Welcome to the Wizard101 Message Boards


Player Guide
Fansites
News
Game Updates
Help

By posting on the Wizard101 Message Boards you agree to the Code of Conduct.

Solution suggestion for housing space limit

AuthorMessage
Survivor
Sep 13, 2011
4
Please note that the issue of too little housing space applies in both Wizards and Pirates.

The limit of 300 max is rather antiquated. Given that server space and processing power has grown significantly over even the last 3 years (typical accounting lifespan for servers), it also seems reasonable that the space limit could be increased. Given also that the houses available are much bigger, grander, and elaborate than before and the 300 limit is quickly met while still leaving large areas looking empty. I do recognize, however, that there should also be a business incentive to change the status quo. As such, here is my recommended solution (to be implemented in both wizard's and pirate's).

Introduce an elixir, following existing motifs, that increases your max limit. Note that Bric-a-Brac elixirs are still needed to reach the cap, this elixir simply moves the cap from 300 to 600 (for example). I would suggest making it account-specific rather than per house, but either is do-able so long as the price is appropriate. Account-specific also helps differentiate it from the Bric-a-Brac elixir. As account specific (though one would be needed for each game), it should be fairly expensive, like 10,000-15,000 crowns. In conjunction with the crowns from additional Bric-a-Brac elixirs used, this should definitely produce sufficient revenue to provide incentive to introduce this option. The cap could even have dual requirements of both the new elixir and an active subscription. This may also increase subscriptions among the free-to-play player base, though that is speculation.

Please give this solution sincere consideration, as it is meant as a compromise to players who desire more space (like myself who has been frustrated with the limits) and King's Isle who needs business justification for the increase in server usage.

Defender
Feb 02, 2014
100
Yes, yes yes!! I don't want to be forced to buy another castle, if the next level bric a brac was bigger and as expensive as a castle I would still rather buy that! It messes with my RP to have more than one castle. Please make this available KI

Archon
Sep 17, 2012
4117
It's not a question of just increasing the limit. The lag caused by loading double the number of graphics and animations just makes this suggestion impossible. Especially with Housing Tours and the added animations of every player's gear/pets/mounts. It's just not realistic.

Defender
Feb 02, 2014
100
seethe42 on Sep 29, 2014 wrote:
It's not a question of just increasing the limit. The lag caused by loading double the number of graphics and animations just makes this suggestion impossible. Especially with Housing Tours and the added animations of every player's gear/pets/mounts. It's just not realistic.
loading for castle tours or games, perhaps. So maybe houses with this expansion would be unallowed to participate in that, but for personal use only houses I don't understand why it would be an issue. This game stores data on your computer. I noticed this first when my laptop fried and I had to switch to my spare, all the preloaded data had to be redownloaded and going to basic area like wizard city took a minute.

Squire
Jun 19, 2010
503
You're just ahead of you time...

...because, Seethe42 calls it like it is.

While I'd love to have more items inside and outside my house too; some players have told me their system kept crashing when they were at my house.

Survivor
Sep 13, 2011
4
Actually, that's not entirely accurate. The load time only matters when the house itself is loaded, not when the character is loaded. When there is no one at the house, it has absolutely no impact, as it is not in active memory anywhere (to do otherwise would be terribly inefficient and KI is much more professional than that). As per my original post, server capabilities have grown significantly since the 300 limit was introduced, meaning that the limit should also be able to be increased. As for delays on textures loading and the "lag" you mention, that has absolutely nothing to do with servers, it is all at the client level. The server doesn't do any rendering, it simply delivers the raw data that enables the client to render (fairly critical distribution of processing).

Squire
Jun 19, 2010
503
The OP wants to be able to display more housing items without any issues.

Instead of focusing on all the whys this can't be done; think and imagine how it can be done successfully.

Disclaimer:
***************************************************************************************************************************
No matter how spectacular any house on the planet, or in the W101 Universe is; I'll move along after so many loading attempts that continue to result in my system crashing.
***************************************************************************************************************************

Delver
Jun 02, 2010
222
This may be an unpopular opinion, but it comes from someone who LOVES to house and has a house on the leader boards and everything. I don't think they should increase item space because then say they increased it to 600, they would be people reaching that limit and saying 600 is not enough. It quite a true reality.

Squire
Jun 19, 2010
503
The most impressive houses I've ever visited have never been on the leader board.

But its not that big of a deal to appear on the leader board AngelStorm...

...I've been on it before too.

And while you're one hundred percent correct some folks will always have a "there's never enough mentality." At one time, a player could only have 250 items; but players demanded more, and a potion was created that allows individuals to increase item size to 300.

So in the end, creating a beautiful home the way you want isn't about having the most items, but just the right amount; and whether it's just one item, 250 or over 300; I say let players have what they require to make this happen.

Sure, this will upsets players on the leader board able to design a house with just 300 items; but for players with a more expansive imagination who are able to create something grander, let them.

Its the same way with folks who complain about PVP; and I say to them if you want to PVP, put on your big wizard pants and bring anything and everything ready to battle. So if you want to design a bigger and more impressive house; then I say put on your big wizard designing pants, and bring anything and everything you can to design and create!

Defender
Feb 02, 2014
100
Angelstormtalon is correct in the loading issues being client based. If you have issues with loading or crashing, upgrade your computer. In my house, we have 5 functioning computers, one of which is a netbook which is even able to run wizard101.....and Alex, yes it is true the grass will always be greener on the other side and people will always complain. If all the evil pains of this world instantly dissappeared and all that was left was splinters, people would complain about splinters. But that is no valid excuse for a company to not improve a game. Imagine if Wizard101 never changed anything, never had any updates.....how long do you think the game would last? We live in a world of new & improved and stagnant games are deserted games.

Archon
Sep 17, 2012
4117
FrelaB on Oct 2, 2014 wrote:
Angelstormtalon is correct in the loading issues being client based. If you have issues with loading or crashing, upgrade your computer. In my house, we have 5 functioning computers, one of which is a netbook which is even able to run wizard101.....and Alex, yes it is true the grass will always be greener on the other side and people will always complain. If all the evil pains of this world instantly dissappeared and all that was left was splinters, people would complain about splinters. But that is no valid excuse for a company to not improve a game. Imagine if Wizard101 never changed anything, never had any updates.....how long do you think the game would last? We live in a world of new & improved and stagnant games are deserted games.
It's a very valid reason to not implement this suggestion. Lag is a very real issue even on higher end computers. This is largely a family oriented game and many of the core customer base that pay for the game do not have the highest end computers. If you make the game unplayable to a large number of your customers, you lose those customers.

Defender
Feb 02, 2014
100
seethe42 on Oct 2, 2014 wrote:
It's a very valid reason to not implement this suggestion. Lag is a very real issue even on higher end computers. This is largely a family oriented game and many of the core customer base that pay for the game do not have the highest end computers. If you make the game unplayable to a large number of your customers, you lose those customers.
lol well I must just be lucky. a $125 netbook from a pawn shop runs wizard101 if neccessary at my house, though we do have high end computers as well, and I agree with you......it should still be an option. For those who can afford good computers to upgrade their houses, no one is forcing those who have cheapo computers to visit these houses.....LOL, let those who can afford it have the option to get it. I'm sure KI appreciates those with bigger wallets who have bought nice computers and probably similarly have more money to put into crowns to keep wizard101 alive.

Hero
Feb 26, 2012
717
I agree with Seethe on this one. The lag on many computers would be a problem.

While the servers may be able to handle the load, many of the players really can't. Most people don't have the most up to date high end systems at home. I know for myself, some of the houses on tour already take a while to load, especially if my antivirus decides to update in the background at the same time. The build-it yourself houses are especially slow for me. My system is not a bad one either, though it is not a high-end one. I suppose I am like most of the players in the game, running an average mid-range system. And lag can already be an issue at times.

Secondly, "more" is not necessarily "better." I have been in some houses crammed to the max with stuff that are just a mess. Increasing the item limit would just encourage the hoarders to clutter up even more. Any good artist knows when to stop working on a piece -- overworking ruins things. I have seen many great houses on the tours, and many more not so great houses. The greatness does not depend on the amount of stuff, either, but on the creativity and artistry with which the stuff is placed.

So I think the current limit is fine as it is.

Squire
Nov 28, 2010
527
How does lag created by excessive housing items affect most people's ability to play Wizard101?

Decorating a castle with excessive items affects the people who are decorating the castle, and the people who visit their castle.

If there was a Crowns cost as steep as the OP is suggesting, it's not something people are probably going to invest in and take advantage of if they have a system incapable of handling it. Visiting other people's castles is optional, and not required to play the game.

I've completed Khrysalis with 2 wizards, 6 more are at various stages of the first part of Khrysalis, 2 more are just about done Azteca, and 2 more are about a third of the way through Avalon. They've all gotten there without going to everybody's castles. I've gone to freinds' castles, but I've never gone on a castle tour since that feature was added.

A lagging castle doesn't affect anybody's ability to play the game.

Defender
Feb 02, 2014
100
High Five Ghost on Oct 3, 2014 wrote:
How does lag created by excessive housing items affect most people's ability to play Wizard101?

Decorating a castle with excessive items affects the people who are decorating the castle, and the people who visit their castle.

If there was a Crowns cost as steep as the OP is suggesting, it's not something people are probably going to invest in and take advantage of if they have a system incapable of handling it. Visiting other people's castles is optional, and not required to play the game.

I've completed Khrysalis with 2 wizards, 6 more are at various stages of the first part of Khrysalis, 2 more are just about done Azteca, and 2 more are about a third of the way through Avalon. They've all gotten there without going to everybody's castles. I've gone to freinds' castles, but I've never gone on a castle tour since that feature was added.

A lagging castle doesn't affect anybody's ability to play the game.
Well said!!!

Not everyone has to drink the lemonade, but for those who want to, why protest to ruin their fun? If my system can handle it (and I've only had my two rl friends at my castle, don't have the desire to host a tour or game) why are those who can't handle it trying to stop me from having it, if wizard101 would be willing to make it an option??? How rude.

Survivor
Dec 06, 2011
18
I wholly agree with the OP. It's easy to say 250/300 is enough although there are plenty reasons why it isn't which I'll come to in a moment. Before that I need to also agree that lag due to items is a clientside issue. Any system crashing due to items and/or e.g. the complexity of their arrangement is due to many things but is in no way linked to server apart from the fact that the server might only send at the rate the client can receive. Whether it does or not could result in a crash but the crash would still be caused by the client machine.

Getting back on topic - Has anyone tried completely decorating a winter winds tower, or lost horizon pyramid, or ever a red barn farm with the current item limit? Lets look at RBF, seeing as its not a cash/crowns only purchase, so is available to all players. RBF has approximately ten rooms I think (I gave up decorating it due to item limit) and the potential to be one of the best interiors. 300 limit gives 30 items per room, all of which are BIG. Not sure if wallpaper/floor counts to item limit but even assuming it doesn't, 30 items to a room is not a lot of scope. Take a dining room kind of layout - 1 table, 4-8 chairs, 4-8 place settings (double if putting food at them too), 1-2 rugs, a fire maybe, perhaps some pictures, a clock and ornaments making another 8 items, maybe 2-3 plants. That's just to do a basic job on the room and comes in between 29 and 41 items. Other rooms like kitchens, lounges libraries take considerably more items and doesn't leave room for a pet or twelve. As for xmas in a well done RBF... it would look awesome but just isn't possible. It's like making Kelly Brook wear a mask! And as for the garden; function or looks, not both. So RBF ends up used purely functionally despite massive potential.
The big castles with 30 items per room look awful. All that space left empty; it's like a minnow in a koi pond!
I have 98 characters left so have to leave out how to improve it. Kinda makes the point for me.

Hero
Feb 26, 2012
717
Mason Stormcaller on Oct 3, 2014 wrote:
I wholly agree with the OP. It's easy to say 250/300 is enough although there are plenty reasons why it isn't which I'll come to in a moment. Before that I need to also agree that lag due to items is a clientside issue. Any system crashing due to items and/or e.g. the complexity of their arrangement is due to many things but is in no way linked to server apart from the fact that the server might only send at the rate the client can receive. Whether it does or not could result in a crash but the crash would still be caused by the client machine.

Getting back on topic - Has anyone tried completely decorating a winter winds tower, or lost horizon pyramid, or ever a red barn farm with the current item limit? Lets look at RBF, seeing as its not a cash/crowns only purchase, so is available to all players. RBF has approximately ten rooms I think (I gave up decorating it due to item limit) and the potential to be one of the best interiors. 300 limit gives 30 items per room, all of which are BIG. Not sure if wallpaper/floor counts to item limit but even assuming it doesn't, 30 items to a room is not a lot of scope. Take a dining room kind of layout - 1 table, 4-8 chairs, 4-8 place settings (double if putting food at them too), 1-2 rugs, a fire maybe, perhaps some pictures, a clock and ornaments making another 8 items, maybe 2-3 plants. That's just to do a basic job on the room and comes in between 29 and 41 items. Other rooms like kitchens, lounges libraries take considerably more items and doesn't leave room for a pet or twelve. As for xmas in a well done RBF... it would look awesome but just isn't possible. It's like making Kelly Brook wear a mask! And as for the garden; function or looks, not both. So RBF ends up used purely functionally despite massive potential.
The big castles with 30 items per room look awful. All that space left empty; it's like a minnow in a koi pond!
I have 98 characters left so have to leave out how to improve it. Kinda makes the point for me.
I disagree. I have decorated my Winter Winds Tower quite nicely, thank you. It even had a good run on the leaderboard. I have also seen many other wonderfully decorated WW Towers and Red Barn Farms, and Pyramids, and Acropolis, etc. There is plenty enough available now to make really great houses.

Again, more is not necessarily better.

Furthermore, the many average players with average systems that play this game do not need to be put at a disadvantage for not having high-end systems. They too should be able to enjoy the castle tours without having load issues -- this should not be a pleasure reserved for only people who can afford fast CPU & graphics machines.

Archon
Sep 17, 2012
4117
Being client side or server side really doesn't change the issue. Making a game that crashes for a vast majority of your user base is not a good business plan. Requiring children and families to upgrade their systems to high end machines shouldn't be a prerequitite to gameplay. I personally use a higher end box as I'm a graphics designer. I still experience lag issues in some places and many houses. It's not just a processing issue it's also memory lissues, the longer you leave the game open the more it leaks memory use. The more animations running the worse it gets. The more pets/mounts present the worse it gets. The more players present on screen the worse it gets. The more items loaded in current area the worse it gets. It very much is an issue that needs to be taken into account by the designers when setting limitations.

Defender
Feb 02, 2014
100
Mason Stormcaller on Oct 3, 2014 wrote:
I wholly agree with the OP. It's easy to say 250/300 is enough although there are plenty reasons why it isn't which I'll come to in a moment. Before that I need to also agree that lag due to items is a clientside issue. Any system crashing due to items and/or e.g. the complexity of their arrangement is due to many things but is in no way linked to server apart from the fact that the server might only send at the rate the client can receive. Whether it does or not could result in a crash but the crash would still be caused by the client machine.

Getting back on topic - Has anyone tried completely decorating a winter winds tower, or lost horizon pyramid, or ever a red barn farm with the current item limit? Lets look at RBF, seeing as its not a cash/crowns only purchase, so is available to all players. RBF has approximately ten rooms I think (I gave up decorating it due to item limit) and the potential to be one of the best interiors. 300 limit gives 30 items per room, all of which are BIG. Not sure if wallpaper/floor counts to item limit but even assuming it doesn't, 30 items to a room is not a lot of scope. Take a dining room kind of layout - 1 table, 4-8 chairs, 4-8 place settings (double if putting food at them too), 1-2 rugs, a fire maybe, perhaps some pictures, a clock and ornaments making another 8 items, maybe 2-3 plants. That's just to do a basic job on the room and comes in between 29 and 41 items. Other rooms like kitchens, lounges libraries take considerably more items and doesn't leave room for a pet or twelve. As for xmas in a well done RBF... it would look awesome but just isn't possible. It's like making Kelly Brook wear a mask! And as for the garden; function or looks, not both. So RBF ends up used purely functionally despite massive potential.
The big castles with 30 items per room look awful. All that space left empty; it's like a minnow in a koi pond!
I have 98 characters left so have to leave out how to improve it. Kinda makes the point for me.
Nicely said. I love your analogy of a minnow in a koi pond!

I agree lag is clientside including their internet connection and computer hardware. So any complaints of that should be dealt to the financial provider of the home or thyself not KI.

I have the RBF and for the fields, corn row setup looks great and themey but it takes so many pieces to make it happen. Indoors I have a bobblehead collection. I have 3 tables full of bobbleheads and each one counts as an item. What about the walls? There are so many options for decorating walls but the limit makes it really hard to narrow stuff down.

Survivor
May 11, 2009
1
I don't know what the solution should be, but I cant tell you how disappointed I am with the amount of space on the midday estate. I built my dream castle only to find that each block counts as one item. I just got started decorating it and came up short, so now it just looks silly. What a waste of money that was, I might as well go back to the wizard city house, Not my favorite, but at least I could decorate it completely

Survivor
Sep 13, 2011
4
I would like to point out (as OP) that this thread was never about whether or not all players want the versatility. The objective was to present KI with ways to leverage increasing the maximum while making business sense. There are FAR more players dissatisfied with the limits than those who think that what exists is fine and that we need never improve upon existing features. I hate to break it to those disapproving few: no game ever lasts if it doesn't continue to improve and satisfy the majority of their customers.

If you are a player and have an opinion on whether or not an increase should happen, I humbly ask you to not respond. There are plenty of older threads that discuss that very topic. THIS TOPIC is about ways to support it from the business side of things.