# Dreamies, Tiers, and the Flawed concepts that have arisen in AC:NL



## feminist (Jul 23, 2015)

This may be a little long winded, but ever since I have joined The Bell Tree (which has been a great experience overall), I've noticed some things that have been weighing on my mind. 
First and foremost, I would like to say that there is really no "wrong" way of playing Animal Crossing. There technically is no "cheating" -- not even hacking is necessarily cheating. Time traveling, plot resetting, and trading villagers are all built into the game. But, with that being said, a certain type of elitism has arisen that really bugs me. Getting all of the villagers you want is great! But where's the fun in that? Where's the fun in shelling out 20 million bells for a villager?
The ranking and bandwagon concepts that exist, not just on The Bell Tree, but also sites like Tumblr and Reddit (which also have different villager popularity standards from The Bell Tree), have essentially created internet hiveminds on what villagers are worthy and which ones are not. I've recently spent a lot of time browsing the Villager Trading Plaza threads and have grown to seriously hating "autovoiding." In fact, a lot of my (so-called) dreamies would probably be autovoided villagers. So the villager market that exists on the internet simply dismisses 50-60% of the villagers because they are not "tier 1" or "tier 2" villagers. In fact, I _hate_ visiting dream towns that are all Julian, Marshal, Stitches, Lolly, Rosie, Beau, Diana, Fang, Marina, and Zucker and I also dislike most of those villagers. 
I want to encourage EVERYONE to give up the dreamie stance on playing and start looking into loving every villager that comes to your town. Not that you have to like every villager, but you would be surprised at the ones you come to love. For example, I love unpopular villagers like Merry, Broccolo, Cousteau, Vladimir, Naomi, and Alli. But, it's very hard to find this villagers because people just shoo them out of their towns before even getting to know them. It's sad to see this happen to so many excellent villagers.
I've reset my town twice now, and I have to say I regret the first reset, but not the second one (which happened back at the beginning of this month). In my very first town, I had villagers like Julian, Marshal, Ankha, and several other pretty popular villagers. I grew to love some of them, but I also found the great disappointment that came with some of these villagers. I've never paid for a villager, but I did win Julian in a raffle. When I came to pick him up, I was ecstatic because "wow! what a cool and popular villager! He's hard to come by and I got him for free!" But the longer I had him, the more disappointed I was with him. I grew to love the widely obscure blue snooty cow Naomi, but I grew to dislike the unbelievably popular Julian. This is because Naomi was a unique villager that you don't see a lot, and surprising gem. The more I knew her, the more I loved her.
This second time that I have reset, I'm focusing on getting to know ALL of my villagers. And sure, I've found that I don't really like Curlos or Frobert, and I'll let them leave when they ask, but I also will find surprisingly great villagers like Tammi and Tia. 
So, please: try to change the way you look at the game and at villager popularity tiers. They're just bourgeoisie ways of making the game about popularity and elitism. 


Thoughts? Comments? Disagreements?


----------



## Melyora (Jul 23, 2015)

I don't have a dreamie list, only villagers that I really like. Fang is a must-have for me, but that is because in my first town ever, Fang randomly moved unto my only perfect peach sapling. Right behind my house. Believe me, I hated him. And he was so grumpy! Arggh!
But once he stayed longer, the friendship built up and we became best friends.
It was only like a halfyear after that that I even discovered the Bell Tree forum. 

For two times now, I have Ankha as a original villager. But I don't like her. We don't click. She is quite unique in design and house, but no she just is not meant for me.

I just go with what I like! The tiers don't matter to me.


----------



## Zandy (Jul 23, 2015)

Well - when it comes down to it, all of the villagers who are of the same personality type will in general, act the same way.  The only real difference between a popular lazy villager and an unpopular lazy villager is their appearance, and I guess that some people have a preference for villagers that look a certain way.

The tiers are ultimately constructed by the users but at the same time - users also assist in maintaining the tiers to some extent.  There will be users who like popular villagers because they genuinely like the way they look while there will be other people who like popular villagers because they're popular.  Ultimately, it's everyone's individual preference on how they play their game and who they choose for their towns.  

Personally, I'm not a fan of most of the tier 1 and tier 2 villagers.  They're all cute but cute isn't really my style.  That said - I'm a huge fan of most of the cat villagers and made my town have 9/10 villagers be cats and Alfonso (the lazy alligator) who is tier 5, is my tenth villager.  It's sad to see some villagers that I like be on the lower tiers - such as Stinky - since they get considered far less frequently than the popular villagers.  At the same time - you get the benefit of having a more unique town too .


----------



## feminist (Jul 23, 2015)

Melyora said:


> I don't have a dreamie list, only villagers that I really like. Fang is a must-have for me, but that is because in my first town ever, Fang randomly moved unto my only perfect peach sapling. Right behind my house. Believe me, I hated him. And he was so grumpy! Arggh!
> But once he stayed longer, the friendship built up and we became best friends.
> It was only like a halfyear after that that I even discovered the Bell Tree forum.
> 
> ...



I agree! For me, I have to have Merry in my town because she's been my best animal crossing friend since 2010. so if I had a dreamie, it would be her.


----------



## Serif (Jul 23, 2015)

I think having dreamies is ok. I have my own and they're strewn throughout the tiers. But I also think people should try to enjoy the villagers they get along the way too. 

Like I love my village now but I'll never forget villagers like Celia and Puddles who were not only some of my best friends but stuck with me through Loki's infancy. 

The tiers mostly exist as a price guide. There is an economy in the AC world and obviously some people will take advantage of it. As you said, there's no wrong way to play. 

I think most people with the tier 1's do genuinely love them. That's why they're so sought after. It is unoriginal true, but it's also our own individual game and we like who we like. I'd like my little Rosie the same if she was a tier 5. 

I do agree with auto voiding, but most cyclers will be really kind in holding tier 5's for those who desire them. Cou did that for me with Puck and I was just so happy to finally get it. It was a hunt! I had lurked so many threads. 

But yea. I do have a certain dislike for auto voids, even though I do understand the reasons behind it.


----------



## Melyora (Jul 23, 2015)

But I don't mind people who have dreamie list and people who sell and buy villagers.

Because for me, I for 'what I like'. But Fang is tier 1, and that is just because for a lot of people he is 'what they like'. 
I see the Tier list more as a window to show what most people like. 
It can't be helped, popular villagers are just popular. My sister has mostly deer and wolves in her town, whom are high Tiers, but she got them just because she likes the species and their designs. She has Winnie the horse because she likes her. She got Diana the deer because she likes her.

If people are happy to sell and buy villagers, I think it's great! Both sides get happy from the trade!
It is logical for the less popular villagers to be (auto)voided, because there just are less people who want to pick them up. Cyclers could sometimes hold them for days before someone comes along who wants it.
So yeah, I really don't mind the whole dreamie, tier and trading villagers.


----------



## Serif (Jul 23, 2015)

Also I had Vladimir in a past town and boy was he amazing for puns lol. Loved him.


----------



## The221Believer (Jul 23, 2015)

I mean, my Julian is an example of the very thing you want me to do--he showed up in my campsite in my first town, and I fell in love. Should I not have wanted him back when I reset? Most of my villagers are ones that I adore myself, not based on popularity here, or part of my theme: Tia is a teapot. What else do you expect to find in a Sherlock-themed town? And Drago, being a dragon, is an oblique reference, so he's my one lazy as I hate the personality otherwise. I also keep space available to constantly move through villagers in Baker, because I like variety. I'm still not giving up my favourites, and because the terminology for those favourites is dreamies...that's what they are to me. 

I don't think it's necessarily flawed to rank villagers; without the ranking (incidentally, because of the human knack for pattern-finding and categorising, that is just a thing that is to be expected), it could be harder to determine what villagers are best for me to spend time running a giveaway. Similarly, autovoiding may be contrary to the spirit of the game, but it's also necessary--we all have limits on our time, and there's only so much time one can spend cycling before they have to move on, sad as it might be for the villagers that get pushed out. Am I supposed to wait weeks for a claimant for one particular villager when I don't have infinite time with wi-fi, as my campus network won't work for the 3DS? No. That's absurd. It's not about popularity or elitism--or at least, not entirely. And popularity itself can only be described as a measurement, not a concrete abstract. I think I could only value that argument if I saw a major trend of "lol I have Marshal he's so much better than your stupid Tipper your town sucks because it doesn't have Marshal"...and eh, that doesn't appear to be a thing. In fact, there's still a lot of appreciation for those "unpopular" villagers, and comments on them. 

There's also the machinist argument of "they're all pixels with dialogue options; trading them is like trading closets". 

All that said, Wart Jr is still an awful villager. He killed some of my blue roses and my carnations and he wrecked my path for a while. >> Ruuuuude.


----------



## Lazy Faye (Jul 23, 2015)

It is always important to remember that "Variety is like a pinch of cumin in the simmering soup pot of life!" 

Mitzi used to say that all of the time back in ACWW. Of course, when I played that game, I ignored that advice. I ended up cycling through all of the villagers so that I could lock in the most popular villagers that I thought looked the best. Eventually, I grew bored of talking to the same villagers all of the time.

This time, in my ACNL town, I am taking it easy. I am not going to force my villagers to stay forever.


----------



## yoshiskye1 (Jul 23, 2015)

I agree with this post to an extent. I don't get how people just decide on villagers they _must_ have and keep that up until they get them all. My list of dreamies is constantly changing and is decided by 3 things. 
 1) I want to have at least one of each personality in my town for the sake of diversity and of course unlocking PWPs
2) Do they fit my theme? I'm restarting my town soon to have a sorta natural, cherry blossom pink and pastel blue themed Japanese, cute kinda town. (also in case you think i'm being stereotypical and racist, i'm half Japanese. oh wait it's still stereotypical and racist? oh.... Back on topic!)
3) have I met them and liked them? i'd never buy a villager I've never met. 'tis not my style
I hate autovoiding too. I get that most cycling towns are made to mainly cater for the majorities dreamies but still. I cri

However..

I think the tiers are accurate enough and should be kept. They are there to ensure that pricing is fair and are a good trading guide so people know what response to expect when selling villagers. I also think that many tier one/two villagers are there for a reason. Supply and demand my friend. And most people like them not "because they are popular" but for reasons like:
They fit a theme
They like the villager design/house design
They find the villager's personality likeable
More personal reasons eg. they were in an old town etc

I for one love stitches. He won't really fit the theme for my next town but I want him there anyway 
He was in my ACCF (lets go to the city in the EU. thanks Nintendo) town and I just adored him beyond measure. When I signed up for this forum less than a week ago I didn't think he would really be popular as his design and house I thought would be seen garish- like pietro. And I love merengue because i'm a sucker for the normal personality and her house is OP and her design just so damn cute and creative just <3
But yea. I've come to love so many of the less popular villagers. Friga was in my ACWW town and she's one of the few snooty villagers I love. Maybe it's just me being all nostalgic but she's a fave. Also I love the penguins THEY SO CUTE AND SMALL AHH I WANNA HUG ONE!!!

*ahem*
but yeah I see where you're coming from and agree that it's sad that people don't give villagers a chance and just decide "i want him him and her and gonna get rid of this one as soon as they arrive"
however I am also a supporter of the tier system and can honestly see why so many of the upper tier villagers are so popular

speech over

*closes book, removes glasses and fades into darkness*


----------



## HopeForHyrule (Jul 23, 2015)

I like to think I have a decent mix of villagers from all tiers and while I do dislike the tier system, I understand it's reason for existence.

It does make it difficult to find villagers in a lower tier, though. This is why I doubt I'll ever get Gaston unless by some miracle he winds up in my campsite.

The most popular villager I have is Stitches and Lolly. Stitches I've loved since I first played WW and Lolly is my final remaining starting villager in my main town. So it's mostly my sentiment that's keeping her.


----------



## Astro Cake (Jul 23, 2015)

I was under the impression villager tiers predated New Leaf.


----------



## Ichigo. (Jul 23, 2015)

I mean, your points are valid, but then doesn't it just go back to how people should play the game the way they want to? To be fair, I played the game alone for a number of months (no experience, no google, no multiplayer) before I decided to reset for villagers (villager reseting, not plot reseting), and the only high tier villager I got as a random move-in was Erik, before I even knew villagers were ranked by popularity online. 

I ended up not really liking most of the lower tier villagers that had a brief stint in my town (Graham, Hugh, Hans, Cheri, Peck, Gwen, etc), even after getting to know them for a while, simply because I wanted to befriend them to get them to move, and I wanted, I guess, cuter villagers. Then I found this website, the whole tier system, and looked into villagers more. I don't really understand why people have such disdain towards tier 1 and 2 villagers, because I think a lot of them are really cute, and apparently they offer something that a lot of players seem to look for. I like the tiers, even if they aren't 100% representative because they provide a guideline.

Autovoiding also isn't THAT terrible. I mean, even if cyclers/traders didn't autovoid, I'm not sure there'd be enough demand for those villagers to be worth the time they'd spend to get them into a nice home. Plus, the player could always request that the villager not be autovoided. I've seen that happen many times. There is a flaw with the tier system because some (though I think a very little amount of) people might be encouraged to obtain villagers solely due to their popularity. But again, I don't think that's the case most of the time. But tbh, it's a game. Play it how you want to.


----------



## CainWolf (Jul 23, 2015)

The main reason I had any "dreamies" to begin with is due to having a themed town, plus Whitney because I really wanted a wolf and she seemed best. The only wolf that ever appeared in my campsite was Wolfgang and he just had to appear when I was at ten villagers. The only way I could get a wolf in my town was to spend a few million bells. It wasn't about popularity or elitism, it's just that wolves have always been my favorite animals since I was little and I wanted at least one in my town. I already had too many cranky and smug villagers so pretty much all the male wolves were redundant and of the three female wolves Whitney looked best to me.

People choose dream villagers for their own reasons. I don't think most people go for popular for the sake of popular and nothing else, or at the very least I haven't seen anyone act "elite" because they have a high tier villager. That would be more amusing than annoying really, can you imagine someone being all "Look at how awesome I am at this game about catching bugs and talking to animals. You can tell I have skills because I have a unicorn in my town, an *original* unicorn, with his normal furniture and everything, you jelly?"


----------



## Candy83 (Jul 23, 2015)

feminist said:


> This may be a little long winded, but ever since I have joined The Bell Tree (which has been a great experience overall), I've noticed some things that have been weighing on my mind.
> First and foremost, I would like to say that there is really no "wrong" way of playing Animal Crossing. There technically is no "cheating" -- not even hacking is necessarily cheating. Time traveling, plot resetting, and trading villagers are all built into the game. But, with that being said, a certain type of elitism has arisen that really bugs me. Getting all of the villagers you want is great! But where's the fun in that? Where's the fun in shelling out 20 million bells for a villager?
> The ranking and bandwagon concepts that exist, not just on The Bell Tree, but also sites like Tumblr and Reddit (which also have different villager popularity standards from The Bell Tree), have essentially created internet hiveminds on what villagers are worthy and which ones are not. I've recently spent a lot of time browsing the Villager Trading Plaza threads and have grown to seriously hating "autovoiding." In fact, a lot of my (so-called) dreamies would probably be autovoided villagers. So the villager market that exists on the internet simply dismisses 50-60% of the villagers because they are not "tier 1" or "tier 2" villagers. In fact, I _hate_ visiting dream towns that are all Julian, Marshal, Stitches, Lolly, Rosie, Beau, Diana, Fang, Marina, and Zucker and I also dislike most of those villagers.
> I want to encourage EVERYONE to give up the dreamie stance on playing and start looking into loving every villager that comes to your town. Not that you have to like every villager, but you would be surprised at the ones you come to love. For example, I love unpopular villagers like Merry, Broccolo, Cousteau, Vladimir, Naomi, and Alli. But, it's very hard to find this villagers because people just shoo them out of their towns before even getting to know them. It's sad to see this happen to so many excellent villagers.
> ...



You've made some excellent points. And what you wrote, in total, is insightful.

I have four game copies of "Animal Crossing: New Leaf" covering three active towns?Applewin; ACNLpics; and Foster?and the last copy is loosely used for cycling and/or developing hybrids.

Two previous towns I had?Progress (mayor was Cameron) and Temps (mayor was Alicia)?had numerous Dreamies. I reset those towns because they were limiting. I ended up transferring some villagers to my active towns.

I joined this site in November 2013. I didn't first take notice of _Bell Tree Forums_ member Hound00med's thread until around January 2014. I was intrigued. So, I went after some particular villagers. Julian was my first. And then I got some other villagers from auctions. Eventually, with the gradual buying of additional game cartridges, I no longer needed to participate in Villager Trading Plaza.

What I find works best for me, personally, is having each town have a good combination of villagers who seem to blend well with a town. I like to have some of them be Dreamies?typically no more than four (of ten)?who have been genuinely popular at this site; but, not for the sake of getting them; but, because I truly appreciate them. (_My favorite overall:_ Stitches.) It is more interesting to me to come across towns where not all villagers are Tier One. I like coming across some underrated gems, and I've taken to having gradually added them to my active towns. (I am truly glad that I have Hamlet in Applewin; Eugene in ACNLpics; and Muffy in Foster. That's to name one for each of my three active towns. They are all wonderful creations!)

Much of "Animal Crossing: New Leaf" is what you make of it. If you're at it for quite a while (for me, it will be two years come August 17)?you look at your experience a bit differently. My best decision overall: keeping Applewin. I've been playing it since August 17, 2013. And I have three villagers still present who were there on Day #01: Jambette, Scoot, and Twiggy. This has established a long-term bond. That makes it feel _personal_. 

I am feeling like there's next to nothing meaningful I can creatively do with any of these towns (with exception of Foster; because that town needs some more black hybrids. I even have Mayor Allie mention it with her greeting in the most recently updated _Dream_). So, my thoughts lately are in asking myself, "How much longer will _ actually play 'Animal Crossing: New Leaf'?" I don't know._


----------



## AppleBitterCrumble (Jul 23, 2015)

I LOVE unpopular villagers, I have a mix of popular and unpopular but I have to say that Tabby is currently my favorite animal right now because she looks like how tabby/ally cats look.  But like then you talk to her and shes a peppy and all and her house is super pretty so I ended up loving her c: But to agree, seeing the same villagers in every town looks a bit plain and boring imo.  Maybe some people should try and get a town with villagers that look ugly or have a certain theme to them.  it would be a cute idea if you get over some bad flaws.


----------



## Awesomeness1230 (Jul 23, 2015)

I have dreamies. However they are almost all Tier 5. I love Poppy because she is so cute, and she is Tier 2. I agree with
you that towns with all Tier 1 villagers should give lower tiers a chance. My dreamies are always changing and I consider every single villager, regardless of what tier they are in. 

The tiers are just price reference. It's only really a fact apart from that. Most higher tier villagers are worthy of their tier.
A few are not. For instance, I discovered someone on the forums has Beau as a dreamie just because he's a deer.
Really. But to be fair we, TBT, choose the TBT popularity list as a community, and I know lots of people think the same
as you. They all get a say. Who knows, maybe the tiers will have completely swapped around! 

Autovoid is a very unfair thing. It should be stopped. I mean, more people have at least one tier 5 dreamie, and autovoid just makes it harder for everyone to obtain dreamies.


----------



## yoshiskye1 (Jul 23, 2015)

this is like that thread that got taken down a few days ago called "abolish tiers" but i think that the difference is that the OP was very thoughtful with their post and the people coming to the thread and posting are actually considering the topic intelligently. I thought the other thread was interesting but it got very out of hand very quickly. i'm glad this thread popped up though as it's a relevant and interesting topic


----------



## Mairmalade (Jul 23, 2015)

I didn't even notice that tiers were a thing until recently and I don't care either way. There are villagers I like that are commonly well-liked and villagers I like that are uncommonly liked. Tiers and ratings will always be in place if there's something you can apply a rating or tier to. If there's a new cool toy on the block that fits a fad that kids are into for example -- everyone is probably going to want it. Both for standards and even to their own amusement/liking. 

Anyway, I don't have a strong opinion on the matter. People are free to do as they please and get villagers they like. Elitism can get pretty scary, though.


----------



## Sona (Jul 23, 2015)

You have some popular villagers in your town right now xD

I myself have loveloveloved Melba, Gayle and Walker despite being 'tier 5' since they are super adorable cx
However I think people are allowed to like whom they like. Tier ones are really based off their looks, as they are seen as more visually nice to be around. I'm like that too LOL I love cute villagers! Merengue is the whole reason I got into AC:NL  I think she's adorable AND pink is my favorite color! Naomi scares me honestly :c
I'm too tired to write a lengthy post, the only thing I find wrong with tiers are the pricing ; v ;


----------



## Patypus (Jul 23, 2015)

It's true that the tier list is based on popularity and demand, and I find it sad that a lot of low tier villagers are autovoids in the trading system. But with that said, why not take a different perspective on the whole tier list and think about it this way: the low tier villagers are so much harder to come by and are rarer to see, that sometimes being able to find them is really rewarding c: In fact, it's because that there are so little out there that I really have a hard time understanding the economy behind the trade: here we have so many sellers autovoiding tier 4 and tier 5 villagers in search of tier 1s and 2s, yet with such a huge supply of them (I literally see at least like 5 of the same tier 1 villagers in a day), they still cost a fortune, whereas that one time your tier 5 dreamie shows up they're absolutely free. I would honestly pay more for a lower tier just because they are so much harder to find! But then that's just my take on the whole tier list thing. I just don't like cycle towns that don't even bother to list their low tier villagers, because honestly I would be willing to pay the same price that a tier 1 villager would generate, but I don't even have the option to because they're not listed :/


----------



## lizzy541 (Jul 23, 2015)

before i joined TBT, i had tons of villagers that i loved in a wide range of AC games. i didn't know what tiers were, i just liked a villager if they were cute and made the game more fun. i do have dreamies though, but most of them are villagers i have had and LOVED. sure some of them are higher tiers, but they all have a spot in my heart. just like you said, i don't get the hype about most popular villagers. i hated stitches, and the octopus creep me out. marshal annoys me too because his face makes him look so high-strung.


----------



## Serif (Jul 23, 2015)

Patypus said:


> It's true that the tier list is based on popularity and demand, and I find it sad that a lot of low tier villagers are autovoids in the trading system. But with that said, why not take a different perspective on the whole tier list and think about it this way: the low tier villagers are so much harder to come by and are rarer to see, that sometimes being able to find them is really rewarding c: In fact, it's because that there are so little out there that I really have a hard time understanding the economy behind the trade: here we have so many sellers autovoiding tier 4 and tier 5 villagers in search of tier 1s and 2s, yet with such a huge supply of them (I literally see at least like 5 of the same tier 1 villagers in a day), they still cost a fortune, whereas that one time your tier 5 dreamie shows up they're absolutely free. I would honestly pay more for a lower tier just because they are so much harder to find! But then that's just my take on the whole tier list thing. I just don't like cycle towns that don't even bother to list their low tier villagers, because honestly I would be willing to pay the same price that a tier 1 villager would generate, but I don't even have the option to because they're not listed :/



I feel similarly, which is why I overpaid for Puck~
I've noticed more cyclers not auto-voiding tier 4s and 5s. It's a trend I hope continues~


----------



## faithmads (Jul 23, 2015)

I agree with this 100%. In my old town, I had Tiffany, Dotty, Sydney, and Nate as my four favorite villagers. When I decided to reset my town (It was an ugly map layout and I wasn't a fan of where my favs' houses were placed), I made an entirely new list of dreamies and only kept pictures of Dotty, Nate, and Tiffany. My new dreamies are all T1's and such, because my plan for the town is to make it fairy tale, perfect, and dreamy. After a couple months of working to make it perfect, I realized what I was doing. Why was I so caught up in making it beautiful and perfect? Why did I feel like I needed to have all tier 1 and 2 dreamies to make the town perfect? I don't even like some of the people I had, I just chose them because they looked fairy tale ish and were popular. when i realized it i instantly went out and got another cartridge, and i play it in my free time to get to know the less popular villagers and hopefully fall in love again like i did with my original town c:


----------



## feminist (Jul 23, 2015)

Just a couple thoughts after I came back and (to my surprise) found a lot of responses! I think that this is a great discussion and I want to add a couple points!
1. OF COURSE everyone has "dreamies" per say! One of mine was Merry and so was Ankha! I'm just saying that basing your whole experience on dreamies is surprisingly non rewarding. (which I discovered in my NL town)
2. Yeah I do have a couple of popular villagers in my town, but the only one i deliberately acquired was Ankha. The others were actually random move-ins.
3. If you got a popular villager by chance, there isn't anything wrong with that and I never objected that.
4. There is nothing wrong with liking popular villagers! There is, of course, a reason that they are popular and it's because they're likable. That is to say, appearance wise... Which is why I encourage people to give "ugly" lower tier villagers a chance.
5. I understand the pricing reason for tiers, but they also effect opinions on villagers no? I feel like the discourse between popular/unpopular villagers is similar to the difference between high-end designer clothes and thrifting. In many ways, both are trendy and it's easy to appreciate both, but they also exist in different subcultures of different people. Maybe that's why people who don't use forums like this would have far less biased opinions on villagers and may be surprised to see that anyone even likes Diana (~~"oh how gaudy she is!"~~). Maybe cycling threads should be less pricing, and there can be auctions for every villager that are not based on popularity. Many people are surprised when no one will bet on their Beau auction.
6. thank you all for responding! this is an interesting subject!


----------



## Voluptua Sneezelips (Jul 24, 2015)

This is a great thread. Very interesting indeed! I wonder if there'd be a way to study whether there's an effect (or what the effect is) of the tier system on the "wantedness" of villagers.

As I obtain more villagers in my 3 towns that I'd like to keep, I lament the loss of the "free" space that I allot to letting villagers move through. As my towns fill with more "keepers", I cherish the free spaces that much more, even though it's a conscious decision to retain the "keepers". There have been times I've decided to let villagers go that have left me with regret, but even though I might miss having them, there's delight to be found in new encounters. 

Some of the initial villagers I had in my main town included Beau (by chance), who I thought was lovely. When he decided to move, I was sad about it, but it was the same level of sadness as when Scoot moved and I never had a chance to stop him. But would I go to the effort of cycling through villagers to get either of them again? Probably not. Would I bid crazy amounts for Beau to get him back? Definitely not. I've had Tom for 2 years and can't imagine my town without him. I'd be gutted if he moved out, but again, would I cycle to get him back? I don't know. Probably not. (This is starting to feel like Highlander: THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!)

For the first 2 years of playing AC, my only contact with other players was through a group of about 100 online friends/ acquaintances who'd all previously played another game together. Villagers didn't come up on offer that often (compared to the forums here) and there was no larger influence on who I/we thought was cute. I never formed a true "dreamie" list for myself; only a loose one of nice-to-haves that I was hoping would maybe move through my town one day.

Here, in the forums, I still didn't assemble a dreamie list because some of the characters I thought were interesting (and some of that interest dated back to AC:WW) were higher-tier and seemed unobtainable because of the demand. That whole "dreamie" thing in our profiles felt weird and difficult to fill out, other than Marcel.

Marcel is one of my hands-down faves and I paid TBT for him, even though he was offered for free, because I was so excited to have a chance at getting him.

Autovoid is sadness. I do understand it, though: I've had the experience of offering up a lower-tier villager as a giveaway (most recently Baabara and her beloved pet sea bass) and there are no takers. I generally won't TT to autovoid as many do (especially if I've had and loved the villager for a couple of years!). But if you're trying to clear space for a dream villager or are running a cycling town, it's understandable that you'd want to keep things moving--especially if you have a reasonable expectation that no one wants that villager. Still, it'd be nice if people would post a villager for at least an hour or two before voiding, just in case.

Maybe an underground buddy network of notifiers or a general registry of seekers is the answer. Something more organised than the straight-up looking-for thread. This would be hard to organise, though. Total pie-in-the-sky and wishful thinking, but I'm imagining a general spreadsheet of villager names. You want that villager, list your name under theirs. If that villager is moving out of someone's town, they could check the list and auto-notify anyone that wants the villager. First to respond gets 'em. Just imaginings. That's all.


----------



## twisty (Jul 24, 2015)

> Some of the initial villagers I had in my main town included Beau (by chance), who I thought was lovely. When he decided to move, I was sad about it, but it was the same level of sadness as when Scoot moved and I never had a chance to stop him. But would I go to the effort of cycling through villagers to get either of them again? Probably not. Would I bid crazy amounts for Beau to get him back? Definitely not. I've had Tom for 2 years and can't imagine my town without him. I'd be gutted if he moved out, but again, would I cycle to get him back? I don't know. Probably not. (This is starting to feel like Highlander: THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!)



This is definitely my thoughts, too. I honestly get frightened by the idea of having my town so locked in, and though one of my absolute favorites (rip in peace, Lobo) moved out unexpectedly, my town's moved on, and I'm not going to purposely cycle until he can return. 

I love having new villagers; it's so wonderful getting to know them, no matter what tier they hail from. I have a dreamie list moreso to figure out who I'd like to experience next, rather than to curate a permanent town. I have a few villagers that I would be heartbroken if they left (ILU IGGLY), but idk, it seems against the spirit of the game to put your town into permanent stasis. 

I also definitely get your criticisms about the tiers system. It creates this super strange supply and demand, where the high-in-supply tier one and two villagers are constantly on the front pages being sold for millions, while the scarce lower tiers, though hard to find, often go for free. I _do_ think some people go for the popular villagers because they get lured in by the hype. I know I bought Beau and Skye on a whim, and just couldn't connect with either of them. Neither just _clicked_, and I let them go while convincing lower tiered villagers to stay. 

That being said, the vast majority of the time, loving a villager isn't something that you can really plan (nostalgia villagers aside). Sometimes you love the villager that you spend 7mil bells on, and sometimes when they arrive, you only feel apathetic towards them. Other times, you fall in love with the impulse free tier 4/5 you snagged from a cycle thread. I dunno, how you feel about a villager is so relative and can change so quickly.


----------



## feminist (Jul 24, 2015)

twisty said:


> This is definitely my thoughts, too. I honestly get frightened by the idea of having my town so locked in, and though one of my absolute favorites (rip in peace, Lobo) moved out unexpectedly, my town's moved on, and I'm not going to purposely cycle until he can return.
> 
> I love having new villagers; it's so wonderful getting to know them, no matter what tier they hail from. I have a dreamie list moreso to figure out who I'd like to experience next, rather than to curate a permanent town. I have a few villagers that I would be heartbroken if they left (ILU IGGLY), but idk, it seems against the spirit of the game to put your town into permanent stasis.
> 
> ...



i just wanted to say that this is great commentary and the points you made are really good!


----------



## Red Cat (Jul 24, 2015)

Here are my thoughts on some of these concepts:

Dreamies: This is the first AC game where I've selected the villagers which I want to live in my town. The biggest reason for this is that in this game compared to the previous AC games, you have so much more control over your town, so my thought was "Why should I design my town with paths, PWPs, etc., but just have random villagers moving in random places?" I don't have a problem with people who want to take what the game gives them, but I don't want to be really OCD with parts of my town and let the RNG decide other parts.

Tiers: This is like the chicken and the egg argument. Are villagers higher tier because they are more popular or are they more popular because they are a higher tier? This could be argued endlessly, so I won't say anything more about it.

Autovoiding: It's just economics. People start bidding wars over Tier 1 villagers while it is difficult to find the one person who really wants your Tier 5 villager. If you are looking for a Tier 5 villager, don't say "I'm looking for (villager)." Say "I'm offering X million bells for (villager)." That gives a cycler an incentive to hang on to your desired villager instead of just autovoiding it.


----------



## Akimari (Jul 24, 2015)

I hadn't even heard of the concept of dreamies before getting more involved with the online AC community, and beforehand I had just taken my villagers as they are. Even though I have dreamies now, a lot of the commentary here is extremely accurate.

The tier system in particular is one thing that I hadn't noticed myself, but is a bit of an issue. You very often see auction/selling threads for T1/2 villagers whilst looking for that pesky T4 or 5 one is near impossible, and if you _do_ happen to find someone who's giving them away, it's likely that a person already beat you to the punch and since most giveaways are first come, first serve, you're SOL. That's another thing - the tier list on the Villager Trading Plaza also states how Tier 5's are "rarely auctioned, giveaways are best" or something along those lines, and I'm sure many users take that very literally and choose to often giveaway or just void tier 5 villagers since they think they can't make a profit off of them at all. 

I've made it my own personal goal to not have a town completely full of JUST dreamies. I have 8 at the moment, and I'm kind of iffy on two of them right now (Marshal and Ruby in particular), but I just feel like it'd be very boring to just have and forever keep the exact same villagers. Honestly, just the thought of that bores me. Even now I'm starting to get a bit tired of some of the same old faces in my town, so I can't even imagine having a set list of 10 dreamies and then just keeping them without ever changing anything ever. 

When it comes to loving a villager, I think it mostly comes down to appearance, hence why all the tier 1's are aesthetically pleasing to the general crowd. I won't deny that I'm the same way - after all, the first thing I do when I get a random move-in is look up the villager online (though I try not to do that anymore so I don't spoil the surprise) and will immediately decide if they're ugly or not. When Hans first moved in, his appearance put me off so much that I was ready to say "See ya!" the moment he decided to move. But now? I can't imagine him getting up and leaving my town. He's a lowly tier 5 yeti-like gorilla, but I can't help but want him to stay. I think there's quite a lot more to loving and connecting with your villagers in your town than just their appearance and tier-rank. I can say from seeing so many Beau's in dream towns that I would *not* connect with him at all, and seeing so many Marshal's in dream towns as well is starting to wear my love for him down. 

Basically, there is flaws in the tier system, though sadly I don't think it's something that can be fixed. As people, we're normally attracted to things that are pleasing to the eyes, and pretty much all of the tier 1's are extremely pleasing or unique enough to have such a status which is usually why they're up there. I do think that more people should give other villagers outside of 10 set dreamies and Tiers 1/2 a chance, and that more people should take risks with auctioning out/selling lower tier villagers rather than just holding a quick giveaway or autovoiding them. 

Hey, maybe the supply/demand market will reverse itself and this time next year we'll have Jambette in a tier 1!


----------



## Wolfgirl786 (Jul 24, 2015)

I remember when I started the game I never knew about the tiers but when I started I played in my brothers town and befriended Marshal and had searched and searched then I had found out he was a tier 1 I sometimes wish he wasn't because everyone wants him but oh well still love my lopez haha


----------



## jax1234 (Jul 24, 2015)

I have 2 towns, one has my favorites, scoot, graham, willow.... not at all tier 1's.  I have had tier 1's and just didn't click with them.  My other town is more of an easy going cycling town.  No one is ever asked to stay but everyone who wants to leave is put up to be rehomed.  I have them all one day.  Yes, I put up the lower tiers ( 3 and under) up for free, but I still give everyone the chance to adopt them.  So far I have been very lucky to get them all adopted.


----------



## Blondieboo13 (Jul 24, 2015)

I don't really have any issues with people having dreamies as long as it's your true opinions and favorites. It annoys me how tiers change people's views on certain villagers though. Like one week someone will want "insert popular villager" then the next week they won't due to it dropping down the tier list.

I have Tier ones on my list but also some lower tiers and some that weren't originally dreamies because of looks but when they came to my town I fell in love with them anyways. It's crazy how many people freak out when the tier list hasn't been updated in a while like they can't form their own opinions without the help of someone else..... Just sell or give away the villagers by what seems logical for the time being, it's really not that hard.

I also pretty much always give my villagers a chance to be adopted, I dont autovoid a villager just because a list says its Tier 5. Everyone atleast needs a chance. =(


----------



## kiti_in_wonderland (Jul 24, 2015)

I agree with the first bit 100%, one thing that annoys me a lot is how some of the members and the staff on here treat those who hack, to me hacking is no different than TT,  etc. As far as the dreamies go, I have made a list and wanted to get them all since in all the previous games I never had anyone I liked that much, but I dislike the ranking and tier system on here (and this would apply to any other site as well). The way I see it its not even an accurate list. I'm sure Beau and Rosie are someone's favorite character, but half the time the "popular" villagers are only so high in demand because some person on here put them with a their 1, and people just want a town that's "good enough". I think every villager should he treated the same, I don't think there's such thing as one being more popular than another ><


----------



## Sanxithe (Jul 24, 2015)

I'm only just starting to know the game, so I can't say I have any "favourites" but those I "favour" in a sense. Right now I'm just letting the villagers come and go and try and meet as many as I can before I determined who're my dreamies. I mean, you can't put them in your dreamie list if you've never had them with you before, right? Get to know your classmates before you pick your friends, as I always say :3


----------



## Sona (Jul 24, 2015)

Liking tier one villagers shouldn't be a crime or something to be looked down upon, you should like who you like. And I think the tier list on here came from who was most requested and that's what made up the tiers?
The people that bother me are the ones who base their towns solely on them being tier 1. In the village popularity thread, it was upsetting how certain users were wanting to know what tier there villagers would be on once the list is updated, because they want to know their sellback value. 
There was a user on this thread who bid 1bil for Beau earlier in the week '_'
I had the hardest time finding Big Top because cyclers would auto-void him or not list him since he was tier 5 ;u;
During my first town I had Merengue and Chief as starting villagers and this was before I knew about TBTforums or tiers, I fell in love with them (that town has since been deleted because I let my nephew play my ds and he made a mistake o;   )
Liking tier ones because you genuinely like them isn't a crime though, you like them and they happen to be top tier, is what I am trying to get at ; v ;


----------



## RynxRawr (Jul 24, 2015)

Well for me personally- my "dreamie" list was always the same, before I even came to the bell tree or began seeing villagers tiered by their "popularity". You would absolutely hate my main town x] because I have ankha, zucker, julian, fauna, chief, molly, pheobe, and kidcat. My last two dreamies are Lolly and Rosie x] I really like cats, I think all of these villagers are cute and they each meet a requirement, that I have one of each personality type in my town ^-^

I don't think that anyone really wants to autovoid or why there is such a huge T5 list >__< but as soon as I finish my main town I am going to work on a second town for my new second batch of dreamies :] I don't think it's that people don't "love" them, but some people have extra copies just to cycle through villagers, I have honestly liked a few T3-T5 villagers, but in order to get a Villager that I wanted, I need to have them leave. I have 4 copies of the game, which I use 2 to cycle through and my Mom does whatever she wants in her town, allowing me to sell villagers she doesn't find appealing all while helping me search for my last 2 dreamies. 

It really depends on how you look at the whole situation, yeah to you it may not be fun having to shell out millions of IGB or TBT.  For some people this is just a way to get who THEY want in their town x] I choose all my dreamies by looks, if I like them and we click, I want them. In my second town, I am trying to get Merry because I had her in my main town and she ended up moving because I wanted Rosie instead >___< and I didn't have my extra 2 copies then... 

Everyone has a different reason why they like whatever villager they do, I mostly think it is appearance based on people preferance. Since you know everyone has different tastes. Meh.


----------



## Bon Bonne (Jul 24, 2015)

there's nothing wrong with liking tier 1 villagers. and there's nothing wrong with liking tier 5 villagers.
I don't really see a problem with having a set list of villagers to want in your town, why does it matter, really? they don't differ, aside from appearance. if I wanna keep the same 2 lazy villagers in my town, what's wrong with that? :v it's not like any others are going to be different. I like Clay and Egbert just fine and would rather keep 'em around.
I think the tiers are dumb, but let's be real about it for a sec. buying/selling/trading villagers is a big thing. the tier system serves as a pricing guide more than anything. it's all fake worth, but whatever. it's due to popularity. it's not like someone just made it up and all the villagers in tier 1 got popular overnight. I do not like when people have the mentality that higher tier=better, that's annoying. but what can you really do? thankfully, _most_ people are not that narrow-minded. 
I have a huge soft spot for villagers that aren't as liked. most villagers in my town aren't popular at all, and that's okay. but if people have popular villagers in their towns, that's okay too.
don't assume that someone's got a tier 1 villager in their town solely because they're tier 1.


----------



## P u p p e t c h i l d (Jul 24, 2015)

I hate it when people don't give lower tier villagers a chance! most of my dreamies are tier 3, 4 or 5....

I love Egbert, he was my best friend back in wild world and I love him to this day <3 and the same with bill and bunnie, they are so cute and loveable yet no one wants them....

and even if they do show up people either auto void them or people swoop in and take them ;-;

Bunnie is only popular because she has her own plushie.... yet she is tier 2 and impossible to find... Rosie is only popular because she has her own plushie and was in the movie....


It is really sad to see people sell villagers to make millions of bells.... it takes the fun out of the game! I am currently changing some of my dreamies because I have learnt to love over ones <3 why can't people give low tier villagers a shot?! you never know you might like them xx


----------



## tumut (Jul 24, 2015)

-I have dreamies, because I like having some new faces, and there's a lot of villagers I'd like to have in my town.  Nothing wrong with that.

-I don't really have an issue with tiers, we don't really need them but I don't have an issue with them. Autovoiding is annoying but I can understand why cyclers do so since it's more convienient. It's just business really so I don't blame them, but at the same time they should always check the LF thread.


----------



## The221Believer (Jul 24, 2015)

I think we need to establish for the purpose of a discussion like this that qualifiers like "cute" and "lovable" (not to call you out in particular, Puppetchild, I'm just using those as examples) are as subjective for Tier 5 villagers as they are for Tier 1s. Meaning, absolutely subjective. I loathe a good portion of villagers, not because of their tiers but for their appearance or their personality (e.g. I hate literally all jocks. I don't find them enjoyable or fun or worth having in my town)--but that's my opinion. When you tell me that a villager is cute and lovable, that's also your opinion. You can't absolutely dictate that villager X will be cute and lovable to everyone. I actually loathe Egbert due to WW. Neither of us has a more valid view of him than the other, though, just as my love of Julian vs feminist's apathy towards him is neither more or less valid based on the tiering. Some people think Coco's terrifying, others adore her; personally I think Freya should be right up there fighting it out with Whitney. 

Tiers are only a method to determine what the most common view is, not the validity of a view. It's really important to keep that in mind when thinking about them.


----------



## Serif (Jul 24, 2015)

I actually like keeping the same 10 villagers in my town, just because they feel like family to me~ I was sad to let Kitty go (we weren't clicking anymore ><), but I can't wait to get to know Flurry and get her into a nice plot all her own, and I hope I never need to say goodbye to her~

I'd rather buy a second cart to switch it up. My own enjoyment comes from assembling villagers who mean a lot to me and will be my friends for a long time~ I guess I could move on and let someone else in if one of them were to uproot, but it just wouldn't feel the same. I've become close to my dreamies, have even written stories about them and their funny antics (Lobo comes to mind, eheh) and even some of my past villagers (both loved and...hard to get along with) have had time and love dedicated to them~

I'm happy where I am now, and I'm gonna keep the 10 of them for as long as I can. Not due to not wanting to expand or get to know others, but simply because that is how I enjoy the game~

But I will never argue the fact that every animal has something unique to bring, and there is no shame in loving whoever you choose.

Also, I don't see this attitude much of "bragging" about having tier 1's or people being insulted for tier 5's. I've seen it brought up a few times throughout the thread and like..Idk maybe I'm just not looking in the right place, and I'm sure some people do care about sellback. I've cared about it before when I hadn't figured my town out yet, but not to the extent some people seem to be mentioning. I don't think the majority of players are like that x: I've never seen anyone dumped on for having lower tiers nor worshipped for higher tiers. Heck I got hella excited seeing Ed in someone's town. I forget his tier but I was just happy to see my old horse friend being so loved in someone's town~

But the people who DO act like that...Idk, try not to take them seriously. Your town's good no matter who you have and what matters is if you enjoy it. If someone's judging people like that, they kinda..well, don't belong here o3o


----------



## wacoma (Jul 24, 2015)

I don't really have issues with tiers, or people that like the more popular villagers? The only thing that bothers me is that I noticed that cycling threads are auto voiding the t4-t5 villagers? But I've found that I like a lot of the lower tier villagers, so I might be one of the few this practice rubs the wrong way?

I've found that when I'm on tumblr, if I see art of villagers, (ones that I initially wasn't fond of), if I like the art, my perception of that villager changes? Like, I used to not like Agnes, for whatever reason, then I saw some really great art of her, and now I just love her and it feels weird not having her in my town right now? Same with Amelia.

Honestly, I guess you would call them both dreamies because I can't imagine a town without them? idk


----------



## Yuki Nagato (Jul 24, 2015)

I totally agree with this post, and can sympathize with the OP incredibly. Having unique villagers is wonderful, and whilst I do have the odd higher-tier villager like Blanche, I also appreciate the enjoyment about getting to know the villagers for their individual personalities. Whilst the personality types all share the same code, each of the animals appear to have distinct little quirks which, at least to us, makes them their own character. Personally, I like the glamorous snooty-beaked Broffina, Queenie and Maelle (all of whom have lived on my town in New Leaf). I used to picture Broffina and Maelle as being the *****y pair of my community until Broffina moved; needless to say, Maelle went soon after (and in came Queenie!). I would rather have Maelle over Marshall any day of the week!

Oh and then there is Hans, who is like a gay best friend to my second character Euanna. He is simply fabulous! Just down the path from his house, by the cliff, is Celia's eco-home, which is powered by the wind turbine. I'd hate to see any of my villagers go - only Cranston, the newest resident, I'd consider allowing to leave.


----------



## Sdj4148 (Jul 24, 2015)

In some ways, this post is right. I played ACNL with no outside influences for almost a year. When I joined TBT, I fell in love with Merengue and Pietro (I watched someone do a LP on ACNL on YouTube and I fell in love with him then). They were popular but I didn't get them because they were. I also find Carmen a cutie but she's tier 4. And I kinda want Beau or Stitches because they are cute. Now did this site introduce me to them? Yes, but even if I found out about Beau and Stitches on another site, I still would have wanted them. So yeah I like villagers based on their looks because I don't know anything else about them and the fact I generally don't like the villagers that randomly move to my town.


----------



## feminist (Jul 25, 2015)

I want to add something else:
I don't think that liking popular villagers is bad (I LOVE Ankha), but what I'm saying is that I don't think you should declare a villager a favorite of yours because they're tier 1, but you haven't even met them before. Even if you choose a few tier 1/2 dreamies, I encourage people to leave open space and find a wide variety of villagers that they come to love.
That's much more my point (not "liking tier 1s is bad")


----------



## mintellect (Jul 25, 2015)

I agree with some of your post. The Teir system can be annoying, but if you love all the Teir 1 villagers, you can have them. My dreamies are made up of about 50% top Teir and it's because I think they are cute, and they have nice personalities. I don't really see why anyone would want a villager just because their Teir 1.


----------



## TheEchoTimes (Jul 25, 2015)

Having dreamies is OK- the term just means "villagers you dream of having." My dreamies are scattered throughout the tiers- Nana and Deli are Tier 5, Lobo is Tier 3 or 4, Ankha and Lucky are Tier 1... People like who they like; some are more beloved than others, but that's just because of their looks. In the end, Tier 1 dreamies (and dreamies themselves) are just a way of saying, "I love this villager and want them."
Tier system just is there for people who need to sell villagers for Bells so that they can be efficient. People run cycling threads and need a way to rank pricing. It's part of the AC economy, like salaries and stocks are for us. It just says, say, "Julian is Tier 1 so sell him for this, but Deli is Tier 5 so he's free." People don't like to get ripped off, so we have tiers.


----------



## hemming1996 (Jul 25, 2015)

Why does it matter? Everyone can have what villagers they want. Villagers are low tier because few people actually want them. It is not flawed. I don't really understand how its your business how much people pay for villagers. It is their choice.


----------



## Enny156 (Jul 25, 2015)

It's just a shame that people choose to void villagers because of their low value. I can of course see why but it's still a shame.


----------



## Voluptua Sneezelips (Jul 25, 2015)

Enny156 said:


> It's just a shame that people choose to void villagers because of their low value. I can of course see why but it's still a shame.



I've been thinking for a while of starting a cycling town specialising in lower-tier villagers, to give folks more of a chance at obtaining them (i.e., no autovoid, lurking only permitted for tiers 4 & 5, etc.). I may just cave and wander over to my local game shop for a 2ndhand AC:NL before the day's over.


----------



## Enny156 (Jul 25, 2015)

Good initiative!


----------



## HHoney (Jul 25, 2015)

I have been quietly building a cycling town --- After reading this thread I know I am starting one specializing in helping mayors find their truly rare Tier 5 villagers.

Tier 3-4-5 should not be considered undesirable. I see them as rare gems deeply appreciated by a select few.

I will never give an animal away completely for free. I want to create an understanding that ALL villagers have value. All of them.

Even if it is one single pear.


----------



## The221Believer (Jul 25, 2015)

Have started a cycling town myself based on no autovoiding. Though I'm giving all villagers away for free, all of them. Even Tier 1s. 

Again, I still have to ask, though--does anyone_ really_ see Tier 3/4/5 as undesirable? Or is it just that more people find the higher tiers desirable, instead, or just _more_ desirable than the others? Popularity/likability is not a zero sum equation, and I still haven't seen_* evidence*_ that there's a significant population (read: more than a couple of exceptionally rude people) that actually outright scorns and disdains lower-tier villagers.


----------



## AmenFashion (Jul 25, 2015)

I don't believe lower tiers are "undesirable", just more popular by the mass' standards.
Like music. Some of the best artists aren't loved by the mass public, but they're just as amazing, if not better, than what the general public listens to.

My only issue is that from another perspective, Tier 1 are frowned upon, because they aren't as "original".
For me, some of my favorite villagers are Tier 1 (Such as Marina, who I fell in love with when she was introduced in Wild World). I'm not going to not have her because she's "unoriginal". I'm going to enjoy the villagers I love, regardless of the tier system.
In my eyes, all of the villagers are on the same level. If I like them, it's because I like them. If I don't, I don't. There shouldn't be a class system in AC.


----------



## Akimari (Jul 25, 2015)

The221Believer said:


> Have started a cycling town myself based on no autovoiding. Though I'm giving all villagers away for free, all of them. Even Tier 1s.
> 
> Again, I still have to ask, though--does anyone_ really_ see Tier 3/4/5 as undesirable? Or is it just that more people find the higher tiers desirable, instead, or just _more_ desirable than the others? Popularity/likability is not a zero sum equation, and I still haven't seen_* evidence*_ that there's a significant population (read: more than a couple of exceptionally rude people) that actually outright scorns and disdains lower-tier villagers.



I don't think there's an abundance of people out there who outright disdain lower-tier villagers, but in terms of appearance and sometimes personality as well, they are usually considered undesirable by both community members and the owners of cycling towns. I can't blame them, really. A lot of lower-tier villagers are pretty ugly, some even infamously so (Charlisle, Jambette, Canberra) and I'm sure their off-putting appearance + the low rank in general can cause some disdain and dislike for lower-tiers.


----------



## ams (Jul 25, 2015)

Before I even joined the site I had a dreamie list (although I didn't know that other people called it that). I got 7 of the villagers on my list by TTing like crazy and getting them from random move-ins and from the campsite. I just restarted a couple days ago and am currently villager reseting to get all of the villagers I want.

It's just how my brain works. It's like when I'd play pokemon as a kid. Before even starting the game I'd sit down with a pen and paper and decide which 6 would be on my team. I now do this same thing with AC villagers. The game wouldn't be fun for me if I wasn't collecting the villagers I like.

Tiers, however, don't really bother me. I have dreamies in every tier, and I think about 5 from tier 5. It doesn't bother me that the low tier villagers are hard to get because I prefer to villager reset rather than buy villagers from other towns.

Edit: I also wanted to mention that since I've restarted I've let a couple tier 1s move into my town for the purpose of giving them away. They seem to mainly be wanted by the little kids on the site and I love giving them away for free and making someone's day, even though in my mind they don't actually have any more inherent value.


----------



## jPottie (Jul 25, 2015)

Yea, I think it's pretty stupid. I don't really care who thinks what is popular, I have my own favorites. 

And I've gotten pretty sick of the more popular villagers... simply because I've seen them everywhere/every dream town.

That being said... I have quite a few tiers ones myself. >.> But it's not my fault! Beau and Marshal were random move ins, and Marina was in my campsite so I decided to invite her. I wouldn't really be sad if any left, although, Marshal is sort of cute..


----------



## The221Believer (Jul 25, 2015)

Akimari said:


> I don't think there's an abundance of people out there who outright disdain lower-tier villagers, but in terms of appearance and sometimes personality as well, they are usually considered undesirable by both community members and the owners of cycling towns. I can't blame them, really. A lot of lower-tier villagers are pretty ugly, some even infamously so (Charlisle, Jambette, Canberra) and I'm sure their off-putting appearance + the low rank in general can cause some disdain and dislike for lower-tiers.



In that case it's more about the appearance than the tier, then? I was referring to a population that disdained lower-tierers simply for being part of lower tiers at all, not because of the awful appearance that put them in the lower tiers.

Also, I don't think I need to point this out, but I will because information redundancy is always good: Cycling towns' 'desirable' villagers are those wanted by the community or the owner themselves. Using them as another element to determine popularity, rather than a lens through which to better see the general community attitudes, doesn't really work. That's why Aretaicist Cycling is my lab, so to speak. I want to see what tiers get most consistently ignored or snapped up, and see if all villagers being treated as absolutely equal will wind up justifying the idea of autovoid in some cases purely for efficiency's sake.

(And I want to give people dreamies like Marina for free but you know that's just a bit of fun on the side)

I also concur with AmenFashion--there definitely also seems to be a reverse elitism going on, where the tier ones can be perceived as less original and therefore lesser (despite the fact that they are subject to the same lack of information as tier fives are: you don't know the owner's personal history with them) in some fashion. All the tiers are victim to this, but I wonder if there aren't any "villager hipsters" about at the same time as the hypothetical "popularity chasers"?

Again, popularity and desirability are a) subjective and b) not a zero sum equation. One villager being wonderful to someone doesn't cancel out their unlikability to another, and the tiers are not intended to preach a universal ranking. They are measurements of what views are more prevalent, so that villager traders can know what view will likely guide the pricing of a particular villager. I still have a fundamental problem with calling that bourgeoisie and elitist, simply because...it's not. The list is ordered and edited by the value of trades that happen in a given week--the market shapes it, it does not dictate. Its pricing recommendations are observations and guidelines at most. The very first post says "make trades you feel suit you". No one's hunting me down for saying I'll be offering Marina for free soon enough. 

>takes debate hat off
I keep meaning to stop coming back to this thread, but I can't D:


----------



## feminist (Jul 26, 2015)

The221Believer said:


> Again, popularity and desirability are a) subjective and b) not a zero sum equation. One villager being wonderful to someone doesn't cancel out their unlikability to another, and the tiers are not intended to preach a universal ranking. They are measurements of what views are more prevalent, so that villager traders can know what view will likely guide the pricing of a particular villager. I still have a fundamental problem with calling that bourgeoisie and elitist, simply because...it's not. The list is ordered and edited by the value of trades that happen in a given week--the market shapes it, it does not dictate. Its pricing recommendations are observations and guidelines at most. The very first post says "make trades you feel suit you". No one's hunting me down for saying I'll be offering Marina for free soon enough.
> 
> >takes debate hat off
> I keep meaning to stop coming back to this thread, but I can't D:



not to argue, but I wanna say: is that not the definition of bourgeoisie? Tiers have, more than anything, created a model capitalist market in which high demand villagers cost leaps and bounds more than the "untouchable" fifth tiers. The fifth tier of villagers is the lowest the game has to offer in this market. 
Cycling definitely has made the villager trading market so very bourgeoisie because is it not them that are essentially controlling the market? I mean, sure there are people who have wayward auctions and giveaways, but they're still the same villagers that cyclers have enforced as "the best of the best." 
When I joined TBT a little over a year and a half ago, cyclers _rarely_ charged for their villagers, which made cycling threads so very, very useful to someone like me who prefers to never pay IGB for villagers. Now, there's MINIMUM prices for villagers on cycling threads. Notice how it'll cost you 5 million bells or 300BTB for a tier one, but the tier 4's and 5's are being autovoided? It is SOO bourgeoisie. And the bourgeoisie, as the wealth controlling middle class, is the cyclers in a way! (not calling out cyclers; just pointing out things about the way that cycling effects the market)
It's just funny to me, because it's all so trivial! This is, after all, digital currency in a video game. Yet, at the same time, is it meaningful to us as players.


----------



## yoshiskye1 (Jul 26, 2015)

hey I find this thread really fascinating and all but it makes me laugh to hear of this ACNL capitalism and elitist community. Whilst I think it is important and relevant as a reflection of the world we live in- it is just that. AC isn't real life, IGB and TBT are worthless. And whilst I am concerned sometimes that the community is a little too focussed on money and worth and a sort of virtual life capitalist reality, at the same time- we ignore the same things IRL. Maybe take this (what has happened with tiers and how an economy has formed in a virtual world) and use it as a projection of human nature and our real life society because at the end of the day, when the wifi breaks, you're left in the world of real loans, real elitism and a real system of tiers and undesirable vs desirable. No point trying to make a change here when the problem lies in the values ingrained into our minds by our society and system. We can't expect liberal and "fair" gaming economies when we don't have those values in real life and that is the end of that.


----------



## Diclonius217 (Jul 26, 2015)

I think having Dreamies is alright, I think it gets a little excessive when people will fork over 25 million bells for someone though. _coughredditcough_
I also tend to really dislike people who cover every square inch of their town with QR code designs. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, but I always thought it eliminated all the nature elements from the game, which makes me sad.


----------



## P u p p e t c h i l d (Jul 26, 2015)

Voluptua Sneezelips said:


> I've been thinking for a while of starting a cycling town specialising in lower-tier villagers, to give folks more of a chance at obtaining them (i.e., no autovoid, lurking only permitted for tiers 4 & 5, etc.). I may just cave and wander over to my local game shop for a 2ndhand AC:NL before the day's over.



please do this!! most of my dreamies are lower tiers and they are like impossible to find XD


----------



## Toffee Pop (Jul 26, 2015)

I can relate to this. One of my favorite villagers is Rasher, he was a starter (or at least moved in very soon after starting) and
one of the first villagers I actually befriended, I wouldn't trade him for all the bells in the world. But whenever I see anyone talking about him, and that's very rare, it's just to say how ugly he looks/how much they hate him/why won't he move out. A good few of my dreamies are popular, and I really do like their designs, but it's sad to see people paying so much for one villager and never considering any that are 3rd tier or under.



Diclonius217 said:


> I also tend to really dislike people who cover every square inch of their town with QR code designs. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, but I always thought it eliminated all the nature elements from the game, which makes me sad.



This too. Paths are nice, but I've seen people using fake GRASS to cover all the nice default...


----------



## Munna (Jul 26, 2015)

I agree with most of it. I appreciate you writing the post--I think it's brave & honest. Thank you. 

I think it's ridiculous how people have pretty much the same town over & over---

fine like 1-3 popular villagers because you actually like them, but simply going after villagers because they are Tier 1 is ridiculous & I agree elitist & defeats the niceness of the game.

Some of my "dreamies" are however popular villagers. I would really like Marina & Tangy. The reason being is I have Zucker (Zucker & Kid Cat were actually in my original 5!), and I'd love an octopus girl to keep him company. I also think octopus creatures are weird & cute.

I like Tangy because I had her in the original Gamecube game & love citrus fruits & cats. And she is both--so I thought WOW! also she is one of the cutest peppy villagers I have seen.

I like Tier 2 Muffy because she is the only Gothic Lotia character in the game & I also love Uchis.

I like the design of Ankha, and I don't really like the snooty types---so if I have to keep one for the PWPs I hope it would be a cat---but I'm not going to chase people for her.

As for Marshal, I met him in dream towns and don't really like him or the design. Same with most of the others.

I actually LOVE Wart Jr even though he is not cutesy & cranky--he is hilarious once you get to know him & an awesome villager to have as a friend.

So basically I love a mixture of popular & highly unpopular---because I like what I actually like.

I was actually shocked that Marina was universally popular, because to me she seems a bit alternative--A PINK OCTOPUS...but I'm glad people can appreciate her & her sweet nature.


----------



## mintellect (Jul 26, 2015)

There are many Teir Fives that are cute and I don't understand why they're voided.


----------



## Munna (Jul 26, 2015)

Wow...I also noticed Ruby is considered Tier 3....

I like her 2nd only to Tangy out of the Peppies... I really don't care that she is "middle of the road" It's a SPACE RABBIT!


----------



## Fizzii (Jul 26, 2015)

The thing with me is that I really do love my tier one villagers. Me and Beau are super good friends, Erik and I are the same, Zucker is my precious little thing, I've had Fauna before and she was just my favourite, And i've met Lolly and think she's really nice. I do have Melba and Coco and Lily though, and those three are like the goody-goody girl gang of my town and I love them so much. Melba is the sweetest villager i've come across. 
I've also had Julian and didn't like him, but then again I've had Vladimir and he annoyed the crap out of me.


----------



## Akimari (Jul 26, 2015)

Magic Marshmallow said:


> There are many Teir Fives that are cute and I don't understand why they're voided.



Many cyclers are running their cycle town for the main purpose of earning a pretty good profit from their villagers. This isn't a bad thing at all, trust me! But things like the commentary over tier 5 saying "Seldom auctioned, giveaways are best" gives cyclers more of a reason to want to autovoid them since it's assumed that trying to keep and sell them will be pretty useless, especially when they could void out a tier 5 and possibly get in a tier 1 or 2. Cuteness just isn't really a factor when it comes to keeping these villagers from being autovoided. Tis all about the tiers and popularity.


----------



## The221Believer (Jul 26, 2015)

feminist said:


> not to argue, but I wanna say: is that not the definition of bourgeoisie? Tiers have, more than anything, created a model capitalist market in which high demand villagers cost leaps and bounds more than the "untouchable" fifth tiers. The fifth tier of villagers is the lowest the game has to offer in this market.
> Cycling definitely has made the villager trading market so very bourgeoisie because is it not them that are essentially controlling the market? I mean, sure there are people who have wayward auctions and giveaways, but they're still the same villagers that cyclers have enforced as "the best of the best."
> When I joined TBT a little over a year and a half ago, cyclers _rarely_ charged for their villagers, which made cycling threads so very, very useful to someone like me who prefers to never pay IGB for villagers. Now, there's MINIMUM prices for villagers on cycling threads. Notice how it'll cost you 5 million bells or 300BTB for a tier one, but the tier 4's and 5's are being autovoided? It is SOO bourgeoisie. And the bourgeoisie, as the wealth controlling middle class, is the cyclers in a way! (not calling out cyclers; just pointing out things about the way that cycling effects the market)
> It's just funny to me, because it's all so trivial! This is, after all, digital currency in a video game. Yet, at the same time, is it meaningful to us as players.



_Is_ it cycling that controls the market? Or the consumers who cause high tier sales to be more profitable by buying out at crazy prices and encourage the high-minimum sales? I'm guilty of that last; I just really wanted Drago and I felt bad for accidentally missing a bit of the rules post so I gave twice his asking price. Or is it *both* the resource-holding cyclers and the wealthy consumers, and therefore an interaction of forces? I tend to lean towards the interaction theory on this forum (though I don't at all in real-life US land--but this is very different, based on observation and study of both). I've seen sale threads even for high tier villagers crash and fail and have to lower prices in the same time that low tier villagers find great successes. It's legitimately very much affected by the people who are online and available to purchase. I think the buying-out practise is a major part of what pushes prices so high, too, as is the very idea of an auction where you tap into human competition and desire simultaneously. Again, I ask, if suddenly 90% of the population that wants Marshal found him in their campsite while they had an open slot, wouldn't his prices drop like a rock because only 10% still needed to buy him? It'd be so much harder to find purchasers, just like it is for a lot of Tiers 4/5s, that for sheer efficiency's sake he'd probably actually get voided on occasion. Marshal the marshmallow king, voided! Cyclers on this site can't enforce "best of the best" nearly to the degree you seem to suggest, nor can they get away with the same nonsense that RL capitalist kings can. No one buying is a very real possibility here because it's a smaller community--and if it happens, they lose out. 

Come to think of it, cyclers don't even actually have complete control over villagers as a resource. They're just faster than campsite resetting. So yes, consumers here are equally culpable.

I also still contest that efficiency is a part of the discussion we're ignoring. I have to quit cycling August 21st because my campus has no 3DS-enabled wifi. What is better ethically: holding one tier 5 for someone for several days, or managing to give away in those same days _multiple dreamies a day_ including ones that usually cost a lot? Now, I am holding a Tier 5, but that's half because I get something nice in return (art) and half because I'm personally _very fond_ of the Tier 5 and don't want to void him. Also because the person I'm holding him for is super nice and adorable.  

I think we need to return to the core question that I keep raising: what _is_ the flawed concept? Popular villagers are popular because lots of people like them. Unpopular villagers have fewer fans; that doesn't mean anything but that they're less liked or appeal to a more niche taste. For example, I'm aware of someone who loves the excessively-cosmetic'ed villagers for that particular look, but more people who think it's aesthetically displeasing and don't care for them because of it. _It's not a zero sum equation_. I love submarine sandwiches, but I like pizza too--but I'd take a good sub over pizza any day. Same thing with dreamies. And everyone has a different "sandwich" and a different "pizza", and for the higher-tiered villagers, that's where the "sandwiches" happen to overlap. No one's peeling pepperoni off the "pizza" villagers just because they prefer their "sandwich", any more than the free samples of my writing available online detract from the eventual value of the things I succeed in getting published. 

(whispers: writing that last sentence made me think of 10 Things I Hate About You and "I like my Skechers, but I love my Prada backpack". Sob I love that movie)

I am glad that the virtual currency/villagers have valuable meaning to us on the forum. It gives me a place to toy around with different economic ideas, study the movement of a smaller economy, and gives me evidence fuel for any economically-based debate that I have to argue this upcoming year now that I'm more involved with my school's team.  

I'm also very much enjoying this thread, it's an intellectual exercise~

But someone has to show me that a substantial population believes that a villager's tier makes or breaks them--not for sale purposes, but as a permanent villager in their town. Someone has to show me proof that there is real and significant hatred towards villagers who aren't popular just because they're unpopular, with no other reason (I hate Wart Jr not because he's unpopular, but because he killed my flowers). There's another thread asking how people choose their dreamies that was posted last night, and one of only two who'd clicked the "because of popularity" tick mark did so because of a misclick. So only one person, even hours later. And they haven't posted, so who knows what they were thinking about it? That's telling to me. And it tells me that that population that would prove that there is actual villager-based elitism as a powerful trend/element in this forum's culture simply_ isn't there_. The overwhelming majority seems to prefer personal sentiment and personal attraction to aesthetic as reasons to love a villager.

- - - Post Merge - - -



yoshiskye1 said:


> hey I find this thread really fascinating and all but it makes me laugh to hear of this ACNL capitalism and elitist community. Whilst I think it is important and relevant as a reflection of the world we live in- it is just that. AC isn't real life, IGB and TBT are worthless. And whilst I am concerned sometimes that the community is a little too focussed on money and worth and a sort of virtual life capitalist reality, at the same time- we ignore the same things IRL. Maybe take this (what has happened with tiers and how an economy has formed in a virtual world) and use it as a projection of human nature and our real life society because at the end of the day, when the wifi breaks, you're left in the world of real loans, real elitism and a real system of tiers and undesirable vs desirable. No point trying to make a change here when the problem lies in the values ingrained into our minds by our society and system. We can't expect liberal and "fair" gaming economies when we don't have those values in real life and that is the end of that.



Also, what,  you don't think anyone here might be anti-capitalism in real life, just because they're challenging this virtual economy? I'm thoroughly anti-capitalism in real life; I have to be, it's a good chunk of what's poisoning my country, which I do love, despite all the things I hate about it.  Along with other things, of course; everything happens for multiple reasons. 

I just wish as a single college student I could be more active in making changes bigger than just working on changing my campus' culture of general xenophobia. But that's so not the point of this thread, I digress.


----------



## Akimari (Jul 26, 2015)

This thread is incredible because we've gone from discussing dreamies and tiers to an online Animal Crossing market that resembles the corruption and flaws present in capitalism and how it goes hand-in-hand with how the system works on TBT.

Not even being sarcastic here either. It's pretty sweet that it's gone to this direction AND has managed to stay civil at the same time! I'm proud of you all.


----------



## ams (Jul 26, 2015)

You know what really confuses me? Why don't people just use villager reseting instead of buying dreamies? I've been doing this over the weekend and now have all my dreamies except one which I will probably end up buying (since I had 2 normal dreamies). I guess it's a problem if many of your dreamies are the same personality, but most people seem to have even personality spreads in their towns.

But honestly it's so much faster and obviously cheaper. I even had the chance to let in 3 tier 1s which I've been giving away, but I could also sell if I needed TBT or IGB. I guess maybe it's more fun for people to get them from other towns?


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Jul 26, 2015)

In my opinion, I never really cared about villagers, even if I have some favorites like Katt or Amelia. That's why I don't have dreamies. All I care about is money making, house decoration, town decoration, character customization, museum donations, and cataloging. As for the Tier System, I stopped liking it because people have taken it too seriously to the point where they start bullying villagers or people who like the unpopular villagers/hate the popular villagers. Not only that, but I hate how the tier system became a breeding ground for multiple discussions (not like threads like this, but more like favorites threads and opinions on one tier). Why do we have too many discussions like that? They were good like for the first few, but like 40 threads on tiers or more, that's what bothered me. And I kinda blame the tier system for causing multiple threads on it to be discussed.


----------



## Red Cat (Jul 26, 2015)

ams said:


> You know what really confuses me? Why don't people just use villager reseting instead of buying dreamies? I've been doing this over the weekend and now have all my dreamies except one which I will probably end up buying (since I had 2 normal dreamies). I guess it's a problem if many of your dreamies are the same personality, but most people seem to have even personality spreads in their towns.
> 
> But honestly it's so much faster and obviously cheaper. I even had the chance to let in 3 tier 1s which I've been giving away, but I could also sell if I needed TBT or IGB. I guess maybe it's more fun for people to get them from other towns?



If you are villager resetting, then you can't plot reset your dreamies because you have to get lucky just to get your desired villager so you can't be picky about where they decide to plot.


----------



## ams (Jul 26, 2015)

Red Cat said:


> If you are villager resetting, then you can't plot reset your dreamies because you have to get lucky just to get your desired villager so you can't be picky about where they decide to plot.



Ah I guess that makes sense. I've never really cared too much where they plot as long as it's on the bottom half of my map. They tend to all plot near each other so I haven't had a problem.

It bothers me more when they sing annoying town tunes tbh.


----------



## yoshiskye1 (Jul 26, 2015)

The221Believer said:


> _Is_ it cycling that controls the market? Or the consumers who cause high tier sales to be more profitable by buying out at crazy prices and encourage the high-minimum sales? I'm guilty of that last; I just really wanted Drago and I felt bad for accidentally missing a bit of the rules post so I gave twice his asking price. Or is it *both* the resource-holding cyclers and the wealthy consumers, and therefore an interaction of forces? I tend to lean towards the interaction theory on this forum (though I don't at all in real-life US land--but this is very different, based on observation and study of both). I've seen sale threads even for high tier villagers crash and fail and have to lower prices in the same time that low tier villagers find great successes. It's legitimately very much affected by the people who are online and available to purchase. I think the buying-out practise is a major part of what pushes prices so high, too, as is the very idea of an auction where you tap into human competition and desire simultaneously. Again, I ask, if suddenly 90% of the population that wants Marshal found him in their campsite while they had an open slot, wouldn't his prices drop like a rock because only 10% still needed to buy him? It'd be so much harder to find purchasers, just like it is for a lot of Tiers 4/5s, that for sheer efficiency's sake he'd probably actually get voided on occasion. Marshal the marshmallow king, voided! Cyclers on this site can't enforce "best of the best" nearly to the degree you seem to suggest, nor can they get away with the same nonsense that RL capitalist kings can. No one buying is a very real possibility here because it's a smaller community--and if it happens, they lose out.
> 
> Come to think of it, cyclers don't even actually have complete control over villagers as a resource. They're just faster than campsite resetting. So yes, consumers here are equally culpable.
> 
> ...



Oh I didn't intend to imply that I thought people here were capitalist or not against capitalism, infact quite the opposite. I find it refreshing that people are speaking out about it- even in a game world  and I completely feel you. I am completing sixth form next year (or college or whatever you folks in 'murica call it) and I have been educated my entire life in such a far right school. I've seen the people around me take their privileges for granted and spit on people who haven't been born into money and it always made me sad, especially as whenever I made an effort to express my thoughts I was called "left wing tosser" and "cancer to the establishment" (seriously? smh). I volunteer for political events I support but I feel like I won't be able to DO anything until i'm well into my twenties. Like i'm seventeen in a few weeks. I respect people of other opinions basically, but it crosses a line if I express mine and people don't respect me. 

That was slightly off topic but also- confusingly enough, in the UK, Capitalism also means the (predominantly) more liberal movement to abolish the monarchy 
But my brain is used to the more duniversal use of the term (but for all it's worth, I am against the monarchy. I have a part time job during term time so I pay income tax. I'm 16 and i'm paying for that lot. Okay, not really but you get where i'm coming from.

But yeah, I believe there are anti-capitalist people on this thread BECAUSE so many people are challenging the ACNL economy seemingly leaning that way. And I am very glad about that- like you


----------



## pft7 (Jul 26, 2015)

Diclonius217 said:


> I also tend to really dislike people who cover every square inch of their town with QR code designs. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, but I always thought it eliminated all the nature elements from the game, which makes me sad.



I agree, I don't like the look of paths all over someone's town. I think it all looks much better as natural grass though I can see why they do it since the grass is getting worn away one way or the other and the paths look better than a town full of mud. Though the grass look is undoubtedly the best look. No question about it.


----------



## Dunquixote (Jul 26, 2015)

Melyora said:


> I don't have a dreamie list, only villagers that I really like. Fang is a must-have for me, but that is because in my first town ever, Fang randomly moved unto my only perfect peach sapling. Right behind my house. Believe me, I hated him. And he was so grumpy! Arggh!
> But once he stayed longer, the friendship built up and we became best friends.
> It was only like a halfyear after that that I even discovered the Bell Tree forum.
> 
> ...



Same with me!  :]  I like who I like regardless of tiers (plus, I joined this website late and didn't bother looking at the tier lists until one or two months ago).  All my life I have been the type of person who doesn't conform to what other people like ~ even when I'm bullied, made fun of behind my back or was ignored.  I actually like being different and thinking for myself; thus, I think it's silly to choose to "like" a villager just because they're popular.

While I have partially invested some of my emotions into the game, I have not yet experienced this "dreamie" sensation, where I'd get all "dreamy," excitable, or giggly about a villager that I really like/want; I do have villagers that I have become attached to and villagers I want.  The extent of my emotional investment in the game is that I'd feel happy when Puddles or Punchy tells me something like how they're always looking out for things that they think I might like or that they want to do something nice for me since I'm always doing nice things for them.  There are still some villagers that I'd like to have in my town even though I don't have room for them or already have enough of that one particular personality group; but, thinking about them or wanting them doesn't make me feel like I'd do anything to get them in my town.


----------



## PaperBag (Jul 26, 2015)

I've posted about this before too. I don't have any dreamies, and like almost all the characters. Really, one of my favorite things about the game has been seeing the varying designs of the characters despite the _"amazing"_ variation in their personality...
 In all seriousness, the limited number of personalities is a huge flaw in the game, there needs to be at least 20, with secondary characteristics or something. It's depressing when they repeat themselves and each other, it's like they're just computers... *cough*...
Anyways...
Yeah, I like to see all the characters. It's fun to see all the designs. I love getting a character I haven't ever had before. Very few characters are totally negligible to me... But I'm not gonna lie, some are pretty irredeemably hideous, but then they can be your town antagonist


----------



## Dunquixote (Jul 26, 2015)

While I still love this game, the fact that the personality types all are based on stereotypes, irks me.  I hate stereotypes...


----------



## PaperBag (Jul 26, 2015)

Dunquixote said:


> While I still love this game, the fact that the personality types all are based on stereotypes, irks me.  I hate stereotypes...



Well, I think implementing stereotypes into media is just something Japan does. At least anime makes it seem that way... 
But yes, one thing I don't like about the games is the (what I view as) unnecessary distinction between genders in the game, which the stereotypical personalities further (not to mention the way they refer to you). I really wouldn't mind the fact that characters weirdly flirt with my character and act dumb if it just wasn't half of them. Like I said, there need to be more personality types, preferably with secondary types, it would add to the variation.


----------



## ams (Jul 26, 2015)

PaperBag said:


> I've posted about this before too. I don't have any dreamies, and like almost all the characters. Really, one of my favorite things about the game has been seeing the varying designs of the characters despite the _"amazing"_ variation in their personality...
> In all seriousness, the limited number of personalities is a huge flaw in the game, there needs to be at least 20, with secondary characteristics or something. It's depressing when they repeat themselves and each other, it's like they're just computers... *cough*...
> Anyways...
> Yeah, I like to see all the characters. It's fun to see all the designs. I love getting a character I haven't ever had before. Very few characters are totally negligible to me... But I'm not gonna lie, some are pretty irredeemably hideous, but then they can be your town antagonist



Yes - it would be amazing if they at least did something like sub-categorize the existing personalities so that you don't have the same conversations 5 times a day. The only personality I can handle doubles of is normal since their dialogue is so generic to begin with, but that really limits my villager choices. I just let go of one of my smugs today because I just couldn't handle another *shoom* we need more dancing convo.


----------



## yoshiskye1 (Jul 26, 2015)

yeah, but each villager adds something personal. for example I love friga but can't stand Francine despite them having the same personality type (snooty)
EDIT: dead bc I put smug haha


----------



## feminist (Jul 27, 2015)

:^O


----------



## cutie34 (Jul 27, 2015)

I agree with mostly all of you, I don't mind people having dreamies but I do mind when they sum up the character by how ugly/cute the Villager looks and not the actual heart, You've all inspired me and I'm going to let the Villagers go when they want to since I have campsite it wont be hard getting new villagers! I'm going to give the villagers that want to go to my friends because i know they will take good care of them  I really want to discover new villagers now without judging by their look/personality!


----------



## RLinksoul (Jul 27, 2015)

This kind of thing is actually what killed Pokemon for me. It's no fun trying to trade Pokemon online when all anyone wants is something that's been carefully bred and calculated to have perfect stats, perfect nature, or special event pokemon you can't normally get. Not to mention the competitive battling scene makes it impossible to have fun because everyone has a Garchomp and even including Fairy Types can't do anything to stop those things from wrecking the scene.

I'm reminded of what Karen said in Gold and Silver. 
"Strong Pok?mon. Weak Pok?mon. That is only the selfish perception of people. Truly skilled trainers should try to win with their favorites."

If only games like Pokemon weren't designed with this in mind. Some pokemon, stat-wise are just made better than others and so everyone in the competitive battling scene is just gonna use those.

As for Animal Crossing, I do understand wanting to get certain villagers in your town, and not wanting others. As much as I like the majority of villagers, the cranky ones (like Vladamir and Limberg) tend to creep me out. But not being able to get the one you want because you don't have anything valuable enough to offer (or because someone only wants that villager in their original condition, with no alterations to their home/outfit/dialog) is pretty much the same as the Pokemon situation.


----------



## creamyy (Jul 27, 2015)

I agree. For me, it's hard to let go of some villagers because I want them all. I love them all. I still have my dreamies, but I've never got to the point of obtaining them all because I end up loving a villager I intended of kicking out. I think that while people are so obsessed with certain villagers, it makes it less exciting seeing them in a dream or visiting another town with the exact same villagers as everybody else. I did not like Marshal at first because there is absolutely nothing special about him. There is nothing special about any of the villagers besides their design. All smug villagers are the same, all normal villagers and peppy villagers and lazy villagers and cranky villager - they're all the same. Why else would we have to have a variety of the personalities in our town? It's only because people are so done with the dialogue. The only thing that sets villagers them apart are their design. None of them are unique personality wise. All villagers can be loved. We can all grow to love the looks of certain villagers. I was creeped out by Tabby at first look but I love her. She's a cute villager even if others consider her ugly. 

I still have a dreamies list, which is constantly changing because people need change. But most of my dreamies aren't even that popular besides Julian. I liked it when his popularity kind of died because it made it more special. I love the lower tier villagers. I love Derwin and I think he is the cutest thing ever. I actually love or have grown to love a lot of the tier 5 villagers, making them almost impossible to find since they're always, always, always being autovoided. I'm like no I love him. I'm actually surprised at the amount of villagers that I am in love with aren't more popular. I think Celia is a cute villager, as well as Joey, Drake and Bill. And I'm really surprised that Margie and Alfonso are not even that popular considering they were featured in the Animal Crossing movie.


----------



## feminist (Jul 27, 2015)

RLinksoul said:


> This kind of thing is actually what killed Pokemon for me. It's no fun trying to trade Pokemon online when all anyone wants is something that's been carefully bred and calculated to have perfect stats, perfect nature, or special event pokemon you can't normally get. Not to mention the competitive battling scene makes it impossible to have fun because everyone has a Garchomp and even including Fairy Types can't do anything to stop those things from wrecking the scene.
> 
> I'm reminded of what Karen said in Gold and Silver.
> "Strong Pok?mon. Weak Pok?mon. That is only the selfish perception of people. Truly skilled trainers should try to win with their favorites."
> ...



wow I agree with this so much! I have the same issues w/ pokemon. Because I love pokemon that aren't super great competitively and just play for fun. this is a great analogy


----------



## Ghostly (Jul 27, 2015)

I really don't like the popularity though. I feel like there about half of the villagers that are cute (Kiki), some villagers that are insanely underrated (Greta, Curlos, Gaston, Patty), some villagers that have great details (Ankha, Lucky, Fuchsia), some villagers have amazing appearance (Muffy, Lopez) , and the rest of the villagers are really plain ugly (although some people may like them which is okay for him / her). But no, people pick the ones that are mostly cute and adorable. Every signatures that I find in TBT mostly have villagers that are cute or based on the popularity (then again I really don't know if it is that or that, probably guessing...). 

To me, I pick villagers that I believe I will let them stay until I somehow don't grew up of liking him / her. It is quite sad how I let them leave early for petty (ew he/she is ugly and disgusting) choices or hard breaking (bad plot location, etc) decision.


----------



## HHoney (Jul 28, 2015)

When Tier Five is listed in as *"BOTTOM OF THE BARREL"*, as shown here:

https://i.imgur.com/A8WTzcW.png

The wording of Tier 5 makes them sound undesirable, unwanted, losers. Auto-void. Don't bother.

Bottom. Of a barrel. Not all of them are at the bottom - I have seen people desperate for these rare creatures.

And Tier 5 is too big. There are way too many that people on these boards consider Dreamies inside of Tier 5. There is a big difference between some of the Tier 5s.  This is about wording. The language we use needs to change.

One more point: There are people who are not posting on the Looking For threads because their Dreamies are so totally Tier 4 or Tier 5 they don't think they even have a chance. They have seen their animals auto-voided. So they give up. 

If you are reading this - tell us you are looking for your Dreamies! Speak up! I'd love to help someone, but I don't know who they are looking for. Maybe it might influence the popularity chart. And your Dreamie might someday rise above the bottom of the barrel.


----------



## Serif (Jul 28, 2015)

I do agree the wording should change. It does sound quite sad. But that list is also kind of old and the person who originally posted it posted it ages ago. The culture of the forum has changed since then so while the wording sucks, I sorta can't blame the list maker. 

But yeah hopefully maybe they'll change it when they update the list.


----------



## Laila (Aug 30, 2015)

I restarted my town and so far have got some low villagers but I really like some. For example Shep, I really like him. I would enjoy some nice looking villagers... but I'll settle for normal ones. I got some I don't want so I'm going to try get ridnof them butbibdont have much of a dreamlist


----------



## Mairen (Aug 30, 2015)

I agree that so many of the upper tier villagers are so disgustedly common that they aren't even interesting to me anymore. Everyone has them in their towns and they are dull and boring to me at this point. There's nothing special about them.  They are everywhere.

I know a lot of people make their dreamie list strictly based off of the tiers on this forum, and that kind of makes me sad. When I was deciding who my dreamies were, I opened up the animal crossing wiki and chose from the entire list of villagers. My only requirements were that I have at least one of each personality types. Everything else was decided based on personal preferences. Popularity had zero influence on my decision. Unfortunately, that's the way humans work. They love following each other around without much thoughts of their own.

On the other end of this, however, a lot of villagers are popular because they look cute. There's some strange and weird and scary looking villagers. Within the personality types, each villager is essentially the same. Each personality type has the same lines of dialogue, just minor keywords are changed. When it comes down to it though, it's all the same. Just appearance that differentiates them. The lower tiers seem more special in this sense because they are rarer among people's villages.


----------



## Kess (Aug 30, 2015)

I had Tia and she is soo precious. I gotta say I kinda agree with you! I remember while searching for Poncho I was so heartbroken because he wasn't "popular" I knew people would be voiding him and I felt like I would never be reunited with him... :[ Same with Jeremiah and Ruby. These are all characters that I've known since WW and Jeremiah since GC!! I feel like a lot more people go for aesthetics now instead of relationships (which I mean, if you want an all frog/bear/deer town or a color theme of villagers, GO FOR IT!) but this system is pretty messed up! There are some tumblrs that lean more towards "hey, your villager moving out? Instead of voiding him, let someone get him! He may be someone's dreamie!" and I really like that. I believe I got my golden trio all from the same tumblr that was like this. It wasn't popularity based with "tiers" and stuff. It was literally just "if your villager is moving, post it here".


----------



## Yumei (Aug 30, 2015)

It's such a struggle to have only 10 that I've played with the idea of having 8 or so permanent ones so that I could always have someone new.  (& to get the PWPs because personalities, yay.  bleh.)  
If there's one thing I learned from watching _Say Yes to the Dress_ is that there are aaaalllll kinds of people out there.  I like the villagers I like, regardless of whomever else.  Tiers are helpful with pricing, but it's always your choice; to buy, to sell, to whatever. 

But yes, please, people, give the lower tiers a chance; don't automatically void them!  u.u


----------



## LordBlumiere (Aug 30, 2015)

Great thread!

I agree with a lot of the points brought up here. Personally, I have a lot of villagers I'd love to have, and I'm always willing to give new friends a chance. Some villagers I prefer are on the bottom tier, some are at the top. For me, it's a combination of appearance, personality, and emotional/nostalgic attachment--that's why I love certain villagers but can't _stand_ others. In fact, I wasn't even aware of villager tiers until a few days ago, when I was looking to get my favourite friend from ACPG back into my town.

Ultimately I think the tiers are only as worthwhile as people make them. If your favourite villager is on a low tier, you shouldn't sadly cast them aside because of it--all of the wonderful animals in this game were designed so that they could be loved, no matter their perceived popularity or worth. And if your favourite villager is on a high tier, that doesn't make them 'better'--they're still just as potentially lovable as the tier 5 villagers!


----------



## mayorcarlie (Aug 30, 2015)

I have been surprised more than once to find a well loved villager of mine is tier 4 or 5, I think it's because I expect everyone will love them as much as I do. I simply like what I like, my sig shows all of my dreamies and a few are tier 1/2 but if anything I wish they weren't since finding Marina for an affordable price isn't the easiest because of the competition and top tier (although I guess you're right about lower tiers and autovoid)


----------

