You know how in James Cameron's Avatar they do that thing where the tribal aliens live as one with nature and never unnecessarily hurt living creatures because muh ecosystem, while the more advanced humans are pure evil and exist to cause suffering and destruction? It's supposed to be the pro-environmental but it falls flat beyond the most surface level imagery because it's completely disconnected from what living with nature would actually be like. Just like the Na'vi the Hhetsarro are shown as living in an incredibly convenient environment without worrying about food, disease, maintaining their population, etc.
The 'nobility' of the 'noble savage' trope comes from the willingness to endure hardships to live in harmony with nature (never mind most real-life tribal cultures aren't actually that great at protecting the environment, but whatever). This means living with the fact that nature can be incredibly cruel, requires rigid conformity and sacrifice to survive without modern comforts, and drives people to conquer and destroy each-other over scarce resources.
When you depict a tribal society as easygoing tree huggers that thrive in harmony with their environment rather than in spite of it, it's kind of impossible for anyone over the age of twelve to sympathize because they've basically had everything handed to them since "muh Pandora" or "muh buffalo". They're closer to rich hippies than actual primitives.
Compare to the Mi'qote of the Sagolii Desert/Ala Mhigo who are also 'noble savages' that reject civilization and live nomadic lifestyles but are shown to be feral hunters with strict patriarchal gender roles, because how the fuck else do you survive and maintain traditions living in desert huts eating giant sandworms?