(09-23-2014, 10:10 AM)Naunet Wrote:(09-23-2014, 09:39 AM)Warren Castille Wrote: I use the word "necessary" to imply you're not barred from playing the game in any way without a house. You lose access to personal land to garden on and the ability to hold a stable, which is fair. To repeat it in case it wasn't clear, I agree that they dd a shitty job making housing available.
Is buying and decorating a house something one does in the game? Is raising a chocobo, gardening, and dyeing a chocobo something one does in the game? The answer to those questions is, of course, yes. They are part of playing the game. Anything that you do in a game is content. The game is not defined solely by its dungeons and PvP.
This is a slippery slope, though. ANY gate to content is exactly that: a gate to content. This one happens to be artificial, and again, I agree the limit on wards makes it frustrating. This is hopefully going to be alleviated in 2.4 and then everyone should be able to have their own houses if they want one.
But saying "it's in the game so I should have it if I want" removes needing to work for it. If my idea of playing the game is wearing a Thug's Mug and Mandervilling on top of Tataru, I've gotta do the MSQ and requisite side story to get there.
I realize, of course, you're not arguing otherwise. I really do feel for the people who were willing to buy homes but were unable because of supply/demand.
![[Image: yEROfKO.png]](http://i.imgur.com/yEROfKO.png)
