Aquarium/Waterworld DLC with diffrent Sharks,Octupus, Rays(mantaray, stingray..),Pyranha,Dolphins,Seals

@NZFanatic, you find the space requirements of polar bears absurd. this is a matter of perception. Many people find the space requirements in the game absurd because they do not see huge polar bear enclosures in real life. I find the current space requirements correct. polar bears are also a favorite marine mammal, but their appearance in zoos is not pleasant.

That is a fair statement to make, but not always accurate.

Modern research suggests that yes, polar bears do need more space than most zoos have provided/can provide, but it also suggests that over-all space is not the main issue; variation in terrain is the biggest problem. Many people assume that polar bears live only on the icecaps and wander the edge of the earth for all eternity looking for a seal to eat. This isn't true; they often live along rocky shores, in taiga forests, and of course in urban environments (though the latter isn't by choice).

What irked me about the way Frontier handled polar bears was the fact that they went with the space, but not with the terrain. The in-game bear didn't require any coverage at all, and couldn't have any coverage even if you wanted it because its continent was set to 'Arctic', which none of the plants were tagged to. Thankfully this was fixed, and now you can add plants and whatever else to your polar bear habitat to make it more natural.

What a polar bear needs to be successful in captivity is considerable space, but also considerable enrichment, which means places to hide, climb, and explore, and plenty of toys. You can get away with a smaller habitat in a real zoo as long as the bears aren't restricted to a singular environment.

In any case, I'm fine with the polar bear now. Since I play in Sandbox I can turn off welfare and build a polar habitat however I please. Usually I had varied terrain, an area lightly wooded, and plenty of rocks, as well as enough swimming space.
 
you find the space requirements of polar bears absurd. this is a matter of perception. Many people find the space requirements in the game absurd because they do not see huge polar bear enclosures in real life. I find the current space requirements correct
Our local zoo has 7000m2 in total. Can't find any details on the land/water ratio.
So with the current requirements it's seems reasonable.

But in-game it feels a bit off, especially compared to other species. If you zoom out, it's even more obvious.
 
Our local zoo has 7000m2 in total. Can't find any details on the land/water ratio.
So with the current requirements it's seems reasonable.

But in-game it feels a bit off, especially compared to other species. If you zoom out, it's even more obvious.
I said that I already found the current space requirements reasonable. I was talking about old space requirements.
 
@NZFanatic I thought you were complaining about the space requirement of polar bears. At least what you said was pointing to this.

I wasn't complaining about anything. I said I find it absurd, but I'm not complaining about it. In fact, what I said was that there's no point in complaining about it because Frontier has already changed it once and are unlikely to do it again. There's a difference between simply stating a reasoned opinion and complaining (the only thing I regularly complain about here is the taxonomical status of the timber wolf, but that's neither here nor there as far as this discussion is concerned).

The AZA only recommends 500m2 for 1-2 bears and an additional 150m2 for every additional bear, plus a water area of only 9m2 (that is a minimum, but it gives a good gauge of where things are in the modern day). It also stresses that variable terrain and enrichment opportunities that promote species-appropriate behaviour are more important, which is the point I was making. When Frontier first released the bear, they were asking for 12,000m2 of land area on what basically amounted to a barren wasteland. What we ended up with is 6000m2 of land area and the ability to add plants. It's definitely an improvement, but as a minimum requirement it's still, IMO, far too large. Bringing it in line with the grizzly bear would have been more appropriate I think. Of course, I also said that I don't really have a problem with the polar bears anymore anyway, because I can give them whatever environment I like in Sandbox Mode without any issue. Giving us the ability to turn off welfare was a godsend in terms of building realistically.

This has all spun wildly off-topic, though, which is also mostly my fault, so apologies to the thread.
 
I get that you love orca or whatever and you want to see them in the game, that's fine, I'm not going to bother trying to make you understand the other side of the argument. In the same way that you ask us not to get upset if Frontier does include them, however, it's equally fair of us to ask you not to get upset if they don't.

I was bummed out that we didn't get the Arctic fox in the Arctic Pack, and instead got the Arctic wolf, but at least I can recognise that they probably had this in the works before the game even launched and it was too late to change anything. I was a little bummed out that we got the llama in the South America Pack instead of a capybara, or maned wolf, or even another monkey (there's no such thing as too many monkeys in a zoo), but I could at least understand their reasoning for including it, and again, no doubt they were already working on it before they had a clearer idea of what people wanted included. So in the same way, if, and it's a very big 'if', they ever include a Marine DLC, and there are no dolphins or orca or gigantic sharks, and instead we get sea lions, penguins, and aquarium fish, do you think you'll be able to shrug your shoulders and at least understand why they didn't include what you wanted? Will you be able to just move on from that, in the same way that most of us moved on from the Arctic fox and capybara?

I guess reagrding real life we are probaly pretty much agreeing, however for the game I am sure we never will, so its good you wont try it again;)

Oh, I would have liked the fox, capybara, maned wolf etc. aswell, just saying^^ Though I also really like the animals they offered instead.

Well, in my opinion getting "upset" and "moving on" are not exactly the same thing. Meaning if they would add such a pack without orcas, I would be a little sad, yes. However, even though its probaly crazy, I would still hope that maybe they have the same idea of a special Cetacean pack (like I already mentioned before) until the end of support, even if it was in vain. Sure, if they did add any kind of dolphin in such a Marine pack, but no orca or if it was the last DLC ever, then of course I would lose hope. But before that happens I will hope for them forever. And honestly, I would then shift my hopes probaly rather towrads "the future" instead of really losing hope😅
(By the way, I dont want/need sharks in the game at all. Neither gigantic, big, medium or small. Not that I would mind if they got added, just that they are not in my preference.)

However, that does not mean I would get upset or shame/hate on Frontier for it. I really love Planet Zoo and yes, its almost perfect for me (there are a few small things that bother me, but I can live with them, though I would have preferd it done differntly). Right now I have well over 1000 hours, placed in the top rank for every community challenge, played everyday since release (except for maybe 4 days I wasnt at home and simply couldnt play), however also lots of bugs hit me, some rather funny others however pretty much game breaking, which I know some others who experienced those gave up on the game, at least took a longer break. Of course those bugs usually hit my favourite zoos at those times and made them unplayable for weeks/months.... Also I had a pretty much unique bug that no one really understood and it took months to fix it (and honestly, I think it was just fixed by chance😅) which was also the reason I came to this forum in the first place^^
And yet I always kept playing, though I cant say it didnt bother me at all, but I never got upset at Frontier for it and never said a bad word about them.
So no, should Frontier never add orcas to PZ I would not shame/hate/get upset at them. Understand the reasons? As I am sure they would never tell the exact reasons anyway, its kind of a guessing game anyways, could be technical reasons, never planned in, dont want them in etc. So yeah, I will have to accept that, at least when the game ends. But before it ends I can still hope, if you know what I mean.

So the conclusion is I wont get upset if they dont add them,(I will just be a little sad, this wont bother anyone, though🤭) however, just as you have a right to show your disappointment should they add them, I can still continue to hope for them should they not. Which may be in vain, but could also be successful, at least in a possible future game.
Though I guess one will only understand this when you really, really desire an animal for the game.
Also I am pretty fine with every animal they could add. There sure are some animals I would rather love to see then others, however I am still fine with any, its just only the orca I really want to see.

And now you, in a scenario were they did add them in...
Could you understand why they did it?
Would you "move on" in a way that you could accept it or would it totally move you away from Planet Zoo?


Honestly, I am on the side that I dont want a statement beforehand from them at all. And even for both reasons. Even if they say "Yes, we are going to add in orcas/cetaceans" it would be awesome for me, but it would get me soo excited if they are not adding them in within a few months from then, I dont know how I could survive another year or two, knowing they will come:ROFLMAO: Half a year I could maybe do, but longer would be awful for me.
And the "no" option would be worse for me of course, pretty crushing. I rather have my hopes until the "end" (=end of support for PZ) Also it would be so final, like I dont know how the devs stand on this topic is currently, maybe they are split about it aswell, who knows? If they already say "no" now, that would mean a forver no.
So I would rather like they keep their options open (like they currently do, hardly confirm or de-confirm anything regarding future plans)
Also for me personally it would be easier to move on from it when the game is over. Right now I am still pretty addicted to the game (which is years ago that a game captivated me so much, I think the last time was like The Sims 3), but I kind of hope it grows more boring to me in the next months, so that maybe I even "forget" about it for some time, which would make things even easier😅



About the polar bear, I dont know why everyone has such problems with them in franchise - I have them in very huge habitats and everything is just fine^^
 
I want to see this happen, just because it's good to have a laugh during these "depressing" Corona times.

I'd like to know whether or not Frontier actually looks at our animal wishlists. We have no idea how long it takes to create new content (beyond a vague "it takes a long time"), so sometimes I wonder if we should really even bother with animal wishlists when it's likely Frontier has already planned out exactly what content they plan on adding in.

So far it seems like they take into consideration what we want in terms of objects, scenery, and so on (the glass panels are a good example of this, as are the sandbox options and things like that), but with the DLC animals it's hit and miss. We can assume the Arctic Pack was made or at least mostly made pre-launch, maybe the same with the SA Pack, but both packs only gave us one or two 'highly-requested' animals (polar bear and jaguar, and I'd say the capuchin as well since there was a lot of chatter around 'monkeys' in general). The reindeer didn't feel 'highly-requested' so much as 'it seems obvious for Christmas', the Dall sheep was more of a welcome surprise, and the Arctic wolf was a bit of a let down. Then in the SA Pack we missed out on the much-wanted capybara and got the llama instead.

So I wonder if any of these discussions actually matter in the long-run, or if they're just a way for Frontier to get a gauge of how we're going to feel about what they already plan on doing.
 
I've been keeping freshwater fish, plants, and invertebrates (snails, shrimp, and crayfish) for about 2 years now, so let me share some suggestions:

Most Essential Stats for Welfare:
  • Salinity
    • Pretty self-explanatory: some fish are freshwater, some are brackish, some are marine
  • Temperature
    • Pretty self-explanatory: Arctic fish need colder water than tropical reef fish
  • Space
    • Gallons per fish - example: a single adult yellow tang would need about 100 gallons, whereas a school of 5 neon tetras would be happy in 8 gallons
    • Tankmates - example: I have an electric blue crayfish who'll try to kill and eat literally anything else in the tank, but my mollies, rasboras, corydoras catfish, and gobies get along fine
    • Hiding Spaces - certain fish (such as harlequin rasboras or neon tetras) will get stressed if they can't hide. This is very similar to 'shy' animals like nyalas
And also a few suggestions for habitat design:
  • EITHER add a barrier specific to aquariums (Aquarium glass) OR add an "aquarium perimeter" option to parallel the "habitat perimeter" option. When that parameter is met, the habitat automatically fills with water and the game defines it as an aquarium. This way, you could account for the difference in welfare management.
  • Replace the 'land area' statistic with 'water volume' for aquariums
  • some basic aquatic plants like hornwort, frogbit, amazon sword, java moss, etc
These are great suggestions. It's probably not feasible but how cool would it be to be able to, zoom in so to speak on the aquariums in order to add plants and hardscape to specific parts?
 
I don't think they will make aquariums very detailed in a zoo game. Of course, these suggestions are great, but if we want aquariums in this game, we should not hope too much.
namely, we shouldn't expect it to be too detailed.
 
Last edited:
Thresher Shark should be one.
1595502146468.png








.
 
I couldn't find a document that he was kept in captivity. This is a very beautiful shark. But I guess it cannot be kept in captivity, or there was no attempt to do so.
 
well we could have Orcas but not great whites because they die in captivity, but reef sharks and sand tigers are an option.
 
well we could have Orcas but not great whites because they die in captivity, but reef sharks and sand tigers are an option.
Absolutely. We cannot have great whites because the longest living great white in "captivity" is only a few months.
If you ask me, I would love to see all the species kept "in captivity" in real life in this game, regardless of whether they are land or aquatic animals.
I do not know much about the types of sharks held in captivity, but I know that the great white cannot survive in captivity. Because the only thing the great whites do is "kill". They're a killing machine. They have to hunt. they don't eat anything from human hands. Still, I was very happy when I saw them at ZT2.
But there are a few species that you mentioned, and many other types of sharks that can live in captivity. Although some large species can be kept in captivity, some small species cannot be kept in captivity.
 
Last edited:
well we could have Orcas but not great whites because they die in captivity, but reef sharks and sand tigers are an option.
Bull Sharks can also be kept in Captivity and are relatively close in Appearance and Size to Great White Sharks and I do really hope that we will get them in the Game 🦈
I think I would even buy a Shark Pack (but hopefully there will be other aquatic Animals too after that)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom