DLC21 Speculation

[RightWhale]

And sometimes, quantity is quality; you can't make a high-quality Amazonian pavilion if you axe the quantity of Amazonian species. You also can't make a high-quality petting zoo if you axe all the barnyard animals.

My issue with PZ1 is that there is quantity, but it’s just a lot of the same animals over and over again. The current roster for an Amazon section is very poor, but I think that has more to do with the current limitations of PZ1 (and also some sort of cost benefit analysis when it comes to adding even basic ground dwelling birds, climbing animals, and habitat reptiles. While I’m not particularly stoked about the Bornean Elephant, I don’t think it replaced a potential bird. More like it was the “best option”. Or Frontier is saving birds for the sequel and bird people just have to use mod support)

I’ve said this before, but what makes South America particularly struggle is that some of the animals the continent is most popular for have always had poor representation in Planet Zoo. Sure we got the large animals: jaguar, puma, llama, Rhea, tapir, capybara, caimans, ocelots, bush dogs, etc.

But the most common South American animals are the monkeys, birds, fish, and the many exhibit animals. Which have never had good representation in PZ. We only just got 2 birds and 2 NWM for the continent.

 

[Utahraptor Arcanus]

As I said they will mostly be just skin and model edits for most of them, not like making an entirely new species (or juveniles), but it's still a workload to consider. Lokiceratops in particular does have notable dimorphism though, such as in the brow horns (shorter and downcurved horns in the female, with males having longer upturned horns with light banding), frill projections (slightly longer in the male) and patterning (more vivid and extensive in the males, though it'll differ depending on the skins you chose of course).

EDIT: Images for comparison

The model is different and i didn't dennied it, i'm just saying it's not vastly different as one would expect.

 

[Chuditch]

The model is different and i didn't dennied it, i'm just saying it's not vastly different as one would expect.

You used the Lokiceratops as an example of an animal that "won't have dimorphism", though that may have just been poor wording. That is the kind of sexual dimorphism I'd expect though - a lot of dinosaurs will have very subtle dimorphism (much more so than Lokiceratops, which is decently dimorphic) while some others may have more extreme dimorphism (like the Triceratops). Some dinosaurs only having very minor dimorphism isn't Frontier being lazy, it's what we'd naturally expect given the variation in dimorphism in dinosaurs today (in some bird species the males and females are wildly different, whilst in others they're indistinguishable).

In any case I don't see the purpose in getting hung up on this point, my main point was that the addition of breeding introduced a huge workload to the development of JWE3 in the form of breeding mechanics and juvenile dinosaurs, with sexual dimorphism being a smaller but still notable part of that.

 

[SanRazo]

Then maybe next time you talk about something completely unrelated to what I am saying don't quote me and start with "In the most respectful way possible, how hard or not hard something is isn’t a concern for the consumer."

Not with a single line did I say anyone should lower their expectation of having a great game. The only expectation I have is for people to be reasonable when it comes to FINANCING a project. And it does not matter if the company writes red numbers or pitch black numbers. Any project one makes has to cost less in investment than what it brings in return. And as a reminder: I was the one constantly voicing how I dislike the hidden price raise in recent DLCs. Shouldn't that alone show you that I actually put a lot of thought into what it is financially acceptable and what is not for me? Doesn't sound like "just be grateful".

And again: Time = money.
There is a nice tune for that on the internet, which I can't post, because it drops the f-bomb. But worth googleing "it cost that much because it takes me bloody (replace with f word) hours".

Also, in that regard: Thank you @Chuditch for so detailed proving my point that this all is not (and should not be) a copy paste job. I feel time and work needed is clearly underestimated here.

TL;DR: You can expect from the game as much as you want - but then be willing to pay the money / a reasonable price for it. Yes, your hard earned money. Because the people working on the game are earning their pay checks hard as well.

I apologize for letting my emotions get in the way of what you actually posted. I personally think I’m speaking for a lot of the fanbase (you included if I remember correctly) that I would happily pay more for more content. I understand that inflation is a thing and we’re probably experiencing that here to a certain degree. I just hope the slippery slope of inflation vs greed isn’t excused. Rightfully just like you I care for the employees at Frontier that just want to make a good game. Never is anything I say pointed at them. It’s always at the higher ups that might (or might not) be genuinely trying to nickel and dime us with intentional roster cuts. Again I apologize and I never meant to completely misinterpret what you said.

I've sat on this for quite a while now, and I really didn't want to get into it because I know the reaction of a bunch of people already ahead of time so I didn't bother with it; but here it goes.*

Everything surrounding the potential sequel is muddled by a general debate mentality that's been a thing across social media for years now. And because of that, every argument has to be enlarged and there has to be a "good side" and a "bad side"; instead of just a bunch of people who can have different opinions and learn from each others perspective. We're not having discussions; it's always debates.

And in these debates sometimes I get the feeling that something as simple (and at the end of the day optional) as a video game is lifted up to this big moral competition because it's much easier to defend your position from a moral high ground against this "evil greedy company" than to just express why you don't like a certain thing. Personally I must say that that also starts to get tiring at a certain point because I really can't keep reading the millionth post by someone who thinks that cutting/reselling even a single animal is a crime against society. (Hyperbole here of course, but you get what I mean).

It's like, just like or dislike it. It's fine. You're just as much in your right to dislike the idea of not getting all the original animals back as someone is who doesn't think all the animals should return. You're completely in your right to think that certain things are not worth it for you to buy the sequel, just as someone else is perfectly in their right to say that for instance the updated pathing system alone is enough of an upgrade to them. You're not more right or wrong if you pick either option, it's fine, it's not a competition. It doesn't have to be siding with consumers vs siding with the company; there's room for your own opinion and nuance.

It would be really nice to just have a calm discussion about this topic. Because so far I've refrained from joining in here because of the competitive nature of it all, whilst I'm genuinely interested in knowing why for instance a certain person wants a specific animal to make it into the sequel because that always comes with an interesting story.

* This isn't directed at you specifically btw, I'm just trying to point out why "the other side" might also be getting a bit frustrated.

You’re right and I’m all for that as well. I don’t want it to be a one side versus the other side. I know we all just want the best game possible, and I know some people want to temper expectations so that others don’t get upset when it isn’t what they want, I feel like most of know what to expect we just wish it wasn’t that way is all. Personally I want all the animals back because I love playing Franchise and building zoos in different parts of the world. I like role playing that one zoo has a great Bonobo breeding program (my Baja California Zoo) whereas another is all about chimp conservation (Sherbrooke Animal Park). I have a zoo that has a bear scavenger hunt of the sorts for guests where they mark down all the bear species they see in the zoo (Spirit Falls) another one has this for dogs (Texas Hope Zoo) I have another zoo full of big yards of hoofstock built similarly to the Wilds in Colombus Ohio. (San Juan Animal Park) I love role playing that different zoos have different options and different animals for each of them. these are all the animals that people most talk about cutting in a future game. The animals that are repetitive or not unique. Of course I want them all back. I’ve already attached meaning to having different options for every zoo. A Black Wildebeest still has a place in one zoo Where a Blue Wildebeest has a place in another. It’s hard to believe that this variety will be present in a future game. All I personally ask for is confirmation they will come down the line even if it’s updates or something.

You’re right that it shouldn’t be a debate or heated discussion I wish it wasn’t. I’d much rather people understand that every animal means something to somebody. But it’s so often you hear the touting of the word clone or worthless thrown out about these additions. I’m guilty of it too. I didn’t want the elephant in the last pack, but now that it’s here I don’t want it removed. That was someone’s hard work to make the elephant and you know what I’ll find a place for it somewhere. So again, I see “the other side” and I propose that for this time between games when we are talking about a sequel we don’t refer to tribalism and try to come together for a better game and just listen to all sides before just dismissing something as irrational.

 

[Utahraptor Arcanus]

You used the Lokiceratops as an example of an animal that "won't have dimorphism", though that may have just been poor wording.

No what i meant was that lokiceratops had differents but not many. My initial comment was towards Carno and Bary, not Loki.

That is the kind of sexual dimorphism I'd expect though - a lot of dinosaurs will have very subtle dimorphism (much more so than Lokiceratops, which is decently dimorphic) while some others may have more extreme dimorphism (like the Triceratops). Some dinosaurs only having very minor dimorphism isn't Frontier being lazy, it's what we'd naturally expect given the variation in dimorphism in dinosaurs today (in some bird species the males and females are wildly different, whilst in others they're indistinguishable).

I honestly expected different sizes for differents genders on ceratopsians considering that they are herding animals, or at least more chamative frills. But sure, i never expected all the dinosaurs to have dimorphism, im not expecting any on most theropods for example.

It's not laziness from Frontier part, i just point out how expecting dimorphism in all animals is unrealistic.

 

[RightWhale]

whilst I'm genuinely interested in knowing why for instance a certain person wants a specific animal to make it into the sequel because that always comes with an interesting story.

Oh I like this as a conversation starter! What I really love to visit in zoos is all the “indoor habitats” that can house animals in climate or light controlled habitats.

Think any of the following:

1. Indoor tropical houses
2. Bird houses
3. Bug houses
4. Reptile houses
5. Nocturnal habitats
6. Primate houses
7. Madagascar house
8. Penguin habitats/ coastal birds
9. Desert domes
10. Aquariums

Of course I also love visiting all animals at a zoo, and the large hoofstock habitats are very fun to visit, on top of every other animal. Part of the reason why I love these types of habitats is that where I live in the United States (New England, or specifically the North East USA) it is way too cold for over half of the year for a lot of the animals to be outside. But if I want a break from the cold the animals inside are always active! Likewise during the heat of the summer any indoor habitats can give me a break from the sun, I am far below heat tolerant so I can’t be hot for too long.

Part of the reason why I want the white faced whistling duck is that it can fill the great niche for an indoor bird, on top of the fact I love waterfowl, birds, and mixed habitat animals. Its plumage is cute, it can be housed with many different species, it’s hard not for me to love it. I mean look at that face:

Also for fun, here are some of my favorite “Indoor Habitats” from the various zoos I have been to:

1. The Columbus Zoo manatee area and Aquarium
2. The Bronx Zoo’s Tropical Jungle area, Bird World, Coastal Birds, Reptile House, Rodent House and Madagascar building
3. Henry Doorly Zoo’s Desert Dome, Lied Jungle, and Aquarium
4. Franklin Park Zoo’s indoor rainforest and bird house
5. Central Park Zoo’s indoor rainforest and penguin house
6. Topeka Zoo’s tropical house
7. Roger William Park Zoo’s tropical house
8. National Zoo’s Amazon area, reptile house, and small mammal house (still haven’t seen the new bird house)
9. North Carolina Zoo’s Desert dome, puffin area, and rivers edge area

 

[NZFanatic]

because that always comes with an interesting story.

Does it? IMO it all boils down to a roster of basics. Like what is the minimum roster of an average zoo (ignoring your local wildlife park or whatever)?

Giraffe, rhino, big cats, great apes, monkeys, lemurs, antelope, meerkat, parrots, mixed reptiles (usually small), peafowl. You could probably add penguins, flamingos to that list. Zebras of course.

The extras would be the more niche inclusions - things like the aardvark, hyenas, small cats, pangolins, rodents, and so on.

What I find eternally frustrating about the "all or nothing" attitude is that it ignores the fact that our cosiderably insular community of zoo/animal nerds is not the group keeping the lights on alone. There needs to be broad appeal, and you don't get that by dumping all the heavy hitters in a base game. Some animals literally have to be withheld for DLC in order to sell DLC. This isn't a moral statement on business practices, it's just reality. Bob Plumber isn't going to buy a DLC that has some small Asian prosimian, a random South American deer, and some funny-named marsupial. But he'll probably buy the one with a baboon in it.

Birds also can't hold down the fort on their own.

So what is Frontier to do? They'll have to resell animals, and weigh that against annoying a few people, but I'll bet they're banking on those people not being annoyed enough not to buy.

 

[Aramar]

Some animals literally have to be withheld for DLC in order to sell DLC. This isn't a moral statement on business practices, it's just reality

I agree! And I think this could be the reason why we are still missing some of the most well known animals by the general public and not only zoo neerds: American black bear and Eurasian brown bear, walrus, coati, pelican, sea otter, yak, impala, Nile crocodile, grey kangaroo, wapiti, cobra, chameleon... Frontier is saving those for future DLCs or PZ2

 

[Iben]

Does it? IMO it all boils down to a roster of basics. Like what is the minimum roster of an average zoo (ignoring your local wildlife park or whatever)?

To me it's at least more interesting than the 500th time the same complaint gets repeated.

As an example, with the Tropical Pack reveal all you could read here was for the most part people being annoyed by the species of sloth. I wasn't thrilled either frankly because in general I prefer more common in captivity species. But then Carlos on BroNation brought up that pretty much every South American zoo he had visited had that exact species and that they're were very common in captivity there. And that not only switched my perspective on them, but learning that was vastly more interesting than reading the same person complain about the sloth like 5 times.

I'm not saying you shouldn't voice complaints or anything negative; it's more that it gets old quite quickly if all you're going to do is just repeat the same thing over and over again.

 

[Mjmannella]

Some animals literally have to be withheld for DLC in order to sell DLC. This isn't a moral statement on business practices, it's just reality.

Casual animal fans are going to buy anything regardless. I know people who've never heard of takins only to be captivated because the game adding them taught them about takins. Will every consumer be like this? Definitely not, but getting hung up on this is fruitless because there will always be an exceptional person. I already listed a several "big ticket" animals that Frontier still has for at their disposal, and even then there's definitely ones I missed.

What I find eternally frustrating about the "all or nothing" attitude is that it ignores the fact that our cosiderably insular community of zoo/animal nerds is not the group keeping the lights on alone.

If anything, I think it's been demonstrated that it seems more like it's this demographic here who's actually more critical of the animal rosters and therefore less willing to give up some cash to keep Frontier's lights on.. The average consumer probably didn't have any outrages against the Barnyard Pack

 

[Swjosdotschka]

If anything, I think it's been demonstrated that it seems more like it's this demographic here who's actually more critical of the animal rosters and therefore less willing to give up some cash to keep Frontier's lights on.. The average consumer probably didn't have any outrages against the Barnyard Pack

To be fair - and as much as it annoys me, because I am included in this group - I know of absolutely no one who complained on here and did not get the DLC.
I wouldn't say any of the critiques is really less likely to spend the aprox. 10 bucks for a DLC. All of us are collectors after all.

What will happen when it comes to bigger sums and one is not happy, that is yet to be seen.

 

[SanRazo]

Casual animal fans are going to buy anything regardless. I know people who've never heard of takins only to ge captivated because the game adding them taught them about takins. Will every consumer be like this? Definitely not, but getting hung up on this is fruitless because there will always be an exceptional person. I already listed a several "big ticket" animals that Frontier still has for at their disposal, and even then there's definitely ones I missed.

If anything, I think it's been demonstrated that it seems more like it's this demographic here who's actually more critical of the animal rosters and therefore less willing to give up some cash to keep Frontier's lights on.. The average consumer probably didn't have any outrages against the Barnyard Pack

Exactly this. No casual player is complaining about the 500th elephant or the barnyard pack or the Dik Dik or a Baboon. Normally they just don’t know of these animals, get them, and find out about them and say oh wow that’s a cool animal or just steer clear and use canid #200 that’s also in the pack. WE’RE the picky crowd who care about taxonomy and zoo roster. Overall frontier all things considered has been good at catering to us both. Adding so many cats and canids is them giving that crowd more things they are comfortable with and they eat it up everytime. If they really wanted to they can keep adding more niche dog and cat species and intersplicing them with animals we care about and they’ll be more than happy

 

[Milurian]

If you're cutting upwards of 40 genera, I don't believe that to be an upgrade to the experience.

And I believe they plainly haven't given the fact that content is continuing to be absent in sequel games (and is once again being re-sold).

This concept is not the amazing take you think it is. You seem to have absolutely no nuance or discretion when looking at this topic and it really does not do your argument any favours.
on paper sure 100 going to 60 is bad but if lets say you completely redo models, add juvenile states, sexual dimorphism for almost all species. entirely new animations and breeding mechanics that 60 is still an upgrade over the 100 because unless the entire limits of your interactions is theoretical or you somehow only used the missing 40 then there is actively improvements made that you will experience. does the lower species number impact how good of an upgrade the game is definitely but the key is its still an upgrade whether you like it or not.

If pz2 removed the exhibit system in favour of letting all animals move in all 3 dimensions then losing some of the exhibit animals is expected but doesnt mean suddenly being able to see snakes spiders and frogs move in a custom 3d space is not an upgrade over the box exhibits even if there are technically less animals.

 

[Mjmannella]

on paper sure 100 going to 60 is bad but if lets say you completely redo models, add juvenile states, sexual dimorphism for almost all species. entirely new animations and breeding

Again, blanket changes like those are universal. That means there's nothing special that warrants a species to be re-sold. There was nothing that justified the premium price for Huayangosaurus in JWE2 when every other JWE1 species got exactly the same changes. There is still nothing that justifies the Concavenator and Thanatosdrakon being re-sold at a premium price when species from the previous 2 games are getting the same changes.

does the lower species number impact how good of an upgrade the game is definitely but the key is its still an upgrade whether you like it or not.

If pz2 removed the exhibit system in favour of letting all animals move in all 3 dimensions then losing some of the exhibit animals is expected

Cool, you gave my car a new engine but you then took out the radio only to try and sell it to me again but with some polish. That's how I feel about what JWE3 is doing.

You seem to have absolutely no nuance or discretion when looking at this topic and it really does not do your argument any favours.

Correct, I refuse to compromise in this circumstance because I care about having a diverse roster and not re-buying things I already purchased; I won't lift my foot up just to get half-disrespected as a consumer in the name of meeting a middle-ground. Those are my standards and I hold them high for a reason; I expect merit and quality decision-making when I buy games, and I won't endorse blatantly slimy practices like what's happened with JWE3.

 

[Frogstrich]

Again, blanket changes like those are universal. That means there's nothing special that warrants a species to be re-sold. There was nothing that justified the premium price for Huayangosaurus in JWE2 when every other JWE1 species got exactly the same changes. There is still nothing that justifies the Concavenator and Thanatosdrakon being re-sold at a premium price when species from the previous 2 games are getting the same changes.

May I Point Out That If All Of JWE2's Roster Was In The Launch JWE3 Roster, The Minimum Amount Of New Models Is 107 Assuming Both Hybrids And Mini Species (Compsognathus, Oviraptor, Lystrosaurus, Jeholopterus, Moros, Segisaurus and Microceratus) Don't Have Babies. That Is Without Sexual Dimorphism And New Species. I Think Holding A Few Back To Come Back At A Later Date Is Fine. We Also Don't Know If They Are Going To Resell All Of The Species, One Data Point Is Not Enough To Know How They Will Handle The Missing Roster.

 

[NachoB]

The Minimum Amount Of New Models Is 107 Assuming Both Hybrids And Mini Species (Compsognathus, Oviraptor, Lystrosaurus, Jeholopterus, Moros, Segisaurus and Microceratus) Don't Have Babies.

I don't play JWE but oviraptor not having babies when the real thing is nowadays best known for their parenting and nesting behaviour, is pretty stupid.

 

[The Carcharodontogenius]

How about this?

Forest Pack:

1. American Black Bear.
2. Blue Tree Monitor.
3. Osprey.
4. Asiatic Lion.
5. Elk.

 

[Utahraptor Arcanus]

May I Point Out That If All Of JWE2's Roster Was In The Launch JWE3. The Minimum Amount Of New Models Is 107 Assuming Both Hybrids And Mini Species (Compsognathus, Oviraptor, Lystrosaurus, Jeholopterus, Moros, Segisaurus and Microceratus) Don't Have Babies.

I don't know where people are taking the idea that small species aren't getting babies when meerkats do reproduce here (and honestly Frontier was never consistent with they juvenile models, i can see baby compy being just a sub-adult).

 

[NachoB]

How about this?

Forest Pack:

1. American Black Bear.
2. Blue Tree Monitor.
3. Osprey.
4. Asiatic Lion.
5. Elk.

I hate it.

 

[The Carcharodontogenius]

I hate it.

What.