Fridaynightcatlady
Sex ed advocate
Before I start, I just want to clarify that none of what I write is meant to be dismissive of other people's feelings and complaints about the game.
It seems to me like every day I log into this forum, I see more and more threads piling up of complaints and rants towards New Horizons. I'm not here to write this as a form of 'policing' those threads or those users. You're completely entitled to your opinions and I absolutely recognize the flaws of the game. I personally really like and enjoy New Horizons. I've been an Animal Crossing fan since I discovered the GCN game when I was 9. It was, quite literally, a happy accident to have stumbled upon such a great game. I've seen the series evolve and even fall flat a couple of times. I've cringed at some of their spinoffs, bought the merch and even watched the film. I've tried to organize my thoughts in the following way,
1. I know I'll probably get a lot of heat for this, but I don't agree with the statement that a game should play the way a player wants it to play. I believe video games, as many other mediums and creations of its own, develop a sense of direction addressed by their creators. Animal Crossing has always presented itself with a 'philosophy', if you will. That you should be patient, take it slow every day, appreciate its mundanity. It does so, I believe, in a number of ways: by doing mundane daily tasks such as catching bugs or fish, chatting up with your villagers and sometimes it's even more drastic, like punishing you for running over your grass instead of walking around. I mean, literally, the first game - nostalgia and all - was pretty much that: catch fish/bugs, chat up neighbors, expand Nooks and you're pretty much set (and yet, we all seem to love it so much, because the formula works for some reason! Or at least, it did). This game has a history of punishing its players for going further than they should (time traveling, resetting, etc). I believe creators or developers, should absolutely brand their game in whatever direction they think it should go. New Horizons allows you to break those rules a bit.
2. I think a staple of Animal Crossing games have also been this feeling of "nothingness". So I'm always a bit puzzled to why people seem so eager to rush through things in NH. If anything, previous games (except NL) were just as slow because those games didn't have any progression to begin with. NL was probably unlike any other AC game, because it provided the player with a lot more 'agency' and 'power' over things and in a more immediate manner. In a way, it broke the AC 'philosophy', if you will. Which brings me to another point...
3. I feel the reason that a lot of people find NH underwhelming is because they're obsessively comparing it to New Leaf. I could absolutely be wrong about this, but I'm under the impression that there must be a lot of folks around here that must've started off their AC series with NL. To be fair, that's a huge starting point in the series, because NL proved to be quite a jump in the franchise (and probably the biggest leap, up until NH). Imo, the transition between GCN and WW was okay, considering how we'd now be able to play online, and WW to CF was incredibly underwhelming because we basically got an updated WW with better graphics and a few more features (also, it was the worst rated AC in the series and the game with the lowest sales). So it also makes sense that the AC team decided to go "all in" with NL, and frankly, it worked. Animal Crossing became considerably more popular with NL. I believe AC becamse as beloved as it is now because of NL. We even got 2 spinoff games for the same reason and Isabelle for Smash. NL, as I said, turned the tables entirely because it changed a lot of the things in the game (being mayor, doing public projects, deciding on which buildings you'd want in your town, etc).
4. Part of the reason why I think players dislike NH is because, unlike NL, NH is going back to what Animal Crossing used to be (or at least, partly). I think the creators went back to GCN and WW on its way to develop NH, and it shows, considering how many loving features got brought back from the past! (glow in the dark, message in a bottle, acres, 3-level-hills, etc). It's also brought back several features from NL, there's no denying that, but in its core, NH is an hommage to golden days of Animal Crossing. I don't wanna be 'that guy', but sometimes I wonder what constitutes this 'hunger' from people for immediacy and to get everything they wanted in a game right away. I think we've also been spoiled in that regard.
I also want to say that I don't mean to tell anyone how they should play their game, but, in many ways, to be humble and to think and look back to what Animal Crossing has always been. You may be looking back to its immediate predecessor, but Animal Crossing has an entire history going back as far (and more considering the 64 game) as 2001.
I enjoy NH, I love playing - even bits (though I've been playing hours if I'm being honest) - of the game. I do believe updated will come with more content, but if they don't, I will still enjoy the game fully.
It seems to me like every day I log into this forum, I see more and more threads piling up of complaints and rants towards New Horizons. I'm not here to write this as a form of 'policing' those threads or those users. You're completely entitled to your opinions and I absolutely recognize the flaws of the game. I personally really like and enjoy New Horizons. I've been an Animal Crossing fan since I discovered the GCN game when I was 9. It was, quite literally, a happy accident to have stumbled upon such a great game. I've seen the series evolve and even fall flat a couple of times. I've cringed at some of their spinoffs, bought the merch and even watched the film. I've tried to organize my thoughts in the following way,
1. I know I'll probably get a lot of heat for this, but I don't agree with the statement that a game should play the way a player wants it to play. I believe video games, as many other mediums and creations of its own, develop a sense of direction addressed by their creators. Animal Crossing has always presented itself with a 'philosophy', if you will. That you should be patient, take it slow every day, appreciate its mundanity. It does so, I believe, in a number of ways: by doing mundane daily tasks such as catching bugs or fish, chatting up with your villagers and sometimes it's even more drastic, like punishing you for running over your grass instead of walking around. I mean, literally, the first game - nostalgia and all - was pretty much that: catch fish/bugs, chat up neighbors, expand Nooks and you're pretty much set (and yet, we all seem to love it so much, because the formula works for some reason! Or at least, it did). This game has a history of punishing its players for going further than they should (time traveling, resetting, etc). I believe creators or developers, should absolutely brand their game in whatever direction they think it should go. New Horizons allows you to break those rules a bit.
2. I think a staple of Animal Crossing games have also been this feeling of "nothingness". So I'm always a bit puzzled to why people seem so eager to rush through things in NH. If anything, previous games (except NL) were just as slow because those games didn't have any progression to begin with. NL was probably unlike any other AC game, because it provided the player with a lot more 'agency' and 'power' over things and in a more immediate manner. In a way, it broke the AC 'philosophy', if you will. Which brings me to another point...
3. I feel the reason that a lot of people find NH underwhelming is because they're obsessively comparing it to New Leaf. I could absolutely be wrong about this, but I'm under the impression that there must be a lot of folks around here that must've started off their AC series with NL. To be fair, that's a huge starting point in the series, because NL proved to be quite a jump in the franchise (and probably the biggest leap, up until NH). Imo, the transition between GCN and WW was okay, considering how we'd now be able to play online, and WW to CF was incredibly underwhelming because we basically got an updated WW with better graphics and a few more features (also, it was the worst rated AC in the series and the game with the lowest sales). So it also makes sense that the AC team decided to go "all in" with NL, and frankly, it worked. Animal Crossing became considerably more popular with NL. I believe AC becamse as beloved as it is now because of NL. We even got 2 spinoff games for the same reason and Isabelle for Smash. NL, as I said, turned the tables entirely because it changed a lot of the things in the game (being mayor, doing public projects, deciding on which buildings you'd want in your town, etc).
4. Part of the reason why I think players dislike NH is because, unlike NL, NH is going back to what Animal Crossing used to be (or at least, partly). I think the creators went back to GCN and WW on its way to develop NH, and it shows, considering how many loving features got brought back from the past! (glow in the dark, message in a bottle, acres, 3-level-hills, etc). It's also brought back several features from NL, there's no denying that, but in its core, NH is an hommage to golden days of Animal Crossing. I don't wanna be 'that guy', but sometimes I wonder what constitutes this 'hunger' from people for immediacy and to get everything they wanted in a game right away. I think we've also been spoiled in that regard.
I also want to say that I don't mean to tell anyone how they should play their game, but, in many ways, to be humble and to think and look back to what Animal Crossing has always been. You may be looking back to its immediate predecessor, but Animal Crossing has an entire history going back as far (and more considering the 64 game) as 2001.
I enjoy NH, I love playing - even bits (though I've been playing hours if I'm being honest) - of the game. I do believe updated will come with more content, but if they don't, I will still enjoy the game fully.
Last edited: