Share house ownership?

Surgee

Homestead just dropped on the consoles and I'm having tons of fun with it.
The only issue that I have is that I can't make my wife an owner as well. She's only a decorator. She can't even add her mount into our house. Inability to share an ownership is just utter crap and creates a lot of issues. What's the reasoning behind this awful decision @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_JasonI ?
Maybe connect it to ring of mara in some way (as it's completely useless as well..)?

EDIT:
As it seems that a lot of people aren't reading the suggestions below here is a possible solution:

THE OWNER:
There is only one owner.
The owner can make another player as co-owner (just like now it's possible to set a visitor or a decorator).
The owner can place, move or remove items belonging to anyone. If the owner removes an item that is bound to another player, a confirmation message will appear explaining that the item will be sent to this person mailbox.
The owner can demote a co-owner. Upon demoting, a confirmation message will appear explaining that all the furniture bound to the co-owner will be removed and sent to co-owners inbox.

CO-OWNER:
Co-owner can place new items, remove items placed by himself, or move items placed by others(but can't remove them, just like a decorator in the current build)
Co-owner can't promote other players.

Bound items stay bound. No one loses anything. No one gets hurt. No in-game divorce court needed (duh!)

Glaiceana

I agree it should really be a part of the Ring of Mara. Mine and my boyfriends rings are just sitting in the bank or our inventories. Completely useless at this point. It would be a perfect opportunity to utilise them again.

Volrion

Agree. I made a thread about this yesterday. Hopefully they take a look at this!

BlackSparrow

SourishWhale wrote: »

Agree. I made a thread about this yesterday. Hopefully they take a look at this!

Sorry to tell you, but people have been telling them this since Homestead hit the PTS in January. They already know this is something a lot of players want. Whether they implement it is entirely up to them at this point.

Surgee

BlackSparrow wrote: »

SourishWhale wrote: »

Agree. I made a thread about this yesterday. Hopefully they take a look at this!

Sorry to tell you, but people have been telling them this since Homestead hit the PTS in January. They already know this is something a lot of players want. Whether they implement it is entirely up to them at this point.

Ouch. I can already see ZOS adding a co-ownership application form for 1000 crowns.

Duiwel

Surgee wrote: »

Ouch. I can already see ZOS adding a co-ownership application form for 1000 crowns.

What I mean by that is 1000 seems a bit low compared to what these popular requests usually go for ( not that I don't agree 1k seems reasonable)

NewBlacksmurf

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

idk

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Surgee

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Na. That's very simple to solve. I don't mean TOTAL shared control. Just ranks like in guild with permissions. There is still ONE owner, but this owner can give permissions such as inviting other visitors and placing and removing items to another player. The person who bought the house still has the real control, just like the guild master.

koralr33fer

Yeah surgee offers a great solution One owner but shared control. The person that buys is listed as the owner and can share ownership with a pledged player. If the pledge is broken the house would stay in the initial owners property. Easy. This would add benefits to pledges and increase its sales. Also the co-owner is likely to also spend crowns decorating the homes..even more sales. This would benefit both Bethseda and the players.

Feel like the inital update news was misleading at this point saying take your pledge to the next level and move in together when really you are not sharing the home at all. Just an owner and a visitor like any other player. Me and my girlfriend are pledged and shes really frustrated about how she cannot buy or place items in the home. And knowing how she loves to decorate I know she would spend lots of $$ to decorate if she had the option too...

And even if you had to buy the co-ownership in the crown store it would sell like hot cakes..1000 crowns? It wouldnt even be a hard decision I woud have bought that days ago plus I would have to buy one for each house...which I would all day.

By not doing this you are losing pledge sales, housing item sales, and possibly co-owner form sales... it's an easy decision to make.

Beardimus

Hang on, sorry i'm behind on Homestead, so can a decorator not place items?

We're setting up a Mead hall - and all were going to gather / craft the different pieces can we not do that? Do we have to send the item to the owner first? i'm confused!

Def agree on your Ring of Mara suggestion for sure!

koralr33fer

No currently only the owner (person that purchases the property) can place items and vistor set to decorator can move the items you place. The decorator cannot place any items at all, which means they cant place mounts or pets, or place any bound furnishings. Very disappointing to be honest.

Elloa

Totally agree with this post. Love the suggestion to add Home Ownership to the Ring of Mara. I'd not mind if it was a different ring either, in case it's easier from a dev point of view. Like "The Double Blessed Ring of Mara"

Uriel_Nocturne

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Na. That's very simple to solve. I don't mean TOTAL shared control. Just ranks like in guild with permissions. There is still ONE owner, but this owner can give permissions such as inviting other visitors and placing and removing items to another player. The person who bought the house still has the real control, just like the guild master.

Agreed, and this is the same suggestion and comaprison I've made myself in various other threads.

The mechanics to make it work are already in the game with the Guild structure. It could easily be modified to work for House co-ownership.

bellatrixed

I 100% want this and I love the idea of it being tied to Ring of Maras.

Also, to prevent it from being abused, the way I've seen other games handle it is this: only the owner can pick up items dropped in the house, but additional decorators are freely able to drop things. This means nobody can steal anything from the owner's house.

Honestly, not being able to drop items makes it largely impractical for one person to decorate for another--it's so tedious to have someone drop every single item and be present the entire time. I love decorating for others and the current system is a huge hindrance.

Surgee

koralr33fer wrote: »

... Also the co-owner is likely to also spend crowns decorating the homes..even more sales. This would benefit both Bethseda and the players.
....

This. My friends lost interest in spending crowns on decorations when they've learned they can't really share any house. Same with my wife.

idk

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Na. That's very simple to solve. I don't mean TOTAL shared control. Just ranks like in guild with permissions. There is still ONE owner, but this owner can give permissions such as inviting other visitors and placing and removing items to another player. The person who bought the house still has the real control, just like the guild master.

Your title and OP are specifically about sharing ownership including saying your spouse is a clan owner of the home as well though she is not by game design.

And decos added become bound to you. Any decos removed are added to your inventory, not theirs. I can imagine someone out raiding with empty inventory, cannot loot boss because the spouse is redecorating and filled up the owners inventory.

More important, to place something the owner already has requires peering into part of someone else's inventory. May seem silly but there are probably privacy concerns Zos would have to consider.

Danikat

I like this idea but I have some concerns about how it would work in practice.

Taking this example, since it's the most detailed description in this topic:

koralr33fer wrote: »

Yeah surgee offers a great solution One owner but shared control. The person that buys is listed as the owner and can share ownership with a pledged player. If the pledge is broken the house would stay in the initial owners property. Easy. This would add benefits to pledges and increase its sales. Also the co-owner is likely to also spend crowns decorating the homes..even more sales. This would benefit both Bethseda and the players.

Feel like the inital update news was misleading at this point saying take your pledge to the next level and move in together when really you are not sharing the home at all. Just an owner and a visitor like any other player. Me and my girlfriend are pledged and shes really frustrated about how she cannot buy or place items in the home. And knowing how she loves to decorate I know she would spend lots of $$ to decorate if she had the option too...

And even if you had to buy the co-ownership in the crown store it would sell like hot cakes..1000 crowns? It wouldnt even be a hard decision I woud have bought that days ago plus I would have to buy one for each house...which I would all day.

By not doing this you are losing pledge sales, housing item sales, and possibly co-owner form sales... it's an easy decision to make.

1) What about ESO Plus? Does the house only get the double item limit if the owner has ESO Plus and it doesn't matter whether the co-owner does or not? Do they both have to have it?

2) You've covered what happens to the house if the pledge is broken, but what about items in the house? If the co-owner has placed furniture in the house are they able to get it back? What if the owner broke the pledge and changed the ownership/access permissions for the house before the co-owner knew anything about it?

2b) If the co-owner loses ownership of any items they place in the house how would this be communicated to them? Would they only be warned when the went to place it or would there be a warning visible when purchasing crown store furnishings? It'd be pretty annoying to pay for something and then be told if you place it you'll lose ownership of it, if you decide you're not willing to do that you're then stuck with a useless piece of furniture which you already paid for.

3) Should players be able to appeal to Customer Support if they aren't happy with the 'default' resolution to 2? I can absolutely guarantee there will, at some point, be a situation where two people buy a house together, decorate it together and then have a real life falling out and want to get back absolutely everything that's "theirs". They would not be happy at all to find out that whichever of them is considered the owner gets everything and they lose all the items, gold etc. they put into the house and would expect ZOS to offer a way to get it back. Is the answer going to just be 'lol no, you made that decision when you became a co-owner' or would Support attempt to work out who owns what?

koralr33fer

In response about Danikat's questions about co-owners goods being lost if the owner sells or loses property.

1) Possibly the items a co-owner places in a house are present in the house but still bound to the co-owner. If suddenly the owner sells the house the items could be returned to the co-owner as they were purchased by them. As if they picked up everything that had placed before the owner sold.

2) If your allowing a person to co-own there has to be some sort of trust between you and this other player as you are allowing them to modify your home. Maybe put the responsibility on the players to relieve Bethseda of this issue. Maybe a simple disclaimer like you said."You are about to place your items in another player's home. Items placed here can be lost if the owner sells or destroys the property" That way bethseda can avoid the QQ if this issue arises.

As far as number of items in the home...good question. I personally dont have ESO plus. But maybe an option could be if only one person has ESO that person can only place a larger number of items and the other is limited to how much they can place. Say 100 items max..ESO member can place 60 and the other 40... idk there are a lot of options here. But at least they would both be able to place some items together

NewBlacksmurf

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Na. That's very simple to solve. I don't mean TOTAL shared control. Just ranks like in guild with permissions. There is still ONE owner, but this owner can give permissions such as inviting other visitors and placing and removing items to another player. The person who bought the house still has the real control, just like the guild master.

@Surgee

No it's actually not simple to solve. See this game is also on consoles so those account are not ZOS, they are Sony and Xbox accounts as our purchases are through Sony and Xbox....not ZOS and in the game our accounts are our gamertag and PSN ids

They'd have to rework the entire account system on consoles just to allow something in houses that doesn't add any value to gameplay at all


It's not character based it's account based so ranks are still tied to the account not a character. Everything is account based like the bank, guilds, so while ZOS has individual character achievements.

The account still shares progress

Surgee

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Na. That's very simple to solve. I don't mean TOTAL shared control. Just ranks like in guild with permissions. There is still ONE owner, but this owner can give permissions such as inviting other visitors and placing and removing items to another player. The person who bought the house still has the real control, just like the guild master.

Your title and OP are specifically about sharing ownership including saying your spouse is a clan owner of the home as well though she is not by game design.

And decos added become bound to you. Any decos removed are added to your inventory, not theirs. I can imagine someone out raiding with empty inventory, cannot loot boss because the spouse is redecorating and filled up the owners inventory.

More important, to place something the owner already has requires peering into part of someone else's inventory. May seem silly but there are probably privacy concerns Zos would have to consider.

You're listing the mechanics as they are in the game right now, and they are designed wrong. Just because an item from crown store (crafted aren't) are bound, doesn't mean it can't be changed. Even if it has to stay bound, no problem! Items also can have an owner easily just as dungeon items can be traded with players from your group (names of players are listed on the item). There are so many solutions to this.

Let's say crown store decors have to be bound. Here is how it could work:
Owner can set another player as co-owner.
Co-owner can place new items, remove items HE placed himself, or move items placed by others (but can't remove them)
Owner can place or remove items belonging to anyone
If co-owner is demoted or removed from the house, all his crown store decors are removed automatically and sent to his mailbox.
Item limit is only affected by the owner's eso plus status.

Simple.

EDIT: just read the previous comment. Good stuff @koralr33fer

Surgee

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Na. That's very simple to solve. I don't mean TOTAL shared control. Just ranks like in guild with permissions. There is still ONE owner, but this owner can give permissions such as inviting other visitors and placing and removing items to another player. The person who bought the house still has the real control, just like the guild master.

@Surgee

No it's actually not simple to solve. See this game is also on consoles so those account are not ZOS, they are Sony and Xbox accounts as our purchases are through Sony and Xbox....not ZOS and in the game our accounts are our gamertag and PSN ids

They'd have to rework the entire account system on consoles just to allow something in houses that doesn't add any value to gameplay at all


It's not character based it's account based so ranks are still tied to the account not a character. Everything is account based like the bank, guilds, so while ZOS has individual character achievements.

The account still shares progress

That's not true at all. Changing any BOUND/ACCOUNT wide settings is not hard at all. It's just item parameter that can be edited. Bound = true/false or anytihng simple like that Of course changes like this have to be tested and can affect other parts of the game, but it's nowhere near what you're saying. Devs don't have to change the entire game code to make one item or another ESO account bound. It has been done with several items before and crown store items are no different. They just keep it bound to prevent people making money out off crown store items.
Even with items being bound, there are simple solutions without changing it. Just read above.

koralr33fer

So why couldn't you share with an Xbox account? Purchased items are still bound to the Xbox or ps account just share ownership of the house. Like I said if pledge was broken house stays with owner of house and goods bound to Xbox or ps account would be returned to Co owner or a disclaimer to Co owner that they could lose items if Co owner status is lost, however zos prefers to do it. You cannot pickup items bound to other character so no crown stealing. I feel like this is very do able without to much work, and the sales that they would get would more then compensive them for it. Pledge sales, Co owner forms, furniture sales...the possibilities are endless

Jurand80

yes OP yes PLEASE!

NewBlacksmurf

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Na. That's very simple to solve. I don't mean TOTAL shared control. Just ranks like in guild with permissions. There is still ONE owner, but this owner can give permissions such as inviting other visitors and placing and removing items to another player. The person who bought the house still has the real control, just like the guild master.

@Surgee

No it's actually not simple to solve. See this game is also on consoles so those account are not ZOS, they are Sony and Xbox accounts as our purchases are through Sony and Xbox....not ZOS and in the game our accounts are our gamertag and PSN ids

They'd have to rework the entire account system on consoles just to allow something in houses that doesn't add any value to gameplay at all


It's not character based it's account based so ranks are still tied to the account not a character. Everything is account based like the bank, guilds, so while ZOS has individual character achievements.

The account still shares progress

That's not true at all. Changing any BOUND/ACCOUNT wide settings is not hard at all. It's just item parameter that can be edited. Bound = true/false or anytihng simple like that Of course changes like this have to be tested and can affect other parts of the game, but it's nowhere near what you're saying. Devs don't have to change the entire game code to make one item or another ESO account bound. It has been done with several items before and crown store items are no different. They just keep it bound to prevent people making money out off crown store items.
Even with items being bound, there are simple solutions without changing it. Just read above.

@Surgee

ZOS doesn't have access to change it. That's the context I hoped to share.

ESO Plus is through Xbox and Sony

The benefits are from ZOS so it's seperate
My crowns are from ZOS
My purchase is to Xbox/Sony and ZOS can't seperate the two

My save file is on the ZOS server but a copy is on the Xbox cloud. I can delete the Xbox one but not the ZOS files.

Xbox doesn't allow accounts to share in the way you describe. There are family settings but it's seperate from the game developers.


ZOS has to develop their game to align with Xbox and Sony.....not the other way around.

Some things are designed intentionally not to share

Artemiisia

an extremely easy way of exploiting the system if we could have more people with ownership for achievements

unless they do it like the pledge of mara, once you made the commitment, there is no going back

koralr33fer

But co-ownership could be a feature within the game. Not xbox live. Everything is bound to each account so they are in reality not sharing anything. Owner has house bound to them and items purchased are bound to separate accounts. We are just looking to share a space which is completely in zos control. When we say co-owning I don't mean that literally you both own the house, but the other player I've been calling Co owner has similar abilities to modify the home. Everything would be assigned to one person or account just a shared space in elder scrolls. And my previous post addresses possible issues as far as separating accounts when "divorce" occurs. The Co owner just has ability to travel to home and place items even though they don't literally own the house or others person's purchased goods inside.

koralr33fer

Artemiisia wrote: »

an extremely easy way of exploiting the system if we could have more people with ownership for achievements

unless they do it like the pledge of mara, once you made the commitment, there is no going back

We were hoping this "Co owner" status would be done with the pledge of mara. You would need to be pledged with the co Owner to share the home. But with Xbox live sharing issue I understand. But we are not looking to literally share ownership. But give permission to one pledged character the ability to place items and transport to the home. The home is still owned by one account although it would be listed to the Co owner as an owned home as they have permission to be there from the owner and could use it as if they did own it.

Surgee

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Na. That's very simple to solve. I don't mean TOTAL shared control. Just ranks like in guild with permissions. There is still ONE owner, but this owner can give permissions such as inviting other visitors and placing and removing items to another player. The person who bought the house still has the real control, just like the guild master.

@Surgee

No it's actually not simple to solve. See this game is also on consoles so those account are not ZOS, they are Sony and Xbox accounts as our purchases are through Sony and Xbox....not ZOS and in the game our accounts are our gamertag and PSN ids

They'd have to rework the entire account system on consoles just to allow something in houses that doesn't add any value to gameplay at all


It's not character based it's account based so ranks are still tied to the account not a character. Everything is account based like the bank, guilds, so while ZOS has individual character achievements.

The account still shares progress

That's not true at all. Changing any BOUND/ACCOUNT wide settings is not hard at all. It's just item parameter that can be edited. Bound = true/false or anytihng simple like that Of course changes like this have to be tested and can affect other parts of the game, but it's nowhere near what you're saying. Devs don't have to change the entire game code to make one item or another ESO account bound. It has been done with several items before and crown store items are no different. They just keep it bound to prevent people making money out off crown store items.
Even with items being bound, there are simple solutions without changing it. Just read above.

@Surgee

ZOS doesn't have access to change it. That's the context I hoped to share.

ESO Plus is through Xbox and Sony

The benefits are from ZOS so it's seperate
My crowns are from ZOS
My purchase is to Xbox/Sony and ZOS can't seperate the two

My save file is on the ZOS server but a copy is on the Xbox cloud. I can delete the Xbox one but not the ZOS files.

Xbox doesn't allow accounts to share in the way you describe. There are family settings but it's seperate from the game developers.


ZOS has to develop their game to align with Xbox and Sony.....not the other way around.

Some things are designed intentionally not to share

I think you are talking about something completely different. Again, this has nothing to do with the xbox live. Its how the game is set ot be and nothing else. If ZOS would want it they could unbind all crown store items. You dont buy stuff from MICROSOFT when you buy eso stuff. You buy crowns from ZOS. Purchases in eso do not work like in other games. With that being said i think you did not read our solution to make it work without changing any crown store/binding settings. Your bound items would still be yours and no one can take them from you by placing it in his inventory. Read my comment abive carefuly.

koralr33fer

My posts #10 and #19 addresses many of the sharing issues he's concerned about. Nothing is shared just different permission allowed within the game. It would be called Co owner although everything is bound to one account.

DeadlyPhoenix

Surgee wrote: »

NewBlacksmurf wrote: »

The reason is that houses, mounts, gear, items, crowns and ESO Plus is tied to the account

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

@Surgee

Let's say a couple go separate ways. Zos shouldn't have to deal with it and
So you cannot share equally in game.

Besides, everything is either account or character based. None is dual account based.

Na. That's very simple to solve. I don't mean TOTAL shared control. Just ranks like in guild with permissions. There is still ONE owner, but this owner can give permissions such as inviting other visitors and placing and removing items to another player. The person who bought the house still has the real control, just like the guild master.

I suggested this exact thing months ago when it was first announced... Just like giving people access to guild bank is an at your own risk type deal, same would be for housing... you place anything any there and you aren't the "true" owner then you are at risk of said true owner banning you and keeping all your stuff.

Same could be said for people stealing from the house, completely looting it dry. It's the at the owners discretion who has access to what, be it very limited or total control.

My wife and I play, yet we are basically forced to build separate houses simply because it's too much hassle not being able to properly place and remove items.

They need to address this issue for the community as well as a handful of other quality of life improvements that the community has been asking for for... well years

*edit*
Also as a side note, account bound trophies and mounts, etc., are not a reason for not having this. They are already bound, so trying to remove the item that is placed will be blocked if you aren't the owner. So basically you can't place a banker and have your friend pick it up giving him and you the banker. Just like how you cant trade bound gear.

Two other older threads on this topic. Some good ideas in there as well if anyone is interested.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/3582532/#Comment_3582532

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/3589012/#Comment_3589012