Planet Zoo | Asia Animal Pack | Announcement

Moose and Indian rhino sound weird to me... Do their territorial extent even overlap?
I think wild boar would make more sense, especially since it already has enrichments with European cervids and also lives in Asia. People have suggested red panda as well, which would be interesting considering it doesn't have any enrichments so far.
Also, maybe the Japanese raccoon dog could have enrichment with the red-crowned crane?
I know Omaha mixes their pere davids deer with Indian rhinos. It’s an amazing exhibit
 
Moose and Indian rhino sound weird to me... Do their territorial extent even overlap?
Moose currently live in China, and Indian rhinos used to as well. All three also live in swampy areas so it's not like they'd have a weird environment.

That said, Frontier's indirectly stated the moose we have is the Alaskan subspecies, even though it's Zoopedia range covers all the Eurasian subspecies
 
They call the elephant the smallest subspecies of elephant in the world... isn't the difference between the mainland and Bornean elephant like 2-3 feet? Also, isn't the African Forest Elephant smaller?
Indian elephants found in Indochina are about the same size as borean populations. Said difference you are talking about comes from iconic indian subcontinent elephants most people talk about. Their pygmy title comes from study, which elevated their status as valid subspecies, but at the same time for some reason didnt bring any measurements alongside it.

So essentially what PZ is getting is animal exactly in the same size range as current elephant since Indian elephant in game is already as small as these animals can be. Literally just elephant, but grey.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I like the new elephant because it fixes my main problems with the base game elephant...
The base game one has always felt kinda... Off to me. Maybe it's the colour, which feels a bit too vibrant (especially on the female), or maybe it's because it looks weirdly smooth, almost rubbery.
So far, the Bornean Elephant seems to fix that for me
 
If they're practically the same, why is it that they get 2 separate species but then tigers have to be lumped together despite several differences?
Entirely valid question, and there's a couple of aspects to this.

Firstly, and most simply, significant differences in genetics do not necessarily correspond to external differences and vise versa. There are tons of species which, when percieved through human senses take specific knowledge and experience to differentiate but are nonetheless significantly genetically distinct, while as you rightly point out in a case like the difference between say a Siberian population Tiger and a Sumatran Tiger, there are numerous visual differences but these are attributable to fairly minor genetic code differences that just happen to be expressed in ways that are obvious to us as humans.

The other big part is that taxonomy is ultimately a jury rigged system designed to make our understanding of natural history manageable rather than a clean perfect representation. The difference between a population and a subspecies and a species and a genus etc is a gradient not a hard definite system. Ultimately the exact qualifications for one stage from the next is basically dependant on the precise views of the people incharge of major taxonomic lists. In this particular case, they don't evem agree with each other! Some tazonomists still consider japanese raccoon dog to be a subspecies of the common raccoon dogs and some split it.
 
THE BABY
1000042737.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom