Good pointCreamedPieYum wrote: »Umm..What exactly is your question? Are you talking about "married" players in game owning the same house? In that case, just move in with whichever spouse has the house first
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »People don't seem to understand this....
The other side is I'm not sure people understand the game as in how it works
The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
Not sure what more people are tryin to ask for.
...this can of worms.But who gets the furniture in the divorce?
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »People don't seem to understand this....
The other side is I'm not sure people understand the game as in how it works
The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
Not sure what more people are tryin to ask for.
Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »
Additionally, what if two actually share a house, then decide to part ways in a less than amicable manner? See the issue there since both have equal permissions that neither can revoke, and this would be the biggest reason to now have house sharing.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »People don't seem to understand this....
The other side is I'm not sure people understand the game as in how it works
The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
Not sure what more people are tryin to ask for.
@NewBlacksmurf Can your wife place her pets, mounts, etc. in the house? Nope. So that's what is being asked. A house for two, not a house where your wife has a "friend" status to only move furniture around.
If she wants to display her pets, mounts, etc. she MUST buy another house. Why? If you are husband and wife, even in the game.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »People don't seem to understand this....
The other side is I'm not sure people understand the game as in how it works
The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
Not sure what more people are tryin to ask for.
@NewBlacksmurf Can your wife place her pets, mounts, etc. in the house? Nope. So that's what is being asked. A house for two, not a house where your wife has a "friend" status to only move furniture around.
If she wants to display her pets, mounts, etc. she MUST buy another house. Why? If you are husband and wife, even in the game.
@CarbonX
You can't share mounts, pets, or any ownership of items now. This whole request is rediculous in context to what this game has always presented in the specific manner which it works.
This isn't even viable for the customer let alone ZOS. Basically you're asking for one person's efforts and work to be open to anyone else. So people's real money and benefits should be open to others cause of real life relationships....no!!!
That's like expecting to have the same allowances at your spouses job without being employed.
I understand completely what you're asking for but it's against the terms of agreement for managing an account. It's pretty clear so while in people's minds we all come up with desires, in this case none of those ideas align with the rules set forth and changing the rules opens the game up to exploits and security issues.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »People don't seem to understand this....
The other side is I'm not sure people understand the game as in how it works
The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
Not sure what more people are tryin to ask for.
@NewBlacksmurf Can your wife place her pets, mounts, etc. in the house? Nope. So that's what is being asked. A house for two, not a house where your wife has a "friend" status to only move furniture around.
If she wants to display her pets, mounts, etc. she MUST buy another house. Why? If you are husband and wife, even in the game.
@CarbonX
You can't share mounts, pets, or any ownership of items now. This whole request is rediculous in context to what this game has always presented in the specific manner which it works.
This isn't even viable for the customer let alone ZOS. Basically you're asking for one person's efforts and work to be open to anyone else. So people's real money and benefits should be open to others cause of real life relationships....no!!!
That's like expecting to have the same allowances at your spouses job without being employed.
I understand completely what you're asking for but it's against the terms of agreement for managing an account. It's pretty clear so while in people's minds we all come up with desires, in this case none of those ideas align with the rules set forth and changing the rules opens the game up to exploits and security issues.
I didn't say "share", I said "place" and "display".
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »People don't seem to understand this....
The other side is I'm not sure people understand the game as in how it works
The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
Not sure what more people are tryin to ask for.
@NewBlacksmurf Can your wife place her pets, mounts, etc. in the house? Nope. So that's what is being asked. A house for two, not a house where your wife has a "friend" status to only move furniture around.
If she wants to display her pets, mounts, etc. she MUST buy another house. Why? If you are husband and wife, even in the game.
@CarbonX
You can't share mounts, pets, or any ownership of items now. This whole request is rediculous in context to what this game has always presented in the specific manner which it works.
This isn't even viable for the customer let alone ZOS. Basically you're asking for one person's efforts and work to be open to anyone else. So people's real money and benefits should be open to others cause of real life relationships....no!!!
That's like expecting to have the same allowances at your spouses job without being employed.
I understand completely what you're asking for but it's against the terms of agreement for managing an account. It's pretty clear so while in people's minds we all come up with desires, in this case none of those ideas align with the rules set forth and changing the rules opens the game up to exploits and security issues.
I didn't say "share", I said "place" and "display".
You did use the word "place" but your discussion is asking to "share" because the design of the game is set by account ownership and account permissions.
The items you're discussing belong to the account holder and are either purchased in real money in most cases or in some earned through quest progression or in game gold.
A real life relationship or not ....what You desire requires "account sharing".
Housing is accessed by the account holders housing decisions. Two different account holders wouldn't be able to own a house simultaneously.
They did offer decorations permissions which is plenty. Other items bound to accounts aren't logical because they cannot be "shared" so why create confusion in housing by doing this.
Similar to buying a house in real life.
Two people can qualify to own a home together but 100% of the time two different people have different ideas about how the home should be changed and such.
Some relationships handle things better than others but why in the world would you desire for a game to place that type of situation on two people.
Let's look at the ring of Mara and how awesome (sarcasm) that worked out.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »People don't seem to understand this....
The other side is I'm not sure people understand the game as in how it works
The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
Not sure what more people are tryin to ask for.
@NewBlacksmurf Can your wife place her pets, mounts, etc. in the house? Nope. So that's what is being asked. A house for two, not a house where your wife has a "friend" status to only move furniture around.
If she wants to display her pets, mounts, etc. she MUST buy another house. Why? If you are husband and wife, even in the game.
@CarbonX
You can't share mounts, pets, or any ownership of items now. This whole request is rediculous in context to what this game has always presented in the specific manner which it works.
This isn't even viable for the customer let alone ZOS. Basically you're asking for one person's efforts and work to be open to anyone else. So people's real money and benefits should be open to others cause of real life relationships....no!!!
That's like expecting to have the same allowances at your spouses job without being employed.
I understand completely what you're asking for but it's against the terms of agreement for managing an account. It's pretty clear so while in people's minds we all come up with desires, in this case none of those ideas align with the rules set forth and changing the rules opens the game up to exploits and security issues.
I didn't say "share", I said "place" and "display".
You did use the word "place" but your discussion is asking to "share" because the design of the game is set by account ownership and account permissions.
The items you're discussing belong to the account holder and are either purchased in real money in most cases or in some earned through quest progression or in game gold.
A real life relationship or not ....what You desire requires "account sharing".
Housing is accessed by the account holders housing decisions. Two different account holders wouldn't be able to own a house simultaneously.
They did offer decorations permissions which is plenty. Other items bound to accounts aren't logical because they cannot be "shared" so why create confusion in housing by doing this.
Similar to buying a house in real life.
Two people can qualify to own a home together but 100% of the time two different people have different ideas about how the home should be changed and such.
Some relationships handle things better than others but why in the world would you desire for a game to place that type of situation on two people.
Let's look at the ring of Mara and how awesome (sarcasm) that worked out.
Clearly you haven't played other games where housing privileges are FULLY shared between two players (and more) and they work perfectly, even with all this ridiculous "obstacles" some people are trying to find here.
Always there is someone trying to say that it's not possible when other games have been using housing system for years now, account shared, with full privileges for multiple members, with no issues at all. Still, people here say it's not possible. Big LOL!!!
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »People don't seem to understand this....
The other side is I'm not sure people understand the game as in how it works
The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
Not sure what more people are tryin to ask for.
@NewBlacksmurf Can your wife place her pets, mounts, etc. in the house? Nope. So that's what is being asked. A house for two, not a house where your wife has a "friend" status to only move furniture around.
If she wants to display her pets, mounts, etc. she MUST buy another house. Why? If you are husband and wife, even in the game.
@CarbonX
You can't share mounts, pets, or any ownership of items now. This whole request is rediculous in context to what this game has always presented in the specific manner which it works.
This isn't even viable for the customer let alone ZOS. Basically you're asking for one person's efforts and work to be open to anyone else. So people's real money and benefits should be open to others cause of real life relationships....no!!!
That's like expecting to have the same allowances at your spouses job without being employed.
I understand completely what you're asking for but it's against the terms of agreement for managing an account. It's pretty clear so while in people's minds we all come up with desires, in this case none of those ideas align with the rules set forth and changing the rules opens the game up to exploits and security issues.
I didn't say "share", I said "place" and "display".
You did use the word "place" but your discussion is asking to "share" because the design of the game is set by account ownership and account permissions.
The items you're discussing belong to the account holder and are either purchased in real money in most cases or in some earned through quest progression or in game gold.
A real life relationship or not ....what You desire requires "account sharing".
Housing is accessed by the account holders housing decisions. Two different account holders wouldn't be able to own a house simultaneously.
They did offer decorations permissions which is plenty. Other items bound to accounts aren't logical because they cannot be "shared" so why create confusion in housing by doing this.
Similar to buying a house in real life.
Two people can qualify to own a home together but 100% of the time two different people have different ideas about how the home should be changed and such.
Some relationships handle things better than others but why in the world would you desire for a game to place that type of situation on two people.
Let's look at the ring of Mara and how awesome (sarcasm) that worked out.
Clearly you haven't played other games where housing privileges are FULLY shared between two players (and more) and they work perfectly, even with all this ridiculous "obstacles" some people are trying to find here.
Always there is someone trying to say that it's not possible when other games have been using housing system for years now, account shared, with full privileges for multiple members, with no issues at all. Still, people here say it's not possible. Big LOL!!!
I've problably played just as many as you if you've been gaming online since the early 1990's
But what other games do or have done doesn't matter. This game is first and foremost on PC and consoles so the content designs this company makes intends to align to be as similar if not identical on all platforms. They have a cash shop so that will drive design decisions specifically for account based logic.
You can't share real money on all three platforms and this game since closed beta was designed with all three platforms in mind.
I'm focusing on account permissions because that is exactly what this boils down to.
NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »NewBlacksmurf wrote: »People don't seem to understand this....
The other side is I'm not sure people understand the game as in how it works
The article does specifically allow anyone to set who can visit or who can decorate so technically speaking two people can exclusively share a house
Not sure what more people are tryin to ask for.
@NewBlacksmurf Can your wife place her pets, mounts, etc. in the house? Nope. So that's what is being asked. A house for two, not a house where your wife has a "friend" status to only move furniture around.
If she wants to display her pets, mounts, etc. she MUST buy another house. Why? If you are husband and wife, even in the game.
@CarbonX
You can't share mounts, pets, or any ownership of items now. This whole request is rediculous in context to what this game has always presented in the specific manner which it works.
This isn't even viable for the customer let alone ZOS. Basically you're asking for one person's efforts and work to be open to anyone else. So people's real money and benefits should be open to others cause of real life relationships....no!!!
That's like expecting to have the same allowances at your spouses job without being employed.
I understand completely what you're asking for but it's against the terms of agreement for managing an account. It's pretty clear so while in people's minds we all come up with desires, in this case none of those ideas align with the rules set forth and changing the rules opens the game up to exploits and security issues.
I didn't say "share", I said "place" and "display".
You did use the word "place" but your discussion is asking to "share" because the design of the game is set by account ownership and account permissions.
The items you're discussing belong to the account holder and are either purchased in real money in most cases or in some earned through quest progression or in game gold.
A real life relationship or not ....what You desire requires "account sharing".
Housing is accessed by the account holders housing decisions. Two different account holders wouldn't be able to own a house simultaneously.
They did offer decorations permissions which is plenty. Other items bound to accounts aren't logical because they cannot be "shared" so why create confusion in housing by doing this.
Similar to buying a house in real life.
Two people can qualify to own a home together but 100% of the time two different people have different ideas about how the home should be changed and such.
Some relationships handle things better than others but why in the world would you desire for a game to place that type of situation on two people.
Let's look at the ring of Mara and how awesome (sarcasm) that worked out.
Clearly you haven't played other games where housing privileges are FULLY shared between two players (and more) and they work perfectly, even with all this ridiculous "obstacles" some people are trying to find here.
Always there is someone trying to say that it's not possible when other games have been using housing system for years now, account shared, with full privileges for multiple members, with no issues at all. Still, people here say it's not possible. Big LOL!!!
I've problably played just as many as you if you've been gaming online since the early 1990's
But what other games do or have done doesn't matter. This game is first and foremost on PC and consoles so the content designs this company makes intends to align to be as similar if not identical on all platforms. They have a cash shop so that will drive design decisions specifically for account based logic.
You can't share real money on all three platforms and this game since closed beta was designed with all three platforms in mind.
I'm focusing on account permissions because that is exactly what this boils down to.
Say whatever you want, put all excuses you want with TESO being first, middle, last, whatever. This can work perfectly.
In gaming world everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, is possible. Everything.
During the last 20 years as a gamer, in forums I've seen a looooot of people assuring something is not possible. I've seen the typical comment: "That will never happen because blah, blah, blah... Days later, weeks later, months later or so, PUM! Implemented by Devs. And so they ate their words...