10 things that make no sense in Jurassic World Evolution 2

As the title suggests this is a list of 10 details that don't really make a whole lot of sense, be it from animal behavior to features that may or may not exist. This is not a bug list, nor is it a list of features I want to see (I already made my peace about that on another thread.), this just some odd happenings that hopefully get ironed out (or at the very least clarified on why it isn't possible) in the future. That all said let's begin the count down (this list is in no particular order btw)

#1 - Velociraptors don't like sand.

As an animal that lived in a desert millions of years ago you'd think Velociraptors would like a sandy exhibit right? Wrong! They don't even have any preferred terrain type and instead just want to have a few trees. I'm sorry, WHAT?!? An animal, that lived in a hot dry desert likes an environment that's more akin to THE JUNGLE? I know these animals lived in the jungle in the movies but come on, you gave wetland requirements to the spinosauruids so why not have V-raptors need a patch of sand in their enclosures? I know what you are thinking, "Why don't you just build in the desert maps if you want a more habitat accurate velociraptor?", My counter inquiry is... What fun is it to ONLY build in the desert? Why not the Alpine forests of California too? Or maybe even tool around on Sorna for a bit? What I am asking is not for multi-biome tools (Again, I already did that on another post), but just for dinosaurs to have environmental needs that really better reflect on their actual counterparts.










#2 - Albertosaurus hates T-rex.

Something I never really got was the co-habitation choices for the carnivorous dinosaurs, We all know Carnivorous dinosaurs wouldn't share territory with another carnivorous species but that is not the issue here (nor is it an item on this list). What I REALLY don't get are the choices they made as to which dinosaur co-habitates with which, I mean albertosaurus and CARNOTAURUS? The didn't even exist on the same continent never mind the same sides of the cretaceous. So how about letting it co-habitate with the tyrannosaurus instead? It may be an alpha predator but, so is Allosaurus and it's fine with TWO DIFFERENT carnivores sharing its enclosure. T-rex and alberto DO exist on the same continent, and it may not have been at the same time but they DID exist around the same area of the cretaceous period. Also, they are both tyrannosaurids so they got that family connection going for them too. Speaking of Co habitation that makes no-sense









#3- Peranodon and Dimorphodon don't like each other.

If there's anything you want to be move accurate when it comes to co-habitation... this is it. Peranodon and dimorphodon shared an aviary in movie 4 so you'd think they would have one another as a liked species correct? Wong again! They actually are neutral to one another and would note care if the one or the other were just not around the next day. Aviaries in general need to be re-worked but none more so than co-habitation for many of them. These two being the prime examples, Why don't they like each other? They were just fine in the movie until Indominous broke in and spooked them out. So Why can't they just preferer each other's company? Did Frontier forget something? did the guy (or girl? Or both? Or Neither?) who was in charge of coding co-habitation fall asleep on the keyboard?? Why do my pterasaurs not like each other frontier!!









#4- Stegosaurs Hates Kentrosaurus.

As a veteran from the JP:OG era, I always loved housing these two dinosaurs together. We also see many species within the same dinosaur family co-exist in the fossil record, so why can't certain dinosaurs of said family be okay with co-existing in this game? Instead they want to rip each other apart! Eh? Many of them don't even have the same diet (in fact Kentro doesn't even eat fruit so what gives?)! So why fight if you aren't competing for food? Or space if the enclosure is large enough? There's little to no reason many of these animals would fight. some of them make sense but not all, Kentro and Stergo are just for sentimental sake to relive the days of JP:OG (I'm sure some of you here would agree to that much).









#5- Torosaurus hates Triceratops.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these two still speculated to be the same dinosaur? I mean I'm of the mind they aren't but if Pachycelphasaurus can be okay with Dracorex and Stygi then why can't these two? They both like Fiber so sure they may compete for food but so will a number of dinosaurs that they TOLERATE in their enclosures. It's an odd choice, but it's one that may have a few scratching their heads after reading this smaller tidbit.









#6- Storms Don't Damage Lagoons.

Now on the one hand Marine reptiles can never escape their enclosures so that's not what I'm trying to get at. What is strange is that storms can't seem to damage the fencing around the lagoons, they can damage the others so why not these aquatic habitats? Just because the animals can't escape doesn't mean a damaged section cant be detrimental to either guests or animals? Plus it seems like lagoon creatures are just immune to all kinds of storms anyway (except snow storms which doesn't make sense either) so at least some impact to where they live would be nice. Lagoons like Aviaries need more work, that includes more management and maintenance.









#7- Meat feeders Can't be placed in aviaries.

Now here's something REALLY strange... Pterasaurs CAN eat meat and from the meat feeder, they CAN Hunt goats and you CAN put a live bait feeder in an aviary... But NOT meat feeders? I mean I know they prefer fish but come on! Many of us like to give are carnivores a varied diet so why can't meat feeders be put inside of aviaries but you CAN put goat feeders in? WHAT?!? Uh!?! Did the same programmer from before fall asleep again? Come on Frontier, let me feed beef to my Tropegnathus! She demands the meats!









#8- Peranodon and Tropegnathus don't like Geosternbergia.

Again with the Co-habitation errors Frontier, I'm starting to think you need to add naps as a requirement in the office between breaks. Why is it that the ONLY pterosaur that likes ANYTHING is not liked in return? you could fix this with the Velociraptors and Indominous but not TWO newcomers to the series and and the ONLY returning flyer? Odd choice to overlook it to begin with, as I mentioned before Co-habitation feels like it needs a re-work, especially with the aviaries and lagoons. and these three are primarily my reason for thinking so.









#9- Hadrasaurs don't like each other

Once again I must stress I am a vet of the days of JPOG, and et another thing I always did was house my Hadrasaurs together. We see Parasaurolophus share a heard with corythosaurus in the dung heap that is Movie 3 so again We go movie accuracy to back this claim, not to mention there really isn't any reason why they shouldn't like one another anyway... Many of them don't even share the same kinds of preferred food so competition is once again non-existent. But I guess the sleepy programmer is just coing to have to consider doing this another time (maybe). Until we are just going to have to live on with Hadrasaurs just being just okay with the existence of other "duck-billed dinosaurs"









#10 Diseases can't be cured from the paleo-medical facility.

So you just healed your star attraction dinosaur from yet another fight it got into and all of the sudden, BOOM! disease out break, and your little star is one of the "Lucky" ones to ALSO be sick. You'd think you'd be able to treat it at the paleo-medical building since it hasn't left yet right? STRIKE THREE! Your are Wrong yet again! not only can you not treat illness using the Facility but you can't treat a sick dinosaur that's already there. You can absolve the injury, but that bug (the illness not an actual glitch) is only going away if it's out in the field. Talk about an oversight, am I right?










And there you have it, 10 things that don't make any sense. hope you found it entertaining to read. Maybe next patch I'll see if I can find 10 more...
 
Last edited:
2. I don't really agree that related carnivores should like each-other, so similar reasons that related herbivores wouldn't like each-other. If anything, Tyrannosaurines arrived from Asia would've out-competed the Albertosaurines already present in North America due to younger Tyrannosaurus occupying the same niche as adult Albertosaurus.
3,9. Game cohabitation doesn't correlate to the films. The Gyrosphere Valley had Triceratops, Stegosaurus, and presumably Ankylosaurus all in the same area after all. And to be honest I like of like it more that way. Before the final release Pteranodon actually used to hate Dimorphodon, and I wish that wasn't changed since it made the relationships between pterosaurs a bit more complex.
4,9. I'm not nostalgic for JP:OG so I'm not super needy to those cohabitation preferences. Also, Stegosaurians being made to dislike both Ceratopsians and Ankylosaurians makes me think they're meant to be super territorial animals in general. I like to think of it as akin to kudu chasing duikers off of its turf.
5. The "Toromorph" idea was heavily long-disputed even when first published, and a recent paper on Canadian specimens of Torosaurus has succinctly put the hypothesis to rest.
 
2. I don't really agree that related carnivores should like each-other, so similar reasons that related herbivores wouldn't like each-other. If anything, Tyrannosaurines arrived from Asia would've out-competed the Albertosaurines already present in North America due to younger Tyrannosaurus occupying the same niche as adult Albertosaurus.
3,9. Game cohabitation doesn't correlate to the films. The Gyrosphere Valley had Triceratops, Stegosaurus, and presumably Ankylosaurus all in the same area after all. And to be honest I like of like it more that way. Before the final release Pteranodon actually used to hate Dimorphodon, and I wish that wasn't changed since it made the relationships between pterosaurs a bit more complex.
4,9. I'm not nostalgic for JP:OG so I'm not super needy to those cohabitation preferences. Also, Stegosaurians being made to dislike both Ceratopsians and Ankylosaurians makes me think they're meant to be super territorial animals in general. I like to think of it as akin to kudu chasing duikers off of its turf.
5. The "Toromorph" idea was heavily long-disputed even when first published, and a recent paper on Canadian specimens of Torosaurus has succinctly put the hypothesis to rest.

Agreed. And also the Velociraptors in the franchise are actually Deinonychus, which lived in a tropical environment...
 
Hm, are you sure that was a retcon? I know that in the original novel Grant says he "just dug up an antirrhopus" and they specifically state that the ones they bred in the park are, in fact, mongoliensis (despite being completely the wrong size). But I don't recall it coming up in the first three movies or the canon materials associated with it at all.
 
Actually, in the movies it was never explicitly stated the Raptors were Dienonychus. They were Called Velociraptor by Both Ellie and Allen, Tim, Henry, and Robert in movie 1 and a number of other people in all the other moves which use the name "velociraptor". It was in the NOVEL where they are identified Dienonychus but called velociraptor on the account that it was being used as an umbrella term for the family of dinosaurs they are from (I guess Dromeaosauridae was just too long a word for Crichton)
 
Last edited:
No, the novel specifically stated that the ones in the park were velociraptor mongoliensis. From page 107 of the paperback:

"Velociraptor," Alan Grant said, in a low voice.
"Velociraptor mongoliensis," Wu said, nodding. "A predator. This one's only six weeks old."
"I just excavated a raptor," Grant said, as he bent down for a closer look.
 
Hm, are you sure that was a retcon? I know that in the original novel Grant says he "just dug up an antirrhopus" and they specifically state that the ones they bred in the park are, in fact, mongoliensis (despite being completely the wrong size). But I don't recall it coming up in the first three movies or the canon materials associated with it at all.
The novel and films operate on different canons. And in any case, both Crichton and the film producers independently based their Velociraptor depictions on Deinonychus. The JP raptors are Deinonychus in all but name.
 
The novel and films operate on different canons. And in any case, both Crichton and the film producers independently based their Velociraptor depictions on Deinonychus. The JP raptors are Deinonychus in all but name.
The Velociraptors in both the novel and the 1993 Jurassic Park film were designed off the Deinonychus, similar to each other in that they both used John Ostrom’s direct help as stated in that link, but with a different respective context each.

All other places in the franchise between then and now that I’m aware of say it to being from Asia, location wise. They just have the basic Deinonychus physical design from the time it was first conceived as a Jurassic dino, while the novel raptors were the latter but with “Velociraptor” in their name. The fossil in Grant’s dig sites are just unique exceptions.
 
Last edited:
The novel and films operate on different canons. And in any case, both Crichton and the film producers independently based their Velociraptor depictions on Deinonychus. The JP raptors are Deinonychus in all but name.
That goes without saying. But you said they were "Velociraptor antirrhopus" in canon until JW retconned it. I know it's an easy conclusion for fans to make that they're supposed to be antirrhopus, but is there actually a canon source of that?

I always assumed that like Crichton before them they were mongoliensis but they just ignored that it was a much smaller animal because they simply didn't care.

I guess it doesn't really matter because both are incorrect anyway. I was only wondering if there was any official canon material or sources that specified JP raptors were antirrhopus.
 
IIRC, in the novel, Wu was assuming the raptors were Mongoliesis because the amber they were drawn from was found in Mongolia, but they have no idea what they have until the first egg hatches and even then they're still guessing, and Wu was hoping experts like Grant could provide their expertise to more accurately identify them. I seem to recall they didn't come to a final conclusion but it was at least implied that these are (as Crichton was enamored of a contemporary controversy concerning whether Deinonychus was a separate genus or should be folded into Velociraptors) either a evidence of antirrhopus in Mongolia or an entirely new species of large velociraptor like antirrhopus.
 
That goes without saying. But you said they were "Velociraptor antirrhopus" in canon until JW retconned it. I know it's an easy conclusion for fans to make that they're supposed to be antirrhopus, but is there actually a canon source of that?

I always assumed that like Crichton before them they were mongoliensis but they just ignored that it was a much smaller animal because they simply didn't care.

I guess it doesn't really matter because both are incorrect anyway. I was only wondering if there was any official canon material or sources that specified JP raptors were antirrhopus.
It turns out that the hardest part of this was finding any JP material that actually gives a full binomial for anything other than the T. rex. The best piece of evidence I could find is Gregory Paul's 1988 book using V. antirrhopus (page 350), which would've been available as a resource for the film producers. I couldn't find a paper that split Deinonychus out of Velociraptor, but in any case paleontological word of mouth was far from the lightning speed it has today (which ironically is partially a result of Jurassic Park's media explosion). It's reasonable to assume that the producers didn't know of any work more recent than Greg Paul's book and thus used the now outdated V. antirrhopus.
 
Last edited:
#5- Torosaurus hates Triceratops.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't these two still speculated to be the same dinosaur? I mean I'm of the mind they aren't but if Pachycelphasaurus can be okay with Dracorex and Stygi then why can't these two? They both like Fiber so sure they may compete for food but so will a number of dinosaurs that they TOLERATE in their enclosures. It's an odd choice, but it's one that may have a few scratching their heads after reading this smaller tidbit.
No. Torosaurus is not the same as Triceratops. They are distinct from each other. It was never much of a hypothesis to lump the two to begin with. But recent finds confirmed that Toro is distinct.
Dracorex hogwartsia is most likely a juvenile Pachycephalosaurus wyomingensis. And Stygimiloch spinifer is most likely also a younger Pachycephalosaurus but possibly a different species of Pachy.

But yes it would make more sense if Torosaurus and Triceratops would tolerate each other.
 
I agree with Best In slot that it's weird how all the dinosaurs are self-hating. The Triceratops hates other ceratopsians. It goes on like this through the whole game. You can disable this in sandbox I believe.
 
I strongly agree with this. The new cohabitation requirements are too limiting compared to the first game. There needs to be more exceptions so the enclosures are more diverse and not always the same combinations.
 
Cohabitation issues in this game are a real problem. They dont make any sense and its like the game is designed to have hundred of enclosures and spend more time creating them than you should. I still im clueless about why i cant mix ceratopsids with sauropods, or anykylosaurids or whatever. Basically almost every single hervivore should be able to coexist without problems with each other. Its the opposite around in the game. I get that carnivores should have more cohabitation issues (and still its really exagerated) but hervivores?. The same happens with feed requierements. They are ridiculous. Its designed, again, to force you to have many enclosures because you need so much space to spread all the different food sources. and im sure this is what the devs followed to design the cohabitation mechanic. Dinosaurs cant coexist together because they just have different food preferences. Again, it doesnt make any sense, at all.
 
Not being able to place two of the same opretarions buildings (example the Control Center from TLW and the Visitor Center in a Jurassic Park setting on last gen) I mean, it is not like the 50 species limit on PS4/Xbox One that will make the console combust.

The only cage available in JW setting is the Indoraptor cage why? DFW should also get access to all the different cages. There are other decorations exclusive to one setting that also don't make sense: wooden boxes, Construction Cranes not on the JP setting, non branded tents, lack of signs across all settings, no flags on the JP or DFW setting, Aviary Perches just for the JW setting (bring the aviary rock formations from JWE1 as a decoration), Mobile Trailer not available in the JW setting (we can use it on the JP3 CT along with the cameras), Cargo containers only for the JW and DFW settings, cache of supplies to the JW setting.
 
Back
Top Bottom