3 Sets Of DLC- Dinosaurs, Birds of the world (That actually fly), and Marine Animals Of the World

[Chuditch]

I've really warmed up to the idea of a recently extinct species pack as of late, to the point that it's now my dream "end of support" pack - just not if support ends this spring. If we got a South America revisit as well as a couple other packs rounding out the community's most desperate wants (baboon, secretary bird, tree kangaroo, pelican etc), I'd be fine seeing such a pack bring PZ to a close in a year's time:

(made this a couple weeks ago, been meaning to find somewhere to use it lol)

The main appeal of having these species in PZ rather than in another game like Prehistoric Kingdom is that, as animals from the modern era, I'd rather house them alongside other modern species than dinosaurs and mammoths and whatnot - things like having quaggas run alongside their fellow south African ungulates again, or dodos sharing an enclosure with Aldabra giant tortoises. A thylacine exhibit looks out of place in a park full of dinosaurs when it could be adjacent to the likes of Tasmanian devils and wombats. They compliment the already vast existing roster of modern species, while prehistoric species are distinctly "something different" and are far better served having entire games devoted to fleshing them out.

So yeah, while dinosaurs are a big no, recently extinct species would be something I'd like to see if we had enough development time - which we probably don't, unfortunately.

 

[NachoB]

I've really warmed up to the idea of a recently extinct species pack as of late, to the point that it's now my dream "end of support" pack - just not if support ends this spring. If we got a South America revisit as well as a couple other packs rounding out the community's most desperate wants (baboon, secretary bird, tree kangaroo, pelican etc), I'd be fine seeing such a pack bring PZ to a close in a year's time:

(made this a couple weeks ago, been meaning to find somewhere to use it lol)

The main appeal of having these species in PZ rather than in another game like Prehistoric Kingdom is that, as animals from the modern era, I'd rather house them alongside other modern species than dinosaurs and mammoths and whatnot - things like having quaggas run alongside their fellow south African ungulates again, or dodos sharing an enclosure with Aldabra giant tortoises. A thylacine exhibit looks out of place in a park full of dinosaurs when it could be adjacent to the likes of Tasmanian devils and wombats. They compliment the already vast existing roster of modern species, while prehistoric species are distinctly "something different" and are far better served having entire games devoted to fleshing them out.

So yeah, while dinosaurs are a big no, recently extinct species would be something I'd like to see if we had enough development time - which we probably don't, unfortunately.

I really like this idea. But like you said, not now that we are missing so many other extant (and even currently endangered ) animals.

 

[CharlieXGaming]

hey Charlie, out of context but why do you dislike the snub-nosed monkey

It holds the same niche as the proboscis monkey, is another Asian monkey which the last several primates we have gotten through DLCs have been Asian while South America and Africa still don’t have any new ones recently. And it’s not common in zoos like you said.

 

[Annie_konik]

I've really warmed up to the idea of a recently extinct species pack as of late, to the point that it's now my dream "end of support" pack - just not if support ends this spring. If we got a South America revisit as well as a couple other packs rounding out the community's most desperate wants (baboon, secretary bird, tree kangaroo, pelican etc), I'd be fine seeing such a pack bring PZ to a close in a year's time:

(made this a couple weeks ago, been meaning to find somewhere to use it lol)

The main appeal of having these species in PZ rather than in another game like Prehistoric Kingdom is that, as animals from the modern era, I'd rather house them alongside other modern species than dinosaurs and mammoths and whatnot - things like having quaggas run alongside their fellow south African ungulates again, or dodos sharing an enclosure with Aldabra giant tortoises. A thylacine exhibit looks out of place in a park full of dinosaurs when it could be adjacent to the likes of Tasmanian devils and wombats. They compliment the already vast existing roster of modern species, while prehistoric species are distinctly "something different" and are far better served having entire games devoted to fleshing them out.

So yeah, while dinosaurs are a big no, recently extinct species would be something I'd like to see if we had enough development time - which we probably don't, unfortunately.

I think it's a cool idea but maybe Moa goes a bit too far back to the past? Would anyone keep it in the pre-XV century menagerie? Personally, I find it a bit hard to imagine.
By the way, Quagga was a subspecies of Plains zebra, not a separate species. There are even some efforts to bring back this variation by selective breeding of Burchells Zebras (check Quagga Project).

As for fully aquatic animals, that would really depend on what. I would hate to see any Cetaceans in the game, as they don't belong in captivity. But some fish tanks with small fish or jellyfish would be fun.

Flying birds, yes please, if possible Even adding some more non-flying or rarely flying birds would be great.

Dinosaurs would ruin the game for me, honestly. But dino statues would be fine. Plus maybe some kind of Natural History educational pieces, possibly skeletons and such.

 

[Chuditch]

I think it's a cool idea but maybe Moa goes a bit too far back to the past? Would anyone keep it in the pre-XV century menagerie? Personally, I find it a bit hard to imagine.

What qualifies as "recently extinct" is definitely going to be a bit subjective, but the moas and the rest of New Zealand's pre-human fauna fit the bill in my eyes. 600 years is virtually nothing in ecological or geological terms, and it was even recent enough on a cultural level for the Maori to still have recollections about moas and their extinction. Whether or not they were kept in old menageries also doesn't hold much value to me, animals don't have to have been seen by westerners to qualify.

The IUCN defines recently extinct as species that have disappeared from 1500 CE onwards, which is a pretty neat (but arbitrary) date. In that case I'd switch the giant moa for the upland moa (which survived a little longer in its remote mountain habitat), or perhaps even for a giant sloth lemur which may have survived into even more recent times.

By the way, Quagga was a subspecies of Plains zebra, not a separate species. There are even some efforts to bring back this variation by selective breeding of Burchells Zebras (check Quagga Project).

Yes I'm aware, hence why their scientific name reflects that. They're definitely the cloniest animal in the pack, but far too iconic to not include. There is also a similar backbreeding project attempting to bring back the aurochs!

 

[premierfong]

Yeah, it is ambitious for sure. Honestly, planet zoo does not even have to go the route of a complete new game (Planet Zoo 2), as we saw Cities: Skylines go that route and it destroyed their brand. They can keep doing updates and adding animal/building DLC to keep the money flowing with less effort than trying to completely build a new game. There are so many animals that they can dd yet, that they have years worth of content releases they could do, with simply maintaining and updating the current game

Exactly that is exactly the point. Just keep adding with DLCs, if they want more money just charge more. Like $15, its not like we dont pay.

 

[Annie_konik]

What qualifies as "recently extinct" is definitely going to be a bit subjective, but the moas and the rest of New Zealand's pre-human fauna fit the bill in my eyes. 600 years is virtually nothing in ecological or geological terms, and it was even recent enough on a cultural level for the Maori to still have recollections about moas and their extinction. Whether or not they were kept in old menageries also doesn't hold much value to me, animals don't have to have been seen by westerners to qualify.

The IUCN defines recently extinct as species that have disappeared from 1500 CE onwards, which is a pretty neat (but arbitrary) date. In that case I'd switch the giant moa for the upland moa (which survived a little longer in its remote mountain habitat), or perhaps even for a giant sloth lemur which may have survived into even more recent times.


Yes I'm aware, hence why their scientific name reflects that. They're definitely the cloniest animal in the pack, but far too iconic to not include. There is also a similar backbreeding project attempting to bring back the aurochs!

I apologize for misunderstanding. I didn't want to question whether or not Moa fits the recently extinct category. And I do agree with you that it does qualify for this. Also, I'm not knowledgeable enough to determine that anyway, I see no reason to question what scientists have said in this matter.

I admit my comment could have been understood this way. I wasn't very clear why I mentioned the menageries at all. Please let me explain.

I mentioned them because I tried to imagine those animals in the context of early zoos. Because PZ is fairly realistic zoo game I tried to have an idea for reasonably realistic zoo setting for those animals. We know that quaggas and thylacines have been kept in zoos, that's why this idea came to my mind.

But of course it's just one way to look at it. And if we ever get a DLC with recently extinct species, I'm sure they would be shown in a new context anyway. Not like "the last living specimen seen here in a cage". That would actually be sad and maybe not fitting the style of this game at all.

 

[Marvinb]

Dinosaurs and other prehistory extinctions get a big "Nah" from me. Anyone who knows me knows im a big paleontology nerd, but they dont belong in Planet Zoo imo, JWE and Prehistoric kingdom got that covered allready. Its to me like if JWE would randomly add elephants and lion into the game, its out of place and rather redundant since other games cover that and id assume most people do play JWE for the extinct animals, otherwise they would play PZ.

Also i remember hearing somewhere that having the licenese to the jurassic park franchise prohibits them from doing anything dino related anyways, idk if thats truly the case tho, sounds logical but idk.

Recent extinctions like auks, dodo, thylacine and the like do get a "eh maybe" from me. Partly because i cant see them ever coming to JWE, prehistoric kingdom maybe tho.
I think they do bright a certain weight to the conservation message Frontier likes to push since the majority of them went extinct due to humans. But if given the chance id chose living animals over them 99% of the time. I do think having some educational displays or stuffed/replica specimens would be cool tho

 

[TheYeti]

I agree with most here that there's no need for extinct animals at this point, especially when we have so many extant animals missing. Planet Zoo, more than any zoo game in the past has become a game where we can actually build realistic zoos, with all due respect much more than ZT2 ever was (both with regards to mechanic and species).

At the same time, my Zoo Tycoon 2 nostalgia makes me desperate for another good game where prehistoric and present animals can be combined in a mechanic that is as detailed as Planet Zoo. I used to make quite elaborate prehistoric parks back when The ZT2 Round Table was there, and part of me misses that time.

In the end, I think it's best to not get it as part of official support, but I may get dinosaurs and recently extinct species through mods when there are no more updates coming. It seems the best way forward without frustrations of missing present species but with opportunities for extinct animal lovers.

 

[Thylaco]

What qualifies as "recently extinct" is definitely going to be a bit subjective, but the moas and the rest of New Zealand's pre-human fauna fit the bill in my eyes. 600 years is virtually nothing in ecological or geological terms, and it was even recent enough on a cultural level for the Maori to still have recollections about moas and their extinction. Whether or not they were kept in old menageries also doesn't hold much value to me, animals don't have to have been seen by westerners to qualify.

The IUCN defines recently extinct as species that have disappeared from 1500 CE onwards, which is a pretty neat (but arbitrary) date. In that case I'd switch the giant moa for the upland moa (which survived a little longer in its remote mountain habitat), or perhaps even for a giant sloth lemur which may have survived into even more recent times.


Yes I'm aware, hence why their scientific name reflects that. They're definitely the cloniest animal in the pack, but far too iconic to not include. There is also a similar backbreeding project attempting to bring back the aurochs!

I think, if it was framed more around a zoo scenario set in the past, when the animals were both known and alive, it might be accepted a bit more, the problems of course being that doing so is quite restrictive, and conditions in early zoos were pretty harsh on animals. Sending expeditions to poach from the wild, and using cash to buy/sell animals, might set it apart as more about profit than about conservation. (It sort of begs the question of what's palatable on Frontier's end, and if it's worth the effort of new UI and period clothing)

1820s-30s is the rise of commercial zoos, if you set it then, 4 of the listed are bordering semi-realistic, being the Great Auk, Warrah, Quagga & Thylacine (+Golden toad if not considering discovery date).

The Laughing Owl might be decently interesting as a habitat species (decently terrestrial, but not flightless), though described a bit later. There's also the Labrador Duck, Spectacled Cormorant & Caribbean Monk Seal (again described later). As far as I've gathered, Frontier would be salivating over the Bluebuck, but that's extinct a few decades earlier.

The super recently extinct species aren't hugely exciting, but they're kind of the only ones broadly accepted here, so extinctions probably isn't the best direction.

 

[Chuditch]

I apologize for misunderstanding. I didn't want to question whether or not Moa fits the recently extinct category. And I do agree with you that it does qualify for this. Also, I'm not knowledgeable enough to determine that anyway, I see no reason to question what scientists have said in this matter.

I admit my comment could have been understood this way. I wasn't very clear why I mentioned the menageries at all. Please let me explain.

Ah I see, sorry for the misunderstanding!

I mentioned them because I tried to imagine those animals in the context of early zoos. Because PZ is fairly realistic zoo game I tried to have an idea for reasonably realistic zoo setting for those animals. We know that quaggas and thylacines have been kept in zoos, that's why this idea came to my mind.

But of course it's just one way to look at it. And if we ever get a DLC with recently extinct species, I'm sure they would be shown in a new context anyway. Not like "the last living specimen seen here in a cage". That would actually be sad and maybe not fitting the style of this game at all.

I think, if it was framed more around a zoo scenario set in the past, when the animals were both known and alive, it might be accepted a bit more, the problems of course being that doing so is quite restrictive, and conditions in early zoos were pretty harsh on animals. Sending expeditions to poach from the wild, and using cash to buy/sell animals, might set it apart as more about profit than about conservation. (It sort of begs the question of what's palatable on Frontier's end, and if it's worth the effort of new UI and period clothing)

When I think of a recently extinct pack I imagine it being more framed around de-extinction to be honest (“giving species a second chance” and whatnot). I’m not really interested in shoehorning historical zoos into the game for the sake of “justifying” the inclusion of these animals under realism, I’d just find that depressing if anything lol. De-extinct species aren’t realistic for zoos for the time being (with how fast things are progressing though I think it’s inevitable sometime in the future, however far off that is), but it definitely matches PZ’s conservation message a whole lot more.

I’m usually a person to likes to adhere to realism with what’s kept in modern zoos, but I think doing something bold and different for the final DLC would be a fitting way to end things, and recently extinct species just sound like a lot of fun. Plus, there’s no doubt such a pack would sell well (the dodo and to a lesser degree the thylacine would be a massive draw to the general public, as would the concept of an extinct pack in general), and in the end that’s what matters most for Frontier.

To be clear I don’t think such a pack is at all likely, nor would I want it without multiple other packs giving us some far more important living animals first (so absolutely not if the next DLC is the last). It’s just an idea I’m fond of.

 

[Iben]

The discussion on whether or not PZ should have extinct animals becomes moot when you answer the question if PZ can add extinct animals. And the answer to that is... no.

It's incredibly common for companies that make stuff for other companies/together with other companies to have contracts that limit them to do stuff themselves. So it's incredibly likely that the contract that allows Frontier to make JWE also includes steps to prevent them from making their own extinct animal based park/zoo simulator. That's logical after all, because they'd otherwise be in direct competition and they would be able to put limitations in JWE that they circumvent in their own IP and benefit from in sales.

Let me be clear, I'm not saying Universal owns the rights to prehistoric/recently extinct animals in any shape, way or form, but it's just that in this specific case, they kinda do for Frontier. Adding dinosaurs (and extinct animals in general, because sure Universal would have thought ahead) to Planet Zoo would mean that the game becomes a competitor to JWE, so a it is extremely unlikely for them to ever add them. So yeah, you can go back and forth about whether the game should have it... but it's most likely never going to happen

 

[The Carcharodontogenius]

I've really warmed up to the idea of a recently extinct species pack as of late, to the point that it's now my dream "end of support" pack - just not if support ends this spring. If we got a South America revisit as well as a couple other packs rounding out the community's most desperate wants (baboon, secretary bird, tree kangaroo, pelican etc), I'd be fine seeing such a pack bring PZ to a close in a year's time:

(made this a couple weeks ago, been meaning to find somewhere to use it lol)

The main appeal of having these species in PZ rather than in another game like Prehistoric Kingdom is that, as animals from the modern era, I'd rather house them alongside other modern species than dinosaurs and mammoths and whatnot - things like having quaggas run alongside their fellow south African ungulates again, or dodos sharing an enclosure with Aldabra giant tortoises. A thylacine exhibit looks out of place in a park full of dinosaurs when it could be adjacent to the likes of Tasmanian devils and wombats. They compliment the already vast existing roster of modern species, while prehistoric species are distinctly "something different" and are far better served having entire games devoted to fleshing them out.

So yeah, while dinosaurs are a big no, recently extinct species would be something I'd like to see if we had enough development time - which we probably don't, unfortunately.

Love it.

Here's my roster:

1. Great Auk.
2. Thylacine.
3. Bluebuck.
4. Aurochs.
5. Laughing Owl.
6. Steller's Sea Cow.
7. Golden Toad [E].
8. Bali Tiger.
9. Passenger Pigeon.
10. Round Island Burrowing Boa [E].

Also, it says on Wikipedia the Great Auk can't be cloned because it's extinct. I think it's time they start thinking Jurassic World now. Getting a genome of an extinct species & then bringing it back to life.

De-extinction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Marvinb]

Love it.

Here's my roster:

1. Great Auk.
2. Thylacine.
3. Bluebuck.
4. Aurochs.
5. Laughing Owl.
6. Steller's Sea Cow.
7. Golden Toad [E].
8. Bali Tiger.
9. Passenger Pigeon.
10. Round Island Burrowing Boa [E].

Also, it says on Wikipedia the Great Auk can't be cloned because it's extinct. I think it's time they start thinking Jurassic World now. Getting a genome of an extinct species & then bringing it back to life.

De-extinction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Isnt cloning them what they did in JP?

 

[The Carcharodontogenius]

Isnt cloning them what they did in JP?

Oh... right. Sorry. But do you agree that we should start thinking JP?

 

[Marvinb]

Oh... right. Sorry. But do you agree that we should start thinking JP?

Not really, no.
For very recent ones sure, or even to save critically endagred ones.
But everything that went extinct due to natural causes should remain so imo. So, no cloning dinosaurs (But thats impossible anyways)

 

[Thylaco]

Also, it says on Wikipedia the Great Auk can't be cloned because it's extinct. I think it's time they start thinking Jurassic World now. Getting a genome of an extinct species & then bringing it back to life.

De-extinction - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

More a problem with birds generally apparently (Dodo and Nicobar pigeon recently), egg cells are difficult to isolate, so you can't reliably replace the nucleus. (all the egg cells are made as an embryo, so you'd have to replace germ cell nuclei, even then it'd likely be a minority of eggs, over the animals likely shorter life)

For sperm cells on the other hand, it's quite doable, just need the right cells in the testes and a dye to mark descendant cells.

Fertile hybrids are a bit more common with birds, so it seems like it might be a decent success rate, albeit takes a long time (in the case of Great Auks, the Razorbill seems the best choice, but there'd be 3-5 years between generations, or 3-5 years until you find out if it's infertile, albeit probably less time if flooded with growth hormones)

You can also alter germ line cells with a modified virus, though that's limited to a few genes per virus really (for extinct subspecies or just increasing genetic diversity, it might be feasible).

 

[The Carcharodontogenius]

Fertile hybrids are a bit more common with birds, so it seems like it might be a decent success rate, albeit takes a long time (in the case of Great Auks, the Razorbill seems the best choice, but there'd be 3-5 years between generations, or 3-5 years until you find out if it's infertile, albeit probably less time if flooded with growth hormones)

Would that mean that if you breed the hybrids, would there be a chance they could breed a Great Auk as the probability increases?

 

[Thylaco]

Would that mean that if you breed the hybrids, would there be a chance they could breed a Great Auk as the probability increases?

I think they'd just keep introducing genetically 100% Great Auk sperm every generation if they can, then you'll eventually get to the point where it should be pure (5 generations of selective breeding is usually considered enough for both gene sets to be identical).

If you bred Gen 1 hybrids (one whole set each species) together, some of the 2nd generation could be around 75% Great Auk (around 100% is hypothetically possible, but realistically not going to happen), but if you bred Gen 2 with itself, you'd also very likely lose some amount of Great Auk from the gene pool. Razorbills are fairly monogamous, but you could set aside Gen 1 hybrids to breed back on, increasing the maximum it could be (it gets harder and harder to get higher than a generation's %, but 95% seems doable in about 5 generations, though with a lot more individuals).

 

[The Carcharodontogenius]

I think they'd just keep introducing genetically 100% Great Auk sperm every generation if they can, then you'll eventually get to the point where it should be pure (5 generations of selective breeding is usually considered enough for both gene sets to be identical).

If you bred Gen 1 hybrids (one whole set each species) together, some of the 2nd generation could be around 75% Great Auk (around 100% is hypothetically possible, but realistically not going to happen), but if you bred Gen 2 with itself, you'd also very likely lose some amount of Great Auk from the gene pool. Razorbills are fairly monogamous, but you could set aside Gen 1 hybrids to breed back on, increasing the maximum it could be (it gets harder and harder to get higher than a generation's %, but 95% seems doable in about 5 generations, though with a lot more individuals).

So, no to my question?