Although whatever I cover in today’s entry is not going to be incorporated into the actual system, one thing I wanted to talk about is the similarities and the types they are. Granted, I will put significance in the changes section, but the types of similarities are hard to incorporate because they only apply to some ratings.
Stuff that needed to change:
In the Rating the changes entries, the similarities I rate with a -1 or -2 mean that they were a problem in the former work, and they were not addressed in the latter work. A rating of -2 indicates I feel strongly about it, and a rating of -1 indicates that I still care, but have a weak opinion.
In this category of similarities, there are three types, which are based on age, external factors, and more.
In the Rating the changes entries, the similarities I rate with a +1 or +2 mean that I was glad that a negative change hasn’t happened and I felt that it should stay the same unless if it were changed for the better. A rating of +2 indicates I feel strongly about it, and a rating of +1 indicates that I still care, but have a weak opinion.
In this category of similarities, there are three other types, just like the negative ones.
In the Rating the changes entries, the similarities I rate with a 0 means that they haven’t changed it, and I don’t care if they have changed it or not. They do not include all similarities that I can name (like how Tom Nook is still a tanuki), but it includes similarities that are open to change or similarities people seek to change.
In this category of similarities, there are three more types, just like the last two.
Stuff that needed to change:
In the Rating the changes entries, the similarities I rate with a -1 or -2 mean that they were a problem in the former work, and they were not addressed in the latter work. A rating of -2 indicates I feel strongly about it, and a rating of -1 indicates that I still care, but have a weak opinion.
In this category of similarities, there are three types, which are based on age, external factors, and more.
- Not bad then, but bad now: These features indicate that they weren’t a problem back from the beginning or back when they were first implemented as changes, but are a problem due to other internal factors, external factors, and opinion changes. For example, after the Star Wars prequels were released, there were several plot holes opened in the original trilogy. Like when R2-D2 can fly in AotC, but not RotJ. Or when the lightsaber battle in ANH looked very crappy because of how well-choreographed the lightsaber battles were in the prequels. Or when Obi-Wan said that Anakin was the greatest pilot in the galaxy when we seen how bad his flying was in the prequels. An Animal Crossing-related example of this type of similarity is the group mechanic, where some items are sold much more frequently in shops than others, and some items are rarely sold. It was fine back when there were fewer objects, but it is a problem in New Leaf since there are so many items. So I expect a change in ACNH.
- Bad both then and now: These features or mechanics were part of the original work or from an a work from two entries (or more) back, but were always bad from the beginning. Take for example, in Pokémon (up to Gen VI), there were HMs. To get past rivers, go up waterfalls, or get past trees, you will need to use party space for your Pokémon. Not every Pokémon can learn particular moves, and some HMs aren’t good for competitive play. Although I wouldn’t mind them in the 1st gen, they were a nuisance, and it remained unresolved for many Pokémon generations until Gen VII. An Animal Crossing example I have is rather an old one, but it goes back to Wild World. One negative quality about the GameCube Version that wasn’t fixed in Wild World is that you are required to have a person from another town buy from your shop to unlock Nookington’s, meaning that if you don’t have siblings or friends, you must have two towns. It was bad in the GameCube Version, and bad in Wild World.
- Negative changes carried on: These attributes didn’t originate from the beginning, but they originated from a negative change from the last version. Basically, these are negative changes to the previous entry, and they were not reversed or alleviated in the next entry. For example, focusing on the perspective of South Park’s 18th season, the season format for South Park has changed between Season 16 and Season 17. They cut it to 10 episodes and pushed them to the end of the year. That was a negative change to South Park during the 17th season, and they did not go back to the 7-7 format in the 18th season. By Season 19, that similarity would qualify as “Bad from both then and now”. An Animal Crossing example I have is Redd’s counterfeit paintings. In Wild World, he will sell counterfeits, and you will never know if they are real or fake. Not only he still sold counterfeits in City Folk, but they also didn’t reverse the problem or even alleviate it.
In the Rating the changes entries, the similarities I rate with a +1 or +2 mean that I was glad that a negative change hasn’t happened and I felt that it should stay the same unless if it were changed for the better. A rating of +2 indicates I feel strongly about it, and a rating of +1 indicates that I still care, but have a weak opinion.
In this category of similarities, there are three other types, just like the negative ones.
- Traditional aspects: These similarities are based on good features that originated from a positive change from an earlier entry or originated from the beginning. They were good from the very beginning, and are always good. For instance, when Disney first opened the California themed park south of Disneyland, they added a real roller coaster named California Screamin’. Despite changing it into an Incredibles’ themed ride, the main track of the ride hasn’t changed. Just the scenery. It’s like re-writing a song by dropping the lyrics altogether, but keeping the score. So the roller coaster and its features remain. An Animal Crossing example is time traveling. It’s been a staple from the beginning, and removing it would be a very bad idea.
- Positive changes carried on: Just like the “Negative changes carried on”, these features originated from a positive change to the latest entry, and they were left alone. While there’s always room for improvement, as it would be better if they improved it even more, by not reversing the change or adding bad stuff to the feature, it stays as a positive similarity for both the next entry and the entry the change took effect in. For example, in 2015, McDonald’s started this “breakfast all day” menu, which is a positive change to McDonald’s organization. One year later, McDonald’s units still had the “breakfast all day” menu. An Animal Crossing example is that the Welcome amiibo update added new features like the campground and mini-games. One feature that remained the same was adding PWPs, which is a positive change to New Leaf from City Folk. It seems that the Welcome amiibo update retained New Leaf’s positive changes.
- Bad if left alone, worse if changed: While many features would be better off if they were changed for the better, some things are better off if they were left alone than changed, no matter how bad they are. For instance, ever since Donald Trump won the 2016 election, there was an increasing demand to abolish the electoral college. I have to agree it is a problem because there is a possibility that all states locked on one party may have a combined total of over 270 electoral votes, and states that are locked on one party would make voters from the other party feel that their voices won’t matter. However, if we got rid of it and relied on the popular vote, it could worsen the problems the electoral college has, and it may create new problems. An Animal Crossing example is these annoying sea basses that all players hate. Getting rid of them would make money-making easier or less time-consuming, but it could upset any internet gaming markets as it makes Animal Crossing too easy and/or make the game not last as long. Games getting easier is an ongoing problem in today’s world, and getting rid of the sea bass will add Animal Crossing to the list of many games getting easier.
In the Rating the changes entries, the similarities I rate with a 0 means that they haven’t changed it, and I don’t care if they have changed it or not. They do not include all similarities that I can name (like how Tom Nook is still a tanuki), but it includes similarities that are open to change or similarities people seek to change.
In this category of similarities, there are three more types, just like the last two.
- Cared for before, but not anymore: These similarities are based on original features or changes that I was passionate about from the beginning (positive or negative), but as time goes by, I start losing interest into the feature, as I wouldn’t care if they did anymore changes or not. This is basically the opposite as “Not bad then, but bad now” and its positive equivalent. In Animal Crossing, I loved chatting with villagers, but I no longer utilize this feature as much as I moved onto the artistic concept of it.
- Never cared for: These features are something I never cared about ever. They would’ve left it alone, changed it, or whatever, and I wouldn’t say anything good or bad about it. In Animal Crossing, the one feature I never cared about is Feng Shui. It doesn’t really benefit me, and I’m not the kind of person that believes in lucky items.
- Neutral changes carried on: The last type of similarity are the changes from the previous entry that I didn’t care about, and they retained it in the next entry. It’s like I never cared for it when they implemented it, wouldn’t care if they retained it or took it off. I would have the same opinion either way. In Animal Crossing, they added feathers in Wild World. I didn’t care about that or how to get them. I also didn’t care when they kept that in City Folk.
