Till now we have seen 2 different Way how to place of origin in a dlc is handled. Either we had 4(7) animals from the same region or 2 and 2, that were both bond by biomes, even though we had 3 different regions.
Now i want to ask, how do you like your splits in the dlc? This is actually a more interesting question then it sounds like, because there are multiple different factors to this.
I personally prefer 4 animals from the same region, because the more animals we got from the same region, the better this one region will be fleshed out and the higher the chance is that we get some animals, that otherwise wouldnt have made it in.
For example, the Fossa is still a quite likely inclusion and could even spearhead its own dlc, but depending on how this is split it could either be the only new addition to madagascar, one of a pair (props with sifaka) or one of a quartet, with 2 other animals, for example a mouselemure or radiated tortoise. The chance of the later three will significantly drop if the dlc isnt a full madagascar pack, or not even lets say a 2 + 2 rainforest pack.
The counter argument to that would be, that while yes, we wouldnt get thouse a bit more obscure animals, but would we really want them in favor of other animals?
For example the fossa could just be one of 4 animals in an aboreal pack, handing us three other iconic arboreal animals like the sloth, gibbon or tree kangaroo, but therefore killing the chance for a madagascar pack and other animals from madagascar, aslong as they wont be chosen for another mixed pack, limiting us to just 3 in the game, making every madagascar zone in our zoos samey and not that flexible, but at the same time other areas would have been improved, in this case mainly tropical and monkey houses.
If we spin this around on the one mixed region dlc in the game, we can see that we allready have one region pretty much locked out of for content, being antarctica, as there biggest hitter has already been deliverd. How much that is of a loss is subjective, but for example the even more common in captivity gentoo penguin has pretty much lost it shot to ever be added in the game, without being extraordinary lucky.
Thats a reason while im personally against a big "grabbag" dlc, as serving us the biggest hitter of several regions wont do as that much good in the long run, minimising the chance of more animals from their respective habitat. My favorite example for that would be the maned wolf, that would be completly wasted as an add one. The maned wolf alone wont save the south american animal selection. A proper pack featuring the maned wolf and having atleast half the focus on the southamerican pampa, adding atleast the mara or the nandu, would be a way better deal for that specific region.
Because in the end, what we want is not neccessarly more animals, but more choice in how to design our zoos, something each animal would give us. Thats why we want a lot of animals to choose from, so that we actually have a choice and dont have to use the same 5 animals every time we want to build a slightly bigger australia section. You can do fine with just a few animals in the section of your zoo, thats not the problem, we want a ton of them so that it arnt allways the same few animals.
That is why africa works, while other regions dont. Africa has a lot of cool missing animals, a lot of "maned wolfs", but other then southamerica, africa has tripple the amount of animals, giving us a choice what we will chose for our zoo. Its very rare to pick even close to all of them, but the fact, that we for example have 7 different antelopes to choose from makes the fact that some very cool ones, like duikers or elands are missing somewhat obsolete. It would be nice to have them, but they arnt needed thx to the element of choice we allready have.
But there is a special cases were im actually all for a wide spread, with something like 1 animal per region in the dlc. That case would be if something entirly new was added, for example birds or a better climbing system. In that case, where we completly focus on a new system, it makes sense to spread them out, something frontier seems to agree on with me, as the only split dlc till now was the aquatic dlc, which left with the inclusion of the free salty diving only one continent with out a diving animals, something the african penguin has now taken care of.
So for example if they reworked their climbing system and added some more unique climbing animals like gibbons and sloths, it again would be better to spread them out instead of pilling them up.
While in general for example the colorful prevost squirrel would be seen by most as the better addition, that would make our 7. climbing animal for southeast asia, if we get the gibbons in the same dlc, while for example europe would have none, making the red squirrel a viable alternative to better cover a far range.
But what do you guys think? Did my rambling make sense to you? And whats your viewpoint? I hope we can have a nice discussion about this topic, especally after things like new dlc concepts or missmatching themes and animals have been the talk lately
Now i want to ask, how do you like your splits in the dlc? This is actually a more interesting question then it sounds like, because there are multiple different factors to this.
I personally prefer 4 animals from the same region, because the more animals we got from the same region, the better this one region will be fleshed out and the higher the chance is that we get some animals, that otherwise wouldnt have made it in.
For example, the Fossa is still a quite likely inclusion and could even spearhead its own dlc, but depending on how this is split it could either be the only new addition to madagascar, one of a pair (props with sifaka) or one of a quartet, with 2 other animals, for example a mouselemure or radiated tortoise. The chance of the later three will significantly drop if the dlc isnt a full madagascar pack, or not even lets say a 2 + 2 rainforest pack.
The counter argument to that would be, that while yes, we wouldnt get thouse a bit more obscure animals, but would we really want them in favor of other animals?
For example the fossa could just be one of 4 animals in an aboreal pack, handing us three other iconic arboreal animals like the sloth, gibbon or tree kangaroo, but therefore killing the chance for a madagascar pack and other animals from madagascar, aslong as they wont be chosen for another mixed pack, limiting us to just 3 in the game, making every madagascar zone in our zoos samey and not that flexible, but at the same time other areas would have been improved, in this case mainly tropical and monkey houses.
If we spin this around on the one mixed region dlc in the game, we can see that we allready have one region pretty much locked out of for content, being antarctica, as there biggest hitter has already been deliverd. How much that is of a loss is subjective, but for example the even more common in captivity gentoo penguin has pretty much lost it shot to ever be added in the game, without being extraordinary lucky.
Thats a reason while im personally against a big "grabbag" dlc, as serving us the biggest hitter of several regions wont do as that much good in the long run, minimising the chance of more animals from their respective habitat. My favorite example for that would be the maned wolf, that would be completly wasted as an add one. The maned wolf alone wont save the south american animal selection. A proper pack featuring the maned wolf and having atleast half the focus on the southamerican pampa, adding atleast the mara or the nandu, would be a way better deal for that specific region.
Because in the end, what we want is not neccessarly more animals, but more choice in how to design our zoos, something each animal would give us. Thats why we want a lot of animals to choose from, so that we actually have a choice and dont have to use the same 5 animals every time we want to build a slightly bigger australia section. You can do fine with just a few animals in the section of your zoo, thats not the problem, we want a ton of them so that it arnt allways the same few animals.
That is why africa works, while other regions dont. Africa has a lot of cool missing animals, a lot of "maned wolfs", but other then southamerica, africa has tripple the amount of animals, giving us a choice what we will chose for our zoo. Its very rare to pick even close to all of them, but the fact, that we for example have 7 different antelopes to choose from makes the fact that some very cool ones, like duikers or elands are missing somewhat obsolete. It would be nice to have them, but they arnt needed thx to the element of choice we allready have.
But there is a special cases were im actually all for a wide spread, with something like 1 animal per region in the dlc. That case would be if something entirly new was added, for example birds or a better climbing system. In that case, where we completly focus on a new system, it makes sense to spread them out, something frontier seems to agree on with me, as the only split dlc till now was the aquatic dlc, which left with the inclusion of the free salty diving only one continent with out a diving animals, something the african penguin has now taken care of.
So for example if they reworked their climbing system and added some more unique climbing animals like gibbons and sloths, it again would be better to spread them out instead of pilling them up.
While in general for example the colorful prevost squirrel would be seen by most as the better addition, that would make our 7. climbing animal for southeast asia, if we get the gibbons in the same dlc, while for example europe would have none, making the red squirrel a viable alternative to better cover a far range.
But what do you guys think? Did my rambling make sense to you? And whats your viewpoint? I hope we can have a nice discussion about this topic, especally after things like new dlc concepts or missmatching themes and animals have been the talk lately
