So don't collect things you don't want to keep. Simple.
That's actually my side of the argument. Thanks for proving my point: since players didn't come back, they didn't care enough to keep the houses and items inside.
If you want to believe it's so cut and dry, what can I say? Enjoy the denial.
I've come to expect such non-answer answers from you. What can
I say? One more time: if a player doesn't want to lose a house and soulstones, then the person needs to keep the account active. It
is very cut-and-dry.
Try reading and replying to what I said in the context of this thread and you'll find it has nothing to do with game mechanics or vollems.
How ironic for you to say that when
you brought up a thread you still seem to be sore about. But game mechanics
are relevant in this thread: a house goes poof a few months after the account goes unpaid. It's a promise any UO player can bank on. In the U.S., if someone doesn't pay for a storage unit, most companies then have the right to auction off the contents. While UO treats contents differently, of course, the principle is still the same: pay up or lose it.
Again, read what I said. It's not difficult to understand. I didn't call for an extension to the 90 days. I don't agree full soulstones should be on this list and turned in for points. As I explained earlier.
I have read what you write. You haven't read what I write. Whether or not soulstones are worth points, the house went poof because the person didn't care enough. Why should it matter to you what happens to the soulstones?
For someone who thinks I was sore about a previous thread, it's kinda funny that you are the one who keeps bringing those old thread discussions up.
You were the one to bring up an old thread, so don't complain when I do the same. Besides, I'm renowned for an excellent memory, and it's a point you refuse to address.
You said these are just pixels. Well, are you still maintaining that? You can't have it both ways.
How on earth can you tell the circumstances behind every IDOC you find in UO? You can't. In the real world people have lives, they get sick, they get called up for work on short notice, they are simply human enough to forget things at times. Everyone including you is susceptible to real life. And to issues with Origin and account management. To state that these items were left behind on purpose is just rediculous. You are placing responsibility for IDOCs quite firmly at the feet of their owners when you say they left soulstones behind purposely.
That last sentence is
exactly what I'm saying. Someone's IDOC means the player didn't care enough. That isn't to say the player cared zero, but that it wasn't important enough to maintain the account. I knew someone for whom UO was so important that she kept her account active for years and got a better PC, meanwhile lamenting in the game how she couldn't afford new shoes for her daughter. It's all about people's priorities, and an IDOC demonstrates that UO was no longer a priority for someone.
And you've never ever heard of a player having a RL issue that took longer than a few months to resolve. Or that they just had a busy time at work and forgot to renew after a UO break... left it a bit late and lost a house? Or they had trouble with customer service and account management/Origin. I would love to live in your world where all my UO friends have managed everything just fine. Where RL stayed out the way so they could pay their accounts and keep everything fine. But that's not how the world is.
If someone got busy at work and let an account lapse, then clearly the game was not that important. Years ago when subscriptions were only per-month, and I had only one credit card, I bought a game time code. It's especially easy now to keep accounts alive when a game can be set to renew every six months. After a number of exploits ruined PvP, I spent over a few
years not playing UO, doing little more than logging in every several weeks, yet my accounts remained active because I cared enough to pay somewhere around $1000 in the chance I'd return. When a credit card expired, I made sure to log in and put in the date of the new one.
I'm not showing you anyone, or their details. Other players are entitled to their privacy, I'm not passing on even rough details of what happened just to satisfy your curiosity. But if you can come up with 2 examples by yourself you don't need me telling you more.
In other words, you can't defend your claim and don't even know, but will stay in your typical fashion of a non-answer answer.
There simply haven't been any such people. If someone hasn't come back in 90 days, then everything in the house is fair game for others.
That's it. It doesn't matter to the original owner if the soulstones are junked, left to decay at the IDOC, or put in a museum where the original owner may never find them. After all, you said these are only "pixels." As I call them, they're representations of time, but even then, at some point they no longer had enough value for the person to care. Yet you lament that people will have an incentive to throw soulstones that are no different than any IDOC loot, namely that the owner didn't consider it important enough to keep the account open. As "history" they're as valuable as the knowledge of my lunch yesterday: important to those with me, but not enough for everyday people to care.
Still not baming the owners huh?
Thanks for not reading my posts. I am not "baming" owners (is that Queen's I've never heard?), but in the end they're responsible. They controlled their UO destinies, but they didn't care enough to keep the accounts active and preserve their houses and what-not, or at least put soulstones in the bank. They're lucky the Devs haven't implemented something like a character wipe for unpaid accounts, say, after 2 or maybe 5 years.
Wow, searching back in old threads for quotes.... If it wasn't so funny it would be creepy.
I didn't have to search very hard, because I remembered distinctly the point you kept hammering about things being "pixels." The lesson for you is to be consistent in what you say.
"Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong." - Ayn Rand
Again, you have no idea if a player intended to come back or not. If you can't get that idea into your head, I don't think there's much point in me explaining anything beyond it.
If a player "intended," he/she clearly didn't have much desire. It's established that after 90 days, a house goes poof, so there is no sympathy deserved for someone who fails to heed the warning. There's an old joke about two economists. Both were looking inside the window of a Ferrari dealership at the new model. One said, "I really wish I had one." The other looked at him and said, "No, you don't."
When you understand the punch line, you'll understand that if a person really wants to preserve his accounts, he'll do what it takes to keep them open. I can't believe you've extended this thread over a simple bottom line.