Stupid idea.
Homes that have a 700 furnishing limit are junk because they offer little to no customisation for the amount of items and size of home. ZOS have yet to link the poor/declining house sales to this prehistoric furnishing limit.
Your solution is to charge customers more to somehow correct a mistake/limitation ZOS have intentionally put in place
Unknown_Redemption wrote: »
Here is my confusion. A sweet roll and separate loaf of bread count as two items. But in the crown store there is a stack of 5 pieces bread and 3 sweet rolls that count as 1 item.
Unknown_Redemption wrote: »Stupid idea.
Homes that have a 700 furnishing limit are junk because they offer little to no customisation for the amount of items and size of home. ZOS have yet to link the poor/declining house sales to this prehistoric furnishing limit.
Your solution is to charge customers more to somehow correct a mistake/limitation ZOS have intentionally put in place
Its not a solution to rectify a mistake. It is a solution to extend a premium housing experience to those who pay more.
Unknown_Redemption wrote: »
Here is my confusion. A sweet roll and separate loaf of bread count as two items. But in the crown store there is a stack of 5 pieces bread and 3 sweet rolls that count as 1 item.
And if you've noticed the author of the post I linked suggests adding more of those "many items in one item" as a possible solution. A table with 4 plates and 4 cups takes 9 slots. But why don't we have an already served table available as a single furniture piece? Asking for more of those items is an actual solution. Asking for more slots is not going to help.
Unknown_Redemption wrote: »Unknown_Redemption wrote: »
Here is my confusion. A sweet roll and separate loaf of bread count as two items. But in the crown store there is a stack of 5 pieces bread and 3 sweet rolls that count as 1 item.
And if you've noticed the author of the post I linked suggests adding more of those "many items in one item" as a possible solution. A table with 4 plates and 4 cups takes 9 slots. But why don't we have an already served table available as a single furniture piece? Asking for more of those items is an actual solution. Asking for more slots is not going to help.
However, if systems allow for my solution, which do you think would be easier to implement?
The only thing that holds me back from spending my RL money on homes is the inablity to furnish them due to item limit. Creativity is confined to a corner of a 700 slot home. I really love this part of the game (REALLY!) but there is this one thing...
@Dangerlucy and I started a homestead guild, that is now always at max capacity with active players, (Divine Design Alliance) and the constant lament, every single day from every single one of us is- THE ITEM LIMIT. I want to build a city! Or a mountian out of quills... A grand castle... etc. Also I would buy three Pariahs if I could have more then one- so I could realize more then one idea in there- I have many but am stuck with the one due to item limits.
Short story:
1. Customer buys 7 of them
2. He places another 700 items inside
3. Now he have 1400 items in his house
4. Customer starts getting serious performance issues when loading to the house
5. Customer asks for refund because the lag and low fps in his house makes it unplayable
6. ZOS refunds and lose $
Simple solutions for most homes - formally divide them into zones. Inside outside is the most obvious. If 700 is some sore of real limit then just make it 700 outside and 700 inside and when you pass through a door load the other area.
On the other side I don't understand the 700 limit. Are there only 700 items in Auridon or Stonefalls? Why are houses different?
Carbonised wrote: »They already are divided.
Enemoriana wrote: »Carbonised wrote: »They already are divided.
Well, not all of them.
Stupid idea.
Homes that have a 700 furnishing limit are junk because they offer little to no customisation for the amount of items and size of home.
bellatrixed wrote: »Stupid idea.
Homes that have a 700 furnishing limit are junk because they offer little to no customisation for the amount of items and size of home.
Not true at all.
The item cap most needs increasing, BUT...
Those who claim it's impossible to work with the current limit and make anything unique are not being truthful. It is possible, very possible, you just have to make sacrifices somewhere. I often wind up blocking off a room or two to make the other rooms filled with detail.
This is NOT ideal, and I desperately want increases. But, it is very possible to heavily customize manors. I just hate seeing people not even try because they think it's impossible. I have four 700/700 manors and none of them look empty in the least.
"Hey, you just payed 100€ for a *** **** virtual home. How about you pay another 50€ to be able to properly decorate it?"
No, housing slots should be vastly increased FOR FREE. And as far as I recall it they stated that this should be coming at some point, when it's possible performance wise. But then again we have been promised performance changes for multiple years and basically nothing changed, so who knows.
"Hey, you just payed 100€ for a g******n virtual home. How about you pay another 50€ to be able to properly decorate it?"
No, housing slots should be vastly increased FOR FREE. And as far as I recall it they stated that this should be coming at some point, when it's possible performance wise. But then again we have been promised performance changes for multiple years and basically nothing changed, so who knows.
I'm pretty sure people who are big into housing are the whales of the whales in this game. It would be really interesting to see stats but I'm sure the Pareto principle applies and 20% of people account for 80% of crown store sales. Taking that a step further, I'm guessing 1% of people account for 30-50% of crown store sales. That's the housing crowd.
We can debate back and forth whether spending hundreds if not thousands of dollars on cosmetics and housing is worth it, but ultimately that varies per individual, everyone has different circumstances.
What cannot be debated is that OP's proposal, even if it further encourages ZOS to be hyper-greedy, would create a lot of value to the people who are playing a vital role in funding this game.
I've personally spent maybe $600-800 on this game, most of that for housing. I would without a doubt buy furnishing slot increases for several of my homes. Honestly, I would pay 2000 crowns to add 100 additional slots. I wouldn't do it for all of my houses, but for certain ones where I really badly want more slots, those 2000 crowns would add significant value to my enjoyment of the rest of the house.
I did not buy Aldmeri Grotto or Princely Dawnlight Palace because they did not have enough slots. If furnishing slot increasest had been an option, I would have bought Princely Dawnlight and dumped money into slot increases, no question about it.
Unknown_Redemption wrote: »The only thing that holds me back from spending my RL money on homes is the inablity to furnish them due to item limit. Creativity is confined to a corner of a 700 slot home. I really love this part of the game (REALLY!) but there is this one thing...
@Dangerlucy and I started a homestead guild, that is now always at max capacity with active players, (Divine Design Alliance) and the constant lament, every single day from every single one of us is- THE ITEM LIMIT. I want to build a city! Or a mountian out of quills... A grand castle... etc. Also I would buy three Pariahs if I could have more then one- so I could realize more then one idea in there- I have many but am stuck with the one due to item limits.
Divine Design Alliance is a great community and one of my favorite things to be part of in ESO. A lot of us spend a lot of RL money to support the ongoing decorating contests and to support the love of making something special within ESO. But we are really limited in the current state. I know ESO would make a significant profit if this suggestion was implemented; enough to pay for additional servers, as required.
100% Agree with everything said. Also, DDA is an amazing guild with very talented and awesome people.
I work mostly on and love "details" and some homes tend to look bare if I try and furnish every room the way I'd like. Thus, some of us end up closing off a portion of a home in order to decorate other areas. What good is a fork furnishing when little details like that sometimes must be omitted from a "scene" in order to furnish an entire home? A fork takes up much less space than a bed, but both use one slot.
Unknown_Redemption wrote: »Stupid idea.
Homes that have a 700 furnishing limit are junk because they offer little to no customisation for the amount of items and size of home. ZOS have yet to link the poor/declining house sales to this prehistoric furnishing limit.
Your solution is to charge customers more to somehow correct a mistake/limitation ZOS have intentionally put in place
Its not a solution to rectify a mistake. It is a solution to extend a premium housing experience to those who pay more.
In my experience it is to rectify a mistake. Look at the homes in ESO and you will see similar size or smaller containing many more items than 700. These are public and not private instances which leans towards a private/capped isntance of ~25 should be able to handle more than 700 items.
Additionally housing should of been released with the base game. We would be talking more about functionality now if it had of been rather than some prehistoric 700 furnishing cap.
Some people are paying the top cost for these houses, premium. Adding additional charges to this is stupid, especially on a house basis and not account wide.