player B can't get a house because they are occupied by inactive players

Player B is pissed.

Now:
Player A can't take a break, or they lose their house. A break is taken, and their house deleted
Player B who is an active sub gets the house they wanted.

Player A is pissed

The point is that SE made a system that is pissing off their players. It doesn't matter if it's player A or player B, the fact that someone is punished in either scenario is the problem.

"Oh but i was only going to be gone for a few months"

They don't know that. For all SE knows, you're gone forever, and there are people who are actively paying who would love a home.

I would have loved to have been able to tell them this way back then. Except without a sub, I have no way to do so. This 7 day trial has given me and thousands of other inactive players who are deterred from returning a voice on the matter. They really should have a forum that inactive subs have access to post in.

[Chadness]

I both love and hate the housing system itself. It's very intricate and detailed and, frankly, fun for those who really want to get into it. But, it was, of course, implemented in a horrible fashion that only allows a small portion of each server's player base to actually own property. "Server issues", right? Whatever, SE.

Unfortunately, like many things SE does with this game, they manage to royally screw up excellent ideas.

Let me preface the following by saying that I do own a small lot and a house and enjoy it. I have never let my sub lapse long enough to lose it. However, several friends of mine have.

From my viewpoint, I understand that the lot and house itself really shouldn't be just left there if no one is using it. Someone un-subs for six months or a year, the lot really should be given up for a more active, subscribed player's use. I really have no issues with the auto-demolishing of the house. (I do think it should be implemented a tad bit different in that - if the player has any sort of active sub, there should be zero timer on demolition - it just shouldn't happen. If that player un-subs, then it starts a countdown to house demolition.)

Now, what it absolutely ridiculous is that, once the house is demolished, all your belongings are stored for approximately 30 more days, then deleted forever. THIS is the issue I have.

Like the OP said, he lost literally millions of gil in furnishings and such. So did my friends, and it left a horrible taste in their mouths. Those items should NEVER be deleted and should be there waiting for people who re-sub to remove from the NPC, store, and use again in the future in a new house or apartment they may use.

There needs to be more balance where their active subscribers shouldn't have a problem getting land in a housing ward, but, at the same time, those who un-sub and who lose their house shouldn't have all their stuff just deleted into the void, either.

In typical SE fashion, though, they go to the extremes and it pisses people on both sides off.

[Masekase_Hurricane]

but that doesn't change the fact that I'm out millions of gil

I'm sorry but that was your own fault. You said you knew it was going to happen but refused to log in to prove some point. YOU had the chance to save your house, YOU had the chance to retrieve your gil and stuff but YOU decided not to. So i'm sorry but the house, gil, time etc can't have meant that much to you.

I have bought an apartment even though I own an FC and house, as someday I might decide to take a break. If I decide to leave the game I will let my friends know the plot will become available.