I need feedback for a game that I am creating.

I've always hated the way Syrnia and most of these games deal with the player house. Specifically that you can just kinda have a separate house at almost every location.

If I went with a single house per player (or per island if we don't do instanced)

Option A — House as a fixed location on the island:
Every player's house is at the same "Residential District" or "Farmlands" location. You travel there like any other location. Farming and Husbandry happens there. Feels grounded in the world.

Option B — House as a personal instance (OSRS style):
Your house exists outside the normal world. You access it from any town (or a specific town on each island/landmass). It's private, personal, fully yours. Farming/Husbandry happens there. The tradeoff is it feels pretty disconnected from the world geography. It's more a focus on gameplay, rather than realism.

Option C — Hybrid
There's a "Farmlands" location on the island that anyone can travel to. Your personal farm plot is there. Your stables are there. Your house is a separate instance you access from the port city specifically. Farming is tied to the location, not the house.

Option D — Exactly like Syrnia.

Option E — Banks and Houses: (Courtesy of Clydex)
Banks exist in more convenient areas (such as port cities) and can be used to store items / gold, similar to the system in Runescape.
Houses exist for at /least/ owning land and the Farming/Husbandry skill (although more could be added). Likely only one house per player per island/landmass.

Any thoughts?

Edited on 23-04-2026 01:12

I'd go with Option A personally

Option D, except let me build a house for someone else without having to get rid of my house first!

Anything but c

No thank you. I don't see anything wrong with the current housing system, besides that it's a pain finding specific items in houses with hundreds different types of items.

Only issue I have with houses is I cant own one at a location and build another for someone else. This is a pain in the neck.

Updated the first line to make it more clear I am not speaking about feedback for Syrnia.

Ahh, I totally misunderstood. I didn't spot that this was in off-topic.

I'd probably lean towards option A. There's something nice about players hanging out at one location visiting their homes, as long as they can't negatively interact towards other players. (orbs!)

I personally think if realism was intentional, 99% of us don't have additional properties / houses etc.

Therefore, 1 house per player in total.

Syrnia has made it far too convenient and removed risk with houses available at the majority of town locations.

Therefore 1 house, then what you can do is as your construction / carpentry level increases, you can upgrade your house size, furnishings, unlocking more capacity and the ability to search your house, make it more visually appealing.

Without knowing your concept or design intent for the game. There would be more various things to consider that could then give a passive bonus to anything done in your house.

It only makes sense to build a house wherever there is land available for sale. Land and houses should be separate entities and land can be finite. Once you buy land, you have to prepare it; then you can build a house. Farms also take land and require preparation. If I was developing a game, land would be a concept, not just houses and farms. If all the land is taken up, then you would have to buy land from another player for your house or farm.

Greensky, I do like that idea.

My main issue with it is... I can't really foresee how many players will play the game in its lifetime. I couldn't even begin to HAZARD a guess as to how much land should be available at each location.

Also not all locations would be suitable for a house, not all would be suitable for farming, not all would be suitable for raising livestock. Which is fine, but that would lower even more the available areas for someone looking for all three, or even two.

Also also, one issue I foresee is skill gates. Ideally, the first island would grow first island crops, and you would raise the tier 1 livestock there. Then you reach a high eenough level and move to the next island and raise the new livestock there and grow the new crops there. This would be far more difficult if you had to deal with HOPING you make it there in time to buy land before it's all sold, then having to find a player willing to not utterly scalp the pricing back to you.

Also what is stopping a rich player just buying up all the land and hoarding it? Could always have an arbitrary cap as to how much land one player can own, but still. I think overall in THIS style of game, I'd have a hard time making that work.

St0rmz_, I actually do love the idea of having just one single house.
My main issue with that is, as the world grows and expands, it'll be increasingly difficult to get back to your house when needed, and you'll have to go increasingly farther just to switch out your inventory. Especially for combat.

Also building houses in Talaran will be more of a long-term investment with steps involved, and not just something that's crazy cheap, quick, and easy like in Syrnia.

I think overall due to this, a cap of one per island/landmass makes the most sense to me.