Donkeys and Elephants: Animal Crossing, Video Games, and Civic Participation

Press Start

Video games are life on a micro scale. Players make choices based on information gathered from the story, the characters, and the general logic of the world — much like how humans dictate their actions in daily life. The simple actions and desires of players and their on-screen representations, though, do a lot more for the in-game than outside of it. Every shot of a gun or swing of a fist advances the plot where the world revolves around the player. But, outside of the screen, the protagonist behind the controller has to share the planet with seven billion others protagonists. Some games, namely those labelled slice-of-life, would rather replicate the objectiveless and plotless world at large, and opt for a more peaceful and quaint gaming experience. These sorts of games afford players the same opportunities as, well, real life: cooking, shopping, doing odd jobs for neighbors. A game like Animal Crossing rewards altruism and goodness, rather than the slaughter of enemies. (There is no option to slaughter enemies!) Players help their neighbors water flowers, rearrange their furniture, and catch bugs for the local museum. With no plot or ending to reward the player, though, it seems as though players do these chores without much of a payoff. Unless you call altruism, kindness, and civility toward their virtual neighbors one. Though civility satisfies some players, violent video games offer more in the ways of escapism, release, and — frankly — plot. So, then, why play a game that replicates a simple, mundane life?

Animal Crossing fosters a softer world. The most recent addition to the series, Animal Crossing: New Leaf, goes a bit hard and demands the player ask what they can do for their country and take the role of mayor. The Animal Crossing series and especially New Leaf provide a twenty-first century framework from which to understand the community and civic values of the generation that grew up playing them. Perhaps Animal Crossing can explain why millennials shy away from invasive, office-based activism, and toward a happy medium between citizen, voter, and friendly neighbor.

Howdy, Neighbor!

The Animal Crossing series has wide appeal. The game lacks violence beyond accidentally hitting neighbors with a bug-catching net when catching jumping fleas. The neighbors speak in cutesy animal tones, always cracking wise, but mindful never to say anything that might upset younger players, yet with their tongues sometimes far enough in their cheeks to get a laugh from an older one. Neighbors offer sage advice like “Always land on your feet!” or “The only thing to fear is fear itself…and bees” (Wild World).

These neighbors drive the series. Each neighbor has a bright, cheery, but unique personality. When starting a new game, a handful of villager characters move into the Village. There are over 300 neighbors programmed in the game, with only ten allowed to live in the town at once. Aside from the fluctuating villager population, there are some permanent residents, like shrewd businessman (businessraccoon) Tom Nook. The anthropomorphized animal neighbors range from friendly deer Deirdre, to the koala Ozzie.

While the neighbor characters provide the player with passive entertainment, they also provide tasks and odd jobs for the player to perform. Befriending neighbors requires delivering misdirected mail or buying medicine. Only thanks rewards these tasks, no matter the energy expended. Rarely is there a monetary incentive — a hallmark of volunteering in the real world.

In every edition of the game, players must work a part-time job under the management of Tom Nook. Instead of receiving wages, players have a small percentage of their home loan relieved. But rather than face their nine-to-five with grief and hopelessness, players do their jobs with diligence and glee for that far-less-than-minimum-wage check. While repetitive, unfulfilling tasks drive real life workers to depression and burn-out, the game treats them with a sense of mirth and quaint accomplishment, rewarding players with a few bells (in-game currency) for personal purchases.

The game simulates the passing of real time, with the game card reading the console’s internal clock. The game, then, allows for seasons and hours, and ignites fireworks for New Years and the Fourth of July. The game also offers players wireless interactions with friends who too own the game, encouraging kind virtual interaction with real life acquaintances. Unlike other online-based games, Animal Crossing forbids violent competition. Instead, the game challenges the users to have a weed-picking contest or fish-off. Unlike many other online games, which have anonymous and worldwide wireless competition, Animal Crossing requires the player know their cohort by inputting their aptly named “friend code.”

All of the previous factors create a world of harmony. Those series mainstays do more to promote a civil society rather than “civil society.” Civics as a function of gameplay in addition to civility comes in the latest installment, New Leaf.

Where the previous games only let players interact with the eternal tortoise Mayor Tortimor on holidays, New Leaf impeaches him and thrusts players into the role of mayor. Upon the player’s arrival in a completely unknown town, mayoral assistant Isabelle comes wagging her tail to hand over the keys to the city. The player now must not only pay off their home loan, pick weeds, and deliver messages for their neighbors, but also govern and promote economic activity.

While the game boils governance down to two simple levels, it does its best to reflect the duties of executives in public office.

The first level is Town Ordinances. Town Ordinances effect game behavior mechanisms in town. The Early Bird and Night Owl Ordinances make neighbor characters more active in the morning or evening respectively, allowing the player adjust gameplay to their schedule. The Beautiful Town Ordinance stymies weed growth and drives neighbor characters to plant flowers outside of their homes, much like a town beatification day. The Bell Boom Ordinance boosts the economy by allowing players to sell extraneous goods for higher prices, but also increases prices in the Island section of town, similar to First Friday sales. These Ordinances echo the policies that legislators and executives propose in real life governments.

The other aspect of governance is the Public Works Projects. Neighbors may write in a particular feature they want installed in the town, like a fountain or a new fancy bridge. Isabelle hands the request over to the player, who then must find the land and raise the funds for the project.

Playing Participant

Millennials, have begun to distrust government and politics as the most effective display of civic aptitude (Fox and Lawless). The youths, perhaps as disaffected as ever, find themselves hesitant to throw their hats in the ring. In Running From Office, Fox and Lawless found a common thread in the young interviewees: only the corrupt play the political game, for the game’s corruption can only attract the corrupt. Students with an activist streak, then, decide to bide their career through services they find more altruistic and beneficial to society, like medicine or owning a small business and hiring local (Fox and Lawless). While these careers appeal to the common good, they do so with paycheck nagging the mind. Noble professions, though, are not the end of giving back to the community. Instead of looking at careers in public service or office, perhaps we should look at the simplest way to engage in civic society — volunteerism and decision making.

While Fox and Lawless found a decline in electoral aspirations, they found that civil society still thrived. Studying civil service and volunteer organization across three different continents, Federico Rossi found the narrative of activist youth consistent: from Argentinian protestors, to Papua New Guinean interest groups, and, most relevant to Animal Crossing, the continued magnanimity of the Young Women’s Christian Association (Rossi, 484). Rossi noted, among the few but dedicated recruits, a passion to “belong to something” motivating their involvement with the group (Rossi 484). Older members joined the YWCA to do volunteer work, join a similar-minded community, but also to “express and defend their rights and/or participating in the decision- making of an organization.” (Rossi, 487) These young women wanted positions of power and credit within an organization that did good works, but did not want to pursue those same ideals through more public means. They cared for leadership roles but within a tight-knit organization, rather than politics.

Even though the involvement of these women in the YWCA power structure reflects electoral office, it does not face the same scrutiny and criticism. Perhaps this lies in the simple mission statement of “dedicat[ion] to eliminating racism, empowering women and promoting peace, justice, freedom and dignity for all” which makes “E pluribus unum” lofty and impossible to reach (YWCA). Rossi found young people favored a close-knit group that recognizes their individuality (489). No surprise, then, that many parents prefer fostering opportunity in “nonpolitical — academic, social, physical” over “pre-adult opportunities for political action” like canvassing and campaign volunteering (Condon and Holleque, 169).

While Fox, Lawless, and Rossi all determined that millennials do not vote in droves as much as their activist attitudes would lead us to believe, some still vote. Since 1972, there has been a whole third decline in 18-to-25 year old’s voter turnout (Levine and Lopez, 1). Levine and Lopez noticed, in contrast, a rise in percentage turnout among more educated youths. Condon and Holleque tested this on a psychological level when they encountered the same uptick.

Condon and Holleque found a three part relationship between perceived political efficacy, socio-economic status, and education in youth voters. Prefacing their findings, they noted “factors [that become] less important as individuals age, contribute heavily to early turnout, such as the characteristics of the family of origin” (Condon and Holleque, 167). These factors impact voter self-esteem and willingness to cast a ballot.

Using the 2006 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, Condon and Holleque interviewed young adults aged 20 to 35 to codify and measure general and specific efficacies. Interviewers presented a series of statements, like “I can solve the problems I have,” regarding control over their lives and political decisions. They indexed and graphed their data according to socio-economic influencers in order to determine a relationship between class, efficacy, and voting behavior. The data concluded that youth with higher specific-efficacy (based on experiences specific to the task at hand, i.e. voting) were more likely to vote using knowledge about the voting process, and were more likely to come from advantaged backgrounds, where their parents might have invited them into the voting booth with them on election day. The youths less likely to vote used general-efficacy (the broader recognition of ability in any task, rather than the specific task) to inform their voting and came from less-advantaged households (Condon and Holleque, 173).

The most telling data, though, connected socio-economic status and voting behavior. Subjects from families where their mothers graduated high school, as well as had education beyond a high school levels themselves were much more likely to use specific-efficacy to determine their vote (Condon and Holleque, 174). Likely, their parents took these subjects into voting booths with them and encouraged them to participate in organizations connected with youth politics — all markers of higher socio-economic classes. These family units making more money are more likely to spend money on game-specific hardware and consoles for their young children, as well as have positive associations with video gaming in youth (Entertainment Software Association, 15).

Curiously, though, the average gamer is well older than the average first-time voter (Entertainment Software Association, 16; U.S. Census Bureau, 2). This skew is thanks to the ever-expanding definition of gamer from the anti-social, LAN-partying to “filthy casuals” and mobile gamers (Know Your Meme).

Press B to Vote

Because political participation explanation intersects with experience, little theoretical work exists. But, Webler and Tuler, in their “Unlocking the Puzzle of Public Participation,” do try to define “good” and “right” public participation (182).

They posit two primary motives: Fairness and Competence. Fairness summarizes the basic opportunities for action when participating in public and political discussion: attend, initiate discourse, participate in discussion, and participate in decision making. Competence, in turn, informs how a participant can use fairness as a vehicle for change. Competence requires access to information and procedures for using fair knowledge (Webler and Tuler, 183). The ability and obligation to define, comprehend, and manipulate information into innovative actions looks remarkably similar to Kristina Egumenovska’s theory behind the tactical and tactile popularity of video games. Games allow for players to control a narrative within a defined set of rules, with only goals as the driving factor — the interpretation of moral issues and the means of taking action are much more open (Egumenovska, 10). One specific aspect, she writes, is that “however small or uninteresting it might be, the effort demanded on the part of the player is never trivial,” or in the ever-potent political tradition, every vote counts and every voice rings (Egumenovska, 10).

Civic tasks require the same scrutinizing as pattern recognition as boss battles. There are objectives (positive change in governance; rescuing the princess), specific parameters presented as the path to pursuing those objectives (passing legislation; game mechanics) — with plenty of wiggle room (lobby groups vs. petitions; killing enemies vs. “mercy runs”) — and greater consequences (the effect on posterity; the effect on plot and level completion). Using Webler and Tuler’s Fairness and Competence model, a game is like a little political discussion wrapped up neatly on a programmed disc. Video games are like practicing Condon and Holleque’s aforementioned general and specific efficacies. The instant cause-and-effect relationship of many in-game actions teaches players that actions lead to consequences. While that may seem vague and overarching, consider Fire Emblem: Awakening and Telltale’s Game of Thrones adaptation. Aside from the obvious notion that button input controls the characters, in Awakening, the personalities and appearances of the second generation characters and their character arcs differs depending on the coupling of their parents. In Game of Thrones, a narrative box will flash after certain player decisions, informing the player that Talia will remember that (or the oft-feared, Cersei will remember that), which comes back as branching plots. No player, then, plays the same game because their actions create different scenarios that diverge. Thus, a player must try to squeeze as much knowledge and context as they can from the plot and non-playable characters before making their decision, lest they do something potentially fatal. But, like real politics, complete information is not obtainable, but the best of fairness is there. Players in Animal Crossing do not know Resetti will berate them and confiscate their bells if they reset their game without saving, but they learn from their mistakes and prepare for the next instance.

Competence, in turn, is the literal pushing of the buttons. It is the flick of the joystick, the punching of the chads in the booth.

Extra Lives

In games with action and adventure objectives, efficacy is only a shadow of its real-world self. Many games lack Good Samaritan, political process. But not Animal Crossing. Animal Crossing makes its objective political, but not partisan. Delivering packages free-of-charge to neighbors promotes peace and dignity. Instating ordinances to rev up economic activity sounds like many a sound bite in a campaign cycle. (Speaking of campaign cycles — if the player really is so inclined, they can prevent foreign villagers from immigrating. Make your village great again!) Animal Crossing does something no other game does: it makes a gamer practice specific efficacy for civil affairs. The series promotes volunteer work. Rossi, earlier, determined that youths gravitate toward organizations that give them a sense of belonging, but allow them to express themselves (Rossi, 484). Fox and Lawless realized that non-elected paths gave millennials the greatest satisfaction and means for benefitting society. The game offers tasks that look an awful lot like starting a business, joining a volunteer organization, and, in New Leaf, seeking that detested public office. The game pushes players to do these things, thus making it easier to do so outside of the game. Players can use specific efficacy — knowledge and experience with the particular task as hand — obtained via Animal Crossing to do the same thing in their real towns. The player knows now how to listen to small, neighborly requests and fulfill them. The player knows now how to run a whole village! While it is a simplification of the real life tasks, it can still provide a valuable reference point. Kotaku reviewer Patricia Hernandez put it best: “The other night I could barely sleep because I was thinking about my long-term plan for my house… I [didn’t use] to want a white picket fence or anything, but I might as well.” Go ahead and get yourself that home loan, Patricia — Tom Nook well taught us the greediness of banks and the pressure of mortgages. “If you check in with your secretary, you can hear about what the townsfolk expect for the town’s upkeep…” Hernandez continues, “the townsfolk will sometimes demand that you devote attention to specific public works projects” just as constituents do (Hernandez).

Game Over

If we buy into the scare narrative that video games promote violence, then we do a disservice to the children who play softer games with more hopeful objectives. For all the fun had shooting bad guys, as much fun is found in town planning, if you find the right kid. Video games teach young children that they can make meaningful change with their own two hands.

What comes next? The United States Military has already implemented some softer research into using video games as training tools, with private contractors citing they help teach new recruits “perform complex tasks in an intuitive environment — taking into account how trainees acquire skills” and “speed the learning process” (Holley). So, should we then implement a campaign simulator?

In games, no matter how real the consequences feel, they can do no real harm. Creative problem solving leads to experimentation and exploration of boundaries and rules, but no one gets hurt if things go awry. Games might then be a safe space for practicing oratory skills or lobbying a congressperson. While these tasks are mundane at best, they are pillars of democracy, which Fox and Lawless saw might have lost some footing in recent years. If people play simulators where they date birds, then might they too play a legislation-drafting simulator?

Animal Crossing, though saccharine at its tamest (and pre-diabetic when you find yourself watering carefully planted tulips), offers that bit of real-world civic experience. While there are neither elections nor legislation, it teaches players that they have a real stake in the world. It reflects the new popularity of non-electoral good-doing, while demonstrating some of the daily tasks of real life mayors. The most special thing about Animal Crossing, though, is just how popular it continues to be. Nobody has yet to put down their copy and regret all the kind deeds they have done. People like to do good by other people — even if those other people are anthropomorphic animals with terribly punny names.

Works Cited

Animal Crossing. Nintendo Gamecube. New York: Nintendo of America. 2002. Video Game.

Animal Crossing: City Folk. Nintendo Wii. New York: Nintendo of America. 2008. Video

Game.

Animal Crossing: New Leaf. Nintendo 3DS. New York: Nintendo of America. 2012. Video

Game.

Animal Crossing: Wild World. Nintendo DS. New York: Nintendo of America. 2005. Video

Game.

Condon, Meghan, and Matthew Holleque. “Entering Politics: General Self-Efﬁcacy and Voting

Behavior Among Young People.” International Society of Political Psychology 34.2

(2013): n. pag. Wiley Periodicals. Web. 22 Mar. 2016.

Egumenovska, Kristina. “DISORIENTING THE LOGICAL: ON THE GESTURAL POETICS

OF VIDEO GAMES.” Teorija in Praksa 51.1 (2014): 8–21. JSTOR. Web. 22 Mar. 2016.

Entertainment Software Association. “2015.” Boom: A Journal of California5.1 (2015): 12-

18. Essential Facts. Entertainment Software Association, Apr. 2015. Web. 1 Apr. 2016. <http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ESA-Essential-Facts-2015.pdf>.

Fire Emblem: Awakening. Nintendo 3DS. New York: Nintendo of America. 2013. Video Game.

Fox, Richard L. and Jennifer L. Lawless. Running From Office. New York: Oxford University

Press. 2015. Print.

Game of Thrones. Computer. Los Angeles: Tell Tale Games. 2014. Video Game.

Hernandez, Patricia. “Animal Crossing: New Leaf: The Kotaku Review.” Rev. of Animal

Crossing: New Leaf. Kotaku 4 June 2013: n. pag. Kotaku. Gawker Media, 4 June 2013.

Web. 23 Mar. 2016.

Holley, Peter. “The Military Is Now Using Video Games to Train Millennials in Cold War

Technology.” Washington Post. The Washington Post, 2 Dec. 2014. Web. 18 Apr. 2016.

<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/12/02/the-military-is-now-

using-video-games-to-train-millennials-in-cold-war-technology/>.

Know Your Meme. “Filthy Casual.” Know Your Meme. Cheezburger, Inc. 9 May 2013. Web. 1

Apr. 2016. <http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/filthy-casual>.

Levine, Peter and Lopez, Mark Hugo. Young-Adult Voting: An Analysis of Presidential

Elections, 1964–2012. Rep. no. P20–573. U.S. Census Bureau, Apr. 2014. Web. 1 Apr.

2016. <https://www.census.gov/prod/2014pubs/p20-573.pdf>.

Rossi, F. M. “Youth Political Participation: Is This the End of Generational

Cleavage?” International Sociology 24.4 (2009): 467–97. ProQuest. Web. 22 Mar. 2016.

Webler, T., and S. Tuler. “Unlocking the Puzzle of Public Participation.” Bulletin of Science,

Technology & Society 22.3 (2002): 179–89. JSTOR [JSTOR]. Web. 1 Apr. 2016.

YWCA. “Mission & Vision.” YWCA USA. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Apr. 2016.

<http://www.ywca.org/site/c.cuIRJ7NTKrLaG/b.7515887/k.9633/Mission__Vision.htm>.