So, if a developer doesn't want to commit resources to a full housing system, is there a path through smaller mechanics that could be used to test player appetitie and the amount of extra work generated? What is the smallest change that your favourite non-housing game could make as a stepping stone towards housing that would be fun on its own?
Or it an all-or-nothing situation where anything less than a fully editable house comes across as a lifeless resource-consuming lounge?
I know I spent at least 50% (maybe 40%) of my in-game time (in UO, but especially SWG) doing things with my houses/city. My crafter alt, 80% of the time in a house/shop.
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT Playing: Skyrim Following: The Repopulation I want a Virtual World, not just a Game. ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
It is quite simple. Because it is a feature most players do not care about.
Most MMOs are combat centric. If you don't have a good LFD system, players will cry bloody murder.
Housing ... most don't care ... because it adds little to the aspect of gameplay (combat, progression) that is deemed important. Look at TOR .. How many is talking about the fact that you have a space ship of your own.
Originally posted by Loktofeit There's what players think they want and what players want. I don't think there's been any data to show that any significant number of people avoided or left an MMO due to lack of housing, despite it being one of the first things on many MMO gamers wish lists.
There's also some evidence to show housing is not good for games that depend heavily on players making the world look alive. I think it's the EQ2 devs that regret having housing in the game.
No, the EQ2 devs have said it was a mistake putting so much ultility into the instanced housing, not that housing itself was a bad idea.
Can you find me one link with a dev saying that they regret having personal housing in EQ2?
Ultility in housing and guild halls, such as crafting stations, teleporters, and the like, is obviously not a good thing for the open world population, but that is not the same thing as saying that housing is a bad thing.
Exactly. The problem wasn't housing but poorly designed housing. They repeated the mistakes of AC and ended withthe same results.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
It is quite simple. Because it is a feature most players do not care about.
Most MMOs are combat centric. If you don't have a good LFD system, players will cry bloody murder.
Housing ... most don't care ... because it adds little to the aspect of gameplay (combat, progression) that is deemed important. Look at TOR .. How many is talking about the fact that you have a space ship of your own.
Is that because most were introduced without housing? I on the other hand started with UO(M59 actually) and followed UO from near the begining. I sold on the dream of actual player world not solely a multiplayer combat simulation.
Problem I have with most MMORPG's is that I can get the same experience better single player. The whole point of playing MMORPG's for me is not even group play it's to have a living world and adventure. I don't need more generic quest, level grinds and gear whoring that I can do in a single player game like Skyrim. Main difference in MMORPG's is I no effect on anything because your just getting in turn with next 20 billion vagabond adventurers.
MMORPG's have largely dropped the ball with MMORPG's diversity chasing the WoW dream. There should be Sandbox games being developed. There should be more FPS MMORPG's being made. There should be other games that don't feel like I'm playing WoW 1.2.
There have been only two sandbox games with large budgets. How many level grind games did we have before the Themepark Formula was prefected by Blizzard? Player housing won't be as hard if someone gets the way down pack. But it has to be designed planned from the beginning.
It is quite simple. Because it is a feature most players do not care about.
Most MMOs are combat centric. If you don't have a good LFD system, players will cry bloody murder.
Housing ... most don't care ... because it adds little to the aspect of gameplay (combat, progression) that is deemed important. Look at TOR .. How many is talking about the fact that you have a space ship of your own.
True but the reason people don't care is because they have probably never played a game where housing plays an important part. If their experience has mainly been in themepark games such as WoW etc I can quite understand why they don't care about housing, In most modern games of that type, it has been nothing more than dressed up additional storage space.
True but the reason people don't care is because they have probably never played a game where housing plays an important part.
I think it's time we stopped making that assumption. Some people really have played (several) games with housing, and somehow failed to fall in love. Simulation gaming, virtual real estate, etc. just doesn't appeal to everyone. Explorer and Achiever are just two axis' of Bartle.
On the other hand, I've been waiting for a dozen years or more in the hope that gamers, in general, move out of their 'comfy' games and explore more of what the whole market offers, some day. So there's some sympathy for that point of view, for sure :P And after living here for a while, I'd offer shiny donuts to any/everyone who doesn't start with the assumption that you must be a fan of either sandboxes or theme parks, not possible to enjoy both. Not a fan of false dichotomies.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
i just don't see the point of housing. logging in to a game to sit in my house does not appeal to me. if i wanted to play a game where i had a house i'd probably go buy the Sims.
Player Housing IS possible. It just is not a priority. If people do not like the game or if they do not find the game fun, they will not build a house.
The reasons make sense though. You could create the best housing feature-set we have ever seen in a game but if nobody enjoys the game to that point, they will not stick around just to have a cool house.?
Seem as if developers now days see no importance in this feature known as player housing. The quote has a point. If Developers put too much resources into Housing over other features, than players may not be interested in the game and wont build houses regardless of how detailed that feature is.
but why has this feature been tossed under the bus over the last few years? seem like this feature has become very unpopular in the developers offices lately.
Player Housing seem like a dynamic feature that gives players something to do when raiding/leveling/other grinds come to a end. Seem like a win win feature from a consumer point of view, but not from a developer.
To make player housing anything meaningfull (like in SWG for example), the game has to be designed from start with that in mind. But the themeparky MMO's just dont have room for this kind of unstanced housing. And if they have instanced housing, they lack the incentives for players to visit their house.
In SWG (from a practical point of view) your house was storage and crafting room. But the best was in combination with the player city system. Giving a buff for crafting, faction, harvesting, mutations. While everyone always talks about preNGE because of the skillsystem, the city system was the best in late NGE. With cities having loads of practical buffs (war related, crafting related, beast master related etc) for players.
EQ2, a game with decent housing system still lacks enough incentives for players (who don't care about decorating) to use their home. The f2p players cant even use those sales crates and apart from that there is no practical reason to visit a house. Crafting is just as convenient outside your house.
In Vanguard that has non instanced housing, it was put far out of the way of questing hubs. And also that game lacks incentives to visit player's homes. LOTRO, AO just have crap housing.
I suspect that developers just dont feel like starting on an immense task like housing in SWG and only consider adding some decoration housing crap after release.
i just don't see the point of housing. logging in to a game to sit in my house does not appeal to me. if i wanted to play a game where i had a house i'd probably go buy the Sims.
Housing is poorly named, unfortunately, so it's understandable that one going by that name would wonder the value of it.
Player-owned structures is a much more applicable description of the feature. Like you, no one really wants to log into a game and go sit in a house. That's kinda silly and pointless. What many who have interest in player owned structures do want is to build in the game world, impact the game world, and create something with more functionality than just a room to store furniture that you win from completing quests.
From MUDs to the early days of MMOs, housing was never really about housing.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I don't care about player housing and never have. Its a mostly useless feature for me and i have been online gaming since before MMORPGs existed.
But I also don't particularly care about it in real life either. I don't decorate anything, my place of residence is just some place to keep rain and cold and heat away.
The only way its important to me is that games like UO and SWG had a fundamentally different economy than auction house base games because of player shops and because those shops existed in certain places. However that doesn't mean they are better. People use amazon and other ordering services and there is no reason a game can't mimic that. Although the only reason things like amazon and ebay work out is because of the shipping companies and that is always glossed over.
i just don't see the point of housing. logging in to a game to sit in my house does not appeal to me. if i wanted to play a game where i had a house i'd probably go buy the Sims.
Housing is poorly named, unfortunately, so it's understandable that one going by that name would wonder the value of it.
Player-owned structures is a much more applicable description of the feature. Like you, no one really wants to log into a game and go sit in a house. That's kinda silly and pointless. What many who have interest in player owned structures do want is to build in the game world, impact the game world, and create something with more functionality than just a room to store furniture that you win from completing quests.
From MUDs to the early days of MMOs, housing was never really about housing.
I totally agree with the underlined part. Players nowadays associate housing with some doll house to decorate. In a game like SWG it was more then that. All players made use of their houses, because they actually had a practical function. Just have to look at crafting in SWG, to see that player structures vary from houses to harvesters and factories. Those were not decoration, but more comparable with strategy games structures.
Player Housing IS possible. It just is not a priority. If people do not like the game or if they do not find the game fun, they will not build a house.
The reasons make sense though. You could create the best housing feature-set we have ever seen in a game but if nobody enjoys the game to that point, they will not stick around just to have a cool house.?
Seem as if developers now days see no importance in this feature known as player housing. The quote has a point. If Developers put too much resources into Housing over other features, than players may not be interested in the game and wont build houses regardless of how detailed that feature is.
but why has this feature been tossed under the bus over the last few years? seem like this feature has become very unpopular in the developers offices lately.
Player Housing seem like a dynamic feature that gives players something to do when raiding/leveling/other grinds come to a end. Seem like a win win feature from a consumer point of view, but not from a developer.
What turn of events causes this?
The first two quote boxes I found kind of ironic especially since housing was a big reason for alot of SWG hold overs. The question for me though is it really true that housing was ever a major priority for mmmorpg's?
Sure maye the first four or five mmo's made considered them essential and added them but let's not forget mmorpg's true step into the major mainstream didn't include housing and hasn't relented and included it still even while losing players because of the lack of features like housing (yes I was one of the daily players of wow who eventually got sick of having to live out of a bank) and I'm not the only one who I saw posting displeasure at the design decisions at Blizzard.
I can understand why devs have tried to shift resources away from housing (and I can equally see how housing can be a great benefit to any mmo).
I wish more games pick up on player housing again and move it in the direction of SWG and less LOTRO but from my entrance into the mmo world at SWG housing was still a hit or miss feature in all the games released since half of them seem to try to have some type of living space but yes lot's of them don't.
If in the first five yearsof development it was popular while there have been some fifteen years where it has been a hit or miss feature I just can't overstate how important the industry saw this feature.
i just don't see the point of housing. logging in to a game to sit in my house does not appeal to me. if i wanted to play a game where i had a house i'd probably go buy the Sims.
Housing is poorly named, unfortunately, so it's understandable that one going by that name would wonder the value of it.
Player-owned structures is a much more applicable description of the feature. Like you, no one really wants to log into a game and go sit in a house. That's kinda silly and pointless. What many who have interest in player owned structures do want is to build in the game world, impact the game world, and create something with more functionality than just a room to store furniture that you win from completing quests.
From MUDs to the early days of MMOs, housing was never really about housing.
I totally agree with the underlined part. Players nowadays associate housing with some doll house to decorate. In a game like SWG it was more then that. All players made use of their houses, because they actually had a practical function. Just have to look at crafting in SWG, to see that player structures vary from houses to harvesters and factories. Those were not decoration, but more comparable with strategy games structures.
Tha'ts funny hearing you say that especially when considering all the people I knew who spent days inside decorating the house in SWG yeah we all know that the structures were different but there was nothing different in the creation of said structures and let's not kid ourselves harvesters,fatories and even houses sat in that game deteriorating to no end.
I loved the implimentatio too but I think you are really looking at this issue through rose colored glasses (as most seem to do when talking about SWG).
If anything housing in SWG was the ultimate dollhouse while alot of other games with housing were too simplistic to even rate on the scale ladies (and a few fellas) spent many hours playing decoration as did my two wives from SWG.
I like housing and personally feel that every game should have it even if it is instanced. Is housing a game breaker ..well no.. but it is a nice addition. I can't even tell you how many hours I spent in SWG messing around with the house.
The best part of SWG's housing was that ability to drop anything anywhere and turn normal boring items in to something more with your imagination. With some time and effort those bookcases could become a fish tank or an oven. You were really only limited by your patience and imagination. Decorating was just a small extra feature that could become like a virtual lego set. A great time burner between killing things. All games could benefit through housing of some sort.
The question for me though is it really true that housing was ever a major priority for mmmorpg's?
Has the clamouring for it from players ever been a truly major factor? The financial impact of not including housing?
Has any game that started without housing and done poorly "saved" itself by adding housing?
How many of those questions are answered (honestly) with "no", even here on the SandboxForum?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Originally posted by Loktofeit There's what players think they want and what players want. I don't think there's been any data to show that any significant number of people avoided or left an MMO due to lack of housing, despite it being one of the first things on many MMO gamers wish lists.
There's also some evidence to show housing is not good for games that depend heavily on players making the world look alive. I think it's the EQ2 devs that regret having housing in the game.
Got any link or official statement to prove this? i am getting sick of people making up stuff around here. Would be nice if people atleast start backing up what they say.
The question for me though is it really true that housing was ever a major priority for mmmorpg's?
Has the clamouring for it from players ever been a truly major factor? The financial impact of not including housing?
Has any game that started without housing and done poorly "saved" itself by adding housing?
How many of those questions are answered (honestly) with "no", even here on the SandboxForum?
I don't think you make or break a game depending on housing. It is just an extra feature that some people enjoy and those that do not enjoy it don't have to deal with it. I have never seen anything negative as far as not using housing in a game that has it except for storage space.
The question for me though is it really true that housing was ever a major priority for mmmorpg's?
Has the clamouring for it from players ever been a truly major factor? The financial impact of not including housing?
Has any game that started without housing and done poorly "saved" itself by adding housing?
How many of those questions are answered (honestly) with "no", even here on the SandboxForum?
I don't think you make or break a game depending on housing. It is just an extra feature that some people enjoy and those that do not enjoy it don't have to deal with it. I have never seen anything negative as far as not using housing in a game that has it except for storage space.
Why is having that choice in a game a bad thing?
Didn't say it was, particularly because Devs just don't think (entirely/only) in terms of costs/benefits.
Every game should have dozens of sub-systems for player-created content, imo.
But realistically? Expecting every game to choose the same features will always lead to disappointment. We spend an extraordinary amount of time complaining when they do that, on this site.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I also see housing as an extra feature that gives the game more deepth. Why should most themepark endgame only be Dungeons/raids or Battlegrounds? Making gear progression the only thing to go after! No i want housing to be another thing worth while to go after. It don´t have to be cheap or easy to come by. It´s cool to have some "goodies" to farm for
just my 2 cent...
Games Played: Anarchy Online,Star Wars Galaxies,WOW,Eve,Darkfall,Vanguard, Fallen Earth,SWTOR,GW2,Tera,ESO,Wildstar, Black Desert, Archeage & Albion Online Now playing: Conan Exiles & Rocket League Games looking forward to: Diablo 4! & Star Citizen?
IMO housing is a sandbox feature for sandbox games.
I fail to see the value of an instanced house in a game where items don't even exist unless they're in a player's bag or bank. Anyone who played UO and got into the housing would know that it wasnt just a sprite but your digital home. This would be doubly so for crafters, shopowners, etc. Not even going to discuss the decoration nuts and rares hoarders.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
It's not that I spend a lot of time in the house doing nothing, but that I spend a huge amount of time everywhere else in the game to get the odd rewards to put in my house. It is a showcase of my achievements and filled with mementos of my adventures.
This, to me, is a great point. Thinking back to the oft-mentioned SWG, I can recall heading out to other vendors for various rug schematics and paintings, learning to tame creatures to display in my house, chasing down random neat looking drops, chasing down high quality resources for crafting, etc, etc.
So, if we were to base a metric off of the percentage of my time that was spent actually in my house, it might look like housing didn't really matter to me most the time. That metric wouldn't really take in to account the veriety of content I went out and explored as a result of my house providing motivation.
And while there was personal enjoyment in the "doll house" activity of setting it all up and getting things to look the way I wanted, the idea that the house was also a showcase of my accomplishments is another good point. I could shift+click an achievement in WoW to show it off or I could invite someone into my house to view my 'trophies'. Each has its place for their respective games, but given the choice, I think the housing display is more immersive and enjoyable.
As someone else had stated, this was what I expected from the MMO genere. Persistent worlds that players had a stake in. Housing and cities provided that in the form of world building (or detroying in the case of city-v-city pvp ). For a while, I got what I expected, but I think the idea of that sort of game, has largely passed for the time being. There are still games with housing out there so there are places for those of us interested. That is, unless we are actually saying "I want a popular MMO with housing" (tongue-in-cheek for anyone reading that too seriously. I know there are other factors to consider)
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers. Do something wrong, no one forgets" -from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
Didn't say it was, particularly because Devs just don't think (entirely/only) in terms of costs/benefits.
Every game should have dozens of sub-systems for player-created content, imo.
But realistically? Expecting every game to choose the same features will always lead to disappointment. We spend an extraordinary amount of time complaining when they do that, on this site.
I wouldn't want every game to have the same exact housing. I would never want SWG style housing in WoW. i do think WoW could benefit from something like a guild hall though. A place to keep your boss kill trophies, portals inside for the major cities, the guild vendor..things like that. Now there is a form of housing that is not in anyway intrusive to players who do not want to deal with it and differs greatly from SWG housing. I just think every game should have some kind of building to show off your accomplishments. It doesnt have to be individual housing at all and if you want to keep everyone in the major cities just disable the ability to que from there.
Comments
So, if a developer doesn't want to commit resources to a full housing system, is there a path through smaller mechanics that could be used to test player appetitie and the amount of extra work generated? What is the smallest change that your favourite non-housing game could make as a stepping stone towards housing that would be fun on its own?
Or it an all-or-nothing situation where anything less than a fully editable house comes across as a lifeless resource-consuming lounge?
I know I spent at least 50% (maybe 40%) of my in-game time (in UO, but especially SWG) doing things with my houses/city. My crafter alt, 80% of the time in a house/shop.
Tried: EQ2 - AC - EU - HZ - TR - MxO - TTO - WURM - SL - VG:SoH - PotBS - PS - AoC - WAR - DDO - SWTOR
Played: UO - EQ1 - AO - DAoC - NC - CoH/CoV - SWG - WoW - EVE - AA - LotRO - DFO - STO - FE - MO - RIFT
Playing: Skyrim
Following: The Repopulation
I want a Virtual World, not just a Game.
ITS TOO HARD! - Matt Firor (ZeniMax)
It is quite simple. Because it is a feature most players do not care about.
Most MMOs are combat centric. If you don't have a good LFD system, players will cry bloody murder.
Housing ... most don't care ... because it adds little to the aspect of gameplay (combat, progression) that is deemed important. Look at TOR .. How many is talking about the fact that you have a space ship of your own.
Exactly. The problem wasn't housing but poorly designed housing. They repeated the mistakes of AC and ended withthe same results.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Is that because most were introduced without housing? I on the other hand started with UO(M59 actually) and followed UO from near the begining. I sold on the dream of actual player world not solely a multiplayer combat simulation.
Problem I have with most MMORPG's is that I can get the same experience better single player. The whole point of playing MMORPG's for me is not even group play it's to have a living world and adventure. I don't need more generic quest, level grinds and gear whoring that I can do in a single player game like Skyrim. Main difference in MMORPG's is I no effect on anything because your just getting in turn with next 20 billion vagabond adventurers.
MMORPG's have largely dropped the ball with MMORPG's diversity chasing the WoW dream. There should be Sandbox games being developed. There should be more FPS MMORPG's being made. There should be other games that don't feel like I'm playing WoW 1.2.
There have been only two sandbox games with large budgets. How many level grind games did we have before the Themepark Formula was prefected by Blizzard? Player housing won't be as hard if someone gets the way down pack. But it has to be designed planned from the beginning.
True but the reason people don't care is because they have probably never played a game where housing plays an important part. If their experience has mainly been in themepark games such as WoW etc I can quite understand why they don't care about housing, In most modern games of that type, it has been nothing more than dressed up additional storage space.
I think it's time we stopped making that assumption. Some people really have played (several) games with housing, and somehow failed to fall in love. Simulation gaming, virtual real estate, etc. just doesn't appeal to everyone. Explorer and Achiever are just two axis' of Bartle.
On the other hand, I've been waiting for a dozen years or more in the hope that gamers, in general, move out of their 'comfy' games and explore more of what the whole market offers, some day. So there's some sympathy for that point of view, for sure :P And after living here for a while, I'd offer shiny donuts to any/everyone who doesn't start with the assumption that you must be a fan of either sandboxes or theme parks, not possible to enjoy both. Not a fan of false dichotomies.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
i just don't see the point of housing. logging in to a game to sit in my house does not appeal to me. if i wanted to play a game where i had a house i'd probably go buy the Sims.
Becouse WoW dont have housing.
To make player housing anything meaningfull (like in SWG for example), the game has to be designed from start with that in mind. But the themeparky MMO's just dont have room for this kind of unstanced housing. And if they have instanced housing, they lack the incentives for players to visit their house.
In SWG (from a practical point of view) your house was storage and crafting room. But the best was in combination with the player city system. Giving a buff for crafting, faction, harvesting, mutations. While everyone always talks about preNGE because of the skillsystem, the city system was the best in late NGE. With cities having loads of practical buffs (war related, crafting related, beast master related etc) for players.
EQ2, a game with decent housing system still lacks enough incentives for players (who don't care about decorating) to use their home. The f2p players cant even use those sales crates and apart from that there is no practical reason to visit a house. Crafting is just as convenient outside your house.
In Vanguard that has non instanced housing, it was put far out of the way of questing hubs. And also that game lacks incentives to visit player's homes. LOTRO, AO just have crap housing.
I suspect that developers just dont feel like starting on an immense task like housing in SWG and only consider adding some decoration housing crap after release.
Housing is poorly named, unfortunately, so it's understandable that one going by that name would wonder the value of it.
Player-owned structures is a much more applicable description of the feature. Like you, no one really wants to log into a game and go sit in a house. That's kinda silly and pointless. What many who have interest in player owned structures do want is to build in the game world, impact the game world, and create something with more functionality than just a room to store furniture that you win from completing quests.
From MUDs to the early days of MMOs, housing was never really about housing.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I don't care about player housing and never have. Its a mostly useless feature for me and i have been online gaming since before MMORPGs existed.
But I also don't particularly care about it in real life either. I don't decorate anything, my place of residence is just some place to keep rain and cold and heat away.
The only way its important to me is that games like UO and SWG had a fundamentally different economy than auction house base games because of player shops and because those shops existed in certain places. However that doesn't mean they are better. People use amazon and other ordering services and there is no reason a game can't mimic that. Although the only reason things like amazon and ebay work out is because of the shipping companies and that is always glossed over.
I totally agree with the underlined part. Players nowadays associate housing with some doll house to decorate. In a game like SWG it was more then that. All players made use of their houses, because they actually had a practical function. Just have to look at crafting in SWG, to see that player structures vary from houses to harvesters and factories. Those were not decoration, but more comparable with strategy games structures.
The first two quote boxes I found kind of ironic especially since housing was a big reason for alot of SWG hold overs. The question for me though is it really true that housing was ever a major priority for mmmorpg's?
Sure maye the first four or five mmo's made considered them essential and added them but let's not forget mmorpg's true step into the major mainstream didn't include housing and hasn't relented and included it still even while losing players because of the lack of features like housing (yes I was one of the daily players of wow who eventually got sick of having to live out of a bank) and I'm not the only one who I saw posting displeasure at the design decisions at Blizzard.
I can understand why devs have tried to shift resources away from housing (and I can equally see how housing can be a great benefit to any mmo).
I wish more games pick up on player housing again and move it in the direction of SWG and less LOTRO but from my entrance into the mmo world at SWG housing was still a hit or miss feature in all the games released since half of them seem to try to have some type of living space but yes lot's of them don't.
If in the first five yearsof development it was popular while there have been some fifteen years where it has been a hit or miss feature I just can't overstate how important the industry saw this feature.
Tha'ts funny hearing you say that especially when considering all the people I knew who spent days inside decorating the house in SWG yeah we all know that the structures were different but there was nothing different in the creation of said structures and let's not kid ourselves harvesters,fatories and even houses sat in that game deteriorating to no end.
I loved the implimentatio too but I think you are really looking at this issue through rose colored glasses (as most seem to do when talking about SWG).
If anything housing in SWG was the ultimate dollhouse while alot of other games with housing were too simplistic to even rate on the scale ladies (and a few fellas) spent many hours playing decoration as did my two wives from SWG.
I like housing and personally feel that every game should have it even if it is instanced. Is housing a game breaker ..well no.. but it is a nice addition. I can't even tell you how many hours I spent in SWG messing around with the house.
The best part of SWG's housing was that ability to drop anything anywhere and turn normal boring items in to something more with your imagination. With some time and effort those bookcases could become a fish tank or an oven. You were really only limited by your patience and imagination. Decorating was just a small extra feature that could become like a virtual lego set. A great time burner between killing things. All games could benefit through housing of some sort.
Has the clamouring for it from players ever been a truly major factor? The financial impact of not including housing?
Has any game that started without housing and done poorly "saved" itself by adding housing?
How many of those questions are answered (honestly) with "no", even here on the SandboxForum?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Got any link or official statement to prove this? i am getting sick of people making up stuff around here. Would be nice if people atleast start backing up what they say.
I don't think you make or break a game depending on housing. It is just an extra feature that some people enjoy and those that do not enjoy it don't have to deal with it. I have never seen anything negative as far as not using housing in a game that has it except for storage space.
Why is having that choice in a game a bad thing?
Didn't say it was, particularly because Devs just don't think (entirely/only) in terms of costs/benefits.
Every game should have dozens of sub-systems for player-created content, imo.
But realistically? Expecting every game to choose the same features will always lead to disappointment. We spend an extraordinary amount of time complaining when they do that, on this site.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Housing needs to be designed as the social hub. Anything less, and it's not a worthwhile part of otherwise murderhobo gameplay.
I also see housing as an extra feature that gives the game more deepth. Why should most themepark endgame only be Dungeons/raids or Battlegrounds? Making gear progression the only thing to go after! No i want housing to be another thing worth while to go after. It don´t have to be cheap or easy to come by. It´s cool to have some "goodies" to farm for
just my 2 cent...
Games Played: Anarchy Online,Star Wars Galaxies,WOW,Eve,Darkfall,Vanguard, Fallen Earth,SWTOR,GW2,Tera,ESO,Wildstar, Black Desert, Archeage & Albion Online
Now playing: Conan Exiles & Rocket League
Games looking forward to: Diablo 4! & Star Citizen?
IMO housing is a sandbox feature for sandbox games.
I fail to see the value of an instanced house in a game where items don't even exist unless they're in a player's bag or bank. Anyone who played UO and got into the housing would know that it wasnt just a sprite but your digital home. This would be doubly so for crafters, shopowners, etc. Not even going to discuss the decoration nuts and rares hoarders.
The above is my personal opinion. Anyone displaying a view contrary to my opinion is obviously WRONG and should STHU. (neener neener)
-The MMO Forum Community
This, to me, is a great point. Thinking back to the oft-mentioned SWG, I can recall heading out to other vendors for various rug schematics and paintings, learning to tame creatures to display in my house, chasing down random neat looking drops, chasing down high quality resources for crafting, etc, etc.
So, if we were to base a metric off of the percentage of my time that was spent actually in my house, it might look like housing didn't really matter to me most the time. That metric wouldn't really take in to account the veriety of content I went out and explored as a result of my house providing motivation.
And while there was personal enjoyment in the "doll house" activity of setting it all up and getting things to look the way I wanted, the idea that the house was also a showcase of my accomplishments is another good point. I could shift+click an achievement in WoW to show it off or I could invite someone into my house to view my 'trophies'. Each has its place for their respective games, but given the choice, I think the housing display is more immersive and enjoyable.
As someone else had stated, this was what I expected from the MMO genere. Persistent worlds that players had a stake in. Housing and cities provided that in the form of world building (or detroying in the case of city-v-city pvp
). For a while, I got what I expected, but I think the idea of that sort of game, has largely passed for the time being. There are still games with housing out there so there are places for those of us interested. That is, unless we are actually saying "I want a popular MMO with housing" 
(tongue-in-cheek for anyone reading that too seriously. I know there are other factors to consider)
-mklinic
"Do something right, no one remembers.
Do something wrong, no one forgets"
-from No One Remembers by In Strict Confidence
I wouldn't want every game to have the same exact housing. I would never want SWG style housing in WoW. i do think WoW could benefit from something like a guild hall though. A place to keep your boss kill trophies, portals inside for the major cities, the guild vendor..things like that. Now there is a form of housing that is not in anyway intrusive to players who do not want to deal with it and differs greatly from SWG housing. I just think every game should have some kind of building to show off your accomplishments. It doesnt have to be individual housing at all and if you want to keep everyone in the major cities just disable the ability to que from there.