FireNinja1
inactive: please read "about" tab on profile
EA is infamous for it's stupid, ridiculous, and overpriced DLC. :/
Selling Villagers for Profit: Thoughts
- Thread starter cheezu
- Start date
EA is infamous for it's stupid, ridiculous, and overpriced DLC. :/
Please stop with the labeling of people as "stupid". It doesn't make you sound smarter than everybody, just rude. Sorry.
Er, by your logic everyone in the world is stupid for even buying anything. Why support any type of business because they profit? Omg, everything should be free!!1 Bad business models! Don't buy!
Um. No.
That's on the buyer. Again, it's up to them to do what they like with their own earnings. Just like in real life.
"Oh, you're buying a puppy from a pet store with your own money? But there's a chance the puppy could contract rabies or get run over by a car! Better not buy one then."
"You're buying detergent? But you could lose it on the way to the car while loading up the groceries! Better not buy it."
Um. Again. No.
Yeah, there are. And I've personally participated in giveaways myself. I understand the frustration of seeing a giveaway and missing my desired villager for free by half a second of posting too late.
Oh but if I see someone selling Tangy for 2mil, and I happen to have 2mil lying around, I would rather buy Tangy than stalk another cycling thread or the whole board for a chance with like 100+ other people to get her. It's like the donut shop thing--if you can afford to cut in line, there's no harm in doing it. If everyone gets frustrated, that's their own fault for not grabbing their chance to cut in line themselves.
If they don't have the money for cutting in line, then they should earn it. Just like in real life. If someone really wants something, they work for it.
I personally catch beetles every night at the island. I've racked up at least 15mil out of it. I've used them all on PWPs and expansions and rare unorderable items (also stuff for my friends <3). Some of my money I earned from villager auctions also (though I've sold for cheaper). I worked for my bells, and I do what I want with it. If others want the same thing as me, they have to work for it also. It's only fair.
And again, it's really on us if we want to take that risk or not. I would rather deal with bells than trade especially with popular villagers. I have a newbie wi-fi rating of 20+ (100%) so I'll almost always be the one who will have to let go of my villager first, and I would rather not risk that. Does that make me greedy or stupid? Doesn't feel like it.
As for the last one, yes, that is an option. But for your points below, this would mean only the one with good wi-fi ratings will ever be able to trade. Then there'll be a different "market". A wi-fi rating market.
It's a cycle, and there's really nothing that can be done. Labeling people as stupid certainly doesn't help any.
- - - Post Merge - - -
If you really have a problem with such a thing, I think you should go consult with real life first. :c They are two completely different business, yes, but they're reflective of each other.
Er, by your logic everyone in the world is stupid for even buying anything. Why support any type of business because they profit? Omg, everything should be free!!1 Bad business models! Don't buy!
Um. No.
That's on the buyer. Again, it's up to them to do what they like with their own earnings. Just like in real life.
"Oh, you're buying a puppy from a pet store with your own money? But there's a chance the puppy could contract rabies or get run over by a car! Better not buy one then."
"You're buying detergent? But you could lose it on the way to the car while loading up the groceries! Better not buy it."
Um. Again. No.
Yeah, there are. And I've personally participated in giveaways myself. I understand the frustration of seeing a giveaway and missing my desired villager for free by half a second of posting too late.
Oh but if I see someone selling Tangy for 2mil, and I happen to have 2mil lying around, I would rather buy Tangy than stalk another cycling thread or the whole board for a chance with like 100+ other people to get her. It's like the donut shop thing--if you can afford to cut in line, there's no harm in doing it. If everyone gets frustrated, that's their own fault for not grabbing their chance to cut in line themselves.
If they don't have the money for cutting in line, then they should earn it. Just like in real life. If someone really wants something, they work for it.
I personally catch beetles every night at the island. I've racked up at least 15mil out of it. I've used them all on PWPs and expansions and rare unorderable items (also stuff for my friends <3). Some of my money I earned from villager auctions also (though I've sold for cheaper). I worked for my bells, and I do what I want with it. If others want the same thing as me, they have to work for it also. It's only fair.
And again, it's really on us if we want to take that risk or not. I would rather deal with bells than trade especially with popular villagers. I have a newbie wi-fi rating of 20+ (100%) so I'll almost always be the one who will have to let go of my villager first, and I would rather not risk that. Does that make me greedy or stupid? Doesn't feel like it.
As for the last one, yes, that is an option. But for your points below, this would mean only the one with good wi-fi ratings will ever be able to trade. Then there'll be a different "market". A wi-fi rating market.
It's a cycle, and there's really nothing that can be done. Labeling people as stupid certainly doesn't help any.
- - - Post Merge - - -
If you really have a problem with such a thing, I think you should go consult with real life first. :c They are two completely different business, yes, but they're reflective of each other.
Last edited:
I agree with everything you said. People sometimes prefer to buy something for MORE money in real life too if it's more convenient. I've tried stalking cycling threads for dreamies but frankly speaking, I'd rather spend 5 hours of my time doing something else than sitting in front of the computer and frantically refreshing the page for a chance of "Lolly is moving" to show up. I have done it once and ended up missing said villager by like 1 second. So yeah... If I really want a villager and have the money, I'd rather buy them.
- - - Post Merge - - -
As for what LambdaDelta said, there's never a 100% chance that the villager you bought will not move out - I know that accidents can happen but if you're a diligent player, chances of having someone move out without your knowledge are slim. But like with anything, it's just a risk people take when buying any other "real" items daily.
>overpriced
>$1-5
pick one
- - - Post Merge - - -
Please stop comparing real life business that has an actual impact to society and the global economy to an in-game faux-buisness which contributes absolutely nothing worthwhile and just serves to drive in-game prices up way more than they ever should be.
The way I see it, buying/selling just adds a new method of getting your desired villagers faster. Getting the villagers you want is always work: earning bells to buy one, waiting to get it off a cycling thread, trading it for a villager that has the same worth, or paticipating in a lot of giveaways are all methods that require some work, but you always get something in return for it.
FireNinja1
inactive: please read "about" tab on profile
Anything that costs more than $0.00 USD is overpriced for some crappy villagers.
As I see it:
>overpriced
>overpriced
Pick one.
Last edited:
I think this would just make it worse, as people would start buying villagers with real life money, just to sell them for ingame money.
Please just stop being rude. And close-minded. You responded with a text wall, I respond with a text wall.
Also, I said they are reflective of each other. Other people in the thread have said so too. So I will obviously compare them, and just because you don't think the same doesn't mean you can just brush off everything I said and summarize it like that. If you don't think the same, you don't have to act rude about it.
Besides, if you think this 'business model' is bad and will crash and burn because sellers are greedy and buyers are stupid, then you should go back and check your own suggestion:
I wouldn't buy villagers for real-life money. That's even worse than buying with fake money. You tell us our market is awful and yet you suggest an even worse one that will require us to use real money we could use for real things like food and clothing.
Um, no.
I'd pick overpriced that I can work on gradually in a game and easily give up on if I so choose than 1-5$ I can save to buy another game I can spend my time on. Or food. How is that even an option? If I lose real 5$ for a fake online item and lose it, I lose that real 5$ forever. If I lose 50mil virtual money on a virtual pet and lose it, I can shrug it off because it's not real money.
Also I hate DLCs, I think DLCs are an awful business model for consumers (but good for the sellers). But do I call people who participate in that market as stupid? No, I don't.
- - - Post Merge - - -
Best.
Last edited:
They're in-game prices (not real money which is what you suggested that Nintendo incorporates, in fact) and if someone chooses not to participate in auction/selling threads then it is entirely up to them. Selling/buying villagers would not have existed if there were no forums like TBT, etc. because you can't trade villagers with random players like you can in Pokemon, for example.
And honestly, there's no need to be rude to anyone. We are all entitled to our own opinions but calling others "stupid" and being overly sarcastic is very inappropriate.
Last edited:
hemming1996
abels 😍
nothing is underpriced. deal with that. just like in real life, you can't expect to be able to pay for everything. if you're acting like its a complete joke and saying all villagers are overpriced, how would you like it to have to work 5+ hours to plot reset for a villager and then give them away for nothing? that's the equivalent of not getting paid for working. so tbh it is okay to sell villagers and if people want to do that for a profit on AC then let it be.
Last edited:
BigZombieMonkey
Hi I'm Spike!
I won't sell a villager, I don't think it's right.
Also some people have worked for their villagers
i resetted for days on end to get Tangy for instance, and then resetted for hours for Marshal to come into my town, and Mira and octavian etc
i have the right to sell them tbh
Idk i just dont see why its a big deal
I can see when its annoying when someone has had a dreamie for a long time, say for instance Rosie from previous animal crossing games and has loved them since WW/GC. Then some newbie jumps on the bandwagon of loving Rosie for no legitimate reason and gets her instead. I do understand that some new people do genuinely like the villagers, but i have seen numerous posts on here of people admitting they jumped on the popular/cute villager bandwagon and just wanted them
i resetted for days on end to get Tangy for instance, and then resetted for hours for Marshal to come into my town, and Mira and octavian etc
i have the right to sell them tbh
Idk i just dont see why its a big deal
I can see when its annoying when someone has had a dreamie for a long time, say for instance Rosie from previous animal crossing games and has loved them since WW/GC. Then some newbie jumps on the bandwagon of loving Rosie for no legitimate reason and gets her instead. I do understand that some new people do genuinely like the villagers, but i have seen numerous posts on here of people admitting they jumped on the popular/cute villager bandwagon and just wanted them
Ok, I feel like I actually need to address this even though its making my head hurt now.
Business works the way it does BECAUSE it needs to turn a profit and has always been the case, even way back when trading was a thing and "currency" was just other commodities. There's a "cost" to get the product/service prepared and without a way to reap benefits from it there's no way it'd be viable or sustaining for an extended period of time.
THAT'S where the difference between this and villager selling lies. There's literally zero cost nor risk involved for the seller; it's all profit with no chance of loss or a NEED to profit.
I'm sorry, but this has to be one of the dumbest things I've read in ages. I don't even know where to begin.
Bad luck there, though that comes with anything really.
Go to every donut shop in your town during their busy hours and wave your wallet around in the air.
Then come back and tell me how many let you cut ahead, and no, people letting you cut ahead of them because they just want to get rid of you being a nuisance doesn't count.
No, but that model makes the most logical sense. The one with the higher rating earned it through multiple transactions done prior and thus has rightfully gained reputation as being a trustworthy dealer, while the person with the lower rating doesn't have this luxury.
Do you ever buy stuff off ebay/Amazon marketplace/etc? If so, do you check the seller's feedback history? The same concept kinda applies here.
No, since it'd be the choice of the person involved. Plus I already mentioned it'd have a huge drawback, since you'd significantly reduce potential traders.
Neither does supporting this awful cycle.
YES
NO
I DON'T EVEN
Business works the way it does BECAUSE it needs to turn a profit and has always been the case, even way back when trading was a thing and "currency" was just other commodities. There's a "cost" to get the product/service prepared and without a way to reap benefits from it there's no way it'd be viable or sustaining for an extended period of time.
THAT'S where the difference between this and villager selling lies. There's literally zero cost nor risk involved for the seller; it's all profit with no chance of loss or a NEED to profit.
I'm sorry, but this has to be one of the dumbest things I've read in ages. I don't even know where to begin.
Bad luck there, though that comes with anything really.
Go to every donut shop in your town during their busy hours and wave your wallet around in the air.
Then come back and tell me how many let you cut ahead, and no, people letting you cut ahead of them because they just want to get rid of you being a nuisance doesn't count.
No, but that model makes the most logical sense. The one with the higher rating earned it through multiple transactions done prior and thus has rightfully gained reputation as being a trustworthy dealer, while the person with the lower rating doesn't have this luxury.
Do you ever buy stuff off ebay/Amazon marketplace/etc? If so, do you check the seller's feedback history? The same concept kinda applies here.
No, since it'd be the choice of the person involved. Plus I already mentioned it'd have a huge drawback, since you'd significantly reduce potential traders.
Neither does supporting this awful cycle.
YES
NO
I DON'T EVEN
Last edited:
"crappy" is in the opinion of the buyer though
Like for example, from what I've seen most people absolutely hate Beardo but I personally love him.
$5 would probably go into overpriced territory, but people complaining about $1 per would just be incredibly silly.
Last edited:
FireNinja1
inactive: please read "about" tab on profile
Crappy or not, it's still overpriced.
LambdaDelta - I believe Gizmodo already explained this. Say, you get a 2nd town and wish to reset for popular villagers to sell them off. This can actually take hours on end depending on your luck. So the trader/seller is putting effort/time into getting the villager people may potentially want. There's also a risk of not being able to sell the villager off - people backing out of trades, not many interested bidders on that day, etc. I have seen popular villagers being given out for free because someone TT'd them into boxes and the potential buyer backed out in the last minute.
Since you yourself are saying that this is not REAL life, and not a REAL business, why do you have a problem with people spending otherwise meaningless currency on villagers they want, and are instead suggesting Nintendo implement the option of buying villagers with REAL money. It seems a bit self-contradictory to me.
Since you yourself are saying that this is not REAL life, and not a REAL business, why do you have a problem with people spending otherwise meaningless currency on villagers they want, and are instead suggesting Nintendo implement the option of buying villagers with REAL money. It seems a bit self-contradictory to me.
MayorKatie
Mayor of Greensvi
I think selling villagers is fine. Its fake money so is there really any harm done? If someone wants to pay millions of bells for villagers they can. We all want our dreamies and to get them selling for bells to buy other villagers is the most efficient way. In order to buy things you need bells and if selling villagers is the way to do it then thats what we are going to do. I sell villagers. Yesterday i sold Diana for 11 million and bought Francine for 1 million, but i also have a cycle town to give people free villagers. I don't charge bells on there no matter what. I do reserve villagers for myself, but I always raffle popular villagers and never sell them. I think it's ok to by them if you give back and give a free villager every now and then. People have yelled at me for trying to sell and giveaway unpopular villagers, but i just want everyone to have a chance to get their dream villagers.
Last edited:
hemming1996
abels 😍
for gods sake guys, NOTHING can be underpriced. everything is overpriced. . no villager can be underpriced, just deal with it. no matter how crap the villager is you still sell it. someone could actually want that villager.
everything is overpriced, no less.
everything is overpriced, no less.
Last edited:
Similar threads
