My absence and return - thoughts on demolished houses

[Rankina]

Alright, so your join date is Feb 2014. You stopped playing about two years ago (2015), so you've effectively played for just over a year. Assuming your house was never empty after it was demolished, another player(s) has played from 2015 until today, 2017. They've paid the equivalent of two years worth of subscription, while you've paid only one.

If anything, they should have the house more than you.

With that logic, assuming OP was serious about taking a month break, he'd have been paying for close to 3 years if Square Enix didn't punish the players for their awful system. Therefore, he'd deserve the house more.

[TensaiSogetsu]

@OP, bye. You think SE cares about your ONE account verses the hundreds that are waiting on you to loose your house so they can buy one? Bwahahahahahahah

[Dameron]

Although I agree that it's stupid that all your stuff in your house gets deleted instead of refunded, I do support SE's decision to purge the wards of inactive houses. Houses should belong to people who actually remain active and keep playing, not to people who just log on for a short period of time and then take prolonged breaks.

However, you are the one who chose to turn a short break into a two year break just because of this implementation. With your short break, you would have been back in time to save your house and all your possessions. Instead, you decided not to come back for two whole years, even though this change would have been inconsequential for you otherwise. So no, it's not SE's fault for taking all of your stuff away, it's your fault for quitting the game for so long over something that wouldn't even have affected you in the first place.

[Arutan]

The apartments seem like an okay compromise, but I disagree with the notion that someone who owns a house has to perpetually remain active to keep it. Really, either your designers or your software engineers failed here big time on this, making housing so restrictive in the first place.

Try not to pay your bills IRL for a while we'll see if you still own a house

[ChocoFeru]

Imagine an entire ward full of houses from people who left the game 1+ year ago; it would be desertic and sad for the people who are still playing.

Maybe 45 days is too low and should be risen to something like 90 days, but I still find it useful to keep wards healthy and with active players, instead of being a graveyard.

[Dark-Saviour]

Still say houses should be individual instances "in the deep woods", "on an island", etc. where you have a large, vacant lot to place outdoor furniture, multiple buildings, etc.

The neighborhood concept seems decent on paper, but kind of falls short in general (they feel like ghost towns, yet claustrophobic, overbuilt ghost towns at that). Especially when housing interiors actually are separate instances. :-/

I know that given SE's constant decrying of technical difficulties, their DB/storage worries etc. they'd still likely say they can't support everyone getting one and would ultimately keep a demolition structure in place, but at least it would mitigate one of the concerns.

[eschaton]

Imagine an entire ward full of houses from people who left the game 1+ year ago; it would be desertic and sad for the people who are still playing.

Maybe 45 days is too low and should be risen to something like 90 days, but I still find it useful to keep wards healthy and with active players, instead of being a graveyard.

Yup a ghost town isn't what active people pay for, right? Granted it is your house and you don't need to be there 24/7, being away for ssssuch a long time, like OP, sounds like the system is doing what it is intended to do. Come on OP, people still run up to houses at every release... not playing for so long and wanting to keep it seems a bit, well you know. Personally 45 days seems a bit low to me as well, there's that. Make it at least two sub periods I'd say, but hey.

[Solarra]

I would be a lot happier with the reclaim system if it wasn't so punitive. There is no reason why reclaiming your furniture has to be on such a short timer, or indeed any timer at all. At least if you had all your belongings when you returned to the game, it would be easier to start over.

Apartments are the only safe option if you want to take breaks, but since they are so tiny and limited (no gardening etc), I can see why they haven't been very popular.

[Penthea]

Imagine an entire ward full of houses from people who left the game 1+ year ago; it would be desertic and sad for the people who are still playing.

That's exactly how many wards were before the demolition system. It was infuriating for any fc or solo player who knew they would use their house every day.

Maybe 45 days is too low and should be risen to something like 90 days

45 days is way too short. It is not unusual for players to go away for a month and half. They might have exams, have a work trip, need to go to hospital, emigrate to another country or simply be unfortunate enough that their gaming machine dies and they can't afford to get a new one within 45 days.

I actually know of players who basically did account sharing so that someone else could log in on their behalf and reset the timer. Account sharing is against the Terms of Use but this silly small window is encouraging it.

90 days would be much more reasonable as it is actually unusual for someone who considers themselves to be a very active player to be gone for more than three months.

[Freyt]

I mean, you said it yourself. You haven't even touched the game for over 2 years, and you're angry that you couldn't keep a limited resource for absolutely nothing for those 2 years.