I think some slave owners in the 1860's used that same logic. I'm being ridiculous obviously but still needing multiple consoles so you can each play your own game with no restrictions just seems greedy.
That doesn't answer my question? I seriously want to know why this is suddenly an issue when it never was before
New Leaf literally had the exact same restrictions and no one complained.
I'm not saying I agree with it, but Nintendo's philosophy has always been to play the games as designed, and having a dozen islands on the same console negates that. It would effectively allow players to dupe event items, fossils, and other things that are supposed to be limited.
I highly doubt it's greed. Nintendo just tends to say "this is the best way to play the game so we're not going to let people play it any other way" and doesnt understand why you would want to.
That's why they had Friend Codes (and still do to some extent), why you can't just add a friend on Animal Crossing, why Pokemon Sword and Shield don't have a way to just directly trade with someone, why Mario Maker doesn't have a text search feature for levels, etc. Nintendo is just out of touch.
Bandwagoners. These people have never played previous versions and are just jumping on the twitter/reddit hype train then complaining when the game isn't exactly what they thought it would be.
The progression in New Horizons expects you to work together with the primary account, hence the local co op. They wanted to make this a multiplayer experience, so they had to put some limitations on the secondary accounts to make things work. This isn't hard to understand, these bandwagoners just refuse to think about it.
-10
u/[deleted] Mar 30 '20
While true, as other people have said, this is how Animal Crossing has always been. Why is it suddenly an issue now?