Uncertainties regarding size, planning itself is so far completed

If you know Grym’s box, you can speak of simple architecture. I assume that someone will provoke about the oversized nature of Baugrym’s house, even if it is not him.

Oh Grym, no, no clue about that either. I just don’t live in a sterile world of numbers. Unlike you, many others and I have already built here and know more from lived experience on this point. What I always find funny is that you want to explain the world to people like Bauexperte—people who have been professionally involved with the topic for decades. But no, Count Number and simultaneous Googler knows better—yeah, sure.

By the way, I’m convinced that this rural exodus will eventually reverse. Incidentally, my village without infrastructure has a growing population—against every trend.

As so often, it always depends...

: Well, that might be the big picture statistic. I also live in the countryside in a small town, but there is steady population growth there. In 3 minutes I am on the highway, in 10 minutes at supermarkets/shopping centers etc.

Besides, there are friends, family, home... and people know each other in the village after all..
Here you don’t lock your garage or bike.

With simple architecture, this statement "can" be correct; if the civil engineer has always only designed and built simple appearances with gable roofs, I am limited with him. If we talk about more elaborate architectures - tent or flat-roof houses, half-hipped roofs, definitely bungalows - his 5% is not enough.

We are talking about single-family houses, which have 99% simple architecture.

If you know Grym's box, you can speak of simple architecture. I assume someone will provoke about the oversized Baugrym house, even if not him

But your house didn't have 3 little towers, 2 dormers, 3 bay windows, 4 cantilevers, and a setback, did it?

Besides, there are friends, family, homeland... and you just know each other in the village..

That was also our main criterion why we want to build here and close to the city center, and not somewhere far away...

Here you don't lock your garage and don't lock your bike.

But I consider that a rumor. From the 100-inhabitant villages I know, everyone usually has a fence and a sign "Beware of dog."

Now just on the topic of simple vs. non-simple architecture, the following examples, just look them up on Wiki, are for me non-simple architectural structures and are nice to look at:
Villa Weigang
Villa Vogesenweg 4
Villa Marie
Villa Stock
(all examples from Dresden-Blasewitz)

But a single-family house built today is built differently. And whether there is a single small bay window or a single setback, for me it remains simple architecture either way. I don’t need to pretend otherwise.

If really something impressive and new is built, it is mostly not in residential areas, but in exclusive, mostly urban single locations.

just because you have this point of view doesn’t necessarily mean it’s correct

Example modern residential areas
xxx.Tiergarten-Pforzheim.de

There is, for example, a design advisory board and luckily no houses with knee walls like in every other new development area.

We ourselves would have liked to build there too, but it would have easily cost 100,000 euros more

Personally, I do not like the houses at all. They look modern, ok. But what is modern changes quickly, and the buildings look inflexible. The plots are not expensive at all.