I thought about this a bit, talked about it sometimes here on the forums and im on a long train ride with nothing to do, so how about we talk about the concept of needed animals and how to more or less objectivly rank them into different categories.
I hope this can spark a nice discussion about both the categories and where certain animals belong into, so lets begin:
Needed Animals
This is the most important and most steadily decreasing category, as it is honestly not that large anymore, as most of the animals have been put in allready.
Its about thouse very iconic animals, that just shouldnt be missing in your zoo game, as well as animals needed to properly build for a certain region. All of these animals chare that they either are still very common in zoos or have been in the past, for example not even half of all zoos that had polarbears in the past still keep them, but they are still an iconic zoo animal.
They also mostly come from underdeveloped regions or animal categories, but also have enough stand alone appeal, that they not only cover holes in the roster, but also are strong inclusions on their own, even if their niche wouldnt be contested in the game.
A good example would be the pelican, as we allready have a common aquatic bird with the flamingo, but the pelicans would shine so greatly, that even though their niche is allready coverd it would be an amazing pick. Good for them that just one species of waterfowl doesnt take away from them to much, or we would see them in a later category.
Most of the time we see them as the seller animals of their packs and there only has been one pack without one.
Some of my example picks would be the red deer, a lynx, emu, a wallaby, a pelican, african dwarf goats and the racoon.
Needed if they can make them work
These are the animals everybody would want, but would the current gameplay machaniks either to be overhauled or completly new ones.
The most obvious ones would be flying birds, with animals like the scarlet macaw and the snowy owl as must have picks, but also most notably gibbons with brachiation and in theorie also fully aquatic animals, but we will get to them.
Good Choice to flesh out a certain thing
Next on the priority list are animals, that could be overlooked in general and dont scream for being included like above, but they would nicly fill out a missing niche in the game, making it hard to argue against them. For example, the De Brazas Monkey is a fine monkey and animal to add in general, but becomes really, really good in the context that we just have one other tropical small monkey and none from africa, where their unique traits like being common in zoos, monogamie and living in the aquatic biome, give them an edge over other monkeys for this spot.
Another good example would be the Himalayan Tahr, which is also nothing special standalone, but with the lack of alpine animals and caprins, but already having three other himalayan animals, it would nicly fit into the game as the main prey species of the snow leopard and one of the few animals that likes to casually chill on mount everrest.
Some examples would be de Brazas Monkey, Himalayan Thar, White-faced-whistling-duck, Mara, Aadax, Collared peccary.
Standalone Animals that would be nice to have
Next tier, we have the capybaras of this world, the maned wolfs and the red river hogs.
Animals, that either already have their niche coverd (we have both an african and a tropical swine), already have alot of relatives in the game (hello canids) or simply are popular enough on their own, without actually feeling like they are crucually missing (Capybara, leopards).
These animals would be amazing to have and would be very fun addition, but are not necessarily needed, as we could have a complete feeling zoo game without them and they also dont cover some glaring holes in the roster, but they are just to darn cool to leave out. Their stand alone appeal is what makes them so desireable to be in the game, eventhough it wouldnt help to flesh the game out as much as other picks.
Some examples would be the capybara, leopard, maned wolf, red river hog, walrus.
Nice to have, okay Animal
These animals are just okay, neither needed because of their unique niche, nor popular enough to be somewhat needed just to satisfy lots of people.
They are all fine choices stand alone and often even good filler animals, but most people wouldnt get excited seeing a dlc only with them.
Often these animals are either already related to animals in the game or just not very exciting on their own.
A good example would be the american aligator, who many people wernt excited for, but because of the fact that they are distinct looking and very common in zoos a good choice on paper.
Important to say is, that this doesnt equal bad animal, as they can still be great, just simply not as needed in the game as other animals might have been.
The aligator again is a good example for that, as they look stunning and bring nice representation to the hot swamps of florida, while we at the same time already have 3 other crocodilians, making their niche not only contested, but pretty much coverd.
Most "reskins" or like we should call them as low effort animals would fall into this subsection.
Nice to have, but could have been something else or even worse, contest the spot of another, better suited animal.
Examples would be american black bear, cojote, jackal, white tailed deer, most south saharan antelopes, european brownbear.
Controversial Inclusions
We reached the spicy zone. These are animals that have both arguments for and against their Inclusion, mostly logistical or ethical.
These mostly include fully aquatic animals, cetaceans and domestic animals, but also very rare but unique animals like the probuscis monkey, which have both strong pro and cons.
Bad choices
Lastly, we have animals that shouldnt be in the game, with a majority and at times even the developer saying no, making it less controversial and more a shouldnt happen.
These animals are mostly not existant in zoos, without unique features that put them over similar, but actually held in zoos animals.
These include extinct, mythical and non existant animals, or for a living animal the saola.
So what do you guys think?
Anything i forgot?
Any animals that you would put into these categories?
Cant wait to see what you guys think ^^
I hope this can spark a nice discussion about both the categories and where certain animals belong into, so lets begin:
Needed Animals
This is the most important and most steadily decreasing category, as it is honestly not that large anymore, as most of the animals have been put in allready.
Its about thouse very iconic animals, that just shouldnt be missing in your zoo game, as well as animals needed to properly build for a certain region. All of these animals chare that they either are still very common in zoos or have been in the past, for example not even half of all zoos that had polarbears in the past still keep them, but they are still an iconic zoo animal.
They also mostly come from underdeveloped regions or animal categories, but also have enough stand alone appeal, that they not only cover holes in the roster, but also are strong inclusions on their own, even if their niche wouldnt be contested in the game.
A good example would be the pelican, as we allready have a common aquatic bird with the flamingo, but the pelicans would shine so greatly, that even though their niche is allready coverd it would be an amazing pick. Good for them that just one species of waterfowl doesnt take away from them to much, or we would see them in a later category.
Most of the time we see them as the seller animals of their packs and there only has been one pack without one.
Some of my example picks would be the red deer, a lynx, emu, a wallaby, a pelican, african dwarf goats and the racoon.
Needed if they can make them work
These are the animals everybody would want, but would the current gameplay machaniks either to be overhauled or completly new ones.
The most obvious ones would be flying birds, with animals like the scarlet macaw and the snowy owl as must have picks, but also most notably gibbons with brachiation and in theorie also fully aquatic animals, but we will get to them.
Good Choice to flesh out a certain thing
Next on the priority list are animals, that could be overlooked in general and dont scream for being included like above, but they would nicly fill out a missing niche in the game, making it hard to argue against them. For example, the De Brazas Monkey is a fine monkey and animal to add in general, but becomes really, really good in the context that we just have one other tropical small monkey and none from africa, where their unique traits like being common in zoos, monogamie and living in the aquatic biome, give them an edge over other monkeys for this spot.
Another good example would be the Himalayan Tahr, which is also nothing special standalone, but with the lack of alpine animals and caprins, but already having three other himalayan animals, it would nicly fit into the game as the main prey species of the snow leopard and one of the few animals that likes to casually chill on mount everrest.
Some examples would be de Brazas Monkey, Himalayan Thar, White-faced-whistling-duck, Mara, Aadax, Collared peccary.
Standalone Animals that would be nice to have
Next tier, we have the capybaras of this world, the maned wolfs and the red river hogs.
Animals, that either already have their niche coverd (we have both an african and a tropical swine), already have alot of relatives in the game (hello canids) or simply are popular enough on their own, without actually feeling like they are crucually missing (Capybara, leopards).
These animals would be amazing to have and would be very fun addition, but are not necessarily needed, as we could have a complete feeling zoo game without them and they also dont cover some glaring holes in the roster, but they are just to darn cool to leave out. Their stand alone appeal is what makes them so desireable to be in the game, eventhough it wouldnt help to flesh the game out as much as other picks.
Some examples would be the capybara, leopard, maned wolf, red river hog, walrus.
Nice to have, okay Animal
These animals are just okay, neither needed because of their unique niche, nor popular enough to be somewhat needed just to satisfy lots of people.
They are all fine choices stand alone and often even good filler animals, but most people wouldnt get excited seeing a dlc only with them.
Often these animals are either already related to animals in the game or just not very exciting on their own.
A good example would be the american aligator, who many people wernt excited for, but because of the fact that they are distinct looking and very common in zoos a good choice on paper.
Important to say is, that this doesnt equal bad animal, as they can still be great, just simply not as needed in the game as other animals might have been.
The aligator again is a good example for that, as they look stunning and bring nice representation to the hot swamps of florida, while we at the same time already have 3 other crocodilians, making their niche not only contested, but pretty much coverd.
Most "reskins" or like we should call them as low effort animals would fall into this subsection.
Nice to have, but could have been something else or even worse, contest the spot of another, better suited animal.
Examples would be american black bear, cojote, jackal, white tailed deer, most south saharan antelopes, european brownbear.
Controversial Inclusions
We reached the spicy zone. These are animals that have both arguments for and against their Inclusion, mostly logistical or ethical.
These mostly include fully aquatic animals, cetaceans and domestic animals, but also very rare but unique animals like the probuscis monkey, which have both strong pro and cons.
Bad choices
Lastly, we have animals that shouldnt be in the game, with a majority and at times even the developer saying no, making it less controversial and more a shouldnt happen.
These animals are mostly not existant in zoos, without unique features that put them over similar, but actually held in zoos animals.
These include extinct, mythical and non existant animals, or for a living animal the saola.
So what do you guys think?
Anything i forgot?
Any animals that you would put into these categories?
Cant wait to see what you guys think ^^
