TheNuminous1 wrote: »Hmmm I've never considered that when we buy crown houses we should ALWAYS have 700 slots active. Just cause they cost so much. I've spent well over 1000$ on houses. But your right if I ever stop paying I lose access to changing them up or adding to them.
I agree that crown store exclusive houses should have full slots always. Regardless of eso plus or not.
JustLovely wrote: »I didn't start playing ESO for housing. Couldn't car less about it. Personally I think it's a distraction and takes away from the combat and fun of the game. I think ESO would be much better off without the housing system.
JustLovely wrote: »I didn't start playing ESO for housing. Couldn't car less about it. Personally I think it's a distraction and takes away from the combat and fun of the game. I think ESO would be much better off without the housing system.
I get why they added the extra slots to the sub perks, they have to add different perks to anticipate many playstyles, so from their financial PoV it makes sense. I don't think the sub perks are the main issue with housing however, it's the prices themselves: 10k+ crowns for a digital asset, when the whole game costs less, is just ridiculous. They should offer at least some of the houses they release for in-game gold as well, and not just once every few years.
valenwood_vegan wrote: »
I'm genuinely curious how housing "takes away from the combat and fun of the game?" Like... just... don't do it if you don't want to? Why read and respond to a post about housing? There are a ton of sub-forums with combat related posts that you might enjoy more?
BenjaminGasper wrote: »
House prices in crown store are indeed ridiculous... Sure, some people still buy them, but I am certain, so many more would buy them( even at that price tag) if they were not forced to subscribe to eso+ forever to maintain those houses.
Here comes the financial aspect you mensioned Jaimeh. Extra slots as sub perk might seem like a good deal for Devs, but from my own experience, it really isn't, definitely not long term. I have seen too many people from housing community quit the game for good, simply because they didn't want to subscribe to eso+ forever. They would have kept buying houses, furnishing packs, as well as Chapters every year as they did before if they hadn't quit. Now Devs don't get ANY money from those players...Sure, they need some steady income to maintain and update the game, but loosing player base at the same time defeat the purpose.
The thing is people who are usually into housing need the craft bag anyway for all the mats, style stones, etc.. so they would get it for that reason alone. It's totally possible to play without it, I have many alts and just made use of the free plus trials for some time, but although it's not mandatory, I think most housing enthusiasts would just have it for the craft bag alone. It does suck that you can't change or remove not one piece of item from the house if the sub runs out, they could at least have made it so that you can still change around the existing furnishing, and not be able to add new ones, and if they don't want to make the slots completely free, to at least sell upgrade packs in the store, but something tells me that since they are not changing things they must have metrics that indicate the way its set up is more profitable.
SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »
ZOS has done nothing but reduce their resources dedicated to Cyrodiil since housing was introduced. Housing does, in fact, directly rob resources from other aspects of the game. There are plenty of other games that are dedicated to housing. It has proven to be a huge mistake for ZOS to make it a feature in ESO. Trials and PvP are virtually non existent activities now with so many resources dedicated to housing.
SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »
ZOS has done nothing but reduce their resources dedicated to Cyrodiil since housing was introduced. Housing does, in fact, directly rob resources from other aspects of the game. There are plenty of other games that are dedicated to housing. It has proven to be a huge mistake for ZOS to make it a feature in ESO. Trials and PvP are virtually non existent activities now with so many resources dedicated to housing.
Er, which do you think is more likely to pay the bills that enable any work at all? 70 dollar houses, or zero dollar PVP?
SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »ZOS has done nothing but reduce their resources dedicated to Cyrodiil since housing was introduced. Housing does, in fact, directly rob resources from other aspects of the game. There are plenty of other games that are dedicated to housing. It has proven to be a huge mistake for ZOS to make it a feature in ESO. Trials and PvP are virtually non existent activities now with so many resources dedicated to housing.
Citation needed.
They don't need to post a citation lolz.
It's just a fact that the PvP players that want to stay cutting edge have to buy all the new releases because ZOS, almost always anyway, puts the premier gear in their new releases. Myself, I spent over $3,200 on the game up until U35 when it became obvious ZOS was never going to invest into Cyrodiil PvP anymore and disregard other important feedback, so I finally stopped giving them money and suffering the consequences in terms of competitiveness in PvP.
I get why they added the extra slots to the sub perks, they have to add different perks to anticipate many playstyles, so from their financial PoV it makes sense. I don't think the sub perks are the main issue with housing however, it's the prices themselves: 10k+ crowns for a digital asset, when the whole game costs less, is just ridiculous. They should offer at least some of the houses they release for in-game gold as well, and not just once every few years.
Many major homes can be purchased with in-game gold, albeit unfurnished. They only have a questing achievement needed to be able to buy them. Depending on the size of the zone it will be a large number of quests completed within that zone and you can then purchase a large house in the zone for in game gold.
Such as,
Gardiner House in Wayrest (Stormhaven)
Mistveil Manor in Riften (the Rift)
Proudspire Manor in Solitude (Skyrim)
Emissary's Enclave in the Telvanni Peninsula (Necrom)
Water's Edge in Blackwood
to name a few.
I agree, I think all of the houses should be available for in-game gold at some point but I get why they are not. It's a business, and buying crowns or subbing for houses is part of the carrot on a stick they dangle. I'm glad for the ones we are able to buy at least.
I would be happy to buy furnishing increases in the crown store even. Not all my houses would need it but the biggest and most spread out, yea. If they offered say, a crown store item that increased a specific house by 100 furnishings (subbed or not), I would be all over that. They could put a limit on it, say you could purchase that increase only twice for a certain house.
And that package would not double with Plus. Only the initial limit doubles with Plus, same as now. You'd just get to add on the extras to whatever the game is including for a house.
Example... You don't have ESO Plus and your base large house has 350 slots. You buy 2 packs from crown store that add 100 slots each, so your house now has 550 slots. You get plus and that 350 doubles to 700.. and you have your 2 packs of 100 so your home, with Plus, now has 900 slots.
Personally, I think it would be a money maker for ZoS.
BenjaminGasper wrote: »
I agree, it would be a money maker for ZOS but only IF base number of slots was the same for both eso+ and non eso+ players in my opinion.
I really doubt anyone without eso+ would spend their crowns to increase slots number from 350 to 550 and...still be below eso+ 700 slots...
I like the idea but like I said, if housing was excluded from eso+ perks way more people would be interested in spending their crowns for their homes.
Not everyone can afford eso+ regurarly, and many players are discouraged from housing and game in general (housing ethusiasts) during 'lean months'. Keeping them in game and engaged in housing would be profitable long term with some crown store options for example, such as your idea.
BenjaminGasper wrote: »
That would be a decent compromise INDEED. Making much more sense.
As a Plus member, I'd rather have the housing slots, as it is now.
A furnishing bag would be awesome, but I can control my furnishing inventories.
For my few accounts that only have Plus intermittently that would be ugh.. when they lose craft bag it's easy to keep flowers and such they get in their bank as they stack. But if suddenly I had to go back to storing all furniture I get in the bank bc I can't add it to a furnishing bag any longer... blarg.
A furniture bag that is purchased separately at same cost for everyone - that would be a great thing! But I would not swap my Plus housing slots for it.
Another great thing I'd love? Being able to decon furniture for mats, something else we are lacking. Even if all we could decon is only furniture that is player made.
BenjaminGasper wrote: »
The whole idea behind this discussion is not about punishing eso+ subscribers but making eso+ more 'play style' neutral...
I explained what i mean by that in details in my very first post here.
I am PLUS member myself and been playing for a long time but what I have noticed is that majority of my friends or guild members who chose not to sub, and have been successfully playing like that for months or years are ONLY the ones who have zero or little interest in housing. On the other hand players who like/love housing and don't want to pay for just ONE eso+ perk are dropping out regularly, even people who can afford eso+ and sitting on 50k crowns on their accounts.
That is why i think replacing housing slots perk with quality of life improvements ideas like 'furnishing bag' for example makes much more sense, since literally ALL othe eso+ benefits are nothing else than QoL improvements...
PLUS members would still benefit greatly for their money since for vast majority of them QoL stuff is main factor anyway.