Houses should have a monthly fee

[Sotaris]

I'll happily let my house demolish if Island Sanctuary is what I hope it is.

Which is ?

[NorthernLadMSP]

Which is ?

Well, basically a space I can go where I don't have to be around other people. A place where I can craft in peace, customize to an extent, and chill without hundreds of people around dancing, emoting or spamming music or special moves.

It sounds like you can build a dwelling, garden, let your minions run free, etc. I'm all for it if it's basically a personal instanced space.

[Sotaris]

You said you have a house. Can't you do all of that there?

Yoshi P should just remove housing altogether and have it strictly for FCs. They don't have to give everyone a house, we aren't owed houses, we don't pay $15 a month for a house we pay a fee for a game that just happens to have housing. If someone spent the time and gil to click and get a house, what they do with it is none of our business.
I'm quite sure when lotto comes out people will still complain about it.

It's about 7 years to late for that. It never should gone to personal houses.

[NorthernLadMSP]

You said you have a house. Can't you do all of that there?

And I said I'd gladly give up that house (for someone else's benefit) if Island Sanctuary has similar properties.

[Kenky]

Sorry to break it to you, but every player who owns a house is already paying rent for it.

It's called their Sub fee. It's monthly and everyone pays it.

Now of course, that's not what you're looking for. You want something to justify owning a house, right? A Rent Payment is not something to Justify ownership. But a way to keep the newer players out. Most of the people who own houses (especially those that have owned them for a long while) probably have very big gil coffers, so the "rent" you're proposing wouldn't affect them in the slightest.

It -will- however, keep new players (and those who aren't great at getting gil, or keeping it) from trying the system out, ultimately reducing the demand for the housing in general.

You may see that as a win. But implementing systems to keep players from playing your content is an incredibly stupid idea.

[AriesMouse]

I feel like this suggestion entirely misses the problem where most houses sit empty because people can't afford to decorate them because they spent all of their gil just getting the house to begin with. Not everyone has the time to farm gil for this, unless that is all then do and then they end up not enjoying the rest of the game(or even being able to enjoy their house). Some people only get a handful of hours in a week to log on and play xiv. This suggestion more or less says those people shouldn't be allowed access to housing, since they would never be able to keep up with the rent once they got a house.

[Bladehawk]

Bad idea. All you do is make a lot of customers unhappy and a few happy with non noticeable change in housing supply.

Gil sellers will end up being happy though.

[Knot_D]

Did you forget that our subs are the monthly fee?

[ForteNightshade]

As long as SE refuses to address the supply issue and keep houses a limited resource, they need to insert deterrents to discourage ownership of houses a player is not actively using. A recurring fee in the form of a property tax or rent would be such a deterrent. Most people don't think twice about buying something when it's a one time fee, they just do it because there will be no future financial burden hanging over them. They do think twice when they have to keep paying for that something monthly even though they aren't using the item. Attach the monthly gil fee and those not using their houses would starting asking themselves why they're paying for a house they don't use instead of saving the gil to buy other items they want and actually would use.

Except the deterrent already exists in the form of a monthly subscription they can't ever lapse on for more than 45 days. I'm actually someone who falls into this exact category, having stayed subbed throughout Shadowbringers only because I didn't want to lose my house, which I don't actively use a whole lot. Many players are in a similar position, keeping their subs constantly rolling despite not playing just to avoid losing their houses. Those same players are often sitting millions of gil. I, myself, have nine digits. A monthly fee wouldn't faze me whatsoever. Meanwhile, players who don't have the luxury to consistently play won't necessarily be able to keep up. Making a rent system impact them far more significantly than the rich players. In other words, OP's solution benefits the very players SE doesn't want to have continual advantages.

To those who go "I'm already paying a subscription for my house", you're not. The subscription is for access to the game servers to play the game, not to keep a house. If you genuinely are paying the $15/mo solely to log on once every 45 days to reset the demo timer then log out without doing anything else in game, do yourself a favor and cancel your subscription. That's money you could be spending on the games you're actually playing so you get more out of them.

You do realize some players simply like to take breaks or run out of content, yes? I stopped playing for several months because it was near the height of our first Covid content drought, and I wasn't feeling the game due to other reasons. That doesn't mean I intended to stop playing, or that I wouldn't want my house when I returned. So no, I wouldn't be "doing myself a favor." In fact, I never even spend that $15 on anything else since I played games I already owned.

All a rental fee would prompt is RMT. I guarantee you people will buy gil just to maintain their houses.

[Mango2020]

Yoshi P should just remove housing altogether and have it strictly for FCs. They don't have to give everyone a house, we aren't owed houses, we don't pay $15 a month for a house we pay a fee for a game that just happens to have housing. If someone spent the time and gil to click and get a house, what they do with it is none of our business.
I'm quite sure when lotto comes out people will still complain about it.