Housing System

[Farohna.6247]

12 hours ago, Doggie.3184 said:

It would actually cuz they'll add Fish Tanks to put in house and your fish will vomit them out randomly.

I would rather have a fish tank in the current home instance.

[Gravitron.7982]

12 hours ago, Ashen.2907 said:

It is the ANet way. I dont think it would be necessary but I would be shocked if ANet implemented housing without high time gated engagement to extend play time, a heavy lean into the gemstore, and more collections than you can shake a stick at.

Yeah I don't think you're wrong here at all.

[Sobx.1758]

16 hours ago, Gravitron.7982 said:

Wow that's crazy, well I guess there really isn't a good excuse not to at this point. That's great though, PSO2 devs probably really like their player base if they are going to add a really cool feature like this to their game, good on those devs!

What? "there really isn't a good excuse not to at this point" because... another game added it? How is  this supposed to make any sense?

Looks like a bad idea to me, high amount of work to implement, low gameplay value, snoozefest, no thanks.

[Gravitron.7982]

7 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

What? "there really isn't a good excuse not to at this point" because... another game added it? How is  this supposed to make any sense?

Looks like a bad idea to me, high amount of work to implement, low gameplay value, snoozefest, no thanks.

To me, that's not a good enough reason not to add it in the year 2023. 

[Sobx.1758]

1 minute ago, Gravitron.7982 said:

To me, that's not a good enough reason not to add it in the year 2023. 

That's more of a reason to not add it than you ever gave for adding it. So... yes, it is.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Gravitron.7982]

10 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

That's more of a reason to not add it than you ever gave for adding it. So... yes, it is.

I just can't agree here, if a smaller dev team implemented player housing in their game than the team Anet has, I really don't see a valid excuse not to now, but that's just me personally. 

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, Gravitron.7982 said:

I just can't agree here, if a smaller dev team implemented player housing in their game than the team Anet has, I really don't see a valid excuse not to now, but that's just me personally. 

Disagreemend with no arguments presented is worth nothing, thanks for the response thought, I guess.

You don't know if "that dev team is smaller" btw, you're just making blind assumptions aimed at the end-goal you want to see.

[Gravitron.7982]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

Disagreemend with no arguments presented is worth nothing, thanks for the response thought, I guess.

You don't know if "that dev team is smaller" btw, you're just making blind assumptions aimed at the end-goal you want to see.

So your assumption is that PSO2 has a larger dev team than Anet?

[Sobx.1758]

3 minutes ago, Gravitron.7982 said:

So your assumption is that PSO2 has a larger dev team than Anet?

No, I made no assumptions about that at all, if only because it's irrelevant to me in the first place. I wrote literally what I wrote in my posts (which you still failed to address at any point in your responses). Now because I pointed out you're making a blind guess, you're trying to make a cheap unsubstantiated "no u" response and pretend I somehow said "the opposite is true". If you think I said the opposite is true, point out where exactly I did that. If you can't (and you can't, because I didn't) then don't pretend I did just because you have nothing relevant to response to my posts you're quoting.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Khisanth.2948]

17 hours ago, Doggie.3184 said:

PSO2 just added player housing today and that game is dirt poor and funded by like 3 players.

It was added to PSO2: New Genesis not PSO2.

While the names makes it look like they are the same game their relationship seems more like GW1 and GW2. According to Sega New Genesis is their second best performing F2P title.

[Gravitron.7982]

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

No, I made no assumptions about that at all, if only because it's irrelevant to me in the first place. I wrote literally what I wrote in my posts (which you still failed to address at any point in your responses). Now because I pointed out you're making a blind guess, you're trying to make a cheap unsubstantiated "no u" response and pretend I somehow said "the opposite is true". If you think I said the opposite is true, point out where exactly I did that. If you can't (and you can't, because I didn't) then don't pretend I did just because you have nothing relevant to response to my posts you're quoting.

And to me, it's relevant. The bottom line is, I just don't agree with you. You don't think GW2 should have player housing...congrats! I think it should, especially when smaller games are getting player housing. I guess that's what the term "horses for courses" describes right? People having different opinions about the same topic.

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, Gravitron.7982 said:

And to me, it's relevant. The bottom line is, I just don't agree with you. You don't think GW2 should have player housing...congrats! I think it should, especially when smaller games are getting player housing. I guess that's what the term "horses for courses" describes right? People having different opinions about the same topic.

That's ok, at no point I said you can't have your opinion about anything here -what I'm addressing is your mention about no reason not to implement it after multiple people stated their reasons for why they don't want that implemented. That and the part I also specifically commented on, where you -as far as I can see- made up a reason you have no real information about in order to push your opinion forward. I'm pretty sure that's what I was saying from the start.
You're free to keep wanting it, but that doesn't make made up claims any less made up, nor does ignoring what other people said somehow make the "reasons against it" go away. Pretty sure that's what I said in my posts from the start, other than also listing why I don't see the proposed housing system worth it.

[vares.8457]

Housing is boring. We already have home instances and guild halls, that’s more than enough. They shouldn’t waste time and resources on housing. 

[Chichimec.9364]

6 hours ago, Marshall Sed.8643 said:

...I have personal housing.  It's called a Guild Hall...

 

4 minutes ago, vares.8457 said:

Housing is boring. We already have home instances and guild halls, that’s more than enough. They shouldn’t waste time and resources on housing. 

Sorry, OP, but I have to agree with these two responses. Years ago, one of my first guilds allowed its members to claim the empty houses in the Lost Precipice guild hall as their own, on a first come, first served basis. You were also allowed to decorate your house with whichever guild hall decorations you wanted. I claimed one, decorated it a bit, and soon got bored with the whole thing. As for my home instance, the only times I go there are to harvest the nodes. There are plenty of other things I'd rather see Anet do than develop a housing system I would barely even use.

To be fair, I have to add that this is just my own opinion and I know some other folks would feel differently. Two of my sisters love those Facebook games where you can decorate your house and invite others to come over and see it. I have three sisters and two brothers though, and out of the six of us, only those two sisters love games like that. The other four of us aren't interested in them.

[Gravitron.7982]

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

That's ok, at no point I said you can't have your opinion about anything here -what I'm addressing is your mention about no reason not to implement it after multiple people stated their reasons for why they don't want that implemented. That and the part I also specifically commented on, where you -as far as I can see- made up a reason you have no real information about in order to push your opinion forward. I'm pretty sure that's what I was saying from the start.
You're free to keep wanting it, but that doesn't make made up claims any less made up, nor does ignoring what other people said somehow make the "reasons against it" go away. Pretty sure that's what I said in my posts from the start, other than also listing why I don't see the proposed housing system worth it.

And I disagree with their reasons, I thought that part was clear?

[Sobx.1758]

20 minutes ago, Gravitron.7982 said:

And I disagree with their reasons, I thought that part was clear?

Thought we've been through this though?

4 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Disagreemend with no arguments presented is worth nothing, thanks for the response thought, I guess.

You don't know if "that dev team is smaller" btw, you're just making blind assumptions aimed at the end-goal you want to see.

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

You're free to keep wanting it, but that doesn't make made up claims any less made up, nor does ignoring what other people said somehow make the "reasons against it" go away. Pretty sure that's what I said in my posts from the start, other than also listing why I don't see the proposed housing system worth it.

 

Just writing "I disagree" with no explanation or addressing anything you disagree with is one weak "disagreement". Almost as if at this point you reverted into saying "no!" over and over again no matter what, which simply shows the strength of your potential (since for now they're non-existant) arguments. In a way, this is enough to show you understand the reasons against it and I'm also fine with that.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Gravitron.7982]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Thought we've been through this though?

 

Just writing "I disagree" with no explanation or addressing anything you disagree with is one weak "disagreement". Almost as if at this point you reverted into saying "no!" over and over again no matter what, which simply shows the strength of your potential (since for now they're non-existant) arguments.

And you're free to think that.

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, Gravitron.7982 said:

And you're free to think that.

And so I do. Until you have anything to challenge any of the arguments against the inclusion of this idea, it seems those reasons are simply stronger than whatever you'd potentially have against them (or anything you'd have to push your opinion forward).

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, Gravitron.7982 said:

And yet, I still disagree....so not compelling enough for me. 

What do you disagree with and why?

[Gravitron.7982]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

What do you disagree with and why?

I disagree with the premise that Anet isn't capable of adding player housing to their game in 2023, therefore they don't. I don't see that as a valid excuse, as a smaller game can clearly add it easily. To me, that's a weak excuse. 

[Sobx.1758]

4 minutes ago, Gravitron.7982 said:

I disagree with the premise that Anet isn't capable of adding player housing to their game in 2023, therefore they don't. I don't see that as a valid excuse, as a smaller game can clearly add it easily. To me, that's a weak excuse. 

"Anet isn't capable of adding player housing to their game in 2023" was not really what was said against this idea. It's something you've used to substitute actual argumentation against it in order to avoid addressing what people in this thread wrote. In other words: bad strawman and still nothing more than a refusal to address anything anyone said.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[Obtena.7952]

I'm at the point where I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of housing is being considered but ONLY because Anet can heavily monetize it. If I was to start seeing rewards from content for house garbage instead of character-based gear and mats ... the game will become a hard pass for me. 

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Obtena.7952

[Gravitron.7982]

5 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

I'm at the point where I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of housing is being considered but ONLY because Anet can heavily monetize it. If I was to start seeing rewards from content for house garbage instead of character-based gear and mats ... the game will become a hard pass for me. 

 

Yeah I wouldn't be surprised either, especially since a lot of other MMORPG's have player housing.

[Ashen.2907]

2 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

I'm at the point where I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of housing is being considered but ONLY because Anet can heavily monetize it. If I was to start seeing rewards from content for house garbage instead of character-based gear and mats ... the game will become a hard pass for me. 

 

This. 

I am not opposed to the idea of player housing but if it is forced into my play, like having to fish in order to complete an elite spec's weapon collection...

[Farohna.6247]

3 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

I'm at the point where I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of housing is being considered but ONLY because Anet can heavily monetize it. If I was to start seeing rewards from content for house garbage instead of character-based gear and mats ... the game will become a hard pass for me. 

 

Think of the gem store possibilities to decorate your doll house.....oh my