How many people have multiple houses?

[Claviusnex]

I've heard you can still get houses even in high pop servers if you camp the boards but there is a lot of contradicting information.

I can only speak abut my experience on Adamantoise. From what I saw when I was looking to buy a plot and have seen as I take walks around the various wards, plots become available often enough that you shouldn't have to camp full time to get one. My lot in the Lavender Beds had been on the market a couple of days when I bought it. It even has a nice view of a waterfall and stream. I've seen others last a couple of days before being sold as well. I'm not trying to say you can walk in anytime you want but over a couple of weeks of random dropping in you have a good chance of finding something. I also think some of the problem is with the Mists being considered the preferred area folks tend to spend more time looking there as opposed to the other two open housing areas. I know of no way to fix this other than being open minded about where your house is.

[Annah]

28 homes on one account...they wonder why people are upset at them?

lol

This reminds me when Martha Stewart bought up every house in a neighborhood once.

[NaesakiAshwell]

28 homes on one account...they wonder why people are upset at them?

lol

This reminds me when Martha Stewart bought up every house in a neighborhood once.

I knew, one day! This gif would be useful.

[Vhailor]

In response to the OP, I don't own multiple houses. I think purchasing multiple plots is disrespectful, personally. Note that while I don't have access to a FC house, I don't begrudge people who have access to two (one a "public" FC house that they may or may not be the owner of record for, and one a personal house). Beyond that, though? Pure disrespect.

A couple of other things.

1.) One of the typical responses to the Mateus incident is that the plots lay vacant for ages, so why should people care? That's hogwash. SE didn't time their transfer windows for a quiet mid-expansion cycle; they timed it for an expansion launch. There were countless returning players, freshly interested in FFXIV, who were likely also freshly interested in housing. Now, they don't have options anymore, on Mateus at least. That's ridiculous. If it were six months into Stormblood, I think this line of defence would be valid, but given the timing of SE's incentives, it's not applicable.

2.) The blame for all of this shouldn't fall on the players. Are they disrespecting others and being self-centered? Yeah, sure - but welcome to life. That's their right. They fully deserve criticism over it, but unlike real life, FFXIV is a completely manicured environment - and it is SE at fault here, as usual. They should have locked houses to one per account, possibly one per account per server - or better yet, not offered limited f*cking housing in the first godsdamned place. Every other MMO has managed it, why can't they? They also should never have disrupted the population levels of smaller servers like Mateus so quickly and thoughtlessly. Keep in mind here, SE had years to react to the overpopulation of servers like Balmung. Despite this, they couldn't even be bothered to lock those servers to transfers, or completely shut down character creation. They couldn't be bothered to upgrade their server hardware when moving data centres so that they could handle the larger worlds. Now, because of their delay in addressing overpopulation, and their sh*tty implementation of houses, we have this scenario. They caused it. They should fix it.

[Aldotsk]

^This about 2nd statement.

I hope people have been asking in the Live Letter thread for Saturday: http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...g-Patch-4.0%29

So that people can actually throw in many Housing related question and discussion in there, and devs/translators would be notified that people are seriously concerned about housing and be addressed this upcoming Saturday.

[Sakuraluna]

I think the worst part of that tumblr post, for me anyways, was the attitude with which those two approached the few neighbors they had - like any house not decorated by them and in their private theme was an eye-sore that they needed to grab and re-build so that everyone on their server could come in and take tours of the pretty ward... or some such. I just don't understand that mentality.

Thing is, though, these players only got what they had access to. Even if they had to work around character-based restrictions to get all those houses, SE did supply them with the means to do that. And we all know that if there is a means to something, there are players who will pursue it regardless if you think it's right or wrong, or it's SE's original intent or not, doesn't matter. I'm just hoping that the publicity that article has given this entire situation will prompt change so that at least new players who are just becoming interested in housing can have an equal chance to the rest of us.

It's always been my opinion that we should have a hard server/account-based limit on the number of houses that a player can have at once, and that fc's should be required to have at least three separate characters with membership and active subscription to the game at any given time in order to obtain and keep FC housing. I'm hoping we'll eventually have a limit of one fc and one personal house per account per server, but I'll admit that it would cause players who have a small handful of alts with a couple or so personal houses on one server and no intentions of hoarding anything to themselves to have to suffer the same consequences as the greedy, and that would be kind of unfair to those people. I certainly don't agree with the "we got to it first so we evidently worked much harder than you did and deserve everything more than you do" point of view - IMO that's nothing but an excuse.

[NanaWiloh]

1.) One of the typical responses to the Mateus incident is that the plots lay vacant for ages, so why should people care? That's hogwash. SE didn't time their transfer windows for a quiet mid-expansion cycle; they timed it for an expansion launch. There were countless returning players, freshly interested in FFXIV, who were likely also freshly interested in housing. Now, they don't have options anymore, on Mateus at least. That's ridiculous. If it were six months into Stormblood, I think this line of defence would be valid, but given the timing of SE's incentives, it's not applicable.

I don't support the idea of players owning an entire ward. But waiting for a free transfer does not excuse the people complaining from their own laziness or priorities, if you want a house and know plots are free on another server then move. Don't wait for a free transfer move then gripe cause plots are no longer open.

[Scenic]

I can only speak abut my experience on Adamantoise. From what I saw when I was looking to buy a plot and have seen as I take walks around the various wards, plots become available often enough that you shouldn't have to camp full time to get one. My lot in the Lavender Beds had been on the market a couple of days when I bought it. It even has a nice view of a waterfall and stream. I've seen others last a couple of days before being sold as well.

When did you buy your house? This is promising information but depending on how long ago it was it may no longer be true. From my understanding you are basically waiting on plots to be abandon and with large amount of people coming back to the game for the expansion the turnover is going to be a lot lower. Also you will have a lot more people looking to buy so houses wont stay up for long.

[Khalithar]

What exactly constitutes an 'unusually high price' to the point it's not allowed and reportable?

They would never gice an exact number. By keeping it vague it gives them leeway to make the decision, if they said "more than double the price is against the rules" but then someone put double -1 gil then they aren't breaking the rules.

By being vague intentionally it gives them more room to navigate what they think is too high.

[Dustytome]

They would never gice an exact number. By keeping it vague it gives them leeway to make the decision, if they said "more than double the price is against the rules" but then someone put double -1 gil then they aren't breaking the rules.

This never made sense to me. If they don't want people selling houses, make the game mechanics work to prevent it. If they don't mind it up to a certain point then just tell us what that point is. Being vague is not helpful on either front, all it does is create more work for the GMs because we don't know what is and isn't reportable, so report everything and more frustration for us the users because when we don't know the exact rules it feels like everyone's breaking them and getting away with it.