Maintenance for the week of December 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
A challenge to the game devs
BloodLegions
✭✭
Increase max housing in the largest manors to 500, thus 1000 to eso+ 350/700 is not enough!
I would like to see the eso devs make either the grand psijic villa or the new ayleid ruins varlavea an actual home filled with 350 slots then 700. That actually looks inviting and complete but also creative with what we have to play with. No using in game assets we don't have access to.
I like how you have a furnishings cap of 700 yet the assets in castle thorn were possible. We can see what your devs can do when they have no limits.
So let's see what you guys can do when your limited to what we have to work. Then say that 700 is a fine cap for a fully furnished home.
Or better yet a guild house that is inviting as well as functional with only 700 slots.
Don't forget to also place half of the antiques and achievement furnishings from all the zones within the 350/700 limit.
You have added larger houses again through out this year from when you made the announcement last year. And also added more furnishing into the game as antiques but that fall into the standard furnishing category with no increase.
You say you listen, so I implore you to give us what we all want. Or prove the community wrong by accepting the challenge also without using housing fx which is essentially an add on to help the furnishing community get around your awful limit.
Edited by BloodLegions on April 4, 2021 5:01AM I would like to see the eso devs make either the grand psijic villa or the new ayleid ruins varlavea an actual home filled with 350 slots then 700. That actually looks inviting and complete but also creative with what we have to play with. No using in game assets we don't have access to.
I like how you have a furnishings cap of 700 yet the assets in castle thorn were possible. We can see what your devs can do when they have no limits.
So let's see what you guys can do when your limited to what we have to work. Then say that 700 is a fine cap for a fully furnished home.
Or better yet a guild house that is inviting as well as functional with only 700 slots.
Don't forget to also place half of the antiques and achievement furnishings from all the zones within the 350/700 limit.
You have added larger houses again through out this year from when you made the announcement last year. And also added more furnishing into the game as antiques but that fall into the standard furnishing category with no increase.
You say you listen, so I implore you to give us what we all want. Or prove the community wrong by accepting the challenge also without using housing fx which is essentially an add on to help the furnishing community get around your awful limit.
5
-
Alurria✭✭✭✭✭
✭Please consider increasing the furniture cap, I love the housing feature in this game. I spend many hours decorating my houses in game and get great enjoyment from it. But some places are huge and really need the increased limits. Many of the people I know love to mix stone and plants or clockwork and plants. Plants come in all sizes from a single flower to giant trees. We need extra slots to complete these creations. Decorating is one of the most fun aspects of house collecting. I would love more quests to earn unique furnishings. With a increased limit on housing slots I can make a piece of ESO my own little world. Please consider giving us more slots in housing?2 -
Tommy_The_Gun✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Tbh. The thing that sucks the most is the fact that houses bought for crowns still have base furniture limit. Take large (and expensive) houses for example - Lakemire Xanmeer Manor, Colossal Aldmeri Grotto or Grand Topal Hideaway.
How are you supposed to decorate those with 350 slots ?
In some cases, sure, you can limit yourself to one area and "wall-off" the other and maybe, maybe it will be ok-ish...
But the fact that you spend so much RL cash on those houses and yet you have to still pay monthly tax fee, just to be able to maybe fully decorate those houses (I would imagine that it can be hard even with 700 slot limit) is just kinda atrocious.2 -
craybest✭✭✭✭✭haven't the devs said that it's because of the capacity the game can process all of those items at once?
0 -
Alurria✭✭✭✭✭
✭haven't the devs said that it's because of the capacity the game can process all of those items at once?
I think what they said is that lower end computers (that is to say someone's personal system has trouble processing in those areas) is why. I don't think it's their servers but the performance of lower end gaming systems. So they don't want to close off the game to certain segment of the populace.1 -
Tommy_The_Gun✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
I kinda believe it, but their explanation sounds... shady. Very shady. So far I am giving it a benefit of a doubt. Nonetheless, it sounds... it sounds as an excuse not to make larger furniture limit and sell ESO+ instead.haven't the devs said that it's because of the capacity the game can process all of those items at once?
I think what they said is that lower end computers (that is to say someone's personal system has trouble processing in those areas) is why. I don't think it's their servers but the performance of lower end gaming systems. So they don't want to close off the game to certain segment of the populace.
You know, one of those things that introduces an artificial problem, made deliberately by design, just to sell a solution (ESO+). That kind of business practise is dangerously close to tourist scamming in certain parts of the world.
I mean, if weaker computers have problems with it, just make an option to render furnitures in lower quality models (less polygons & textures). Not a rocket science really...Edited by Tommy_The_Gun on April 4, 2021 3:34PM2 -
B0SSzombie✭✭✭✭✭
✭The current cap is due to being able to allow systems of any strength to handle the strain of loading furnishings.
A big issue is that all kinds of furnishings take up the same value as far as slots are concerned, but not the same as far as system performance is concerned.
You could put 700 Dwarven Gears in a house and things will be fine. Or you could put 700 of some gigantic, very detailed, moving object and a lower spec computer or the older generation consoles will start to melt inside.
If I tried to put 700 Clockwork Pumps in Linchal Manor, I think my PlayStation 4 would actually explode. Hell, one time my character crashed in Linchal, and I had to wait 2 days for support to move them out because it would just crash the game if I tried to load them.
The devs have to take into account any and all possibilities as far as decorations are concerned.
It's bizarre to actually say it, but I think I prefer the Fallout 4/76 style of House making: where placing a furnishing uses up "capacity" instead of "slots," with larger, more detailed items costing more capacity and smaller, simple decorations using very little. You could place dozens of heavy machinery items or hundreds of small decorations.Edited by B0SSzombie on April 4, 2021 6:43PM0 -
ThorianB✭✭✭✭✭
✭haven't the devs said that it's because of the capacity the game can process all of those items at once?
I think what they said is that lower end computers (that is to say someone's personal system has trouble processing in those areas) is why. I don't think it's their servers but the performance of lower end gaming systems. So they don't want to close off the game to certain segment of the populace.
Lower end systems which are technically OG PS4s. They have to support the entire generation of a console if they choose to support that gen and the early PS4s are the worse systems this game is played on besides potato PCs. But with PCs they just discontinue support for something and then either you upgrade or stop playing.
I think it will be another couple of years at least before we seen any changes in this as they will have to phase out the old gen consoles first.0 -
B0SSzombie✭✭✭✭✭
✭haven't the devs said that it's because of the capacity the game can process all of those items at once?
I think what they said is that lower end computers (that is to say someone's personal system has trouble processing in those areas) is why. I don't think it's their servers but the performance of lower end gaming systems. So they don't want to close off the game to certain segment of the populace.
Lower end systems which are technically OG PS4s. They have to support the entire generation of a console if they choose to support that gen and the early PS4s are the worse systems this game is played on besides potato PCs. But with PCs they just discontinue support for something and then either you upgrade or stop playing.
I think it will be another couple of years at least before we seen any changes in this as they will have to phase out the old gen consoles first.
What a strange perspective. The original XBox One is even weaker than the original PS4. Why not use that as the example?Edited by B0SSzombie on April 4, 2021 9:44PM0 -
ThorianB✭✭✭✭✭
✭B0SSzombie wrote: »haven't the devs said that it's because of the capacity the game can process all of those items at once?
I think what they said is that lower end computers (that is to say someone's personal system has trouble processing in those areas) is why. I don't think it's their servers but the performance of lower end gaming systems. So they don't want to close off the game to certain segment of the populace.
Lower end systems which are technically OG PS4s. They have to support the entire generation of a console if they choose to support that gen and the early PS4s are the worse systems this game is played on besides potato PCs. But with PCs they just discontinue support for something and then either you upgrade or stop playing.
I think it will be another couple of years at least before we seen any changes in this as they will have to phase out the old gen consoles first.
What a strange perspective. The original XBox One is even weaker than the original PS4. Why not use that as the example?
But it runs better. Xbox players almost never complain about performance. PS4 players complain about performance all the time.0 -
B0SSzombie✭✭✭✭✭
✭B0SSzombie wrote: »haven't the devs said that it's because of the capacity the game can process all of those items at once?
I think what they said is that lower end computers (that is to say someone's personal system has trouble processing in those areas) is why. I don't think it's their servers but the performance of lower end gaming systems. So they don't want to close off the game to certain segment of the populace.
Lower end systems which are technically OG PS4s. They have to support the entire generation of a console if they choose to support that gen and the early PS4s are the worse systems this game is played on besides potato PCs. But with PCs they just discontinue support for something and then either you upgrade or stop playing.
I think it will be another couple of years at least before we seen any changes in this as they will have to phase out the old gen consoles first.
What a strange perspective. The original XBox One is even weaker than the original PS4. Why not use that as the example?
But it runs better. Xbox players almost never complain about performance. PS4 players complain about performance all the time.
That's just selective observations.
The PS4 literally has a stronger Processor and more efficient memory allocation.
Not that it really matters, the differences are nearly microscopic.0