Houses are in limited quantity? ? (Dev) Replied

The tax system will knock out all of the non KS homes that go abandoned. They had talked then about maybe auctions or lotteries. People will likely try to sell their good houses for real world money if they are leaving the game.

 

Non KS? And what about the KS ones (what is KS, by the way?)?

 

"If they do it as it?s described now, it will fail. Mark my words."

Easy to make predictions like that when you are set to lose nothing ( only has an upside). If your prediction fails no one will care and I doubt anyone will screenshot this post to remind you. So let's put the drama aside. On the flipside, those folks who have pledged beyond $500+ have a lot of downside if housing is implemented badly. Potentially a large upside too but that's why folks are willing to take the risk but any solution that wipes out their investment will make them severely unhappy.

Real estate has been designated as rare which is one of the reasons people are happy to pledge large amounts of dollars. If they change that now or at any other point in the future then it amounts to a dishonest 'tax'. Very few people are likely to pay $500+ if it is easy to get a house with minimal effort. Remember that there are many games that don't have housing, there are others that went years without implementing too.

If folks pay for a deed with dollars then it is theirs to keep forever. However, if they become inactive for X number of months then the simple solution is to wrap that house back up into the deed (in its current form, RG has already said that's how house deeds will work if you want to pick them up) and then place that deed in the inactive player's bank. That way they still have their deed but it does ultimately mean that they lose their lot on the map. The assignment of this lot to a new person can follow whatever method they eventually implement (lottery/land rush/whatever).


I figured it is better to have these discussions on the developer forums when they open up.

 

KS is Kickstarter. The big pledgers who are getting a home (donated over $500) which is tax free. Their houses are theirs unless they sell them. These people are likely to be very active in the game or they are investing in property now to try to sell it later.

 

Ah yes, Kickstarter, my bad.

Well, even a kickstarter dude should not be able to hog a housing spot eternally after he stopped playing. As said by Jarvardur, he'll get his deed back but loses the plot, which sounds the right thing to do design wise.

@Jatvardur
If you think a vast majority (yes, I said majority) of the potential players (aka customers) won't get angry when they realize a whole part of the game is inaccessible to them because already owned by the hardcore, the gold farmers and the rich people able to invest $500+ into a video game that's not even in alpha yet, then you are delusional. If housing is inaccessible to all but a selected few, the vast majority will just do that: quit, stop playing, and therefore stop funding the game.

I thought about this longly, and only one solution would be viable to make everybody happy. The limited amount of open world plots would not change and would go to the first come, first served and obviously those who paid of course, but you would also have instanced housing available in each town, village and even in the wilds. In inns, of course, but also in houses that are shared between a great about of players. Of course, those shared houses could not be customized outdoors by the player like the unique "one owner" houses, but the inside could be. This way, everybody would be able to get his own home in SotA while still giving a huge advantage to those who own the limited open world plots, who would have outdoors decorations and also player run vendors.

And they definitely have to find a system to stop the gold farmers from ruining the limited house plots for the legit players. And for that, I have no idea how they can do it, since they can't stop players from trading property, that would be silly. The system as it is right now WILL be ruined by gold farmers. That's not even a guess, that's obvious, any veteran online/MMORPG player should be aware of that, and even more a veteran MMORPG designer.

 

I agree with you about the gold farmers. They throw and wrench into just about everything. I don't think you need to worry about the KS people not playing. I'm a $3500 Baron and the other Lords and Barons I've talked to are already very active and will be in the development of the game.

You also have to keep in mind that the game is doubling in size each year. Many players will be fine renting a room/vendor space from a city home owner like me until they can save for a home.

Also, just because many of us our financially stable, doesn't mean we aren't taking a big risk investing in this game. The property is the reason we are investing this much. Please keep in mind that the big investors really push us to higher stretch goals and a better game for everyone.

 

To add to my previous post, the first thing to do is to set a limit of one house per account. Otherwise, the gold farmer's job will be made even easier.

 

I actually agree with you on the one house per account. The only problem with that is it will be hard for people trying to upgrade housing. It would suck to sell you village house expecting a town deed only to have it fall through. In some ways I think the limited housing helps against the gold farmers. I would be shocked if any city home owners sold their homes for in-game gold.

 

If gold farmers are _guaranteed_ to ruin every MMO then there is no point creating a new one. RG should just quit then. A similar fallacy applies to what the luddites believed: that X% growth in technological advancement will make X% of people unemployed. It didn't happen. It isn't necessary for the game to have a million players either. People will pay $500+ now and at some point in the future a good number of those players will go inactive. It will happen. At that point, "legit players" will have a chance to place a house that they bought with in-game gold. There will be a natural rate of coming and going that fluctuates over time. This rate of fluctuation just so happens to favour people that are early adopters.

What is a "legit player" anyway? One with no money but lot's of time? The opposite system is one where all the hardcore players who dedicate all their time to the game will "ruin" the game for the casual players since they will have all the best stuff/houses. Which side is more deserving? The hardcore player base or the rich player base? Neither. It's an old debate, yes, but blaming either style won't get us far. One style has an advantage that the other side may not, the very small number of people who have both advantages will surely be kings among men but also they would be dedicating their entire life to the game....

Naturally, there needs to be a smart approach to it. It isn't necessary for a game to include housing (SWTOR - failure of this title should be blamed on other factors) at all but it is certainly an attractor for a larger player base. Some system of inns or similar will help; I don't think it is entirely necessary that all inns are player owned but player owned inns would be a cool feature.

Some games favour people that spend more, such as free apps with paid addons. The richest players are the ones that subsidize the game which allows it to run freely. I'd guess the distribution of dollars spent versus number of players is probably a negative exponential: a small number of players spent a huge amount of dollars, while a very large number of players spend almost nothing. If SOTA hosts a trading part of the website then they can monitor sales and perhaps take some 'tax' from each sale, the benefit here is that they can conduct all property trades safely. If players can only hold one deed then it is very difficult for one person to hold a large stake in the market, i.e. difficult to manipulate prices (although not impossible).

edit:
RG has stated a willingness to build new cities for large guilds too.
See the Reddit thread:

Q: In SotA will players be able to control cities, uo felluca like?
A: I am hoping to hear from giant guilds like The Syndicate, or Pax Lair, for whom we would love to ?build a town?.
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/?topic=transcript-of-the-reddit-qa/#post-7201

While this is cool, it also adds worry to investors who pledge a lot. If Barons pay $3500, they want the option to sell out in the future should they chose to quit or sell up. Constantly adding new cities will weigh upon the price. Simple supply and demand. Adding new housing needs to be done with thought and care.

 

Jatvardur - I hope you donated $400 or more because we need people like you in the Dev forums.

 

Yep, I'm somewhere in the $500+ category. I don't want to beat my chest or measure epeens here, but I've decided to take the risk. I like what I see/ hear and I'm excited about the possibilities.


While I'm cooking my soup I thought back to the role of 'evil' speculators that is a popular topic in newspapers. If someone buys many deeds of in-game properties then yes we could point to the undeniable fact that they are holding (say) $1 million of housing deeds but that is also (more importantly) $1 million of _liabilities_. Let's assume that the speculator over pays for the entire portfolio and can't sell? Ouch, I hope they didn't take out a loan to pay for that s###!

The market will set the prices. People will pay whatever they are willing to pay. As a recent example I've played a bit in the SWTOR market and made some money by buying when I think something is very cheap and then selling at a higher price. This higher price isn't a new all-time high everytime, the price can't be pushed to new highs every single time. It doesn't happen. So far I haven't been burnt, although was a bit close this month, but I keep notes and monitor risk. Note: all in-game money.

 

That's awesome and a bit of a game its own right

 

I've pledged for a city house too, not sure why people would label me as "rich" because of that, also not sure you would appreciate me labeling you as "poor" because you did not pledge at least a 3 digit amount...?

With that out of the way, I honestly would love for everybody to get a fair chance on a house. I personally don't think lords, barons or even the village house owners would have to fear about house prices, because cities/towns/villages/ are going to be the most sought after real estate in the game.

I would welcome it if they made islands or something of this sort (persistent, like in UO) where others can have their house and vendors, if it's planned better than UO it won't become as crowded either (remember, in UO they never planned for so many people to play!)

It would allow others to own a persistent house of their own, feel more at home in the world, and to not only rent a vendor somewhere but to place their own. If we have another means of fast travel like runes and recall for example, it would help those people to get customers and would add some player generated content to the persistent world also, so you could also explore more land than "just" the main maps.

 

To me, the housing system has turned me off of this game a great deal. It appears that housing will be even more limited than in Ultima Online. On top of that, the best spots are being auctioned off with real money well before the game is released. I've been knocked out of the race before it even began.

Can you imagine the benefit of having a vendor house in a main city? Especially in a game where a portion of the player base will choose to play that "Friends Only" Online option? There will be a portion of the economy that will only be accessible by people with the best houses; houses already sold for real-world money. And that's added to the obvious benefit of having a Luna-esque vendor spot now and forever.

I don't know; I'm pretty opposed to any game that has a "cashing" option. I'm very disappointed that Richard Garriott decided to go this route. I'd donate without receiving an in-game benefit.

 

Geeze, not to mention I've only read two threads on this forum so far and have already seen three people brag about their City House. (x.x ) I might hate that aspect of "cashing" more than anything.

 

Velner: "There will be a portion of the economy that will only be accessible by people with the best houses"

It's not clear at this point. If travelling in the overland map is easy, village house owners may have as much customers as city house, and I understand there will be a few thousand village houses available for ingame money. No need to panic just yet, nothing is set in stone.

 

For whiny people like veiner there will be the lottery. Keep in mind everyone had the same opportunity to pledge. It is only your fault if you want a house that bad and cant afford to pledge. The city houses going to passionate players instead of gold farmers is a win. The world will expand. Either be good in real life or be good in the game and you will have a house.

 

@Velner I think you have a wrong mindset about the rewards that come with KS pledge.

This KS campaign is to raise funding for a game still in early development, there are a lot of uncertainty and even with RG at the helm it can still fail. Those pledging at higher tier could potentially lose all their money.

Surely no one will really give up cold hard cash in something unfinished unless there is something substantial in return. In this case the substantial return is property.

Its a fair business. It happens everywhere. Venture capitalists often ask for major cuts of profit for the high risk.

 

I know my friends aren't pledging because of the scarcity of homes they keep talking about. Let the 500/1500/3000/3500 and above have their special homes but make homes available to others. I can let my friends use my vendor they just want aplace they can call home and customize with furniture and stuff.

 

Death knell. Which is exactly why the need to hammer down the inn or camp based housing. To say that people will not pledge 33 dollars because of house limits is a reflection on them. There will be 1000s of village homes available day one. Tell them to stick to consoles if they need hand holding