With still no official word about a new Animal Crossing game on Nintendo Switch 2, a reader has a very unconventional idea of what direction it should take.
Reflecting on the challenges of overcoming class oppression, the leader of the October (Russian) revolution, Vladimir Lenin, famously posed the question: ‘What is to be done?’ We might ask the same question of Nintendo’s Animal Crossing, especially in the wake of the arguably better Pokémon Pokopia.
The comparison to overcoming oppression may sound trite, and in a way it is, but it serves the purpose here, of answering how the series can, though likely will not (in a million years), evolve.
This relies on how the text is interpreted, specifically the character of Tom Nook. That Nook is a parody of a capitalist is not controversial. Nintendo are not exactly subtle about it.
Tom Nook appropriates the land to turn it into real estate to sell to inhabitants for money (bells). Just as in real life, acquiring property means getting into debt and paying off the mortgage through hard work, here by cultivating and gathering fruit and so forth.
The bells acquired for Nook can also be exchanged endlessly for commodities to decorate the home. Hence production (cultivation, harvesting, fishing, and so forth) is a means to generate an income to exchange for goods (consumption) owned by Nook and other traders.
Expert, exclusive gaming analysis
Sign up to the GameCentral newsletter for a unique take on the week in gaming, alongside the latest reviews and more. Delivered to your inbox every Saturday morning.
As with consumerism, the desire for such products is never satiated. In fact, Nook entices the player to consume more by taking out further mortgages to buy bigger homes in which more products are required to fill them. And on it goes…
The question of what is to be done about the franchise is answered in response to the secondary question of what is to be done about Tom Nook?
My idea for the next game involves the player building solidarity with other villagers through kind acts such as gift giving, helping them out, and so forth, thereby recruiting them to the cause of overthrowing Nook and turning the island into a commune.
As happened after the October Revolution, this is complicated by nearby islands under the yoke of their own Tom Nooks being threatened by the example the now liberated commune sets. To thwart their attacks, island defences must be constructed and once the external threat is overcome the task is to liberate the other islands by clandestinely recruiting its dwellers to the cause.
While this would introduce a battle element, it would be in the same charming aesthetic and satirical tone the game is known for. Failure of worldwide revolution would lead to scenarios such as that depicted in George Orwell’s Animal Farm where, in an allegory for Stalinism, the liberators become the oppressors who also must then be overthrown, thus starting the sequence again (and again until ultimate victory).
If a critique of capitalism is indeed a subtext of Animal Crossing (it can be considered as one irrespective of whether intended), there is also a utopian subtext too, of a non-alienated society where work is play, nobody goes hungry, there is no war or violence, and everyone (aside from Tom Nook) is a potential friend.
If utopia is realised, the game continues, only now the form through which resources are gathered, managed, and distributed change. This opens new gameplay mechanics such as resource management and construction of new public institutions and infrastructure, such as railroads.
The history of popular culture is one of appropriation, corporations appropriating critiques of capitalism for monetary gain. Punk and black American rap music are obvious examples. More recently, Disney bankrolled the surprisingly subversive Rogue One television spin-off Andor, which is unashamedly and unsubtly a story about working class people under the yoke of fascist-authoritarianism becoming revolutionary agitators organising and using all means necessary to overthrow an evil Empire.
It made Disney a lot of money and helped somewhat redeem a tarnished reputation for the truly dire sequel trilogy. If audiences do not act on message by becoming revolutionaries too, Disney is untroubled. So, while it may appear strange that a corporate behemoth would sponsor such incendiary texts, if it makes them money then all well and good.
While I say not ‘in a million years’, it is not entirely inconceivable or contradictory for Nintendo to double-down on the satire by taking this logical next step. The point, however, is not for Nintendo to make a political text (it can be done more subtly than depicted here) but rather a game that builds on previous iterations in novel and engaging ways. Here is one idea for doing precisely that.
By reader Ciara
The reader’s features do not necessarily represent the views of GameCentral or Metro.
You can submit your own 500 to 600-word reader feature at any time, which if used will be published in the next appropriate weekend slot.
Just contact us at gamecentral@metro.co.uk or use our Submit Stuff page and you won’t need to send an email.
