We can agree here. I always try to see the best in every new DLC and advise everyone to do the same
I was just trying to explain that the "inequality of opinions" doesn't necessarily come from malice
Fall DLC 2023 Speculation
- Thread starter Leaf Productions
- Start date
I was just trying to explain that the "inequality of opinions" doesn't necessarily come from malice
I find it so funny that this is an opinion that even exists. Frontier is one of the nicest developers and actively listens to the community produce high quality content that plays mostly want. Also how else are they going to pay for all the developers if not from dlcs people are just spoiled from the development style that Minecraft popularised which is release a game half done and release a constant stream of updates which is a completely unsustainable way to produce a game unless it becomes a global phenomenon with its own merch line. I think planet zoos dlc are almost the perfect representation of what dlc should look like in games where it is closely linked to what you want in the game insead of just gating content.
Honestly the majority of the community wants them to keep making dlc forever and clearly frontier cares about what people would buy because why make something that no one will buy.
there are 2 very big reasons why the reaction to arid and Oceania packs are different
1. The arid didn't mark itself as a region pack it marked itself as a biome pack so people were disappointed to not get something from NA deserts, Australian deserts or even central Asian deserts. Compare this to Oceania which clearly isnt trying to be something other than a pack of oceanic animals. Also a pack that focues on both a single biome and a single global region leave little room for diversity in the types of animals provided.
2. all the animals from the arid pack came from Africa and the middle east while the middle east isn't the African continent is greatly over saturated in planet zoo with a large majority of the animal coming from that region. compare this to Oceania which without the Oceania pack the continent has just under double the amount of animals the arid pack has total so it is a very under represented region.
yes people would complain if the tropical pack was all SA species. Part of it is that using a biome as the name of the pack implies that the animals from the pack represent that biome to the best of its ability so having a biome pack focus on a small subset of that biome would feel like the devs are saying this is the only part of the biome that matters so like saying that the only arid area that matters is the middle east and Africa and that Oceania and NA don't have arid areas that are worth representing. I would feel the exact same way if a continent pack only included animals from a single biome unless that region only has one biome ie arctic pack. This is the main reason I dont like the South America pack.
a couple of things people aren't angry at sloths in general they are angry at the 3 toed sloth specially people wouldn't be mad if it was a different more common kind. People are excited about the Oceania pack firstly because it is is the only major representation for new zealand and many of the animals included are in many oceanic zoos almost every Australian zoo I have been to has had the Tasmanian devil. animals and zoos in Oceania tend not to mingle with others because of various import and export restrictions and distance so oceanic animals yes are very underrepresented outside Oceania but the opposite is also true oceanic animals make up a huge proportion of oceanic zoos compared to animals from other continents so people from Oceania are finally getting representation of what the majority of their zoos look like.
SA pack had two rainforest, one pampas and one mountainous species, not to terribly "rostered" if I say so. But regardless -
I understand the technical argument of biome/region relations, and the best argument forward made Cpt.Callum when he/she brought up casual audience which I have tendency of forgetting about.
My argument mainly targets this community, as I had a feeling that we more or less agree on what needs to come next and what's a priority, so furthermore if developers somehow align their product with our expectations, I feel like we should "let it slide" if the name of the pack doesn't exactly line up.
At the end of the day the gift is what matters, not the wrapping paper
breeding issues and transport mainly.
The platypus is very hard to breed stable captive populations haven't really been achieved they are also easily stressed and hard to transport. They used to be more common worldwide but as the zoo world in general became more conservation heavy they stopped sending platypi overseas since they never really survive long and would only really be for the novelty.
I agree with this sentiment if it gives us what we want but the pack names weird I don't care still want more south American mountain animals though.
I think a big difference is that not only is the sloth only kept in a single zoo outside South America, I’ve seen no evidence that it’s common within South America either. If a bunch of South American users came around and corrected us that the sloth was actually a common animal in their local zoos, or even if we had some sort of website that showed they were present in a large number of zoos, then I’d be fine with the inclusion and happy that they got their needed sloth species. From what I can find via ZooChat images the only places I can find them being kept in SA recently (“recently” including 2011) are two Peruvian zoos and the occasional rescue animal. If anyone has any better resources proving otherwise, I’d be greatly appreciative (I’d love to love the brown-throated sloth’s inclusion, I really would) but until then it just seems like the worse choice for a sloth species in comparison to a two-toed sloth.
The only animal in the Oceania Pack that’s somewhat comparable to the sloth IMO is the spectacled flying fox (walkthrough exhibit moment). Unlike them their husbandry isn’t significantly different from other flying foxes and they can easily be kept outside their native range, but with just 4 Australian zoos keeping them currently they’re pretty decidedly a species that is uncommon in Australia and extremely rare globally. I still love their inclusion personally (probably my favourite exhibit animal now), but I’m not going to pretend that they’re a very relevant choice for a zoo game regardless.
All the other species however have a much larger captive presence and are staple zoo animals within their native countries. For example, the Tasmanian devil is kept in around 40 zoos in Australia alone and that number continues to increase as the insurance population grows, while the kiwi is kept in 12 zoos in New Zealand (which, considering its size, is quite a high number). I don’t have the numbers for little penguins or quokkas but I do have personal experience and can tell you that they’ve been in the vast majority of zoos I’ve been to. They’re just not comparable to the sloth at all.
I've posted this in a different topic, but there are several South American members on BroNation that have mentioned that the sloth was indeed quite common in captivity in South America.
Ah well there you go, I stand corrected! The fact that it is common somewhere does make it more valuable addition than I previously assumed.
EDIT: I still think there is some point to be made over how for the sloth there were alternative species available that would have been useable both in South America and further abroad, while for all of the Oceania Pack species they are either too unique for there to be a feasible alternative (devil, kiwi, quokka) or they are part of groups that already have more widely kept species in the game but none for Australasian zoos (little penguin, spectacled flying-fox). But I digress, not as bad as I thought and I'm happy for our South American users!
Last edited:
North Africa and the Middle East literally had representation of only 3 species before the Arid pack so it was the most underrepresented region in the game.
But why am I even trying. There won’t be even any discussion if we were talking about America or Australia. There are clearly “more deserving” and entitled regions and that would never change here.
Last edited:
Just to be clear, I don’t regard Australia or New Zealand as “more deserving”, merely “as deserving”. I don’t begrudge anyone anything when they get what they want.
I don’t actually know the answer, they're pretty easy to take care of and breed from what I understand, but my guess is that up until recently there was just no interest in international zoos importing them. Gotta remember that prior to the internet popularising quokka selfies and their identity as “the worlds happiest animal” in the 2010s, they were just another small, obscure wallaby species found in a small corner of Australia. Given the tight exportation laws for native wildlife (which I don’t know much about tbc, just that they often making exporting native animals to international zoos a big undertaking), it’s just taken a while for them begin to be exported out of Australia. Again I don’t know if that’s actually the answer, but it’d be my best guess.
That does sound reasonable, it is true that the trend of having Australian sections in European zoos is fairly new concept. Usually it was just Emus and kangaroos/wallabies with occasional Koala thrown somewhere in the zoo without a dedicated section. Things are starting to change, as more and more zoos are starting to build these dedicated sections, so hopefully we will see more Australian animals being displayed, including the Quokka.
Also
Its usually only emu + wallaby or red kangaroo squeezed in somewhere between other herbivores.
Now that we are gonna get a bunch of devils here i really hope dedicated Australia sections will get more common
Yeah i can confirm that. A dedicated australia section is something i have never seen in a Zoo as far as i can remember.
Its usually only emu + wallaby or red kangaroo squeezed in somewhere between other herbivores.
Now that we are gonna get a bunch of devils here i really hope dedicated Australia sections will get more common
Where are you even getting these ideas? We all are happy that all the continents, minus South America, have big rosters and great representation. The whole community is in agreement that South America should be focused on next, now. You're acting like Americans, Australians, and Europeans are entitled, when the truth is that we're already happy and have been hoping for more rep for African forests, Asia, and South America since day one.
You have to also remember that Frontier is European, so it also makes sense that they will make choices that will largely affect European players as well as those from North America and Australia (when I say Australia, I'm also including New Zealand, but I don't know the plural for somebody from Oceania)
That's very cool, actually. I wished, since I was a little kid, that the Houston Zoo would have kangaroos, but nope. As far as I know, it doesn't have any Australian animals (I'm taking about large, habitat animals, not terrariums)
NZ and south Western Australia had none at all so,…. No.
Edit: also the mid east had way more than 3 unless your using some very niche weird definition that excludes a lot of what I’d generally included.
Last edited:
