It only took me a year to understand why I never sat well with this line lol. But I really don't like this example. It's too easy to make a false dilemma out of it if you ignore who it affects (housed and unhoused) and how and why the housing system is the way it is.
Housing became a feature in 2.1.
Individual housing didn't start until 2.38, 9 mos after 2.1.
Reclamation system was put into place in 3.1, after another 9 mos in direct result of housing shortage and inactive-owned houses.
I really began maining XIV during HW. Seeing an empty plot on Excalibur ? Not a thing. Imagine the bigger more popular servers. For those who knew how plots became available during this time - you knew. But demand only continued to rise and rise.
The reclamation system was an effort to help that. Then came the extra wards.
As it is now, we have about 6 periods where houses go up for reclaim. If we extended the reclamation period to 60, then there would be 4 periods of reclaim. 90 ? 3 periods of reclaim. Etc. A player without a house would have only these times to attempt the lottery in a year while an inactive-owned house sits there.
Someone could try 6 times in the lottery and not get a house meaning the player had waited an entire year and was not successful. On the other hand, the inactive-owned house is given 6 chances during the year to keep it from being demo. And due to a combination of costs/infrastructure/instancing/YoshiBeingYoshi, the housing system will likely never change.
Can we say that the game is deliberately keeping player from unsubbing in order to keep their house knowing these past and current issues ?
Along those lines ...
In a year if a player only subbed for a house and only pay their sub before their house is reclaimed, in the end they would have only paid 6 times vs 12 times (1 sub fee per each month, 30 days). SE loses a maximum potential of 6 months of sub fee for allowing a player 45 days after they last entered their house. Or in this case let's say after their last sub day which we'll also say was the last day they entered their house.
A lot of players here have a saying: "if you lose your house, you didn't need it". If that's true, then those 6 weeks are in fact a grace period from SE. The system was made to evaluate that you didn't need your house (inactive player) and it's time to free up the resource. But while you see disincentive, an extra 6 weeks outside of the natural sub period (30 days) could be considered a grace period in advantage of the inactive player. SE has even created apartments and FC housing to compensate, but alas the playerbase wants the valuable commodity.
Many who don't play but resub for their house alone are hanging onto something that exists as a "just in case I need it/want to enjoy it/can't get it again" or because it's simply a valuable/unique resource in the game. I don't care how you spend your money, but you know how the system works and if you want that house that is what you have to pay to keep it. At the end of the day, it is you alone who gets to decide what is worth your money.
But, to say it's deliberate disincentivisation to not unsub isn't fair when you consider the leeway SE has given: inactive players are given multiple notices and a 6 week grace period and up to a 6 month discount.
*had to fix my maths
*side effects of mathing while sleep, don't do it people
*i am now questioning math