Why the needless emphasis on housing?

I just found this thread and I have to put in my vote and say that all this housing makes me feel more like I'm playing The Sims than an Ultima game...

Also, what I saw in Release 2 did not look like an organic part of an existing or growing medieval European town, but rather like some American suburban housing project.

 

Ultima online involved housing. Its something people ask in every MMO. As for the town not having a medieval European look, its alright. Its not supposed to be medieval European town, but rather a generic fantasy-game town. Think Ultima Online, if that help you understand the concept.

 

I agree that this is one of the results from the needless focus on persistent housing as a backer reward and marketing scheme.

However, for me this impression comes also from lack of realism, so I would not entirely blame this on the housing.
City walls/fortifications and building material in general were very precious. Design highly followed functionality. Inside a town the footprint of a house was small and houses were built in height. Taxes were commonly collected on the base area, so building in height gave more space for the same amount of tax. Walls were often adjacent or common walls to save building materials, maximize space and keep the homes warmer in winter months. Stables were often not separate buildings but build on the other side of sleeping quarters to make them warmer.
In this regard Kingsport looks better than Owl's Head.

 

Akeashar, while I disagree with you and Mystic, I'm glad you're participating in the discussion. Welcome! I like reading other people's views and am glad you're on topic.

 

Keep in mind that in the story line, we're all from Earth and have made our way to this new land so it kind of makes sense.

 

No it does not, as the form of European medieval towns followed as a natural result from various factors including use of resources, history of the settlement, design following function, necessities imposed by the environment (climate, etc.), and not in the least the lack of cheap mass transit.

This is another example where it pays off if basic design decisions are in place before content is ever created. If concepts for all these things are in place a world where form follows function and the necessities imposed by the environment and the economical situation can be created. For example some people point out that city guards in full platemail are unrealistic and that it is in fact highly unpractical for their job. Getting details like that right helps enormously with immersion. I feel some other games have done a very good job at exactly that.

 

I believe Mystic was referring to the fact that the Earthers are from *modern* times, where standardized cookie cutter grid roads were the norm, so have imposed their ideals on the new districts in which they intend to live.

Mind you, if one were to base it on my home-town : The original center of town is a grid-layout, and later modern suburbs have been more organically designed (with curves and cul-de-sacs).

 

This would be correct.

 

The more i watch the vids the more excited i get due to my idealism but participating in chat always seems to ground me back in reality. Im now of the mind if its not possible for everyone who wants some sort of house to get one somehow then nobody should get a house and instead dev time spent on things that benefit everyone. Especially with this model of attainment.

Ideally you would have to do something ingame to get a house strictly by lore and roleplay ideals. I can just imagine this house popping up in A RP community before the person that owns it is even merited as worthy ingame or even in existance. Thou hast a house but thine soul does not exist

 

Unfortunately, that is simply not possible now, considering the rewards provided to backers to help them part with their funds.

The offer of housing is essentially paying for the development of everything else in this game, which understandably made it the primary focus during early development.

Now that the initial push is complete, we can see the other systems coming into place (crafting and conversation being the latest ones).

 

Not to mention that crafting is slowly coming more on the front for funding. Check all those prosperity items. I imagine that they will keep them coming till fall.

 

The vast majority of the funds comes from those lower level backers (33-450$) that do not get a house.
(Not to speak of those who look at the kickstarter rewards and run the other way when they see the pay to win elements.)
With all the game aims at offering, the excessive emphasis placed on housing in advertising seems to only have lead to a fairly small perecntage of players being willing to shell out the 550$ + to get housing.

As stated elsewhere, other kickstarter game projects have obtained a lager amount of backer money without creating such a focus.

 

Nothing in the current design indicates that crafting will be limited to a small number of players, so the same moral dilemma (advertising something most people will not be able to fully enjoy) does not arise here.

 

Ok, suggest a funging campaign. What they should do? I mean, alright, say you were in RG's shoes. How would you proceed the crowdfunding?

 

I'm with you all the way, especially when it come to that Aston Volante I would really really like.

Then I kind of get a reality check......if everyone had one, I don't think i'd want it. Then I also think of the cost, I cant get one now......but one day with hard work and maybe with the odd little prayer to the man upstairs.....who knows.

In all seriousness, the current housing system is exactly how they intended. I can see people moving into shared housing, player landlords etc.........I honestly believe that will bring together much better social interaction just like it did in the old days of UO.

 

The crowdfunding train has left, what could be easily changed is the store.

One could focus the store on vanity items. Examples of existing things in this category would be the cloaks, the unique house designs, the statue head, etc..
I would suggest extending that to special character customization options (hairstyles, etc.), titles, emotes, the ability to craft armor that looks different instead of being better, and so on and so on. It should not be hard to come up with many things here.
This is the aproach of League of Legends selling character skins. Combined with the backer money and the money from selling the game upon release this should provide ample opportunity to fund the game.
(You could also sell things that fund a part of the game that not everyone will want to spent money on, like additional music tracks, etc.. However unlike housing those things should not have a gameplay advantage. For Crusader Kings II for example you can buy additional music =) )

Of course you skip some opportunities to make short term cash but you do not restrict future design decisions and it does not alienate possible players and the game's longevity.

 

$570+ just for a cloak and extra face option? perhaps even a soundtrack? I doubt there would be many people going above $300 for all this. Thus we wouldn't be celebrating $3 mil today.
Also this isnt an e-sports game to acquire the visibility LoL has. So you might as well not compare tomatoes to oranges.

EDIT: They did add several crafting items in the store, as well as cosmetics, but those cant be charged more then 10-20 bucks the most. You cant expect them to have a significant revenue based on just that.

 

I honestly cannot think of one thing that they could stuck in the Citizen pledge level other then housing that would get me to spend $550.

 

And just so you know, and to inform others who may be reading this, you can still pledge to the game all the way up to release.

 

That's probably why some people weren't on the funding development team, because those on the team should be aware what can be offered to make pledges enticing.

In Wasteland 2 (which we've mentioned many times), they offer no in game deals for anyone. Honorable mentions are pretty much it. And yet they raised the same amount. Here is an example of their $10,000 tier, where they had 12 backers:

Pledge $10,000 or more

12 backers Limited (4 left of 16)
Previous reward + COME TO AN EXCLUSIVE PRIVATE PARTY hosted by Brian Fargo, Alan Pavlish and other key members of the Wasteland team (must be able to travel to Newport Beach, CA). Talk design, previous works or anything else you’d like to discuss. Also, a shrine in Wasteland 2 will be erected in your honor. You’ll receive 50 copies of the game to do what you want and our deep appreciation. You'll also receive a medal and AN EXPLODED BLOOD SAUSAGE Wasteland limited signed and numbered collectible figurine.

Now consider the other pledges that were made at the same dollar level as our "Citizen":

Previous reward + WASTELAND DOOMSDAY PREPARATION SURVIVAL KIT. All your doomsday needs in a themed Wasteland collectible bag. You’ll also receive a lv2 Desert Ranger medal of honor limited edition collectible.

Personally, I have no problems with "medals" or "monuments" that have no real estate or other value. It's honorable mention, and people that help fund should be honored.

Granted, Wasteland 2 is a different audience with different expectations. But I still believe the comparison is valid.

But all that is water under the bridge. It's too late to do anything different, and no one is suggesting they revoke or change anything that's been done in the past. But there are ways to address these issues that will make both sides satisfied in the future.

What Wasteland 2 offered may not have been appealing to many people, but they got funding, mostly through lower level backers anyway. Just like SotA majority of funding are in the lower tiers, not the housing tiers. They could have launched without housing tiers at all, the funds were exceeding the goal. So this is why the question of this thread was created. For something that a minority can enjoy, why is so much emphasis on this? That's pretty much it.