That pack would knock it out of the park for me, not gonna lie. Do I believe in it? Absolutely not.
Counterpoint: Zookeeper also had half a year and they still skimped out on doing anything climbing related for the sifaka.
Rainforest and Savannah would have me hyped ngl
In all honesty, I don't think they ever were going to not re-use the climbing system of the lemur, I genuinely think the sifaka climbing doesn't work that well with the current climbing system. It's a compromise that some people are fine with and others aren't; but that's always going to be the nature of any game.
Yeah i agree that the sifaka was never gonna be 100% accurate. But i just cant accept that having them as a lemur reskin that moves around nothing like they do irl is the best they could do.
That I can agree with, that feels like something that should have been done and shouldn't be impossible to do either. I was mostly talking about the vertical/diagonal climbing.
I never even understood what kinda criticism "too many dlc" is supposed to be. Like they are completely optional, if you dont wanna buy any just dont
I do think an arboreal pack would be pretty cool. But thinking on it more, I think the biggest "hurdle" that theme has would be similar to a pack that was just any one animal type: You eliminate any potential consumers who dislike that particular type of animal, or who prefer to build for animals of other types. There's a not-insignificant chunk of players who don't like building for climbers. So a pack like that would have the same issue as, say, a pack full of any one animal type (whether that be birds, primates, dogs, cats, reptiles or whatever).
Usually the people complaining about "too many DLC" are the same folks who gripe that games are released "before being completed" nowadays (i.e., they want to buy a game and then have it never be updated again and/or have to purchase DLC at all--but all for the same price, usually).
Trolls i suppouse. Complaining about greedy companys when this is still far from the abyss that corporate greed can be.
i don't think there's a very good way to put it in words, so i will instead just post a meme that sumarize those people problem with PZ dlcs:
While defenetly a fair criticism for the first 2 years of dlc but especally the very first one, since wetlands that doesnt really hold any water to me.
But how is that any different from the expansion approach ZT2 had? That game also had no monkeys, nothing for south america and 1 animal each for europe and australia. and there you would have to spend 30 if i remember correctly to get any od the expansion packs
i would argue it's a problem for the first three years though, if you only buy the dlcs from arctic to Wetlands you still doesn't have anything to put on the WE plus lack of a horse, so put conservation and twilight together and we have a agreement.
It's argubly different because ZT2 had 4 dlcs with the second half being the "fries" of the burguer analogy, while the first two were expansion pack that put together what in PZ would be 3-4 dlcs each. through it's not my point to say "ZT2 expansion pack good, PZ dlc bad", as the meme isn't made by me and i couldn't remove the "then and now", i'm simply anshwering your question of why some people feel like the game has too many dlc.
It's not, the point is that the base game of PZ is lacking and you need to spend more to have the bare minimum or to use whole mechanics.
