So, tans.

[beemayor]

The tanning feature in the game actually really makes me really mad because the default skin tone for this game is very light and that's great for someone who is fair-skinned, regardless of ethnicity. But it angers me that anyone who has medium to dark skin has to spend all this time out in the sun if they want their mayor to resemble them in any way. I'm not claiming racism, but I'm certainly claiming thoughtlessness and I feel terrible for my friends that have to leave their DSes open for five hours every few days to maintain their skin tone. Not to mention, they then have to make bi-daily trips to the island during the winter to keep their skin tone.

It's just frustrating and even as someone whose skin matches the preset skin tone, I'm annoyed, so I can't begin to imagine how players with dark skin must feel.

TLDR; Tanning in ACNL makes me very angry and I don't like it.

 

[tamagotchi]

I hate it. I mean, I don't mind the colors itself, I just don't like going through the process of doing it.

 

[doctor creeper]

I wasn't a fan of the tan at first, and I got pretty tan--then it faded, and I got pasty white again. I actually really like how I looked tan, so I've been trying to get a little darker ever since. I tan really easily IRL, too, so I really like the feature.

 

[Naiad]

The tanning feature in the game actually really makes me really mad because the default skin tone for this game is very light and that's great for someone who is fair-skinned, regardless of ethnicity. But it angers me that anyone who has medium to dark skin has to spend all this time out in the sun if they want their mayor to resemble them in any way. I'm not claiming racism, but I'm certainly claiming thoughtlessness and I feel terrible for my friends that have to leave their DSes open for five hours every few days to maintain their skin tone. Not to mention, they then have to make bi-daily trips to the island during the winter to keep their skin tone.

It's just frustrating and even as someone whose skin matches the preset skin tone, I'm annoyed, so I can't begin to imagine how players with dark skin must feel.

TLDR; Tanning in ACNL makes me very angry and I don't like it.

I understand that tanning can make people mad, but remember: Animal Crossing was developed in Japan.
Japanese people usually all have the same skin tone/hair colour.

Still, I think the next game should allow people to choose their base skin tone. I'm not exactly sure how it would work. Maybe they could have a create your character at the beginning?

 

[Le Ham]

I understand that tanning can make people mad, but remember: Animal Crossing was developed in Japan.
Japanese people usually all have the same skin tone/hair colour.

Still, I think the next game should allow people to choose their base skin tone. I'm not exactly sure how it would work. Maybe they could have a create your character at the beginning?

But if they did put in an option to have a set skin color, imagine what Rover would ask you in order to determine that factor...? Oh, I can see it now...
"So how dark are you?" Then there'd be a slider where on top it says "White as snow!" while on the bottom it says "Pitch-black!" ...Oh man. That would just be terrible.

 

[tamagotchi]

But if they did put in an option to have a set skin color, imagine what Rover would ask you in order to determine that factor...? Oh, I can see it now...
"So how dark are you?" Then there'd be a slider where on top it says "White as snow!" while on the bottom it says "Pitch-black!" ...Oh man. That would just be terrible.

Or it could kinda' be like that feature in the new Pokemon game or whatever. Just have the skin tones right there or something.

 

[beemayor]

But if they did put in an option to have a set skin color, imagine what Rover would ask you in order to determine that factor...? Oh, I can see it now...
"So how dark are you?" Then there'd be a slider where on top it says "White as snow!" while on the bottom it says "Pitch-black!" ...Oh man. That would just be terrible.

Rover doesn't have to ask the question. As mentioned, the skin tones could just be right there. To say "Well, we can't add it because it wouldn't sense!" instead of working a way around the problem is kind of racist.

 

[Le Ham]

Rover doesn't have to ask the question. As mentioned, the skin tones could just be right there. To say "Well, we can't add it because it wouldn't sense!" instead of working a way around the problem is kind of racist.

Then you're calling Nintendo racist for putting profit before people. They added skin tone to Pokemon because they realized they could fit it in without disturbing the "theme". When you make a new save file in Pokemon, the starring tree-named Professor pretty much just shows you pictures and asks you to poke the one you want. Putting in pictures of different skin-tone options, in that setting, worked. Meanwhile in Animal Crossing, the whole basis of your appearance depends on how you answer the questions of either Rover or Kapp'n. If they disturbed that by sticking in a screen completely out of nowhere saying "Pick your skin!" and then letting Rover casually continue with the conversation like nothing happened, that would probably bother some people and make the game look less professional, translating into less market value. The tan thing is most likely there because that's the closest thing Nintendo could come up with to race option that "fits" with the game's style. Nintendo only puts things like that in places where they make sense, regardless of whether someone thinks that's racism or not. It's not their thing to slap something on with duct tape.
Don't point your finger of judgment at me, point it at the folks who made the game. If they by some chance put a race option in the next AC game, I think it'd be great. But thinking that they're gonna go out of their way to make a few more people happy with one little quirk is just unrealistic.

 

[WatashiWantsWaffles]

They're not exactly beautiful.
IRL, i have a natural skin colour that looks like i have a tan

 

[beemayor]

Then you're calling Nintendo racist for putting profit before people. They added skin tone to Pokemon because they realized they could fit it in without disturbing the "theme". When you make a new save file in Pokemon, the starring tree-named Professor pretty much just shows you pictures and asks you to poke the one you want. Putting in pictures of different skin-tone options, in that setting, worked. Meanwhile in Animal Crossing, the whole basis of your appearance depends on how you answer the questions of either Rover or Kapp'n. If they disturbed that by sticking in a screen completely out of nowhere saying "Pick your skin!" and then letting Rover casually continue with the conversation like nothing happened, that would probably bother some people and make the game look less professional, translating into less market value. The tan thing is most likely there because that's the closest thing Nintendo could come up with to race option that "fits" with the game's style. Nintendo only puts things like that in places where they make sense, regardless of whether someone thinks that's racism or not. It's not their thing to slap something on with duct tape.
Don't point your finger of judgment at me, point it at the folks who made the game. If they by some chance put a race option in the next AC game, I think it'd be great. But thinking that they're gonna go out of their way to make a few more people happy with one little quirk is just unrealistic.

I'm not pointing fingers of judgement, so please, calm down. What I'm saying is that, like always, people with lighter skin tones have it very easy, while people with darker skin tones have it more difficult. In the game, people with light skin tones (whether they're white, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, or any race that has the potential to have light skin) can start up the game and immediately, they have their skin tone. No work, no effort. They can look at their character and say "Yep! That's me!" But people with darker skin (even Japanese, Korean, and Chinese people -- because they CAN have dark skin) have to work to get their mayor to look like them. Is that racism? Short answer, yes. Because it's not equal. People with light skin don't have to do anything for their skin tone, while people with dark skin have to work hours and hours to get their skin tone in the game to match their skin tone in real life.

If Nintendo really put profit before people (and they probably do, considering they are a huge company), that's morally wrong and, yes, that's their problem, but not calling out the problem won't make it go away. They're not going to put a different skin tone option into the next AC game unless people bring up the topic of "Hey, why is everyone so pale?" I'm not saying YOU are racist, and I'm not even saying that Nintendo, as an entire company, is racist. I specified in my original reply that it's, in the least, forgetting and exclusionary.

However, if you are willing to say "We can't add a better race option because it destroys the ~atmosphere~ of the game," instead of reasoning that having a selection of skin colors on-screen long enough for the player to pick theirs is a decent and acceptable option, that's a little racist. It would be two seconds out of thousands of seconds that anyone would be playing the game. White people and other light-skinned people are not and should not be the default option. That's why I would never rate any AC game as 5/5 or 10/10, because it's exclusionary in both the aspects of race AND gender. But the gender thing is another discussion entirely.

Basically, what I'm saying is that if Nintendo can't be creative enough to add questions that could determine a player's skin tone, they can just add a screen so a player can choose. If they can't do that, they're racist. And if you think they SHOULDN'T do that, you're not immediately racist, but you should definitely think about WHY you think that.

EDIT: Also, "But thinking that they're gonna go out of their way to make a few more people happy with one little quirk is just unrealistic" is really offensive. Someone's RACE is not a "little quirk." It's their race. Come on now.

 

[Brackets]

Yeah I think they should add an option for skin colour, it makes sense to do so.
And I agree on the villager thing, especially all the 'which villager' and 'should I reset' threads, why can't people decide anything for their own game anymore.

 

[Titi]

I quite like the tans! I'm caucasian in real life but I still like my mayor to have quite a bit of a tan. I'm too lazy to go out on the island for it though, so I'll be waiting for it to be possible in town haha.

 

[Le Ham]

I'm not pointing fingers of judgement, so please, calm down. What I'm saying is that, like always, people with lighter skin tones have it very easy, while people with darker skin tones have it more difficult. In the game, people with light skin tones (whether they're white, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, or any race that has the potential to have light skin) can start up the game and immediately, they have their skin tone. No work, no effort. They can look at their character and say "Yep! That's me!" But people with darker skin (even Japanese, Korean, and Chinese people -- because they CAN have dark skin) have to work to get their mayor to look like them. Is that racism? Short answer, yes. Because it's not equal. People with light skin don't have to do anything for their skin tone, while people with dark skin have to work hours and hours to get their skin tone in the game to match their skin tone in real life.

If Nintendo really put profit before people (and they probably do, considering they are a huge company), that's morally wrong and, yes, that's their problem, but not calling out the problem won't make it go away. They're not going to put a different skin tone option into the next AC game unless people bring up the topic of "Hey, why is everyone so pale?" I'm not saying YOU are racist, and I'm not even saying that Nintendo, as an entire company, is racist. I specified in my original reply that it's, in the least, forgetting and exclusionary.

However, if you are willing to say "We can't add a better race option because it destroys the ~atmosphere~ of the game," instead of reasoning that having a selection of skin colors on-screen long enough for the player to pick theirs is a decent and acceptable option, that's a little racist. It would be two seconds out of thousands of seconds that anyone would be playing the game. White people and other light-skinned people are not and should not be the default option. That's why I would never rate any AC game as 5/5 or 10/10, because it's exclusionary in both the aspects of race AND gender. But the gender thing is another discussion entirely.

Basically, what I'm saying is that if Nintendo can't be creative enough to add questions that could determine a player's skin tone, they can just add a screen so a player can choose. If they can't do that, they're racist. And if you think they SHOULDN'T do that, you're not immediately racist, but you should definitely think about WHY you think that.

EDIT: Also, "But thinking that they're gonna go out of their way to make a few more people happy with one little quirk is just unrealistic" is really offensive. Someone's RACE is not a "little quirk." It's their race. Come on now.

I agree with what you're saying entirely. As for the last part, yes, it is offensive, and if that offended you or anyone who reads this post, I'm sorry. I'm just trying to make clear that while we see a large flaw in the treating of race within gameplay, Nintendo only looks at that as a small detail, a feature in a game, and in terms of reality, chances are that won't be changing anytime soon unless it involves their loss of massive amounts of money, especially in times like these where they are running short on it. But that still takes a whole lot of concern from a whole lot of consumers. Yeah, not speaking up doesn't solve anything, but speaking up won't do too much either until half the world's doing it. And, looking at the cold, hard truth of life, the number of people who are willing to do that compared to those who don't really care and just wanna play a game are unfortunately slim to none.

This doesn't change the fact that what Nintendo is doing is wrong. It just makes the chances of Nintendo changing their ways smaller. I am not defending Nintendo, I am just predicting what Nintendo's take on the whole idea would be. I'm right there with you, there should be more race-friendly attributes to AC to make it more accepting and equal. Not to offend, but good luck getting them to budge.

 

[beemayor]

I agree with what you're saying entirely. As for the last part, yes, it is offensive, and if that offended you or anyone who reads this post, I'm sorry. I'm just trying to make clear that while we see a large flaw in the treating of race within gameplay, Nintendo only looks at that as a small detail, a feature in a game, and in terms of reality, chances are that won't be changing anytime soon unless it involves their loss of massive amounts of money, especially in times like these where they are running short on it. But that still takes a whole lot of concern from a whole lot of consumers. Yeah, not speaking up doesn't solve anything, but speaking up won't do too much either until half the world's doing it. And, looking at the cold, hard truth of life, the number of people who are willing to do that compared to those who don't really care and just wanna play a game are unfortunately slim to none.

This doesn't change the fact that what Nintendo is doing is wrong. It just makes the chances of Nintendo changing their ways smaller. I am not defending Nintendo, I am just predicting what Nintendo's take on the whole idea would be. I'm right there with you, there should be more race-friendly attributes to AC to make it more accepting and equal. Not to offend, but good luck getting them to budge.

In an attempt to not further disband from the actual topic of this thread, I will just say that your attitude of "Nothing will change if I speak up so I just won't speak up at all" leads to the continuation of the problem and I sincerely hope that you rethink your stance on this in the near future.

As for Nintendo, if they cared about their customers, they would address this problem. There are just as many people of color in the world as their are white people and they need to realize and remember that.

 

[akidas]

I don't bother with it, its too much to maintain seeming as i'm a light/med tan irl
i'd rather they give us an option to select our colour at the beginning of the game so my mayor would actually look a little like me...

 

[Yggdrasil]

I don't like to tan because a lot of my pro designs show skin. XD

 

[ellabella12345]

I love tan <3

 

[jolokia]

I don't want my guy to be tanned. I've been checking Labelle every day in the hopes of finding a hat that isn't horrible but no luck yet. Why are all the programmed clothes hideous?

As for the long screeds of text regarding whether it would be possible/advisable for Nintendo to allow AC players to pick a skintone without compromising the innocent sweetness of the Rover-questions-randomizing-appearance thing, it's absolutely possible and easy to implement. Imagine this:

You go through the normal questions and so forth.
While still in first-person perspective you see the train stop at your station, and your character stands up to leave
Your character moves past the window/a mirror/any other form of reflection and stops to check him or herself out, a little adjustment of the collar, sweep hair back animation, whatever
>there's the slider, pick your skin/hair color

there, done

 

[CuriCurry]

I would prefer to be tan but it takes some maintenance and I end up just giving up on it.

 

[Waluigi]

White as a ghost and proud.

- - - Post Merge - - -

Btw, this thread is getting really off topic