Re-enable Housing Demolition!

[ItMe]

I agree with this; this would also make you feel a bit more accomplished with the purchase

If I want to feel a sense of "pride and accomplishment" from my grind I'll play EA games thank you.

[Coletergeist]

If I want to feel a sense of "pride and accomplishment" from my grind I'll play EA games thank you.

Tis the reason I said "personal opinion" :3

[Sairys]

I don't think you see a flaw in your own response here; this wouldn't fix a thing - the auction idea that is. If folks could bid whatever price they wanted for a house, folks would be bidding at exceedingly high prices. Auction idea = no bueno.
Wouldn't fix a thing for the situation at all, and folks would constantly be in the dark over what the price of that house would potentially be, then. Could be as low as 500k to something as high as 500+ mil, because people do be swimming in gil I assure you.
Poor players would never really stand a chance, particularly on high populated worlds.

I would point out that you've supported an idea on pricing people out so poor players would never really stand a chance on any world heh, also the og pricing idea would see even higher prices on large plots.

With auctions at least, people swimming in gil participating in the auctions would, in theory, taper off over time because they'd get houses using that gil, they might pop in again to upgrade to better plots but that just means that bunch of gil sunk out of the economy. Auctions typically also have a reserve price which could be set at the current value of the plot so they couldn't go below that.

[ItMe]

Tis the reason I said "personal opinion" :3

Hahaha fair point.

[Alyanna_Elingval]

So? 4M is way to low for a small nowadays. I would much rather see a proper gilsink and make people farm 40m+ (which dont't take long)

They can't do it now. They would just make the situation worse.

Having said that. It was a huge mistake to lower prices in the first place. You can't make something accessible to everyone without having enough supply for everyone. If something is in limited supply is should be priced accordingly.

[Aniew]

I think it's about time to turn it on too. There's a balance to be struck between accommodating players so impacted by current events that they are unable to access their games and making features of the game itself accessible and practical. If the demolition timer is to be disabled for the length of the pandemic, it might not be turned back on for years for years to come.

[PennyStormfire]

After reading all of the countless reasons why it is so humane to keep the demo timer off, I have some simple questions:
Does SE allow you to log in to your account if you allow your sub to lapse?
Can you access your additional retainers if you do not pay the additional retainer fee?
If you allow your sub to the Companion App to lapse can you access any of the items that are in your spare chocobo bag?

The answer to all of these questions is a resounding NO.
Why is it then that these houses are considered sacrosanct to people who for whatever reason cannot fulfil their commitment that they made when they made the in-game purchase?
I understand showing some empathy but attempting to assign some grand altruism to SE is disingenuous at best and hypocritical on it's face.

[Penthea]

After reading all of the countless reasons why it is so humane to keep the demo timer off, I have some simple questions:
Does SE allow you to log in to your account if you allow your sub to lapse?
Can you access your additional retainers if you do not pay the additional retainer fee?
If you allow your sub to the Companion App to lapse can you access any of the items that are in your spare chocobo bag?

The answer to all of these questions is a resounding NO.

This is a false equivalence. As soon as you pay your fees again you get all of those things back exactly how they were when you left them. This is not the case with housing at all, and if you're logged out for long enough you can also permanently lose all furniture used or stored in the house that got demolished.

[PennyStormfire]

This is a false equivalence. As soon as you pay your fees again you get all of those things back exactly how they were when you left them. This is not the case with housing at all, and if you're logged out for long enough you can also permanently lose all furniture used or stored in the house that got demolished.

Nothing that you get back is a severely limited resource. All of that is clearly stated at time of purchase, just as the timer is clearly stated. My point is that pausing the timer is not an act of altruism. It is a calculated way to motivate subscription payment.

[Penthea]

Nothing that you get back is a severely limited resource.

Which is precisely why losing a house can be a huge hit. Not only does it mean it could be close to impossible to get one again, you also lose at least several million gil's worth of assets. You can even lose assets that cost real money depending on what furniture you had.

The fact that we even need demolition just shows how flawed the housing system is. Literally nothing else in the game works like this because it doesn't need to.

The problem is the lack of houses, not demolition or a lack of it. Demolition wouldn't even be a discussed subject if the game had enough or unlimited houses.

But too many players focus on being angry about a symptom instead of directing their attention to the actual cause, which is why we still have this horrendous system. The last time we got anything resembling positive change was when the community was unified in demanding real change from SE (Shirogane launch). As long as most players are complacent and/or only ask for minor band-aid fixes, that is all we will ever get.

Demolition will be turned on again one day but in the grand scheme of things this will change very little. Why? Because we don't have enough houses. There will always be players unfairly shafted by the system as long as it stays the same.

All of that is clearly stated at time of purchase, just as the timer is clearly stated. My point is that pausing the timer is not an act of altruism. It is a calculated way to motivate subscription payment.

Why can't it be both?