Fix Housing Megathread

[Divinemights]

When a handful of players control a ward... that's a problem. They are denying many the chance to even participate. I would rather give people the option between the carrot and the stick, but that problem needs to end by any means necessary.
The initial system design should have been tight enough that this problem should have never been allowed to occur in the first place.

Except S/E officially acknowledged that it is not an issue and those 2 players have all the right to keep the ownership.
You and your obsession do not over rule their decision because S/E legally owned all of the FF14 digital assets including your character.
Your monthly fee is only a rental fee to use their digital assets.
SE respects their ownership right and the housing plots they obtained following their rules, that is the fact.
Only SE how many grandfathered houses are out there and you knows absolutely nothing beside an article you read online.
What makes you think you can make correct decision when you don't even have the access to the information?

Even China whom is still operating on a dictatorship type of doctrine do not seize their citizen's private property just because of a "law changes"
Why do you thinks S/E should seize those 2 player's properties?

[Almagnus1]

You and your obsession do not over rule their decision because S/E legally owned all of the FF14 digital assets including your character.

Which means SE can do whatever they want to with them, up to (and including) completely resetting the housing system and not refunding anyone for any lost resources.

Only SE how many grandfathered houses are out there and you knows absolutely nothing beside an article you read online.

That's also true for you as well....

Even China whom is still operating on a dictatorship type of doctrine do not seize their citizen's private property just because of a "law changes"

No, but they did weld the doors shut to several hundred of thousand people they thought had Covid leaving them to die inside. I mean, China has an absurd amount of human rights violations (including the ongoing genocide against the Uyghurs) so using them as an example for anything positive is an exceedingly bad idea.

[Divinemights]

No, but they did weld the doors shut to several hundred of thousand people they thought had Covid leaving them to die inside. I mean, China has an absurd amount of human rights violations (including the ongoing genocide against the Uyghurs) so using them as an example for anything positive is an exceedingly bad idea.

Another follower of BBC propaganda?
Why is BBC not interest with Isarel bombing Pakistan civillain?
Just stop, you are making yourself looks worth than before

[Catstab]

the issue is dealt with and will never reappear.

The issue is dealt with. Guidelines were added in 2018. You are fully aware they exist, as you've linked them before.

Grandfathered houses will never increase in number, and continue to decrease as their owners move on from housing entirely. If you want a good carrot for housing enthusiasts you should get into game design, and woo them away that way.

[Almagnus1]

The issue is dealt with. Guidelines were added in 2018. You are fully aware they exist, as you've linked them before.

No it's not. We still have grandfathered in houses, shell FCs, and people owning wards. They are tying up scarce resources that's preventing hundreds of players from participating in housing.

you should get into game design

While I find the discipline interesting, ultimately, I do not like working in the video game interesting because the pay is bad, the hours are long, and you can get let go for doing nothing wrong because marketing didn't do their job correctly.

[Almagnus1]

Another follower of BBC propaganda?
Why is BBC not interest with Isarel bombing Pakistan civillain?
Just stop, you are making yourself looks worth than before

From a simple search on DuckDuckGo on the matter...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...es/2938374001/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...s-your-health/
https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1703503427818
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/109256...d-homes-china/
https://thehill.com/opinion/internat...d-on-the-world
https://metro.co.uk/2020/02/02/wuhan...home-12162599/
https://www.theepochtimes.com/a-beij...s_3407337.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsoVuKy2_PA

Go educate yourself on this, and stop shilling for the CCP.

[Divinemights]

From a simple search on DuckDuckGo on the matter...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...es/2938374001/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...s-your-health/
https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1703503427818
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/109256...d-homes-china/
https://thehill.com/opinion/internat...d-on-the-world
https://metro.co.uk/2020/02/02/wuhan...home-12162599/
https://www.theepochtimes.com/a-beij...s_3407337.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsoVuKy2_PA

Go educate yourself on this, and stop shilling for the CCP.

Oh, labeling is the only thing you can do now?
You don't even know who I am
China is sending fleet and fighters into my home nation's air space on daily base and you assume I am shilling for CCP?
The only difference is I have logic and sense of good judgment.

It doesn't change the fact even as low as CCP's doctrine they didn't seize private property just because of law change
You are only showing yourself much worst than CCP
Such irony, I am defending the fundamental principles of Western Freedom from someone like you who thinks it is ok to seize other's properties

[Catstab]

grandfathered in houses

Quite deliberately allowed. The majority of the population applauds the decision, as well.

If you truly do not understand why this decision is beneficial, let's use a comparative example.

hypothetical:
Player A cares about their 8 characters and their 8 houses. Each character has a house decorated to just their liking. Some are libraries, some are dungeons, some are gyms, and some are studies. SE says "I know we said in 2018 you could keep those, and you earned them fairly through hours of gameplay, but we're taking all but one of them. Choose." Player A is heartbroken and quits ff14.
Player B cares about their 8 jobs and their 8 glams. Each job has a glam suited to the feel of its gameplay. Some look suited to workbenches, some to battlefields, and some to high fashion. SE says "I know we originally folded all jobs into one character, and you have earned gear for every job on this character, but we've decided it's now 1 job per character like any other MMO. Choose." Player B is heartbroken and quits ff14.

Either of these changes would detract from players enjoyment of the game and probably cost SE money.

shell FCs

Technically allowed as well.

While 4 people are needed to buy a house for an FC, only 1 member is required to retain or relocate an FC house. Changes to this system would have to be applied carefully - otherwise anyone who can kick people (or enough people leaving) can effectively demolish the house and disband the FC. This would be an intolerable side effect.

people owning wards

This is two separate issues, actually, so I'll discuss them separately for you.

1. It is of note that you need 8 player accounts to own a ward. So it's totally impossible for a single player to own a ward. Since 8 player accounts cost 8 subscriptions, those 8 player accounts have the same rights as any other 8 player accounts, even if one real life person owns each of them.

2. Now as for the house per account limit, should one player account be able to hold 8 FCs? SE sees merit in any character being able to accept leadership of any FC, as evidenced by the way the system works. I see merit in this, too. Inactive players are always stripped of FC leadership after 30 days, and a 'block' would be a problem here. Likewise if an FC leader is quitting and wishes to relinquish to their sole member, a 'block' would be a problem. Obviously, a system limiting FC leadership transfer would also have to be very carefully implemented.

So: Grandfathering, not going anywhere. FCs, definitely some discussion to be had, but changes would need to be VERY careful to not to harm the casual player.

[Almagnus1]

Oh, labeling is the only thing you can do now?
You don't even know who I am
China is sending fleet and fighters into my home nation's air space on daily base and you assume I am shilling for CCP?
The only difference is I have logic and sense of good judgment.

You're coming off as someone that is pro-CCP, which (assuming that is correct and not something that is lost in translation) is ironic since it sounds like you are in the nation of Taiwan.

It doesn't change the fact even as low as CCP's doctrine they didn't seize private property just because of law change
You are only showing yourself much worst than CCP

Why seize property when the CCP can just execute you and reclaim your former stuff now that you no longer have an ownership claim? The CCP has shown MANY times over they do not care about a single person's life... even going so far as to claim that the Three Gorges Dam is perfectly safe despite it being in a slow state of failure (and THAT will kill millions when it finally collapses if the lake is not drained and the dam fixed).

I mean, in most communist systems, you have no personal property, so the notion of property in those systems is really incomparable to what most in the US (or the West for that matter) would consider personal property.

Such irony, I am defending the fundamental principles of Western Freedom from someone like you who thinks it is ok to seize other's properties

Thing here... we are not working within a system that has traditional property rights. We are basically getting a digital right (as in a right to use something and not a personal right as in the US Constitutional First Amendment) to enjoy the housing system. There is no digital property here, as everything exists on SE's servers, and we cannot transfer our house off of their server. If a homeowner fails to renew their subscription for a long enough period of time, they lose their usage rights to the house which indicates that they never really owned the house in the first place, only had access rights to the property and never actually had ownership of the land.

Now compare the FFXIV housing system to an NFT or digital currency, which are both digital property. The FFXIV house IS NOT the same thing, and (going by the in game mechanics) cannot be easily transferred from one party to another (at least, not if the player wishes to stay in their current FC). The FFXIV house is not digital property, it is merely access rightS to the housing system that is purchasable through in-game means.

[Almagnus1]

Edit:
NOTE: I'm quoting myself throughout this post because Catstab has broken up the first sentence of the post they responded to and without my quotes it makes Catstab's quotes lose context.

Player A cares about their 8 characters and their 8 houses. Each character has a house decorated to just their liking. Some are libraries, some are dungeons, some are gyms, and some are studies. SE says "I know we said in 2018 you could keep those, and you earned them fairly through hours of gameplay, but we're taking all but one of them. Choose." Player A is heartbroken and quits ff14.

And your still ignoring that while SE lost a single subscription, 8 more people just got houses. If SE outright banned all the grandfathered in housing owners, then more people would be able to participate in with housing

shell FCs

While 4 people are needed to buy a house for an FC, only 1 member is required to retain or relocate an FC house. Changes to this system would have to be applied carefully - otherwise anyone who can kick people (or enough people leaving) can effectively demolish the house and disband the FC. This would be an intolerable side effect.

This is something that needs to end as it's pretty clear from the signature requirement of the FC, and also that there are subscriptions that allow for only one character per server, that SE intended the FC to be formed from four unique subscriptions. I get that there may be people that want access to the gardens and workshops and don't want to be part of an FC that will roll their own FC, or that you have people that are in a failed (or failing FC), and that is the main reason why I have advocated for moving the gardening and workshop content out of the FC (which would also make it generally more accessible as I would assume most FCs do not allow most of their members to garden nor have workshop access). Getting that content detached from housing would be in everyone's best interest as you provide a carrot before implementing the stick (which in this case would be a mechanism to strip housing from FCs that fall below four unique subscriptions or just disband the FC).

We still have grandfathered in houses, shell FCs, and people owning wards.

This is two separate issues, actually, so I'll discuss them separately for you.

NOTE: Catstab's response is being read as "[grandfathered in houses and shell FCs] and [people owning wards] are two separate issues, actually, so I'll discuss them separately for you." Both quotes are included for context.

People owning wards cannot be done without grandfathered in houses and shell FCs. Or put another way, because we have grandfathered in houses and shell FC housing, people are able to own wards.

These two issues are connected whether you want to acknowledge it or not.