Housing Ownership System Abuse

[Catstab]

No one on the forums asking for more housing will ever be satisfied either if anytime housing is added, someone ends up with an entire ward and locks up 60 plots for themselves - whatever DC they're on. But do carry on defending them, at this point I'm really tired of people who claim to not care about other players yelling at me for caring about other players but not caring about this one player's feelings.

The long and the short of it is: SE allows 1 personal house, 8 FC houses per account (or up to 8 personal, 8 FC houses for grandfathered characters.) No one acting within those limits, or purchasing multiple accounts to expand those limits is doing anything wrong.

You can certainly protest that a single account can hold 8 FC houses, but it would seem that is the way SE wants their game to be. I could see the merit of leading multiple FCs on an RP server where each FC has more of a unique 'feel' and 'purpose' rather than just being a gaggle of buddies who want a chat window and a workshop. You don't seem to agree, but unless we get instanced housing for every character and FC, more wards is the best solution.

Might enterprising players who have multiple accounts buy all 60 in one ward like people have done? Maybe, but for that to happen, the entire ward would have to go unclaimed for weeks on end. So show the newly opened wards some love and fill them up organically, rather than letting them rot for a month or three until someone gets inspired to make something out of the empty space by themselves.

[Almagnus1]

So show the newly opened wards some love and fill them up organically, rather than letting them rot for a month or three until someone gets inspired to make something out of the empty space by themselves.

You and I both know this isn't going to happen, or rather, it will happen on Cactuar in a matter of hours (if that) but the smaller worlds are going to have some land baron buy a ward shafting the rest of the population.

Being selfish is not inherently a bad thing. it js your time and money use it as you see fit just operate with the rules.

But it becomes a bad thing when being selfish starts to negatively impact others. We don't live in a bubble, you have to think about those around you.

[PewPewPewPewPew]

You and I both know this isn't going to happen, or rather, it will happen on Cactuar in a matter of hours (if that) but the smaller worlds are going to have some land baron buy a ward shafting the rest of the population.

But it becomes a bad thing when being selfish starts to negatively impact others. We don't live in a bubble, you have to think about those around you.

Someone is always gonna get burned when someone else tries harder. You will never avoid this, its impossible. There are people who care more about certain things in life than you do and are willing to do more for it than you are. You should be happy there are outlets like this existing for people to throw more money at. More money translates into more game development budget. Boohoo that it's not being used on HOUSING, but that money is going in and benefiting the game no matter how much you want to argue that it's at the expense of players suffering in housing. Selfish? Sure okay its selfish. What are you going to say now? More about morals? You are literally just here screaming out loud with the hopes of attracting a crowd large enough to have the upper hand in this discussion. But there will be no resolution for you. Resolution isn't achieved by attacking users. Resolution is only achieved by going after the source, so the people who make this game. Why don't you try contact a GM or something? Why don't you sit down and talk with them and post your chat log to show that you're right, have this argument with them and see what they say. But you'll probably still be dissatisfied with the outcome anyways.

What you people are arguing is to literally stop people from enjoying the game the way they want. You want an enjoyment cap because other people's enjoyment absolutely disgusts you and the only way to fix it is to tell everyone what is the 'right amount of fun' by your personal standards. Since you cannot dedicate X amount of time and X amount of dollars, nobody else should be allowed to do more than what you can because that would be abuse of the system. Pathetic.

[Almagnus1]

Someone is always gonna get burned when someone else tries harder. You will never avoid this, its impossible. There are people who care more about certain things in life than you do and are willing to do more for it than you are. You should be happy there are outlets like this existing for people to throw more money at. More money translates into more game development budget. Boohoo that it's not being used on HOUSING, but that money is going in and benefiting the game no matter how much you want to argue that it's at the expense of players suffering in housing. Selfish? Sure okay its selfish. What are you going to say now? More about morals? You are literally just here screaming out loud with the hopes of attracting a crowd large enough to have the upper hand in this discussion. But there will be no resolution for you. Resolution isn't achieved by attacking users. Resolution is only achieved by going after the source, so the people who make this game. Why don't you try contact a GM or something? Why don't you sit down and talk with them and post your chat log to show that you're right, have this argument with them and see what they say. But you'll probably still be dissatisfied with the outcome anyways.

What you people are arguing is to literally stop people from enjoying the game the way they want. You want an enjoyment cap because other people's enjoyment absolutely disgusts you and the only way to fix it is to tell everyone what is the 'right amount of fun' by your personal standards. Since you cannot dedicate X amount of time and X amount of dollars, nobody else should be allowed to do more than what you can because that would be abuse of the system. Pathetic.

Let's look at this from a purely money point of view:

If we look at award of 60 houses, going by the restrictions, that means it's somewhere between 30-60 subs for that ward... in other words SE is expecting that a ward will require enough subscriptions to generate between $4.5-9k/year (assuming that an annual subscription costs $150). If a player wants to own a ward IMO they should pay for the ward. Why should you get a discount?

Not really if we are operating within the scope and rules of the game we have no obligation to think of those around us.

And that is the exact selfish behavior that has caused this entire debacle. Anyone that shares that line of thinking is part of the problem and they should at least be honest about it.

[Awha]

Let's look at this from a purely money point of view:

If we look at award of 60 houses, going by the restrictions, that means it's somewhere between 30-60 subs for that ward... in other words SE is expecting that a ward will require enough subscriptions to generate between $4.5-9k/year (assuming that an annual subscription costs $150). If a player wants to own a ward IMO they should pay for the ward. Why should you get a discount?



And that is the exact selfish behavior that has caused this entire debacle. Anyone that shares that line of thinking is part of the problem and they should at least be honest about it.

Nothing wrong with putting your own enjoyment above others. It is okay to be selfish, so what exactly is the problem since I fail to see it? Or let me rephrase how exactly is it the problem of the player base that does have?

Thing is you have not pointed out why the player base that is operating within the rules has any obligation to alter their behavior. By what metric can we say their actions are bad, or even. the cause of the current housing system.

Reality is you have grounds to vilify the players. Your beef is with SE but instead of only taking it out with SE you also feel the need to go after the players that are just playing within the scope of the game.

[Penthea]

Nothing wrong with putting your own enjoyment above others. It is okay to be selfish, so what exactly is the problem since I fail to see it?

This really depends on the degree at which you put your enjoyment above others.

I personally do not think that hoarding a limited resource is okay. Especially when that resource is designed to and does work perfectly fine when you have only one of each type. It's not as if you need two or more fc or private houses to make a certain type of mechanic to work correctly. One of each is enough to do everything housing has to offer.

Reality is you have grounds to vilify the players. Your beef is with SE but instead of only taking it out with SE you also feel the need to go after the players that are just playing within the scope of the game.

You could say this about a multitude of thread topics where heated debates happen.

Even if a person does not use names or locations to point out exactly who is hoarding and where, hoarders very often voluntarily reveal themselves. I don't think anyone should be surprised when the focus is put on them when they enter a thread and tell people, entirely out of their own choice, that they engage in this behaviour. And because SE never enter these conversations the debates between players stay between players.

It is especially not surprising that very heated debates happen when a certain someone we all know actively trolls and laughs at players who do not have a house. They are a very vocal individual so they make the entire hoarding group look very bad. Really bad.

So yea it's all well and good to say "your beef is with SE" but when hoarders reveal themselves they are making themselves a target. They of course have the right to reveal themselves, but they should not be shocked that people have something against them when they enter a thread that specifically criticises their behaviour.

I've seen this sort of thing happen with so many topics. Player complains about a thing, player who does that thing enters the thread, what they say makes it clear they do the thing, people who agree with OP argue with them, people who agree with those who do the thing argue back...it's constant back and forth until the thread inevitably unravels itself into a mess, people get tired of the thread, it dies...and the whole process happens again when someone makes a new thread with the same topic.

I've seen the above happen with housing, parsers, tanking, healing, dps, party finder, raiding, hunts, msq roulette...anything that criticises how people play, act, or the ability/inability to do something very often become an argumentative mess.

I have seen this happen in literally every gaming forum I have been in. These threads about house hoarders are not particularly special. It's just players being players.

[PewPewPewPewPew]

Hrmm...just because something doesn't go against rules doesn't automatically mean that doing that thing cannot be selfish or greedy. A rule or lack of one doesn't make an action bad or good. It simply makes it permitted or not allowed.

It is true that selfishness is not inherently a bad thing. It really depends on what you do with the selfishness and your motives. Everyone needs to be a bit selfish at times for the preservation of their own well-being. Whether that's things like making sure you have enough food to eat, or cutting someone out of your life who is a source of stress.

But going too far one way or the other is bad. Being too selfless can mean denying your own well-being, and being too selfish can mean denying the well-being of others. It is especially damaging when neither end of the spectrum is even necessary.

This really depends on the degree at which you put your enjoyment above others.

Would you stop already with these "It's selfish but not if .... " interjections? Who made you the righteous king to determine what degree of 'selfishness' is allowed and not allowed? We get it. You think it's bad. Selfish is bad for certain things by whatever your personal standard is. And you want to be on the "good" side like the others against multi house ownership so you don't have to face the mob either. You want to stick to your 'morals' and preach to people what the RIGHT WAY is. You are literally that guy every thread, trying to stay 'neutral' but it's painfully obvious what your intent is. You spend all your posts trying to tell US to accept and admit what we are and that what we are doing is harming others. Yet you continue to try and put on the face of a saint so you can stand above both parties. Every time you come on here and type out this "It's selfish but" yadda yadda, you continue to push the negative image on people that wanting more is bad. So we're selfish, OK get over it. Keep it to yourself. We all kept to ourselves with our selfishness. None of us ran out there to rub it in your face. People on the forum are the ones who dug us up out of the ground and try to make examples of us. Why do you have to keep going out there and bring it back up and constantly raising the "Selfishness is bad" discussion over and over again to reinforce that negative image attached to it? You tell us that selfish actions affect other players, well don't you think your constant echoing of SELFISH BAD SELFISH BAD is also damaging to people? And then you always cop out with a half-assed answer because you don't want to have a target on your back.

Like what I said to the other insane entitled player, why don't you go ask a GM if selfish is bad and ask why SE doesn't conform to your views of enforcing selfishness so you can post it out there and say "LOOK SE SAYS BAD MORALS ARE BAD". You aren't contributing everything in your hundreds of cop out posts.

[Awha]

Same, things get messy because players need some tangible to blame to they vilify the players instead of just the system.

No matter how you cut it I do not think it is fair to turn a disagreement into a witch hunt. We may have differing views the core of the issue is yes under your standards this is negative action, which is cool. Though under the rule set of the game it is allowed. So pushing ones standards as norm seem kind one skewed. Since the only norms we have agreed to as a community happen to be the ToS.

That is my issue some do not understand the difference between a disagreement of ideals and standards and witch hunt.

In the end ybe standards that matter are t he put in place by SE everything else is kind of moot. We have no obligation to adhere to the standards of other players since hoarding is acceptable by SE due to the nature if the rules. Sure you could argue it I s not the intent or Yoshi-P is not in favor of it. Though if the rules and game system state otherwise even his view / company view becomes just an opinion.

This has been an issue in gaming for ages do not hate the player, hate the game. Seems people have forgotten that.

[Almagnus1]

I personally do not think that hoarding a limited resource is okay.

And this is the statement that sums up this entire debate.

[Awha]

You and I both know this isn't going to happen, or rather, it will happen on Cactuar in a matter of hours (if that) but the smaller worlds are going to have some land baron buy a ward shafting the rest of the population.



But it becomes a bad thing when being selfish starts to negatively impact others. We don't live in a bubble, you have to think about those around you.

Not really if we are operating within the scope and rules of the game we have no obligation to think of those around us. In a world of finite resources there will always be those that have and those that do not. One can be known disagreement with the status quo and can try to change the system but they should not vilify like some have because they do not share the same value system. Problem is some do not understand the difference between disagreement and Witch hunting.