[deleted]

[wolfie1]

How can you not be bashing the game for the sake of it while claiming the game is - according to you - completely barebones (even compared to CF). Like, are you for real? That is objectively false.

Did you even bother to read the whole thing or did you just focus on what fit your narrative? I said the game was barebones when it was released, even worse than City Folk. I acknowledge it's no longer worse than City Folk, mainly because it now has what City Folk had except for the city, of course, and then some tiny changes. If you're going to try to argue that something is "objectively false", at least do it after reading the whole thing. Also, it is objetively true that the game is lacking a lot of features. I'm happy for you if you can't see it or if it doesn't bother you, but don't try to belittle other people's opinions just because you seem to be happy with what the game is offering you right now when you could have that AND MORE.

You can't say something is objective based on how you feel. It isn't OBJECTIVELY barebones; that's how you feel, not how all of us feel. I find it has more than what the previous games have offered.

If you feel done with the game and you feel it's barebones, that's a-okay. But please don't make others sound like they have poor taste, or that they're "smoking" something simply because they like a game and how it's made. Thought that after everything that went down in another thread, that people would be past stuff like that.

As I said, I was quoting another user who belittled people by outright asking what they were smoking when they expressed their opinions towards the game. Are you going to call them out too or simply because they have the same opinion as you they're entitled to do that? Sometimes I can't believe some of y'all, really.

Also, literally nowhere did I say you have "poor taste" simply because you're content with the current state of the game, which is OBJECTIVELY lacking, no matter how hard you try to make it seem like it's not. I think I tried to convey it as well as I could in my post, but it seems it fell on deaf ears because it was more important to focus on other irrelevant things that had nothing to do with the rest of my message. I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to put words in my mouth that I haven't said.

 

[Moritz]

Did you even bother to read the whole thing or did you just focus on what fit your narrative? I said the game was barebones when it was released, even worse than City Folk. I acknowledge it's no longer worse than City Folk, mainly because it now has what City Folk had except for the city, of course, and then some tiny changes. If you're going to try to argue that something is "objectively false", at least do it after reading the whole thing. Also, it is objetively true that the game is lacking a lot of features. I'm happy for you if you can't see it or if it doesn't bother you, but don't try to belittle other people's opinions just because you seem to be happy with what the game is offering you right now when you could have that AND MORE.




As I said, I was quoting another user who belittled people by outright asking what they were smoking when they expressed their opinions towards the game. Are you going to call them out too or simply because they have the same opinion as you they're entitled to do that? Sometimes I can't believe some of y'all, really.

Also, literally nowhere did I say you have "poor taste" simply because you're content with the current state of the game, which is OBJECTIVELY lacking, no matter how hard you try to make it seem like it's not. I think I tried to convey it as well as I could in my post, but it seems it fell on deaf ears because it was more important to focus on other irrelevant things that had nothing to do with the rest of my message. I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to put words in my mouth that I haven't said.

I would say its objectively lacking in the sense that it just does not have brewsters for example. Its objectively lacking that.

But when you look at the games content as a whole, it's not objectively lacking. Because it brings so much new to the table.
I would say its objectively got way more content since brewster is only good for the same 30 seconds worth of dialog and animation each day.
But I've not done the math, nor am I even sure how to work out such things when technically all content is optional.

So yeah, really depends how you're using the term. One is factually true but poor word choice. The other is not a factually true.

 

[Commodore]

This is my first Animal Crossing game, even though I've been playing Nintendo games my entire life (I turn 39 this year), so I can't really say what this game is missing. I have friends who have played every other incarnation and felt really let down by this version of the game. So, I do hope Nintendo adds in some old features to entice wayward fans and keep current fans playing. The thing is, how much time and money is Nintendo really going to pour into this game? Sales are already done. There aren't in-game purchases for IRL money. Is there much incentive to devote resources to upgrading this game when there is little profit to earn by doing so?

 

[Fridaynightcatlady]

Did you even bother to read the whole thing or did you just focus on what fit your narrative? I said the game was barebones when it was released, even worse than City Folk. I acknowledge it's no longer worse than City Folk, mainly because it now has what City Folk had except for the city, of course, and then some tiny changes. If you're going to try to argue that something is "objectively false", at least do it after reading the whole thing. Also, it is objetively true that the game is lacking a lot of features. I'm happy for you if you can't see it or if it doesn't bother you, but don't try to belittle other people's opinions just because you seem to be happy with what the game is offering you right now when you could have that AND MORE.

I'm not trying to belittle your opinion, but you're lying if you're saying that NH base game had less content than CF. That is not true.

 

[Matt0106]

As I said, I was quoting another user who belittled people by outright asking what they were smoking when they expressed their opinions towards the game. Are you going to call them out too or simply because they have the same opinion as you they're entitled to do that? Sometimes I can't believe some of y'all, really.

Also, literally nowhere did I say you have "poor taste" simply because you're content with the current state of the game, which is OBJECTIVELY lacking, no matter how hard you try to make it seem like it's not. I think I tried to convey it as well as I could in my post, but it seems it fell on deaf ears because it was more important to focus on other irrelevant things that had nothing to do with the rest of my message. I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to put words in my mouth that I haven't said.

I think this is the first time I have to truly back away. I apologize, but what you are saying is subjective, not objective; simple put. If I believe this game has more content compared to previous entries, that is my right, and I shouldn't be told whether or not that is true or false, when it is all based on perception. You can't mathematically put weight on any criteria (i.e. does more furniture outweigh terraforming? Does moving buildings outweigh pwps?)

And I didn't have to put words in your mouth; saying someone is "smoking" something assumes (to me, at least) that they are not in a normal state of mind and don't perceive things correctly. And in the context of this game, I took it as poor taste, since you literally said you don't see what anyone sees in a game that is objectively--oh wait, my bad--"objectively" lacking. If that isn't what you meant, then I completely understand and apologize.

Also I can't call that user out because I have never seen someone say that on the forums, in all 100% honesty. I'm a not gatekeeper who foresees what everyone says. Are there people who take things too far? Of course, and on both ends of spectrum most certainly. But I've never seen someone use that term in any thread. Recently, at least.

Anyway, take what you will from this. I'm not going to add more fire to this argument. You have your opinion and I have mine.

 

[nightglow]

New Horizons is a great game imo and I really enjoy it. What "kills" it for me, is how much they are drip feeding. I feel like that is more of an Nintendo problem and unfair to call it an Animal Crossing problem. Like... how many people will still be playing the game by the time they finally decide to roll out something big? And if they noticed that less people are playing.. will they skimp out on what they may add to the game?
Maybe my thoughts are a little "dramatic" in some people's opinions, but I really really don't like things done in this manner. Maybe it is an anxiety thing for me. I just feels like it kills the game and lower's its quality. Esp if the past games of the same series had all this stuff in it at release that Nintendo took out. And if they ever decide to cut corners later or decide they don't want to mess with it anymore you could end up with a partial game as an end result.

If they added everything back that was in past series (talking about what people call as core stuff) within one year because they are trying to get it out faster supposedly, then that would be more acceptable. Then the new whatever could be for the second year. (however supposedly it was said that updates are going to be for 3 years for New Horizons). I mean, the holiday/event stuff aren't like super big things to where they need to be locked.
Maybe that was what people were expecting, since I see soooo many comments about how they came back into the game and the game still feels the same as it did soon after release after being out for one whole year.

However New Horizons is the first game that I have decided to get that didn't have any kind of story/lore/worldbuilding in it and isn't a platformer. Things that are kind of big for me. I mean, I assumed there was a little world building in it from villagers and NPCs but not really. I mean you have the Able family... and I know there are things with Blathers and Celeste but nothing is really said in game yet.. if ever.
Considering many of the NPCs are traveling ones, you'd think they would have more dialog since they travel and see and experience various things because they aren't locked into the same environment.
And thinking about this aspect, I get curious about New Leaf...
Maybe it is just me, but I keep thinking that people look at New Leaf with Rose colored glasses. I mean you have the outside but you can't decorate it with benches or outside looking things from what I hear. Considering it was an already established town with multiple NPCs, maybe there was a little more there in the dialog department. No Idea. I'm new to the series and don't plan on sticking around for the series unfortunately. So don't bank on my thoughts too much if you dislike them or don't agree. I feel like Animal Crossing may have either gotten squashed while at the same time expanding the series' horizons to where you can finally move a tree out of your way, or place an outdoor bench somewhere. Or, they didn't take a large enough step forward if the dialog was lacking in past games too.
Eventually they should stop making additional villagers because of the sheer number. It would be better to work on fleshing out characters whether villager or npc and move forward with the game in the sense of expanding what you can do or what can be done or being more detailed in dialog or by having a story instead of rehashing a game with a different environment. And they should definitely not take villagers out just to add them back in with the label of new content or an update. And I would love for people to comment on this because I would love to know if maybe the step wasn't large enough for me personally to really stay with Animal Crossing instead of just playing one game to just experience the game. Any series getting squashed is sad to me even if I don't have anything to do with it. Some people out there love it and it's sad to see that kind of thing go for them.

And again, it's not that New Horizons wasn't a step forward... I mean crafting, whew! That is what made me have any kind of interest in the game at all. Then I heard all this talk about the villagers having dialog and whatever.. instead of being pets with different skins. Maybe the step wasn't quite large enough if they were wanting a larger fan base. I mean that was the vibe I got with New Horizons. They wanted more new players.

I know I feel this way about pokemon... steps not being large enough for fans yet Nintendo stating they don't want to release the same game over and over again.
I understand the public is harsh and gets insane quick, but like if you want co-op, then actually do it. Don't do a half job to where it doesn't even really work.

I mean, Nintendo holding polls for ideas on their website may not be a bad idea for them if they are that concerned with moving slow and cautiously. Let's Go was a big step, but most fans didn't like that direction. However fans forever have been asking for overworld pokemon spawns as well as being able to ride pokemon which Pokemon/Nintendo claimed they never thought it would be popular or that well received. As a resulted it was added in last minute with Sword and Shield. Yet over world pokemon sprites were well received in the remakes of g/s and using pokemon visibly like riding some of them in S/M/US/UM.


As a side note, I think games today are probably better off being created then have updates "forever" rather than releasing the same game with micro changes or micro steps. I think the product and quality would be better. Consumers would be happier, and the game will gain popularity and more revenue in the long run as well. Not a quick buck because copy pasting, and relabeling wouldn't be a thing, but it could eventually become a nice steady income with customers looking at whose ever name is attached to the game as making good quality fun games. I know alot of people don't like to talk about business with video games because the mobile gaming issue but let's be real, profit is a factor and effects the game, and what is done with it.


Or maybe I am just being ignorant and short sighted because I don't actually know anything about any of this stuff.

 

[WaileaNoRei]

To quote someone I saw on this thread: I don't know what some of you are smoking, but I'd like some to see what you all see in this game, to be honest. This game is objectively lacking a LOT of stuff and trying to cover it by implementing landscaping options or being able to place furniture outside is not going to make it go away (both are awesome features, mind you, but there's so much you can do before you get bored with it or finish modeling and decorating your island).

It's been a year and it still doesn't live up to its predecessors (not only New Leaf, which I know some people don't like comparing them for whatever reason) when they were released. The game was completely barebones, even worse than City Folk, which is saying something, when it was released because they didn't want time-travelers to spoil the game and burn out earlier or because they wanted players to remain engaged for a longer time, you name it. The problem is they intentionally withheld content that had always been in the game before just so they could create their "cute" trailers and present them as if they were brand-new additions, which they were not for the most part. As far as I know, these updates have only brought some new reactions and furniture items that replaced other existing items, they didn't add to them. I strongly believe this doesn't warrant making us wait for months on end until they release a half-baked update that will give us content for a whole day and then nothing else. Call me a pessimist or whatever, but that's not how anyone should expect an AAA game such as this one to be treated, especially taking into account the astounding figures and sales it has achieved. You might think that Nintendo would've decided to support the game with those sales, but no, instead, they only waited for a year before starting to implement paid DLC. Sure, those cards already existed, but one would think they would've waited until everything or mostly everything was in the game before resorting to that.

Villagers haven't looked cuter and better in the past, in my opinion, but if they're these shallow pixels that can't go two minutes without repeating the same thing, they're not really that worth it. It's been datamined for months now that they're going to implement new interactions with them, such as having them visit your house. Well, what are they waiting for? Where are all or most furniture sets that are missing? Where are all or most NPCs that are missing? Did they really release the game without having taken all of this into account and only now that people are complaining about its shallowness have they decided to "look into implementing" these options? I think the game was in development long enough to deeply consider what previous games had in order to build upon it, not take away. I honestly would love to know what people do to spend 3,000 hours playing? It's mind-boggling to me, to be honest.

I swear I'm not bashing this game simply for the sake of it, but because I want it to be better, both as a standalone game but also with respect to its predecessors. I've been holding out hope that they would do more than simply unlock what was there from the beginning in the past, but now it's clear to me that I should never have expected a multibillion-dollar company to do such a thing. The problem is that if most people are complacent, they won't feel the need to make an effort and will keep drip-feeding us these whopping 1-item updates every two months until they decide it's no longer worth their time.

i don’t have an issue with you expressing your opinions about the game. I don’t agree, but I also don’t feel like I need to shout you down. You truly are entitled to dislike the game as much and as loudly as you want (as long as you are willing to embrace people loudly loving it). I don’t have a problem with you using ‘what are you smoking’...after all you are just quoting someone else in the thread, and it is just an expression of your strong feelings. The game may be lacking things that you personally valued in other games, which have been replaced with things you value less, and I can sympathize with that feeling. It may not be what you hoped, and i can’t know what that is like, not having had that experience, but I imagine it would be a huge upset.

the only issue I would take is with ‘objectively’. The only numbers I have seen suggest that the number of furniture items in the game are roughly comparable to NL (admittedly I do not have them in front of me, but someone pulled them together in a thread on facts vs opinion on this forum a while back). Now, the furniture items in one game vs another may not appeal to you, and that is fair, but particularly if you compare one year in NL to NH I believe the numbers are comparable - again I could be wrong, which is fine, happy to see the numbers again if I am.

I also have not seen a script comparison of NL and NH, but the issue of which game has better dialogue seems to be a continued debate not objective fact.

Obviously, I can’t and don’t want to control your use of words, but I think the misuse of ‘objectively’ creates a lot of the arguments in threads like this. And it really isn’t important whether your opinion is objective or not, seriously. You feel and experience the game however you do and that is totally fair and valid. But I think when you start throwing in ideas of objective value not actually based in fact it does come across as a judgement against those who disagree. And I think it is what creates a situation where so many people feel like they need to argue back. I hope you do not feel attacked, that is not my intention. Please continue to happily and freely critique the game.

I respect you and your opinion. I did read your entire opinion and I understand that you see a lot of missing in the game for you which would improve your experience.

Yes, people on both sides of any argument misuse objectively, and i am by no means unbiased in my opinions. But I still think it is best to try and separate facts from opinions, and it does not make your opinion worse to call it an opinion rather than objective fact.

TL;DR for me it comes down to...if you want to say something is objectively worse than something else then I think that should be supportable with factual data. If you want to say something is worse in your opinion then, fair enough, shout it from the rooftops and we can agree to disagree and I am fine with that.

 

[Moritz]

New Horizons is a great game imo and I really enjoy it. What "kills" it for me, is how much they are drip feeding. I feel like that is more of an Nintendo problem and unfair to call it an Animal Crossing problem. Like... how many people will still be playing the game by the time they finally decide to roll out something big? And if they noticed that less people are playing.. will they skimp out on what they may add to the game?
Maybe my thoughts are a little "dramatic" in some people's opinions, but I really really don't like things done in this manner. Maybe it is an anxiety thing for me. I just feels like it kills the game and lower's its quality. Esp if the past games of the same series had all this stuff in it at release that Nintendo took out. And if they ever decide to cut corners later or decide they don't want to mess with it anymore you could end up with a partial game as an end result.

If they added everything back that was in past series (talking about what people call as core stuff) within one year because they are trying to get it out faster supposedly, then that would be more acceptable. Then the new whatever could be for the second year. (however supposedly it was said that updates are going to be for 3 years for New Horizons). I mean, the holiday/event stuff aren't like super big things to where they need to be locked.
Maybe that was what people were expecting, since I see soooo many comments about how they came back into the game and the game still feels the same as it did soon after release after being out for one whole year.

However New Horizons is the first game that I have decided to get that didn't have any kind of story/lore/worldbuilding in it and isn't a platformer. Things that are kind of big for me. I mean, I assumed there was a little world building in it from villagers and NPCs but not really. I mean you have the Able family... and I know there are things with Blathers and Celeste but nothing is really said in game yet.. if ever.
Considering many of the NPCs are traveling ones, you'd think they would have more dialog since they travel and see and experience various things because they aren't locked into the same environment.
And thinking about this aspect, I get curious about New Leaf...
Maybe it is just me, but I keep thinking that people look at New Leaf with Rose colored glasses. I mean you have the outside but you can't decorate it with benches or outside looking things from what I hear. Considering it was an already established town with multiple NPCs, maybe there was a little more there in the dialog department. No Idea. I'm new to the series and don't plan on sticking around for the series unfortunately. So don't bank on my thoughts too much if you dislike them or don't agree. I feel like Animal Crossing may have either gotten squashed while at the same time expanding the series' horizons to where you can finally move a tree out of your way, or place an outdoor bench somewhere. Or, they didn't take a large enough step forward if the dialog was lacking in past games too.
Eventually they should stop making additional villagers because of the sheer number. It would be better to work on fleshing out characters whether villager or npc and move forward with the game in the sense of expanding what you can do or what can be done or being more detailed in dialog or by having a story instead of rehashing a game with a different environment. And they should definitely not take villagers out just to add them back in with the label of new content or an update. And I would love for people to comment on this because I would love to know if maybe the step wasn't large enough for me personally to really stay with Animal Crossing instead of just playing one game to just experience the game. Any series getting squashed is sad to me even if I don't have anything to do with it. Some people out there love it and it's sad to see that kind of thing go for them.

And again, it's not that New Horizons wasn't a step forward... I mean crafting, whew! That is what made me have any kind of interest in the game at all. Then I heard all this talk about the villagers having dialog and whatever.. instead of being pets with different skins. Maybe the step wasn't quite large enough if they were wanting a larger fan base. I mean that was the vibe I got with New Horizons. They wanted more new players.

I know I feel this way about pokemon... steps not being large enough for fans yet Nintendo stating they don't want to release the same game over and over again.
I understand the public is harsh and gets insane quick, but like if you want co-op, then actually do it. Don't do a half job to where it doesn't even really work.

I mean, Nintendo holding polls for ideas on their website may not be a bad idea for them if they are that concerned with moving slow and cautiously. Let's Go was a big step, but most fans didn't like that direction. However fans forever have been asking for overworld pokemon spawns as well as being able to ride pokemon which Pokemon/Nintendo claimed they never thought it would be popular or that well received. As a resulted it was added in last minute with Sword and Shield. Yet over world pokemon sprites were well received in the remakes of g/s and using pokemon visibly like riding some of them in S/M/US/UM.


As a side note, I think games today are probably better off being created then have updates "forever" rather than releasing the same game with micro changes or micro steps. I think the product and quality would be better. Consumers would be happier, and the game will gain popularity and more revenue in the long run as well. Not a quick buck because copy pasting, and relabeling wouldn't be a thing, but it could eventually become a nice steady income with customers looking at whose ever name is attached to the game as making good quality fun games. I know alot of people don't like to talk about business with video games because the mobile gaming issue but let's be real, profit is a factor and effects the game, and what is done with it.


Or maybe I am just being ignorant and short sighted because I don't actually know anything about any of this stuff.

I might have misunderstood what you said, if so I apologise. But you haven't played the older games right?

Personally I think you need to have checked them out, at least a little, in order to really have an opinion on the evolution of the series.

Because to me new horizons was a huge leap forwards, breathing so much new life into a franchise that was growing stale and tired.
I mean wild world and city folk was literally the same game released twice. Just one with a city added to it.

New leaf certainly helped the franchise by making you mayor. But the gameplay did become "fish all day long so you can buy a very expensive bench as a public work project. Something you can only do once a day"

The stuff like shop upgrades did feel rewarding and I do miss that feeling, but ultimately, a bigger shop isn't new content.

So yeah, I would check out the older titles to get a better understanding of the history and make your own opinions from there

 

[nightglow]

I might have misunderstood what you said, if so I apologise. But you haven't played the older games right?

Personally I think you need to have checked them out, at least a little, in order to really have an opinion on the evolution of the series.

Because to me new horizons was a huge leap forwards, breathing so much new life into a franchise that was growing stale and tired.
I mean wild world and city folk was literally the same game released twice. Just one with a city added to it.

New leaf certainly helped the franchise by making you mayor. But the gameplay did become "fish all day long so you can buy a very expensive bench as a public work project. Something you can only do once a day"

The stuff like shop upgrades did feel rewarding and I do miss that feeling, but ultimately, a bigger shop isn't new content.

So yeah, I would check out the older titles to get a better understanding of the history and make your own opinions from there

Correct. That is because the past games do not interest me. Like, looking at them, and from what I hear, to me, there isn't much there to do that interests me personally.
New Horizons has crafting. With crafting, building comes to mind. I have played crafting games and building games before and liked them.
I am just saying, for me, and maybe for others who have been complaining about New Horizons having a lack of whatever, that even though a big step was taken, a big enough step wasn't taken. You also have the ability to decorate outside, as well as terraform.
My opinions drawn is just stuff I have seen with Nintendo in other franchises, how I feel about New Horizons vs my feelings about animal crossing before and what I see people expressing online.

 

[nammie]

Def agree. They could've literally released an ACNL reboot just with new HD graphics and the ability to place furniture outdoors like in HHD, and I would've been happier with that than ACNH lol.

I think I put in almost 2000 hours in ACNL by the end, and so far I have like.. 450ish in ACNH? But a ton of that was spent literally with me loitering on the beach to get those balloons with DIYs, esp during holiday seasons. My island still isn't finished either cause I just have no inspiration left with the items we have. I also haven't played since early Jan, so this is the fastest I've gotten burned out from a AC game, other than CF I played every game since the GC one for at least a year before I got tired. And since the dialogue was so much better in the older games, I'd still pick them up occasionally just to talk to my villagers.

And seeing this list a few weeks ago made how much they actually removed really hit home.

 

[Venusian31]

About the only thing I would really like to see come back again is Tortimer Island. I miss being able to go to another island and meet other people from around the world and play the fun games without having to worry about monitoring people running around my island or worrying about the rules of someone else's island. A cool twist to that would be to make Tortimer Island's region the opposite of your island, so if your island is North, you would get a South Tortimer Island or vice versa instead of an always Summer island. To me, that alone would make having Nintendo Online more worthwhile. Right now, I barely use it at all.

 

[nightglow]

I've said this before and I don't think people get it...you can't have all the old stuff AND expect new stuff. If NH was just NL 2.0 people would STILL be complaining that there's nothing new, and that they miss (insert whatever you want here) from WW/CF.

AC games are heading in the same direction as Pokemon did, and look what happened there. They removed Pokemon/Moves and fans were furious. If fans keep pushing for new this this and that, then expect villagers to become casualties...and it wouldn't matter what villagers they cut, because much like the Pokemon scenario, every villager is someone's favorite.

Raymond/Audie/Judy/Sherb/Cyd/Reneigh/Megan/Dom were included at the expense of losing some old characters. Would you trade villagers to get NPCs back? I know I wouldn't.

Since you mentioned Pokemon that community is still divided. Like when the Gen 4 remakes was shown people were angry at the art style? I mean really? As a Pokemon fan I welcome the art style and I am glad its coming but sheesh I wish people would stop being so judgmental about it. Also people were being too harsh with the other Pokemon game called Pokemon Legend Arceues where they say it looks bad. I dropped out the community due to toxicity but its really bad over there so I would not bother with them,

To get back on topic I do welcome what Animal Crossing New Horizons did to make the game go in a different direction with the whole terraforming since in past AC games the customization was limited. However with that being said and I will still stand by what I said that the game has flaws that should be acknowledged.

Ugh yes I was just thinking about this while writing my reply to the original thread topic before reading all the replies. And I find it more as an Nintendo problem than a __insert franchise name here__. And probably why I am looking at Animal Crossing right now in a "more negative" light than maybe others feel I should be.
This is kinda what I mean by the "copy and paste with relabeling". It isn't necessary to have new villagers for every new animal crossing game. But it is necessary to have more new things to do or expanded dialog/details; or in the case of a new game, new graphics.

Raymond/Audie/Judy/Sherb/Cyd/Reneigh/Megan/Dom are great. Infact I love Megan and Dom. Tons of people love Dom because they struggled with liking Jocks.. but if the focus of fleshing out characters were a thing over/instead of producing more characters for marketing (because that is what it comes down to imo) then perhaps there would be a happiness of hey we have the "core stuff" (i know that is subjective but whatever) but we also have actual NEW stuff in a new game... or if Nintendo ever did go the route of making a game and doing updates "forever" instead of pushing out the same game later with small steps of change the game wouldn't be stale later.
I mean, isn't part of the point of Animal Crossing is to build friendships? What about learning details about your villager through interaction? I feel like that is sorely missed. Missed as in missed the mark rather than it being a thing in the past and not returning. Because even if it was a thing in the past, it should have been expanded on by now. And maybe there would be a jock someone wouldn't struggle to like if villagers become more fleshed out with time and we wouldn't need Dom plastered on things for sales or as an advertisement of something new for this game. Other things that are actually new would be advertised as new. And the risk of things being cut that people may actually get upset about would reduce.
I know that I sometimes get criticized on the forums for saying I feel like there is still a lack in New Horizons when I haven't played the past animal crossing games, but fact is Nintendo Nintendos... and as such... they Nintendo in Nintendo's games lol. What they tend to do in one game is bound to happen in another. Hence the pokemon thing... and I would HATE to see that happen to someone else's jam. And regardless of past animal crossing games and playing them, I just feel like New Horizons could be better because we are looking at New Horizons and Nintendo if you want to know the future of animal crossing.

 

[Tiffany]

I'm happy for the extra design slots only because I know others want them, i dont even use the ones i have now. but whoopie cushions and prom items? really nintendo? so many things have been asked for from mass crafting/buying to more furniture items and this is what you give us? How about giving us what we are asking for, bringing back much wanted npcs? very disappointing.

 

[Moritz]

I'm happy for the extra design slots only because I know others want them, i dont even use the ones i have now. but whoopie cushions and prom items? really nintendo? so many things have been asked for from mass crafting/buying to more furniture items and this is what you give us? How about giving us what we are asking for, bringing back much wanted npcs? very disappointing.

I'm actually really excited for the prom stuff
I'm really into it.
And I've used up like 10 of the new design slots today and I'm not close to done haha

Also I know you're not trying to say everyone is on the same page, but I genuinely don't want a lot of the requested NPCs back.
So its not really what "we" are asking for, it's more "what myself and those who agree with me want"
Sorry, just a pet peeve of mine

(Never going to use a whoopee cushion though)

 

[VanitasFan26]

One final thing I'll say about this after reading a lot of the comments. To be honest the more I read the more there is mixed reactions some say that AC has always been this way and others wish they would add more. it’s a mixed bag. I can see it from both perspectives tbh I do wish they would add more to the game.

However, I will point out something from some of the debates I've seen. The thing is people shouldn’t be so defensive when it comes to other people’s opinions. Some will only have good things to say and others will have words of improvements but to confront someone because their viewpoint is completely different from theirs is ridiculous that they feel the need to call them out for it. While its true and valid that everyone has different viewpoints and opinions, everyone needs to remember it’s all opinion based with anything in life there will always be those like love and those that don’t but like I mentioned earlier it’s important to acknowledge what could be improved on too.

 

[Airysuit]

I wonder if the divide in opinion is related to the creativity or social interaction while playing Like if you play with a lot of people and/or are very creative, than yes, this game has endless possibilities!

But if you're not, or more into the immersiveness and day to day life, than I assume this game is more frustrating.

Like I'm a very creative person but I fell in love with ac with wildworld with all the characters and kk and the little holidays and cozy music and store updates etc. So I tend to get whiplashed between being a bit disappointed by lack of *non creative based* content and being very happy with this game and all its creative possibilities hahah

Its just a theory tho.

 

[KhalidPrecious]

I would be so HAPPY to see old characters coming back, all of them, no exception! Store upgrades and more new stores please. Maybe I could transfer the island into forset village? Even more customization for the building (even stores!).

 

[Bilaz]

I don’t really think the life sim aspects were that big in New Leaf either though? The dialogue was repetitive and they cut allll of the NPC backstories? It’s a great game but mainly due to the vast pool of items and all the different ways of obtaining them
New Leaf shines in collecting, New Horizons shines in designers, the life sim aspect shines in the original and wild world

 

[Moritz]

I wonder if the divide in opinion is related to the creativity or social interaction while playing Like if you play with a lot of people and/or are very creative, than yes, this game has endless possibilities!

But if you're not, or more into the immersiveness and day to day life, than I assume this game is more frustrating.

Like I'm a very creative person but I fell in love with ac with wildworld with all the characters and kk and the little holidays and cozy music and store updates etc. So I tend to get whiplashed between being a bit disappointed by lack of *non creative based* content and being very happy with this game and all its creative possibilities hahah

Its just a theory tho.

I dunno
I'm not the most creative person. The only custom designs I made myself for my island is a wire going from my mic to my amp that takes 6 slots. And a sign saying "rocks <---"
The layout of my island is essentially 1 big square and I haven't played around making things like water features. My entrance isn't a grand entrance. It's modeled more after the idea of how you normally leave an air port.

I love all my villagers, talk to them all at least 20 times a day I'd say, often hang out at their houses just chilling on the sofa. Love watching them run around, or sing, or seeing who's hanging out with who each day.

I also rarely play with others.

I'm not frustrated with the game.
I'm content and relaxed just walking down my beach at night or chopping trees for wood I will likely never use.

But maybe there are people less creative than me who don't like to design areas in general and would rather the game go back to how it was before where you didnt need to worry about stuff like terraforming or making inclines because the game was made with all areas accessible from the start.

It certainly was simpler when the most you could effect were trees and flowers
Less options can mean less things to stress about
I can think of the word but there is a thing where so many choices can leave people feeling overwhelmed and find it harder to be happy with what they chose, where as having less options makes it easier and leaves them feeling more satisfied with the choice

 

[o013 WOLF 130o]

I'm with you. The game is beautiful but empty at the same time. When I got my favorite villager kyle. I thought somthing was different about him. He dosent say much and I used to want to speak to him everyday. I'm bored. I havent collected a signal picture because my villagers have no life. Some items are amazing some arnt and i miss alot of the old items. I want more events, things to do, items that can be interacted with like kicking a ball, games....I have nothing to do on my island. When people come over we just stare at each other. Look at the changes to our islands and leave.