Possible slight rework of the housing demolition timer? In response to content delays

[EaMett]

Looking around recently, I noticed that the demo timer for personal housing doesn't reset if a member you share your personal with uses the house.

Now I have no issues with the timer. I think 45d is fair for the most part. The thing is, this has been quite a year. SE has had setbacks and delays in providing the content (It's unfortunate but I'm not here to blame anyone).
However, this means that players like myself who play the game mostly for high-end raiding will only have gotten one piece of content over a period of about 20 months.

Given how exceptionally long these delays are, I was wondering if something could be done for players who own houses but are looking to unsub at some point while waiting on the expansion. I use my house a lot (every other day) whether it's for crafting, hanging out with friends, do my gardening, etc. It's definitely not an idle place. But I'm also quickly running out of content where I would usually have just enough to justify my subscription.

Currently, I'm looking to wrap things up over the next couple of months. Then I'll unsubscribe my extra retainers + unsubscribe my account every other month to avoid the 45-day demo. But this is a pain, a bit of a subscription trap, and mostly, it's not really my fault.

I was wondering if resetting the demo timer on shared estates when a roommate enters would be an option up until a month or two before the next expansion? Uniquely from the exceptional nature of this year's content release drought.

I don't think this would affect the market much. People who want to keep their housing are already managing to do so. And you still need an actual player to enter. It would however make things easier for a section of the players who drew the short straw this year.

[Jojoya]

Looking around recently, I noticed that the demo timer for personal housing doesn't reset if a member you share your personal with uses the house.

Now I have no issues with the timer. I think 45d is fair for the most part. The thing is, this has been quite a year. SE has had setbacks and delays in providing the content (It's unfortunate but I'm not here to blame anyone).
However, this means that players like myself who play the game mostly for high-end raiding will only have gotten one piece of content over a period of about 20 months.

Given how exceptionally long these delays are, I was wondering if something could be done for players who own houses but are looking to unsub at some point while waiting on the expansion. I use my house a lot (every other day) whether it's for crafting, hanging out with friends, do my gardening, etc. It's definitely not an idle place. But I'm also quickly running out of content where I would usually have just enough to justify my subscription.

Currently, I'm looking to wrap things up over the next couple of months. Then I'll unsubscribe my extra retainers + unsubscribe my account every other month to avoid the 45-day demo. But this is a pain, a bit of a subscription trap, and mostly, it's not really my fault.

I was wondering if resetting the demo timer on shared estates when a roommate enters would be an option up until a month or two before the next expansion? Uniquely from the exceptional nature of this year's content release drought.

I don't think this would affect the market much. People who want to keep their housing are already managing to do so. And you still need an actual player to enter. It would however make things easier for a section of the players who drew the short straw this year.

No. Allowing tenant entry to reset the demo timer would open up the system to even more abuses, denying even more players the chance to own a house when there already aren't enough to go around.

As long as house plots remain a limited resource, they should be owned by those who are actively playing the game and not those who only play intermittently. Apartments were added for those players who want keep housing for those intermittent periods they do play. You can craft in an apartment, have your friends hang out in an apartment and even do some gardening in an apartment (intercross being the exception).

The trap is in your head because you want to keep something you aren't using so another player who would use it can't have it. If you feel like maintaining a subscription is a burden, give up the things that are causing you to maintain that subscription. Then you will be free of the burden.

[Catstab]

For some reason my first thought is always "how will someone make a business out of this" so now I'm picturing people selling their alts. Each of your 8 characters can be a tenant in 2 houses - so you can get 16 people to pre-pay in gil before they quit for a year. You maintain their personal houses for them, and SE only loses $2,880 for those 16 subs for a year.

The problem is pretty clear.

[Themarvin]

Its either you play or not, it is the contract you signed when you bought the house plot... if am not going to stick around.. then you snooze you lose.

Also for those that only play partime, then an apartment would be an excelen choice, as can do all the things tyou do in a house, but cross breeding plants.

[EaMett]

Guys, I think you are misunderstanding a few things. I understand why things are the way they are, that's exactly why I'm asking for a temporary gesture given the exceptional circumstances (SE not being able to fully provide the content that was scheduled. Which is kinda their own half of the subscription deal).
And make no mistake, people like myself who play more than the average person, have been subscribed for years and use their houses a lot will keep their houses regardless of what happens. It's about whether or not SE is willing to give us some leeway or not in the upcoming months.

[Catstab]

Guys, I think you are misunderstanding a few things... I'm asking for a temporary gesture

I think you're misunderstanding the fundamental concept of how a business uses money to produce products.

I really doubt SE can take the revenue hit you're proposing. If they did, they would have to scale back production on Ednwalkers and future expansions, obviously.

[EaMett]

I think you're misunderstanding the fundamental concept of how a business uses money to produce products.

I really doubt SE can take the revenue hit you're proposing. If they did, they would have to scale back production on Ednwalkers and future expansions, obviously.

They have done this plenty in the past. They've kept housing timers off for months at a time. Surely something less drastic, like what I suggested, is in the realm of possibilities. Whether they would consider it or not is a matter of its own, though. But that's why I'm posting.

[Themarvin]

They have done this plenty in the past. They've kept housing timers off for months at a time. Surely something less drastic, like what I suggested, is in the realm of possibilities. Whether they would consider it or not is a matter of its own, though. But that's why I'm posting.

It gotta be a fair system to all, not just a select few, it is enough they permitted grandfathering.

[Catstab]

They've kept housing timers off for months at a time.

SE stops the timers for covid, earthquakes, tsunamis. What do those have in common? They kill people. So SE has been known to pause timers for up to 10 months while people around the world deal with loss of community members and loved ones.

If you can show that a couple thousand people will be killed as a result of this content lapse, maybe SE will make this happen as suggested.

This entire suggestion is based on the logical fallacy that our subscriptions are being paid for SE to develop new content. FF11 doesn't develop new content, but the game still requires subscription fees. FF14 will likewise include a subscription fee as long as the server is maintained. Those subscription fees go in part toward the cost of that maintenance.

[EaMett]

SE stops the timers for covid, earthquakes, tsunamis. What do those have in common? They kill people. So SE has been known to pause timers for up to 10 months while people around the world deal with loss of community members and loved ones.

If you can show that a couple thousand people will be killed as a result of this content lapse, maybe SE will make this happen as suggested.

This entire suggestion is based on the logical fallacy that our subscriptions are being paid for SE to develop new content. FF11 doesn't develop new content, but the game still requires subscription fees. FF14 will likewise include a subscription fee as long as the server is maintained. Those subscription fees go in part toward the cost of that maintenance.

A lot of air here. I never suggested stopping timers, so please spare me the logical fallacy talk when your post itself is 90% strawman.
And although this wasn't the point I was making. Whether it's the money I paid for the expansion or the subscription fee, patch releases are part of the service I paid for. Are SE legally obliged to provide anything beyond server availability, I doubt it. But it doesn't mean that 1) there isn't an underlying understanding that they will try their best to meet those expectations (and I'm sure they have, given the circumstances), 2) that they can't provide extra customer care when delays happen < which is what I'm asking for.

Clearly, people who want to take a 3-4 month hiatus (due to delayed content) and keep their house while SE catches up, are some form of evil(?)selfish(?)disillusioned(?) and should lose their house/paytheirsub. At least to some.
Here's to hoping that SE is a little more understanding. We're only talking about a temporary quality of life improvement. Make it easier on us than to have to resub every other month. We're hardly at fault for the content drought the delays have brought.

It gotta be a fair system to all, not just a select few, it is enough they permitted grandfathering.

What flavor of fairness are we talking here? I mean, I could turn around and use that exact phrasing to describe SE prioritizing more casual content until the expansion hits. Of course, their decision makes perfect sense and it's the correct decision, but they had to split the cake to get to it. And some people came up short during the splitting, that's not exactly "fair" as much as it is sensical business. It's just what it is. One could argue that it's actually fair to make a gesture for those people that are losing out, especially if other players can have access to that gesture. No? (whether it's worth their time is another matter)