Yup,... would be a lot of new mechanics to add just for a few species rarely kept in zoos to begin with - I totally want an endangered species pack but I think there are plenty of terrestrial and semi-aquatic species that are endangered to choose from.
How about an endangered species conservation DLC that includes rare dolphins that must be bred and cared for with special buildings and researchers?
- Thread starter Davic
- Start date
I don't think these Species of Cetaceans are kept in Captivity (at least pretty sure regarding the Vaquita).
But I would like Cetaceans in the Game even though I would like a more commonly kept Species like the Bottlenose Dolphin. But there are lots of wrong Informations about Cetaceans in Captivity, so maybe we'll never get them.
But I just thought about the Amazon river dolphin. I'm pretty sure at least one Zoo in Germany has/had them. I assume there are more of them outside of EAZA Zoos and I think People would accept them better than their Marine Counterparts
But I would like Cetaceans in the Game even though I would like a more commonly kept Species like the Bottlenose Dolphin. But there are lots of wrong Informations about Cetaceans in Captivity, so maybe we'll never get them.
But I just thought about the Amazon river dolphin. I'm pretty sure at least one Zoo in Germany has/had them. I assume there are more of them outside of EAZA Zoos and I think People would accept them better than their Marine Counterparts
Without going into the 'should cetaceans be kept in captivity' discussion there is a clear reason Vaquita are not kept. A few years ago (2017) researchers tried capturing some to setup up a captive breeding program. It was an absolute disaster and one Vaquita died in the process. The other one they caught needed to be released because it was stressing out and they were afraid it would die. Vaquita are not kept and will never be kept due to the high risks of losing more of them.
Species conservation means more than just keeping animals in zoos. Even captive breeding is not synonymous with zoos. If Frontier ever does a dedicated endangered species pack than there are plenty of endangered species that are kept in RL zoos to choose from. For example, the scimitar oryx, still officially listed as extinct in the wild, but it has already been successfully released back in the wild in recent years. It would be cool to see more attention going to RL breeding programs.
Species conservation means more than just keeping animals in zoos. Even captive breeding is not synonymous with zoos. If Frontier ever does a dedicated endangered species pack than there are plenty of endangered species that are kept in RL zoos to choose from. For example, the scimitar oryx, still officially listed as extinct in the wild, but it has already been successfully released back in the wild in recent years. It would be cool to see more attention going to RL breeding programs.
Although I am someone who wants marine mammals, I think it would be wrong to expect too many marine mammals for a game whose main focus is the zoo.
I think this is the most logical step, everyone agrees on this. Planet Aquarium should be a game that will showcase your efforts for marine animals as it actually is. "25000m2 area is required for dolphins!" It's not a game in style. It must be a bold fully realistic game that is not afraid of any criticism. For this they have to visit various aquariums, and what efforts are made for these animals. Of course, the point of view of the player is important in this regard, if an anti-bondage person plays this game, of course, he will criticize. This must be the player's point of view and what the game gives us; How much effort is being made, whether sufficient or insufficient for marine animals? Think of the content of the game like real life, there is a dolphin in your park and the dolphin is dying because of your mistake, fines are coming to the park, protesters come, such a game would be great. Moreover, the water system in Planet Zoo is not very good in visuals, the real water dynamics would be great for such a game. However, if we look at the leaked road map of Frontiers and take a look at its 5-year projects, there is no such project to come in the near future.
I think this is the most logical step, everyone agrees on this. Planet Aquarium should be a game that will showcase your efforts for marine animals as it actually is. "25000m2 area is required for dolphins!" It's not a game in style. It must be a bold fully realistic game that is not afraid of any criticism. For this they have to visit various aquariums, and what efforts are made for these animals. Of course, the point of view of the player is important in this regard, if an anti-bondage person plays this game, of course, he will criticize. This must be the player's point of view and what the game gives us; How much effort is being made, whether sufficient or insufficient for marine animals? Think of the content of the game like real life, there is a dolphin in your park and the dolphin is dying because of your mistake, fines are coming to the park, protesters come, such a game would be great. Moreover, the water system in Planet Zoo is not very good in visuals, the real water dynamics would be great for such a game. However, if we look at the leaked road map of Frontiers and take a look at its 5-year projects, there is no such project to come in the near future.
Last edited:
I suggested this a while back as well, Planet Aquarium would definitely be the way to go, if one is to expect the same level of quality and content found in Planet Zoo. If Frontier was to go the route of a similar DLC like the ones we have been receiving, my believe is that everyone will be highly disappointed. Imagine four species and calling it an aquarium, it would just be absurd, on the same token, that would be four highly requested and needed zoo animal slots lost.
Aquariums can be quite complex, and they are essentially managed completely different than zoos. While many zoos do have aquarium facilities annexed, few have truly immersive and elaborate aquariums. In the U.S, only Omaha Zoo has a high quality aquarium. In Europe the situation changes, as they are often part of historical zoos, when modern and state of the art Aquariums had yet not been conceived. Just to name a few examples, Antwerp, London, and the Berlin Zoological Gardens all have aquariums within their historical grounds. While each one has gone thru a number of restorations and improvements, none can be suggested to be world class Aquariums.
The only exception that in my opinion has the merit of being a state of the art Aquarium annexed to a Zoo is Ozeanium Zoo Basel. This aquarium, at least in concept and theory is of exceptional detail and quality, and while the planned design, might not be a mega facility, it certainly holds its weight.
Would definitely love to see Planet Aquarium one day as its own game. By all accounts, it might be the best scenario for this game, since Frontier will by then have learned tremendously from PZ, from all the positives to all the negatives, it can only aid in making Planet Aquarium a truly exceptional game. It will definitely bring a new crowd in my opinion, and most of the PZ community will surely get behind it as well.
Last edited:
The London Zoo aquarium has closed.
How do you define world class?
This does not exist, it was rejected in a referendum. Physically it would have been on a separate site from the zoo.
The London Zoo aquarium has closed.
No big loss there I guess, it was never truly anything memorable as I remember it, I have only visited the London Zoo a handful of times, and never thought much of the Aquarium. As a measuring bar for old historical aquariums found within zoo grounds, Aquarium Berlin is outstanding, especially considering the sheer number of species found there. Have not found my way back to Antwerp and seen what theirs look like after the renovations.
How do you define world class?
How do I define it? Or how is it defined within the Aquarium world? There is an entire community dedicated to Aquariums out there and they definitely have a specific criteria when it comes to a number of aspects. From the number of tanks and volume of water to species displayed and quality of exhibitions. There are a number of informative sites that debate the rankings of Aquariums based on many particulars. One of them is https://worldcitiesranking.com/best-aquariums-top10/ The list seems fairly accurate to me, and as you can see no Aquarium found within a zoo is in it, as expected.
My criteria is definitely a little different, since my architectural background and lifelong involvement with zoo planning and design, does steer me quite significantly towards the quality of the exhibits, visitor facilities, overall functionality of the design, and interpretative narrative of the educational displays. I definitely still consider species in display, size of tanks and viewing panels as a good measuring bar, however, quality would always overcome quantity from my perspective. A particular favorite of mine is Nausicaa Centre National de la Mer in France. After its expansion, it is not only Europe's largest Aquarium but simply a phenomenal place to visit. L'Oceanogràfic in Valencia is definitely in my opinion, still the superior facility in terms of Architectural design and functionality, as it was a facility planned in its entirety, unlike its French counterpart that expanded an aging facility.
Size and species are not always the deciding factor for me, for example, here in the U.S, Georgia Aquarium is king, but for me, it is a facility that lacks functionality, lots of wasted space, the quality of the exhibits and level of detail in most things could have been done a lot better for the money spent. A true case of old fashion American focus on quantity over quality. Here in the U.S I still prefer the historical Shedd Aquarium in Chicago. Sure it is an aging facility, and has none of the modern glamour of Georgia, but the level of detail in everything they have done there is exceptional. It is in my opinion the Bronx Zoo of the Aquarium world.
Without a dough, the premiere Aquariums in the world are in Asia, and in my opinion Singapore's SEA leads the way there, with stiff competition coming from China's emerging mega Aquariums and the Japanese power houses. Sorry for the long reply, as you are probably accustomed by now, they are usually never short.
This does not exist, it was rejected in a referendum. Physically it would have been on a separate site from the zoo.
I'm aware it does not exist, that is why I wrote in concept and theory. Had no idea it was rejected though, that is truly disappointing. The plans I had seen for it, called for two separate entrances, one from outside the Zoo and another from within, similar to Berlin, not sure if those plans changed. I remember following this project for quite a bit, but it took so long to get off ground. Really detrimental this revelation of yours, I was looking forward to it. I travel to Basel often whenever I'm in Frankfurt and the zoo there has never truly inspired me much, however the aquarium plans looked spectacular and had it materialized, it would have certainly being a reason to visit the zoo. Oh well, such is life.
With more reason then, there is not much in way of high quality aquariums in the zoo world, and if Frontier ever tried their hand at it, well lets just say, that it could become their best selling game, if done correctly. You would need the right individual leading the project, not only passionate about a Planet Aquarium, but very well prepared in all aspects of building such a game. In many ways, since the animations in most of the fish could be very limited in comparison to the animals in Planet Zoo, it would not be out of the question to imagine 100 species in the base game, and the DLC being quite larger than what we receive in Planet Zoo. In any case, we can only dream.
No big loss there I guess, it was never truly anything memorable as I remember it, I have only visited the London Zoo a handful of times, and never thought much of the Aquarium. As a measuring bar for old historical aquariums found within zoo grounds, Aquarium Berlin is outstanding, especially considering the sheer number of species found there. Have not found my way back to Antwerp and seen what theirs look like after the renovations.
How do you define world class?
How do I define it? Or how is it defined within the Aquarium world? There is an entire community dedicated to Aquariums out there and they definitely have a specific criteria when it comes to a number of aspects. From the number of tanks and volume of water to species displayed and quality of exhibitions. There are a number of informative sites that debate the rankings of Aquariums based on many particulars. One of them is https://worldcitiesranking.com/best-aquariums-top10/ The list seems fairly accurate to me, and as you can see no Aquarium found within a zoo is in it, as expected.
My criteria is definitely a little different, since my architectural background and lifelong involvement with zoo planning and design, does steer me quite significantly towards the quality of the exhibits, visitor facilities, overall functionality of the design, and interpretative narrative of the educational displays. I definitely still consider species in display, size of tanks and viewing panels as a good measuring bar, however, quality would always overcome quantity from my perspective. A particular favorite of mine is Nausicaa Centre National de la Mer in France. After its expansion, it is not only Europe's largest Aquarium but simply a phenomenal place to visit. L'Oceanogràfic in Valencia is definitely in my opinion, still the superior facility in terms of Architectural design and functionality, as it was a facility planned in its entirety, unlike its French counterpart that expanded an aging facility.
Size and species are not always the deciding factor for me, for example, here in the U.S, Georgia Aquarium is king, but for me, it is a facility that lacks functionality, lots of wasted space, the quality of the exhibits and level of detail in most things could have been done a lot better for the money spent. A true case of old fashion American focus on quantity over quality. Here in the U.S I still prefer the historical Shedd Aquarium in Chicago. Sure it is an aging facility, and has none of the modern glamour of Georgia, but the level of detail in everything they have done there is exceptional. It is in my opinion the Bronx Zoo of the Aquarium world.
Without a dough, the premiere Aquariums in the world are in Asia, and in my opinion Singapore's SEA leads the way there, with stiff competition coming from China's emerging mega Aquariums and the Japanese power houses. Sorry for the long reply, as you are probably accustomed by now, they are usually never short.
This does not exist, it was rejected in a referendum. Physically it would have been on a separate site from the zoo.
I'm aware it does not exist, that is why I wrote in concept and theory. Had no idea it was rejected though, that is truly disappointing. The plans I had seen for it, called for two separate entrances, one from outside the Zoo and another from within, similar to Berlin, not sure if those plans changed. I remember following this project for quite a bit, but it took so long to get off ground. Really detrimental this revelation of yours, I was looking forward to it. I travel to Basel often whenever I'm in Frankfurt and the zoo there has never truly inspired me much, however the aquarium plans looked spectacular and had it materialized, it would have certainly being a reason to visit the zoo. Oh well, such is life.
With more reason then, there is not much in way of high quality aquariums in the zoo world, and if Frontier ever tried their hand at it, well lets just say, that it could become their best selling game, if done correctly. You would need the right individual leading the project, not only passionate about a Planet Aquarium, but very well prepared in all aspects of building such a game. In many ways, since the animations in most of the fish could be very limited in comparison to the animals in Planet Zoo, it would not be out of the question to imagine 100 species in the base game, and the DLC being quite larger than what we receive in Planet Zoo. In any case, we can only dream.
Last edited:
The Rotterdam Zoo is exceptional without question, it is definitely an above average facility overall when taking into account modern zoological facilities and exhibits. Their historical legacy is what sets it completely apart for me. You get to appreciate modern zoo design in an ambience full of character, and historical memorabilia. I have visited this zoo only once, but my impressions were definitely on the positive side, I ended up spending a considerable amount of additional time in this zoo than originally planned.
The Oceanium is definitely state of the art, and I did not mention it before in the same sentence as the historical buildings of London, Antwerp and Berlin, because it clearly does not belong there. It is definitely a modern Aquarium facility that eclipses most other aquariums found in European Zoos. Even in North America you would have a hard time matching this aquarium with anything else found in zoos here, with the notable exception of the Omaha Zoo Aquarium. That is of course, because in North America Aquariums and Zoos are kept separated, and there is substantial public support for the construction of stand alone facilities dedicated to marine life.
Europe as with most things it is a completely separate issue, because historically aquarium houses were part of zoos, as back when these facilities were conceived there was no modern understanding of what was needed to effectively run a state of the art Aquarium. Simply put, there was neither the need or understanding of what one would entail. Modern European Aquariums have evolved and transition to become stand alone facilities, but they still have to deal with the hot and embattled European topic of funding.
As Markun pointed out, Ozeanium Zoo Basel seems to be the latest victim of Europeans not being to keen on opening their wallets. Having taken part in the planning and design process of many European Zoological projects as well as North American projects, the fundamental differences in how the subject of spending is tackled by the two, are drastically substantial. This is one of the factors why many European cities still gravitate to include their Aquariums as part of larger institutions like Zoos.
My point is that while Blijdorp Zoo's Oceanium is exceptional by zoological and Aquarium modern standards, as a standalone facility there is a lot missing to take it to that next level. It would not even appear in the same conversation as any of the top aquariums of the world, so by most standards in that industry it is a simplified product of high quality. I hope you and others do not take this as an offense, as it is only my objective opinion based on what I have learned thru the years. So happy holydays and a prosperous 2021 to everyone.
Last edited by a moderator:
Burgers Ocean is an outstanding Aquarium exhibition Markun. As is the case with Blijdorp Zoo's Oceanium. Both are exeptional Aquarium facilities within zoos, just not large enough or diverse enough to be considered world class Aquariums.
I will give you a local example. The Phillip and Patricia Frost Museum of Science in Miami is also a state of the art, modern Aquarium. There is an entire floor dedicated to the Aquarium. The design and concept of the facility was ground breaking in many aspects, however it is in no way a stand alone Aquarium or world class by any accounts. In fact, when it was built one of the stipulations by Dade County Commissioners was that it could not be labeled as an Aquarium, in direct competition with Miami Seaquarium, since the later had just being purchased by Palace Entertainment (the same company that owns Dutch Wonderland) and it could be constituted as an act of bad faith, and possibly entangle the Dade County in a lawsuit.
Miami Seaquarium is one of the oldest Oceanariums in the world, and when it first opened its doors in 1955, it was considered the premiere marine facility in the U.S. Stating that time has been unkind to this facility is an understatement. Right before Palace Entertainment bought it out, the facility was completely falling apart, and facing attacks from every animal rights organization in the world. In fact you were guaranteed to have seen protesters outside on any occasion, almost like a real life badly run Planet Zoo game, lol. If anyone thinks Sea World is a bad example for keeping large cetaceans in small confined spaces, they should take a trip down to Miami Seaquarium, the killer whales there actually live in a box, no exaggeration, a box.
So anyways along comes Palace Entertainment and saves the day, buying the place, and planning a restructuring that consisted on some cheap coats of paint a few tank cleanings and refurbishing's, and oh yes, a brand new gift shop, with overpriced merchandise featuring all the resident inmates. A complete disgrace. However one of the stipulations during the closing of the deal is that Miami could not built a new Aquarium for a period of 10 years, they happily accepted. And that is how the The Phillip and Patricia Frost Museum of Science in Miami ended up being neither a science museum or an aquarium, just a preview of what those two places could have looked like if properly handled.
To an extend a similar situation as trying to incorporate an Aquarium in a Zoo, it just does not work, and you end up having missed opportunities and resources for two great separate institutions. The Oceans are by far in their most critical hour, this is where everything you know will eventually fall apart if we let it. Aquariums when done tastefully and majestically can be an incredible tool of conservation and preservation for not only marine life and the Oceans they inhabit, but our survival as a species.
PS: In case anyone is interested a really good short video taken by a drone showcasing a section of the Aquarium floor within the Science Museum, I would have loved to see what this level of quality and design could have accomplished in a full on Aquarium.
Last edited:
I pointed out nothing of the sort. The reasons why projects may or may not go ahead are far more complex than Europeans being mean. You should know from your experience that funding models are often completely different to those in the United States and it wasn't only a question of money. There were concerns about the sustainability of the project and Switzerland is rather unique in that projects often have to be approved by a public vote.
Bigger doesn't mean better.
I pointed out nothing of the sort. The reasons why projects may or may not go ahead are far more complex than Europeans being mean. You should know from your experience that funding models are often completely different to those in the United States and it wasn't only a question of money. There were concerns about the sustainability of the project and Switzerland is rather unique in that projects often have to be approved by a public vote.
Never said Europeans are mean either Markun, lol, meant exactly what you stated. The process within Europe in getting funding for this kind of projects is rather complicated, this of course varies country to country. However I think that you might agree with me, that when it comes to funding a project a lot of the hurdles often found in Europe seem to be with the general displeasure and distrust of the public as to where funds are allocated. In general having been part of several large and small projects in many European countries, the red tape and bureaucracy there is overwhelming. Their concerns about sustainability, and Switzerland being a landlocked country were understandable, however it still comes down to funding and willingness to fully commit to a project.
As an opposite angle, in North America, rarely projects such as this are faced with such stiff opposition or overwhelming public disfavor. It is quite different here as well, depending on the region of the country where you are in. The closest place in the U.S when it comes to these set of issues is right here in South Florida, where I currently reside. This, in part has to do with the great diversity of cultures within this region, and the negative experiences with past projects, where funds where either mismanaged or misappropriated. In recent years however, the general consensus in South Florida, especially Miami has moved more towards a traditional American mindset of getting things done, while observing the long term benefits and such, versus the European ideology of let us talk about it, and then talk some more, and talk a little more until none of us come to an agreement and understanding. I'm of course in no way, shape or form implying that this is always the case, in one or the other, it is more of a general observation, and a recollection of experiences in both places in relation to projects of this type. They are not mutually exclusive and in a number of cases I'm completely sure that the roles have been reversed.
Bigger doesn't mean better.
I pointed that out earlier in the post, it has been my doctrine through out my professional career. I would always choose quality over quantity. However it would be erroneous to assume that bigger has to also be inferior or a lesser compromise. Compromising the quality of any zoological or Aquarium project over getting a few more things in, is never a good idea, and that is not what I meant when I said those two Aquariums are not stand alone facilities. There is just too much missing from both places to be considered world class Aquariums.
If you have a zoological section within an aquarium, that mainly focuses on a specific area or ecosystem of the world, or even a combination of different areas, as many of the large facilities in the world do, and it is exceptionally well done, would that place that zoological section within the zoo as a world class zoo? Lets say Aquarium A) has an award winning section within it devoted to Madagascar, something like Zoo Zürich's Masoala, a place I absolutely love. Would that make the Masoala exhibition a world class zoo?
The difference here is that Zoos, primarily within Europe, and for a number of reasons already stated in this thread, have traditionally immersed Aquariums within their facilities, and not the other way around, had it been done, we would be having the same argument.
World class aquariums cover a substantially large territory as not only they have all the Oceans of the world to cover, with a variety of ecosystems, and over 2 million species, but there is also a number of freshwater ecosystems that are equally as diverse and present great opportunities for educating the public as well.
Take a look at Singapore River Safari, an entire facility dedicated for the most part to showcasing the amazing variety of freshwater ecosystems in the world, they do have some odd ball exhibits in there, but then again, it is Singapore, they have their own way of doing things. On the same token, for quite some time they had the largest Aquarium in the world, and the quality of all exhibits was outstanding. Even Aquarium Biotope experts who are usually rather critical of large institutions, gave nothing but outstanding reviews to this place. This is the perfect example of bigger can if done correctly mean better.
Never said Europeans are mean either Markun, lol, meant exactly what you stated. The process within Europe in getting funding for this kind of projects is rather complicated, this of course varies country to country. However I think that you might agree with me, that when it comes to funding a project a lot of the hurdles often found in Europe seem to be with the general displeasure and distrust of the public as to where funds are allocated. In general having been part of several large and small projects in many European countries, the red tape and bureaucracy there is overwhelming. Their concerns about sustainability, and Switzerland being a landlocked country were understandable, however it still comes down to funding and willingness to fully commit to a project.
As an opposite angle, in North America, rarely projects such as this are faced with such stiff opposition or overwhelming public disfavor. It is quite different here as well, depending on the region of the country where you are in. The closest place in the U.S when it comes to these set of issues is right here in South Florida, where I currently reside. This, in part has to do with the great diversity of cultures within this region, and the negative experiences with past projects, where funds where either mismanaged or misappropriated. In recent years however, the general consensus in South Florida, especially Miami has moved more towards a traditional American mindset of getting things done, while observing the long term benefits and such, versus the European ideology of let us talk about it, and then talk some more, and talk a little more until none of us come to an agreement and understanding. I'm of course in no way, shape or form implying that this is always the case, in one or the other, it is more of a general observation, and a recollection of experiences in both places in relation to projects of this type. They are not mutually exclusive and in a number of cases I'm completely sure that the roles have been reversed.
Bigger doesn't mean better.
I pointed that out earlier in the post, it has been my doctrine through out my professional career. I would always choose quality over quantity. However it would be erroneous to assume that bigger has to also be inferior or a lesser compromise. Compromising the quality of any zoological or Aquarium project over getting a few more things in, is never a good idea, and that is not what I meant when I said those two Aquariums are not stand alone facilities. There is just too much missing from both places to be considered world class Aquariums.
If you have a zoological section within an aquarium, that mainly focuses on a specific area or ecosystem of the world, or even a combination of different areas, as many of the large facilities in the world do, and it is exceptionally well done, would that place that zoological section within the zoo as a world class zoo? Lets say Aquarium A) has an award winning section within it devoted to Madagascar, something like Zoo Zürich's Masoala, a place I absolutely love. Would that make the Masoala exhibition a world class zoo?
The difference here is that Zoos, primarily within Europe, and for a number of reasons already stated in this thread, have traditionally immersed Aquariums within their facilities, and not the other way around, had it been done, we would be having the same argument.
World class aquariums cover a substantially large territory as not only they have all the Oceans of the world to cover, with a variety of ecosystems, and over 2 million species, but there is also a number of freshwater ecosystems that are equally as diverse and present great opportunities for educating the public as well.
Take a look at Singapore River Safari, an entire facility dedicated for the most part to showcasing the amazing variety of freshwater ecosystems in the world, they do have some odd ball exhibits in there, but then again, it is Singapore, they have their own way of doing things. On the same token, for quite some time they had the largest Aquarium in the world, and the quality of all exhibits was outstanding. Even Aquarium Biotope experts who are usually rather critical of large institutions, gave nothing but outstanding reviews to this place. This is the perfect example of bigger can if done correctly mean better.
Last edited: