Maybe there needs to be a good balance between nice and rude villagers

VanitasFan26

I'm just a ghost.
Joined
Aug 9, 2020
Posts
5,819
Bells
2,064
Dragon Tokens
0
Red Envelope
Red Envelope
Okay I know this is going to be a controversial take but I am kinda glad they got rid of the rudeness in the original AC game now that I did more thinking. Now with all due respect I know this game was in a time when everyone in 2001 was edgy and tried to look cool. Nowadays that is not considered okay by today's standards. If the villagers behave like this in New Horizons I can tell the same people who said the villagers are "too friendly" will be the same ones saying how they are "too mean".

You see there is a bit of problem here. There needs to be a good balance between nice and mean villagers. Sure you may want to have villagers who actually care for you, but I understand you want a bit of conflict so you have a meaner villager.

The problem with ACNH is that you barely see any conflict. Most times its with other villagers talking to each other and thats when you see real rudeness, the problem is its not with you most of the time. I can see why some people may get uncomfortable with these villagers because they don't want to feel bullied, but I know there are some out there who enjoy the rudeness.
 
I agree with that.
If I hit them with a net repeatedly, I do expect some kind of negative response that isn't hand-waved away by selecting 'Sorry'. I also think that your friendliness should be able to gradually go lower, and elicit a 'meaner' response (but not too mean, since Nintendo games have clung to the family-friendly status) to the point that it becomes obvious you've got a villager who doesn't really like you. I could barely tell the difference between regular villagers and best friend villagers in NH, they were never upset with me no matter how often I refused to help them.

It doesn't have to be GC levels of awful, just something to let me know that this villager is tired of me.
 
I think I wish the anger lasted longer, maybe like how it is in Stardew. Where your given the shoulder if you do certain stuff, or trigger a certain event. But they eventually calm down.

If the villagers were angry at you fir like a day or two I think would be more interesting. I do understand why its like this. But it would be more realistic? Also fun.
----
I think villagers shoulder have mood swings, sometimes just wanna be alone, or stay angrier for a longer amount of time. Hold a grudge. So yeah I agree, we need a better balance
 
LOL, honestly i wish we had the ******* villagers back, because it'd be funny to see happen like it would be so funny just to see constant roasting on that island lol.
 
i agree. my first animal crossing was new leaf so im not used to rude villagers but it would be great if there were mean villagers if your behavior towards them warrants it.
 
It should be like Wild World. That game has the perfect balance imo. In that game, the rudest villagers were snooties and crankies, which did make sense, but even other villagers could be mean. Despite that, other villagers could be rude to you, usually if you actually do something to deserve it, but sometimes even if you did nothing wrong and they happened to ping you when they were in a bad mood. Villagers don't have to be jerks, but they should still be at least mean to an extent, or at the very least certain personality types should be mean until you become closer friends with them.
 
It would be interesting if the cranky and snooty villagers started off as a bit rude, but then opened up their heart to you over time! <3333
 
I understand why some people don't want actual unkindness in their escapist video game, but I also think it's possible to show friendship progression without having to start out with mean/rude dialogue. I mean, think about Sable. When you talk to her the first several times, she's like "Oh, sorry, I'm busy." It takes quite a bit of effort before she starts engaging with you and sharing personal details. I wish we had villagers like that.

I'd say the Peppy and Jock villagers would be the most outgoing and most likely to be all buddy-buddy early on, and would open up easily about their experiences and personalities. Smug and Sisterly villagers would be more reserved at first, sharing more surface details, but would still be friendly and initiate interaction, slowly divulging backstory over time. Lazy and Normal villagers might be more shy but still receptive, though they'd give short responses at first; it would take a long time to get to the exclamation points. Cranky and Snooty villagers could start out more curt, like "I just want a nap" or "Oh, it's you again." "Sorry, I'm busy." "You sure do stay up late." And slowly their conversation would become more personable. I think that would add a lot of depth to the interactions without resorting to outright insults.
 
I find the idea that people can look at NL and NH, games where you're explicitly named as the boss of the small patch of rural land that you live in, and where you're encouraged to do basically what you like with the place, even going as so far in Welcome amiibo and NH to having easy control of the specific villagers that live in your town, then proceed to go "villagers aren't mean anymore because people complained (despite the fact the devs specifically named Resetti as the thing people complained about), so if we complain loudly enough they'll put it back! This has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that you're the most important figure in the town now!" kind of... stupid, I'm not going to lie, and it's a harrowing reminder that most Animal Crossing discourse is ultimately based on complaining and treating things as a bunch of content rather than, y'know, thinking about why things are the way they are and how everything meshes together.

I only really feel as if villagers would become people that you've got to work to befriend again if the NL/NH model truly wears out its welcome and Animal Crossing goes back to being a world you've got basically no control over again... and I think a good portion of the AC playerbase would then complain that you can't easily swap out Ugletto for Cutesie, or that you can't force your animals to wake up at 7am so that you can see them before you go to work because that's the only time you can play the game, or that you can't turn this rural slice of nothing into a purely aesthetic theme park.

Don't get me wrong, as someone who started out with Wild World, part of me would welcome that! I just don't think it's possible in the current model of Animal Crossing, and I'm fed up of hearing about it as something you can just easily reimplement (or worse, add as an option, as if Animal Crossing dialogue hasn't been stretched enough by villagers talking about the things you've placed, two extra personalities, and the expectation that AC games have to be released worldwide at roughly the same time, instead of releasing potentially more than 2 years afterwards like the European version of the GC game)
 
As charming as it seemed to be in the GameCube version, I personally don't want to see villager rudeness come back, except maybe in response to things like being repeatedly hit by nets since it would be a very valid response in that kind of instance. However, I would really like the villagers to actually have some depth to them again. Right now it seems like the villagers' friendship levels range from "best friends" at the start to "even better friends." I would like to see a much broader range, even if it's just from "Neutral feelings" at first to "best friends" in the end, maybe with some variance between personalities where some would naturally start out friendlier than others. I want the villagers to feel more like villagers and less like neat little decorations for your town, which is what they really felt like to me in New Horizons.
 
I feel like everyone has some great points here.
I personally love rude as hell villagers since they are always unpredictable and that gets a laugh out of me. But I also understand that modern players wouldn't like something so unpleasant.
I think the key here is that villagers really need a range of emotions that feel more in depth. When they get angry, let them be ANGRY rather than angy. When they get sad, let them stew in it. When they get happy, let them surprise you with gifts or ask for favors out of the blue.
As well as emotional range, the villagers need a more pronounced friendship level indicator. Let the "rude" villager types be more standoffish before they warm up to you. Let the Peppys be way too overbearing and in your face before they mellow out and get to know you better.
A good mix of new and old, yes, but just more significant depth.
 
This is the only sane position to have about this, and something I’ve been arguing for a while, now. Since there are eight personalities, it shouldn’t be too hard to have the four more passive ones be kinder in varying degrees, while the remaining four are a bit more rough around the edges. This isn’t even asking much, here — just designed archetypes in a way that doesn't lean too much on either side.

I have no reason not to suspect that people going off about villagers being “too nice” in New Horizons would’ve flip-flopped and went, “They’re too mean!”. Seriously. People don’t know what they want from a game when they ask for characters to mindlessly berate them for trivial reasons, or no reason at all. That was obnoxious in the first two games. If Peppies just stole from you and were basically a ditzier version of the Snooties (like they were in PG!), if Snooties just regarded you as a troglodyte despite you being in charge of your own island and establishing a home for them, if Crankies just considered you a nuisance to be ignored, if Jocks shifted from being nice to insensitive on a dime, if Lazies made jokes about your weight whilst talking about nothing BUT food, if Normals sometimes brushed you off despite instances of them latching themselves onto you, and if villagers PAINTED your roof without your permission and you COULDN’T ask Tom Nook to paint it back, and had to hope the Nooklings were selling a paint color your roof had before it was painted into something you NEVER asked for… all of this was obnoxious and never charming — rarely was it ever humorous, either. It’d just be your neighbors being absolute bastards and you couldn’t even retaliate, other than decking them with a net or pushing them. There is no way in hell that people wouldn’t have complained about this sort of behavior, especially when the game came out nearly a week after a lockdown (speaking just the U.S.A, here, and this is an American site, after all), and was marketed to be a break from the harsh realities of this life.

Going back to Wild World would’ve also been a terrible idea. Peppies are still easily the worst villagers in that game because they act even more rudely (if it could even be believed) in there than they did in the first game. Snooties and Crankies might not be in-you-face about how arrogant and crude they are respectively, but that doesn’t mean they were any better, either. Jocks are relatively the same; they still meditate between being your buds, and being insulting. Normals are a strange case. They’re still the nicest, next to Lazies, but there's a certain tone the English localization gave them that I can’t say I hate, but don’t particularly like, either. All-in-all, WW was pretty bad at handling this whole “Nice/Mean” dichotomy. When they gave you their picture, it didn’t make a damn difference in the slightest, either. All that work to befriend them, all to be treated like garbage, anyway. It’s good that they’ll wave (or bow) back if you initial the gesture, but there needed to be waaay more of this in the game to show that your work meant more than, “I got a pic! Maybe the quote won’t be a recycled one from the other three pics that I already have!”

The inverse of the particular issue above is that villagers in the newer games won’t even behave in a way that appropriately reflects how poorly you treated them. There might be subtle visual cues, but villagers not acting in a way that accurately reflects their relationship with the player is a series-wide problem. It’s baffling how much this is ignored whenever the topic of this dichotomy is brought up.

Honestly, there doesn’t even need to be a dichotomy, anyway. If you make villagers angry, write dialogue to reflect that, and make it justified. Don’t have them insult you because you refused an insane offer, or didn’t want to spend money on non-native fruit when there’s already a tree of the stuff right next to them. If you’ve been continuously nice to them, they shouldn’t turn on you because of the games' dumb RNG that randomizes what a villager says at any given time — that’s what makes this dichotomy muddled in the first place.
I find the idea that people can look at NL and NH, games where you're explicitly named as the boss of the small patch of rural land that you live in, and where you're encouraged to do basically what you like with the place, even going as so far in Welcome amiibo and NH to having easy control of the specific villagers that live in your town, then proceed to go "villagers aren't mean anymore because people complained (despite the fact the devs specifically named Resetti as the thing people complained about), so if we complain loudly enough they'll put it back! This has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that you're the most important figure in the town now!" kind of... stupid, I'm not going to lie, and it's a harrowing reminder that most Animal Crossing discourse is ultimately based on complaining and treating things as a bunch of content rather than, y'know, thinking about why things are the way they are and how everything meshes together.

I only really feel as if villagers would become people that you've got to work to befriend again if the NL/NH model truly wears out its welcome and Animal Crossing goes back to being a world you've got basically no control over again... and I think a good portion of the AC playerbase would then complain that you can't easily swap out Ugletto for Cutesie, or that you can't force your animals to wake up at 7am so that you can see them before you go to work because that's the only time you can play the game, or that you can't turn this rural slice of nothing into a purely aesthetic theme park.

Don't get me wrong, as someone who started out with Wild World, part of me would welcome that! I just don't think it's possible in the current model of Animal Crossing, and I'm fed up of hearing about it as something you can just easily reimplement (or worse, add as an option, as if Animal Crossing dialogue hasn't been stretched enough by villagers talking about the things you've placed, two extra personalities, and the expectation that AC games have to be released worldwide at roughly the same time, instead of releasing potentially more than 2 years afterwards like the European version of the GC game)
Once again, McRibbie is the voice of reason when it comes to this topic. Though I disagree with the point that the current standard has to be removed in order to make villagers be people you can be friends with, you're certainly right about how the AC fandom takes these problems and makes complaints about them without understanding why these decisions were made in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top