1 Instanced House Per Account

You're right, it's not a solution. But I haven't seen anyone suggest such a thing. Have you?

 

That wouldn't be allowed I think the basement is instanced you don't just walk into it. No instanced housing allowed in the game you know the rules.

PS: if you read this 5 minutes after my post it may no longer be relevant as the rules may have changed

 

That's exactly the point I'm making.

 

I don't know a single player on UO in the last 15 years who has jumped shards looking for housing (people don't tend to like playing with a 600 ping). I know people who have moved shards looking for a greater population (technically less chance of having a house). In terms of Tram/Fel, you are really just talking about landmass........... Is the landmass on SotA greater than Tram/Fel combined? I don't know the answer; however with the way SotA works.....my educated guess is that its much bigger.

 

Absolutely bang on.

There is no solution because technically there isn't a problem to begin with. What people are seeing is an intended feature of the game itself.

 

My wife and I did several times, but we live in south/west US.
Maybe US and Canada have/had more options for moving shards with a lesser impact on latency than you guys in EU.

 

I would hardly consider earning one ingame a freebie

 

I like how people create straw men, making an argument against instanced housing based on the idea that people are asking for free housing.

It's a straw man. Not one person, in any thread - even the housing threads that got locked due to arguments, has asked for free housing.

Get real, people.

 

Well how much would you add to your pledge then if it were an option?

sent from the future using my Coleco Adam

 

Make it a stretch goal it would attract a lot more interest than a Fencing match that is raising funds by creating merged accounts at the expense of original founders.

 

So how much would you kick in for this stretch goal?

sent from the future using my Coleco Adam

 

depends on what the stretch goal amount is would it be $500k or $1m whatever.
I would then try to work out how many people have actually backed the game difficult now (with all new numbers floating around) and see what I needed to pay as a fair share.

 

*not from the origional quote, but an answer in general*

If you "pledged" more than you would have payed for a normal, full, completed Triple-A game...the answer for me would be Nothing.
If it was F2P and I didn't have to purchase the game to get in, then sure, if I liked the game I wouldn't hesitate to support the company and buy from the cash-shop.

If I payed for the game, I should have access to all the basic elements that make the game (without any kind of mystery or questions on my part).
Some might say a house isn't necessary, but if it's not, then why are people putting down hundreds of dollars for them...nobody spends money like that on things they don't think they need.


All I want is assurance that I can earn a place just like I did in UO.
I don't want to hear that it's going to be "limited" or get the feeling, due to what seems at a casual glance from the sales/promotions, that by the time I can earn the money in-game that maybe there won't be anything left for me, or that I'll have to pay rent to another player.

I don't care about "prime real estate" or living in a downtown merchant's row.
I am more than willing to earn what I get in-game...I just don't want to get there and find that the door is closed and can only be opened with RL cash.

 

I spent 6 years living in international student accomodation - often in quite basic conditions.

The best times we had together was always when the internet went down. Everyone would come wandering out of their own rooms (blinking at the bright light), and after it was clear a few modem power cycles wasn't bringing the net back again, we would start an impromptu party in the living area.

You'd hardly see anyone any other time.

And here we have a "problem" in a game that seems to be trying to make us share limited areas, rather than having our own dark little hidey holes to go away and hide in. I don't really see it as a totally huge problem. We might need to make friends, share things and talk to each other.

 

That's hard to say, because it would depend on the kind of instanced housing. If it was just a room in an Inn, it shouldn't cost very much real cash. If it was an actual instanced house, it should cost less than the Citizen level.

But if this became a goal, it would give me more hope in backing the game because there would be ethics that didn't shut out a good portion of players.

If the backing issue was only over housing, and I could get this assurance, I would bump up my pledge. But there are too many other issues holding me back, apart from just housing.

 

For one thing, those "dark little hidey holes" are $550+. I don't think people would be paying that much for a description like you just said.

Secondly, I made tons of friends in UO when I owned a house. I don't have to be homeless to do so.

 

The "dark little hidey holes" I was referring to was OP's suggestion of an instanced house that everyone gets.

As for UO - I played first two years when houses were hard to come buy. We had a "guild house" (someone volunteered their own house for this) that held the guild stone. This was a very big deal and where everyone gravitated to.

Some people had their own houses, but they were a much lesser deal - the big thing was having that first guild house or not.

 

I hear you. They're not getting anymore money out of my until they clean up their act. I'm cool with your response about the cost. @wagram, this was never billed as a triple A title. Would you chip in for everyone to have a basic house or not?
I'll confess a little bit here: When I logged into EQ2 at launch I had an inn room with a little bit of storage. They were assigned and you could get a cheap one for free or buy a nicer one. They all had weekly upkeep fees from 5 silver to several gold. I didn't appreciate it at all and even thought it was stupid. Well at least it gave me somewhere for me to put all of this dumb furniture I kept getting as quest rewards. I didn't decorate my place, I just dumped furniture there.
If I couldn't eat it, sell it or use it as a weapon I really didn't care. I'm a little more into it now for EQ2 but it is such a fraction of the game. I do recall playing Vanguard near launch and thinking, man it would be great if this game had some housing but I think it was more the atmosphere. I just felt like I needed to get away all the time. Turns out I didn't need to get away from the action I needed to get away from the game.

 

It's always overlooked, but as far as housing goes EQ2 has had the best of it since day one (not counting SoTA at this time because it hasn't been released yet).
As far as accessibility goes, EQ2 really set the standard (not counting SoTA as of yet because it hasn't been released yet).
No game has a housing system as robust and/or detailed and well rounded as EQ2 (not counting SoTA right now because it hasn't been released yet).

 

Why are you assuming an instanced house would automatically mean this description? I'd think the developers could be much more creative than that dismal description.

Everyone's UO experiences vary. One size does not fit all.