Large houses can only have 12 visitors... seriously?

Wolfchild07

Those houses are instanced, there's no excuse for having low caps. You can fit 50 people easily in those large houses.

altemriel

the cap for such a big house is ridiculously low, the same with the cap for trophies for small house being only 4 trophies


it should be at least doubled!

Laplace

You had one job, Zeni. This was supposed to be the big one, the most anticipated update since Dark Brotherhood, if not ever. The single most requested feature since the game launched. And you totally blew it with these laughably low caps, which don't even come close to justifying the price tags.

You have just ensured that I will not be spending one gold or one crown on housing.

Laplace

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

bellatrixed wrote: »

This is going to hurt their sales.

I doubt it. Most players don't check Reddit or the forums so they won't know these limitations until they buy the houses.

Then I hope for the sake of their sales they reconsider this deceptive (no nice way to put it, really) practice of not telling you the cap until AFTER you buy it.

You thought the crapstorm over the Breton Hero outfit was bad? When players demanded refunds? Just wait until some players drop a couple mill on a large house and only one fourth of their guild can come in.

Zeni, I have been playing this game since beta. I've been a consistent subscriber literally all of that time. I can honestly say that this is the first time I've considered unsubbing. I've been stockpiling crowns for this update specifically.

Please, please reconsider these caps. You are killing this game.

altemriel

Laplace wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

bellatrixed wrote: »

This is going to hurt their sales.

I doubt it. Most players don't check Reddit or the forums so they won't know these limitations until they buy the houses.

Then I hope for the sake of their sales they reconsider this deceptive (no nice way to put it, really) practice of not telling you the cap until AFTER you buy it.

You thought the crapstorm over the Breton Hero outfit was bad? When players demanded refunds? Just wait until some players drop a couple mill on a large house and only one fourth of their guild can come in.

Zeni, I have been playing this game since beta. I've been a consistent subscriber literally all of that time. I can honestly say that this is the first time I've considered unsubbing. I've been stockpiling crowns for this update specifically.

Please, please reconsider these caps. You are killing this game.

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_RichLambert

redspecter23

updegramub17_ESO wrote: »

At this point, i'm just going to "adopt" an empty home and move in and invite my friends over. There are plenty of nice homes w/o npcs in them scattered about and I don't have to worry about a visitor limit and can even interact and loot objects in them.

Just as much functionality of the "real" homes w/ no cost.

This right here is what makes the housing cap extremely sad. You can just go do what you want, where you want and invite as many people as you want without spending millions on a house that can't hold even half as many people as you want.

I totally understand there is some sort of technical limitation to housing that is forcing the cap to be so low but with no storage, limited interaction with objects and a tiny player cap, who are the people this is targeting? Right now, it's a storage space for training dummies, dueling arenas and obstacle courses. Yes, I could dress it up nice for RP reasons but as the poster above states, you can already do that in any area in the world without the crazy low limitation on player capacity.

Rev Rielle

Why there needs to be a limit at all is beyond me. Especially considering the huge numbers of players that were in close proximity to each other at banks/crafting stations just after launch.

I'm sure ZoS have their reasons for restricting players in housing instances, I'd love to know what they are.

Whisper292

Laplace wrote: »

Then I hope for the sake of their sales they reconsider this deceptive (no nice way to put it, really) practice of not telling you the cap until AFTER you buy it.

The player cap is totally ridiculous, but this makes me even angrier. It reeks of "scam."

Elsonso

GreenTea wrote: »

That's twenty five people there. I was already thinking we could split people into two different houses if we needed to fit everyone, but I can't work with twelve. A quarter of that would just be my staff.

Homestead visitor FAIL. There are public spaces in the game right now that can hold more people than what they are allowing with houses. It is alarming how many people they allow in banks, given this revelation that they cannot bump housing populations before launch. I am thinking that they need to limit how many people can be in the Rawl'kha bank, immediately! The banks are not even instanced, so this blatant disregard for capacity could bring down the whole server!

Oh wait...

NewBlacksmurf

I understand it that the houses are literally dungeon and trial instances.

The game engine seems to be setup this way in this mega server approach.

I don't like it but I'm starting to better understand that their engine choices have restrictions on instances and server loads.

I do believe it's not 100% just the server tho. Having played on both PC and Xbox one, there are memory issues as well from our machines.

I've let this roll off my back and created a poll in the general forums with a different focus specifically for guild halls.

Beating the dead horse seems pointless now but there is a lot of great perspectives written here.
Maybe we will see "guild halls" and some player limit increases later but no word on it so far has me only looking to ESO live that usually isn't historically going to announce a change like this without it being in the forums first.

We'll see tho

Elsonso

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Beating the dead horse seems pointless now but there is a lot of great perspectives written here. Maybe we will see "guild halls" and some player limit increases later but no word on it so far has me only looking to ESO live that usually isn't historically going to announce a change like this without it being in the forums first.

The problem really isn't that housing population limits are so low. Honestly.

The problem is that they have had access to pages and pages of discussion about houses over the last couple of years. They should know exactly how people are thinking of using them. They know that people will be wanting to use them for guild halls and larger parties. They decided to scale back their implementation. They are releasing something that doesn't do what a lot of people want, and are trying to social engineer around the problem.

Homestead is synonymous with "missing the target", and not just because of population caps.

It is too late for Homestead, but my hope is that when they do future designs, and decide where to draw that line, that they don't do Homestead again. I think the horse deserves a few more whacks, because I don't think ZOS quite gets it, yet. They really need to get it before they pull another "Homestead" with Vvardenfell.

altemriel

as I understand it, a house instance includes also the yard, not only the house interior, so seriously, 12 people should be the cap for the smallest house, not the large house!!!


small: 12
medium: 24
large: 34
manors: 45 minimum


@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_RichLambert

seriously WTH are these low caps????

altemriel

no storage.....stupidly low caps....so...sadly....housing caps make Homestead an another fail...

Spearblade

ZOS isn't just plucking population caps out of thin air. Sure, they could raise caps, but at what cost? Complete performance loss?

I can definitely understand the frustration here, but give them time. Homestead in itself was clearly a massive undertaking. Many MMOs don't have housing at all, and certainly not with the options that ESO is offering.

ESO has been one giant WIP since the very beginning. For example, One Tamriel is how ESO should've been at launch. They keep working at getting it right- this is just step one. And it's a big step.

Larger population caps, storage space, bankers, merchants, etc...let them work out the kinks in this rollout, and they can focus on what prevented the aforementioned features.

Elsonso

Spearblade wrote: »

ESO has been one giant WIP since the very beginning. For example, One Tamriel is how ESO should've been at launch. They keep working at getting it right- this is just step one. And it's a big step.

Larger population caps, storage space, bankers, merchants, etc...let them work out the kinks in this rollout, and they can focus on what prevented the aforementioned features.

Part of the problem with WIP is that it takes them years to finish the work, with little visible progress while they are doing it. On top of that, when they are all done, it still isn't done.

I get that they feel that MMO's are a work in progress and are never done. They need to be challenged to roll out more complete first efforts, and leave the WIP to be fine tuning, not overhauls.

silvereyes

Matt Firor say:
"It all goes back to being social.

"One Tamriel is about being social, because now you can group with more people. We dropped alliance restrictions. So more people you can group with; more people you can play with.

"Housing is kind of an evolution after that, which is, 'I now own a piece of Tamriel. I want to invite my friends to it. I want it to be the centerpiece of what I do in the game.'"

Matt Firor also say:
"And guilds are going to take advantage of this, because there are some pretty big houses out there, and you can have guild meetings in your house, if you invite them in."


Mr. Firor, I wish you would have shown those clips to your engineering teams when deciding on housing population caps. I don't think they heard you.

willlienellson

altemriel wrote: »

so...sadly....housing caps, item caps, no functionality, insane grind, invisible walls, wayshrine incompatibility, etc make Homestead an another fail...

fixed

MLGProPlayer

Spearblade wrote: »

ZOS isn't just plucking population caps out of thin air. Sure, they could raise caps, but at what cost? Complete performance loss?

I can definitely understand the frustration here, but give them time. Homestead in itself was clearly a massive undertaking. Many MMOs don't have housing at all, and certainly not with the options that ESO is offering.

ESO has been one giant WIP since the very beginning. For example, One Tamriel is how ESO should've been at launch. They keep working at getting it right- this is just step one. And it's a big step.

Larger population caps, storage space, bankers, merchants, etc...let them work out the kinks in this rollout, and they can focus on what prevented the aforementioned features.

There would be no loss in performance from raising the cap for large homes because most of the large homes are the same size or bigger than the manors.

And ZOS needs to get into the habit of releasing finished products. This game was such a huge flop on release precisely because it was an unfinished product. Customers expect to receive finished goods when they pay for something.

silvereyes

The population caps are all either half, equal, or double the cap of a Trials instance (12).

To me, this seems like they are using slightly modified versions of their existing instancing algorithms for Trials to determine how many instances will fit on a server without negatively impacting performance.

The problem is, the way people use Trials instances is nothing like the way they use housing instances. Trials are almost always at or near full population. Housing, by contrast, is almost always nearly empty, with spikes during events/parties. If they bump the population limit up too high, it means they need more servers and the overhead costs become higher, while most of the instances are sitting around empty and getting no value out of the increased limits.

What they *should* have done is build a dynamic instancing system that could move an instance from one server to another with more capacity when population spikes. This would allow them to cram a lot more instances onto each server and reduce overall costs while increasing the population caps. The evidence doesn't seem to indicate they went this route, which is disappointing.

altemriel

willlienellson wrote: »

altemriel wrote: »

so...sadly....housing caps, item caps, no functionality, insane grind, invisible walls, wayshrine incompatibility, etc make Homestead an another fail...

fixed

also small house has a cap on trophies, I think it was only 4 , WTH ???

silvereyes

Perhaps some sort of a way to schedule an event with greater population is in order. Maybe a 12-24 hour housing population increase token or something of the sort. It would have to be significant enough of a cost so not everyone runs them constantly, but still cheap enough for small to mid-sized guilds to afford at least once a week. Maybe around 5k-10k gold or 700-1400 crowns (~$5-10).

What would be even cooler would be if they were stackable. Like if you want a 60 member event in a large house, buy 2x 24 player population increases. If you wanted to have a giant cross-guild party with 500 people on your private island, buy 20x of them.

Elephant42

It's just more of the same pattern that has been developing at an accelerating rate since the crown store was implemented.

Put desirable stuff behind a _huge_ grindwall and then offer the same stuff in the crown store.

:sad:

MornaBaine

MissBizz wrote: »

This sucks.

That manors aren't even nearly as cool

I am also very underwhelmed by the 3Million+ mega mansions. Most of the Large houses are much nicer and have comparable space for less than half the cost. Many of us were planning to buy more than one of them, probably with crowns. But with a cap of TWELVE we won't bother now and that will also not force us to buy the insanely priced manors just to get to that 24 cap which is still too low. The whole thing is just unacceptable.

altemriel

MornaBaine wrote: »

MissBizz wrote: »

This sucks.

That manors aren't even nearly as cool

I am also very underwhelmed by the 3Million+ mega mansions. Most of the Large houses are much nicer and have comparable space for less than half the cost. Many of us were planning to buy more than one of them, probably with crowns. But with a cap of TWELVE we won't bother now and that will also not force us to buy the insanely priced manors just to get to that 24 cap which is still too low. The whole thing is just unacceptable.

this a manor that could easily fit 50 people inside with no problems, with a 24 people cap, that is just non-sense

Zariah

Please pleaaaseee increase it. Aswell as the furniture cap aswell >< It's ridiculous.

altemriel

Zariah wrote: »

Please pleaaaseee increase it. Aswell as the furniture cap aswell >< It's ridiculous.

aswell as the trophies caps!!

Titansteele

Time to play devils advocate a little here.

It has been made clear the current limits are to ensure performance. Where I agree they are too low as I see it ZOS are faced with 2 options.

1. Release Homestead as planned with the caps and allow people to enjoy the features as they are at the moment and address the performance issues using live data as the reference.
2. Delay Homestead until the performance issues are addressed.

So if they go for the first option at least some people are happy \o/ and in theory at least any performance fixes they put in after using live data to carry out the analysis should be more robust.
If they go for option 2 everyone has to wait, more people are impacted.

I get it, the RP community feel let down but look at it this way. Early Feb you can buy your gaff and by the time you have decorated it the way you want it then perhaps the caps will have increased ..... yay!

Zypheran

I was very much looking forward to player housing. This was my favourite immersion feature of previous TES games but based on what I'm seeing in PTS, ZOS have taken a relatively straight forward concept and bashed it to death with limitations.
- It will take ages and cost a fortune to craft your own furniture.... this is because they want you to use CS!
- there is no storage
- merchants and bankers have limited functionality
- buggy lighting
- cripplingly low limits on guests
- impinging caps on item placement

And for all these limitations I have no doubt that the costs will be scarily high... I fully expect CS items in excess of 10K crowns!! I think ZOS has missed major opportunity with Homestead to make it far better. I just never understand, ZOS is told by the customer what they want and as always ZOS say 'No, we're gonna give you something else'

manavortex

Hey @SadieJoan,
other from everything being FUBAR now, I found out this:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/316212/housing-lamp-variety#latest

FleetwoodSmack

Titansteele wrote: »

Time to play devils advocate a little here.

It has been made clear the current limits are to ensure performance. Where I agree they are too low as I see it ZOS are faced with 2 options.

1. Release Homestead as planned with the caps and allow people to enjoy the features as they are at the moment and address the performance issues using live data as the reference.
2. Delay Homestead until the performance issues are addressed.

So if they go for the first option at least some people are happy \o/ and in theory at least any performance fixes they put in after using live data to carry out the analysis should be more robust.
If they go for option 2 everyone has to wait, more people are impacted.

I get it, the RP community feel let down but look at it this way. Early Feb you can buy your gaff and by the time you have decorated it the way you want it then perhaps the caps will have increased ..... yay!

And honestly, for me at least, I don't see the need of having everyone pile into one house. Have officers hold various homes and set them up as different themed places of interest/RP until they're fixed. Gina already stated that they're looking for ways to up the cap, soooo.. I'm still getting my houses.