No Personal Housing Unlock

[gbe931]

1) Taking all personal housing from people who currently own them is not objectively fair in the slightest and just sounds vindictive just because you didn't get anything. I'd be the first to say if SE stripped people who own houses currently, that will permanently drop subs faster than people whining about cancelling their subs because they can't get one and those same people never cancelling.

2) The minimums per housing size is arbitrary. I definitely agree with SE wanting a min of 4 people for an FC to buy a house since you need 4 to start an FC to begin with.

3) While not impossible per se, you are not taking into account the sheer cost of implementation of all that. Its not simply slapping in more servers and hard drives contrary to what most people believe. You have to take into account the architecture of a data center and everything from soup to nuts.

4) No thanks. We already have a cash shop for cosmetic items, I don't want legit features locked behind a pay wall.

[Ruf]

1) Taking all personal housing from people who currently own them is not objectively fair in the slightest and just sounds vindictive just because you didn't get anything. I'd be the first to say if SE stripped people who own houses currently, that will permanently drop subs faster than people whining about cancelling their subs because they can't get one and those same people never cancelling.
2) The minimums per housing size is arbitrary. I definitely agree with SE wanting a min of 4 people for an FC to buy a house since you need 4 to start an FC to begin with.

3) While not impossible per se, you are not taking into account the sheer cost of implementation of all that. Its not simply slapping in more servers and hard drives contrary to what most people believe. You have to take into account the architecture of a data center and everything from soup to nuts.

4) No thanks. We already have a cash shop for cosmetic items, I don't want legit features locked behind a pay wall.

No i do not think that taking ppl houses away would be fair but at the same time if its needed to make it fair for everyone else then it should be done if thats the main issue, secondly, be the first to say that doing that would drop subs, i beg to differ opinion, allowing to retain one house no matter what doesnt crash the rest of the game content. Someone said into another post that they already paying extra dollars for a different character so they could have more than one house, & they would be willing to pay a monthly fee for another one... you are not grasping the concept that this is greed versus a single plot wanted for everyone with adjustable size not just leftovers for a relocation later. FC only is bs. & as far as the cost of implementation, i dont believe any excuse made up upon that & yes i myself think that slapping in some servers & hard drives properly would unclog enough & architecture can be modified, forget your kupo nuts & your soup...

[Ruf]

Do you work in IT? Have you ever stepped inside a data center or seen one outside of some random google images? Do you even have a semblance of the business concept called TCO and its application in regards to a single server let alone how to properly provision one? The reason you "dont believe any excuse made up upon that" is because you don't "know"anything about the data center side of the house so you're merely speaking from ignorance rather than knowledge. If SE removed houses from individuals who already own them, a very high portion of those people will permanently unsub and SE would be viewed as untrustworthy by the entire community and create a PR nightmare that is otherwise completely avoidable.

So your best defense for your rather weak position is "someone said" they would pay more? So because 1 person says they would pay more makes your argument on the whole valid? Please.

There is a lot of things i am restricted from typing so i can not counter interact with what you said or else itll probably get deleted, but ill say this instead, sure you are correct idk theses things but i know for a fact that you cant claim for sure how many persons will quit & also a lot of the players already view se like you claim so. its not about one person saying they would pay more its about you defending something that can be reverted & in an unknown matter could even, heck who know bring even more subs to the game versus the quitters

P.s: Nothing is impossible, its doable in/for/from A LOT OF PLAYERS VISION/VIEW/PERSPECTIVE (cant give a % sadly...) , WORTH IT.

To be fair your excuse of "Do you work in IT" is rather weak also...the way SE went about housing was such an easy thing to do from the beginning..MAKE IT INSTANCE but they didn't if they had just gone with instance housing this housing problem would be fixed...

I agree, the way its been created from the beginning was a poor choice & instead of fixing it they carried it over & over & over & over. I refuse to believe its too late & that it would have a tremendous negative effect on the player base as a couple persons "only a few possess almost a whole ward by themselves atm" Being inexperienced in a profession, doesnt mean that you are gullible either, never lose hope & struggle for your goals, if its unfair FIX IT

[gbe931]

Do you work in IT? Have you ever stepped inside a data center or seen one outside of some random google images? Do you even have a semblance of the business concept called TCO and its application in regards to a single server let alone how to properly provision one? The reason you "dont believe any excuse made up upon that" is because you don't "know" anything about the data center side of the house so you're merely speaking from ignorance rather than knowledge. If SE removed houses from individuals who already own them, a very high portion of those people will permanently unsub and SE would be viewed as untrustworthy by the entire community and create a PR nightmare that is otherwise completely avoidable.

So your best defense for your rather weak position is "someone said" they would pay more? So because 1 person says they would pay more makes your argument on the whole valid? Please.