Well, most people seem to immediately like this but some of us still doubt, maybe we just misunderstand the whole idea. I only want to add that I am not arguing against a player's house, only against its location in another plane.
(I am also puzzled that so many people willingly accept the pyramids of teleportation but I said that I wouldn't argue hehe). I think the player’s house is a good achievement of RPGs, it is not only “a place to store all our trifles”, also is an organization system who adds a strategy touch. But if a castle is too common for the Divinity series, imho there are still ways to do that, keeping the immersion:
abandoned town,
ancient ruins,
behind a waterfall,
the top of a mountain,
the underground,
a vault (in context), my favorite is
a sailable ship, and many more options.
But I'm just speculating and Larian's idea could be much better.
I really don't see how a house adds a "strategy touch" or how it even is an organization system, could you elaborate on that?
In BG2 I just used a couple of containers in Waukeen's Promenade to store and organize all my stuff, worked just fine.
They *can* add to a game but only if you get sufficient freedom to decorate them (and I've only really seen that in one game, an MMO: EverQuest 2). Even in the Elder Scrolls games your freedom to decorate your home(s) is minimal and their main use is for the non-respawning containers.
So far the only (single player) RPGs I've encountered where a "house" added anything of value (except for storage/crafting) was KotOR (and by extension ME, if you count those as RPGs), because your house was also your main means of transportation.
If someone could enlighten me as to what I'm missing, because I must be missing something given the popularity of housing...
