Housing Ownership System Abuse

[ErysNight]

snip

I read it! Thanks for the reply!

I can appreciate your candid admittance of being annoyed by the Haves and I am familiar with those that owned the ward prior to 4.1 and got grandfathered in. I think it's fair to be annoyed if it's against your own personal ethics.

I'm not here to change anyone's mind and no lol, I don't think I'll be changing mine but we can still discuss!

I think our opinions split at the assumed intent behind SE changing the housing system. The only thing they actually verbalized was that in an attempt to stop reselling they changed the house system to have an invisible timer. They even asked us to report people reselling so RMT was their main concern.

I'd need a source on SE caring about hoarding. Especially considering many prominent and celebrated JP designers own full neighborhoods and it's accepted widely there. In fact, there is a level of double standard. JP designers are worshiped for it but NA/EU are demonized.

I've heard people say "well housing is worse on NA/EU" but at the time the grandfathered people acquired their homes it was not. This game got really popular during stormblood for some reason and Housing exploded. Anyone that's been here and into house can remember the wards full of max devalued houses.

I don't care if SE makes the housing rules more strict going forward. I only care if they decide to punish people for playing the game as they designed.

From the concept of morals and ethics, someone in this thread said it best, everyone's moral compass differs. It's a game, not real life. A layer of consequence is removed. As long as you don't break TOS then you are fulfilling your contract. There is no social contract because this isn't real life.

Now this might be where our opinions differ even further but yeah, I'm not limiting myself for internet strangers when I come to this game for escape from real life. It's amazing to have acquired what I have in 4 years. I'm incredibly proud, happy and honored to be able to support my community and the best part? Since it's not real life, I can just block toxic people and keep on going lol. SE is the only law I abide by and then I care for me and mine.

I'm ok with being selfish in this way then. Different strokes for different folks. Life is hard out here, I'm not letting a game make it worse lol.

[ErysNight]

Hrmm...just because something doesn't go against rules doesn't automatically mean that doing that thing cannot be selfish or greedy. A rule or lack of one doesn't make an action bad or good. It simply makes it permitted or not allowed.

You need context there though. There is an entire post surrounding that quote that makes it situational. If the game does not have any parameters that would make someone feel as though something is "greedy" when owning multiple homes was a normal occurrence, then what you're saying doesn't apply. Owning multiple homes was a game given norm.

There were not enough interested people to even fill a ward and lets not talk about the Goblet. So you're right but only with the right context.

[Penthea]

You need context there though. There is an entire post surrounding that quote that makes it situational.

So you're right but only with the right context.

No what I said is simple logic that is true regardless of context. Unless you're trying to argue that the act of purchasing a house is a good deed for the simple fact that you're allowed to do it?

Being allowed to do something doesn't automatically mean that the act of doing it is good. Not being allowed to do something doesn't automatically mean the act itself is selfish or malicious.

Permission and restriction are not infallible indications of moral standing. If they were...well rules would never change. And everyone knows the housing rules have changed quite a bit since the feature came to the game.

Permission and restriction only state what we are able to freely do. Nothing more.

[Jojoya]

I only care if they decide to punish people for playing the game as they designed.

What is punishment?

Games do change over time and so do their player bases. Sometimes games have to change what used to be okay to accommodate the current needs. Players have to give up things they used to have. As long as the rules are being applied equally to everyone, no one should be feeling "punished".

If the rule is one personal house per account, then removing any houses over that limit is not punishment. It's bringing that account in line with the current rules of the game. Removing every house from that account would be punishment.

Not saying that I think removing the grandfather clause should be done, only that it's removal is not punishment.

[ErysNight]

No what I said is simple logic that is true regardless of context. Unless you're trying to argue that the act of purchasing a house is a good deed for the simple fact that you're allowed to do it?

Being allowed to do something doesn't automatically mean that the act of doing it is good. Not being allowed to do something doesn't automatically mean the act itself is selfish or malicious.

Permission and restriction are not infallible indications of moral standing. If they were...well rules would never change. And everyone knows the housing rules have changed quite a bit since the feature came to the game.

Permission and restriction only state what we are able to freely do. Nothing more.

I've read your post about 3 times now, revisited the original sentiment and still... ehhhh.

I agree with the way you've written it but disagree with the way it's being applied here because the concept of what's good and morality only matter in areas where there are consequences to dictate those terms. Our game is consequence free outside of the TOS because it's not real life.

So I 100% agree with you, what you've written is right and makes sense. But this is a virtual world and I don't have to care if people think that me taking advantage of perfectly normalized and legal actions before the game environment changed is moral.

I will concede you are probably right though. Reading it again and yeah, it makes sense for life but does not feel as though it applies within this context.

What is punishment?

Games do change over time and so do their player bases. Sometimes games have to change what used to be okay to accommodate the current needs. Players have to give up things they used to have. As long as the rules are being applied equally to everyone, no one should be feeling "punished".

If the rule is one personal house per account, then removing any houses over that limit is not punishment. It's bringing that account in line with the current rules of the game. Removing every house from that account would be punishment.

Not saying that I think removing the grandfather clause should be done, only that it's removal is not punishment.

Give an example from an MMO that took away in game assets that gamers accrued. Not challenging, just genuinely looking for examples in MMOs so I can be proper terrified that SE might do it as well lol.

Has a game completely wiped out one of it's systems to replace it and forced everyone to move over? Something that cost a lot of hours and in game currency to aquire?

[Sylvastreak]

snip!

To be fair the mention of hoarding was to do with the reselling specifically, iirc but my memory is absolutely naff on that front cuz I was dealing with some irl stressful stuff at the time.

I've never been on the JP servers and can't comment on their views as it's a wholly different culture in every way, not just with housing but with etiquette and general unspoken rules. The only window I've had on them was the "FFXIV: Dad of Light" tv series.

I tend to operate on the moral compass of "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" and while that may sound really hypocritical as the OP, I do think this should be addressed overall. I don't like the idea of having multiple service accounts on a game that already allows you to have so many characters per server and DC - although I can understand having one on say, PC and PS4 if you've got kids or something.

That said I also think all alts on a server should be allowed to have access to the same personal house to limit the need for someone's characters to have separate housing.

I have several characters all on the same service account and only one has their own house and fc house; the rest have fc rooms or apartments (or even nothing). I don't understand the need to have this many houses to yourself when you could easily spend the same amount of gil redecorating every so often, nor do I see how SE could possibly add enough housing wards within the physical servers' capacities if people continue to act like this and buy entire wards. Something will have to give eventually if we're to have even your idea of "equal" opportunities to get housing and the features with them. So yes, this still seems selfish and greedy to me, I'm afraid.
Personally don't use the aetherial wheel stands, but we do have airships in the FCs I'm in and while I agree that they should not be locked to FCs now that they can be solo built, I'm not sure where else exactly they would be implemented. Perhaps a Grand Company barracks type area? Crossbreeding facilities in apartments and fc rooms would be nice for avid gardeners, along with some sort of upgrade system for apartments. I'd note that they are equally available to everyone as apartments are permanent, all cost the same and are all the same size. They're also the same size as fc rooms.

[Sylvastreak]

I've read your post about 3 times now, revisited the original sentiment and still... ehhhh.

I agree with the way you've written it but disagree with the way it's being applied here because the concept of what's good and morality only matter in areas where there are consequences to dictate those terms. Our game is consequence free outside of the TOS because it's not real life.

So I 100% agree with you, what you've written is right and makes sense. But this is a virtual world and I don't have to care if people think that me taking advantage of perfectly normalized and legal actions before the game environment changed is moral.

I will concede you are probably right though. Reading it again and yeah, it makes sense for life but does not feel as though it applies within this context.




Give an example from an MMO that took away in game assets that gamers accrued. Not challenging, just genuinely looking for examples in MMOs so I can be proper terrified that SE might do it as well lol.

Has a game completely wiped out one of it's systems to replace it and forced everyone to move over? Something that cost a lot of hours and in game currency to aquire?

I can't confirm on game currency or hours, but TERA has done this with its starting area and dumped my character back at the start of the game when he had been in one of the slightly further along areas.

[Penthea]

But this is a virtual world and I don't have to care if people think that me taking advantage of perfectly normalized and legal actions before the game environment changed is moral.

The players who play are not virtual people. They're real. They spend real time and money playing the game. Their joy and frustrations are also real.

Sure you don't have to care about them but it looks like you're saying "none of this is real!" to justify your stance.

You'd be better off sticking to how you're not breaking any rules because at least that stance has some merit. Going into "it's just a game" territory just allows others to say the same to house hoarders when they say SE should take away their grandfathered plots.

[TwistedTea]

I'd need a source on SE caring about hoarding. Especially considering many prominent and celebrated JP designers own full neighborhoods and it's accepted widely there. In fact, there is a level of double standard. JP designers are worshiped for it but NA/EU are demonized.

QFT.

I wouldn't be surprised if SE is addressing housing before 5.4 because Covid affected housing significantly on JP servers as well. (Credits: Mew FC for scrapping the Lodestone data)

People seem to be hypocritical about ward owners who do it on 'dead' servers on NA/EU. I can respect a stance that's universal instead of this hand-waving "cultural differences."

[ErysNight]

snip

I respect your perspective, life is just everyone's experiences shaping their own views. So while you haven't personally found a reason that multiple homes might benefit you, others have. I don't mind people feeling some type of way about why beliefs and I don't expect to change someone elses'. I think I only ever jump on these threads because people seem unwilling to understand that FORCING your personal view on someone else is what's wrong.

If those are your housing standards and you hold yourself to one house, great for you. I know tons of people that don't even want housing to decorate (i noted earlier, decorating is just one of many functions of owing a plot) and I support that as well. So I also chime in when people complain about those with undecorated empty houses. It's up for the individual to decide the value, and people would be a whole lot happier if they minded their own business.

Ultimately, I think I'm a whole lot more lenient because this game always feels like a bonus layer of life. What I'm finding though is that people LIVE this experience and hold it almost as important as their real lives. So I can see how emotion can get built up there. So if players like those, encounter players like me who don't find this as serious because it lacks the consequences of real life, you'll continuously have these different opinions. It's ok to think someone is selfish, it's an opinion but it's not right to harrass them for it. I don't think forcing your way of life on someone is humane/right. (which is just my own moral compass lol, so I'm sure people will disregard that too haha)


I would hope that we get a community garden and a standard workshop as a room in the grand company. One that, like a real house relocates to your plot when you get an FC house. So that new FCs without a home can access their workshop right away.