Arctic wolves: My humble opinion

tigris115 · Dec 13, 2019

So of the 4 animals announced for the Arctic DLC, the Arctic wolf is the most strongly disliked due to it being a mere subspecies of the gray wolf we already have in the game. So for this, I propose 3 changes that should make people happier

1. Instead of the Arctic wolf, make an Arctic fox. This is an animal that's decently unique in that in terms of model and rig, is easily distinguishable from the other base roster animals.

2. Give the ingame wolves a specific subspecies like with the big cats. I propose the Northwestern wolf (Canis lupus occidentalis)

Northwestern wolf - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

3. Give the timber wolves more color variation. Wolves have insane color variation, including white, gray, black, brown, and anything and everything in between. This will compliment the new pack patch beautifully and will make breeding very exciting.

Andy Vega · Dec 13, 2019

Think it's to late for them to change the arctic wolf to an arctic fox but I do agree they should give the wolf different patterns

DrBurrito · Dec 13, 2019

I don't know about replacing, because I like variety, but having an Arctic Fox someday would be great!

Making new rigs and animations is quite costly. Therefore instead of removing "clone" animals from DLC's but keeping them can actually increase the chances of new rigs in the future. It's not like you have to choose one. Having both actually can be more profitable/doable from a financial standpoint.

So, I'm 100% pro-variety even if that means more "clones" in the future, as long as those funds are then invested in making fresh models and animations.

NZFanatic · Dec 13, 2019

The Northwestern wolf and the Arctic wolf have enough overlap in territory and range that one North American wolf is enough. In my own thread I suggested making it the Eurasian wolf, since the timber wolf was clearly only made 'generic' to add a European animal anyway.

deinonychus110 · Dec 13, 2019

Not an expert on wolf taxonomy but I guess a few model edits can change the current wolf into a Eurasian wolf
Real Eurasian wolf for reference

NZFanatic · Dec 13, 2019

DrBurrito said:
I don't know about replacing, because I like variety, but having an Arctic Fox someday would be great!

Making new rigs and animations is quite costly. Therefore instead of removing "clone" animals from DLC's but keeping them can actually increase the chances of new rigs in the future. It's not like you have to choose one. Having both actually can be more profitable/doable from a financial standpoint.

So, I'm 100% pro-variety even if that means more "clones" in the future, as long as those funds are then invested in making fresh models and animations.

I have no problem with copy-paste animals. The Bengal and Siberian tigers are both nice additions to a zoo, and I would love to see the Sumatran added at some point, and certainly I want to see Asiatic lions make their way in (and more - Rothschild's giraffe, Chapman's zebra with its brown shadow-stripes, the black-and-white ruffed lemur). I personally think the biggest problem with the Arctic wolf is that, indeed, we technically already have the Arctic wolf since the timber wolf covers all the grey wolves. What I and others would like to see is the timber wolf localised into a different subspecies (for me, the Eurasian, since I believe it was intended to be a European animal anyway).

Frankly a remodel isn't even necessary, not really. Perhaps a size adjustment, but I'd be happy if they just rewrote the zoopedia, changed the map, and changed the animal's name to Eurasian wolf. The rest of it is fine, or at least a close enough approximation that it makes no difference.

tigris115 · Dec 13, 2019

tbh, I'd only be down with the Asiatic lion if the West African lion was renamed into a different subspecies as with the current 2 subspecies model of Northern and Southern lions, Asiatics and West Africans would be the same thing.

So what I would do is use the Southern lion as the new name for stock lions and in a later DLC, represent P. leo leo with the Gujarat lions.

Sheep · Dec 13, 2019

I'm in love white the white wolf<3 To me, as long as they look different enough, shape or color-wise, I don't mind how they are classified.
I much prefer this over the two brown bears or the near identical Thomson's gazelle and springboks.

DrBurrito · Dec 14, 2019

NZFanatic said:
I have no problem with copy-paste animals. The Bengal and Siberian tigers are both nice additions to a zoo, and I would love to see the Sumatran added at some point, and certainly I want to see Asiatic lions make their way in (and more - Rothschild's giraffe, Chapman's zebra with its brown shadow-stripes, the black-and-white ruffed lemur). I personally think the biggest problem with the Arctic wolf is that, indeed, we technically already have the Arctic wolf since the timber wolf covers all the grey wolves. What I and others would like to see is the timber wolf localised into a different subspecies (for me, the Eurasian, since I believe it was intended to be a European animal anyway).

Frankly a remodel isn't even necessary, not really. Perhaps a size adjustment, but I'd be happy if they just rewrote the zoopedia, changed the map, and changed the animal's name to Eurasian wolf. The rest of it is fine, or at least a close enough approximation that it makes no difference.

I know the pain, this is something I have been campaigning about since the beginning, in both my thread and others.

Just wanted to point out to a different aspect of game development (budget), and that having both might be more plausible instead of removing one as the OP suggested.

DrBurrito · Dec 14, 2019

tigris115 said:
tbh, I'd only be down with the Asiatic lion if the West African lion was renamed into a different subspecies as with the current 2 subspecies model of Northern and Southern lions, Asiatics and West Africans would be the same thing.

So what I would do is use the Southern lion as the new name for stock lions and in a later DLC, represent P. leo leo with the Gujarat lions.

We already have two different populations of the mainland tiger, so that wouldn't be very different if we had two northern lions, with the exception of habitat in the case of the tigers.

DrBurrito · Dec 14, 2019

Miken said:
I'm in love white the white wolf<3 To me, as long as they look different enough, shape or color-wise, I don't mind how they are classified.
I much prefer this over the two brown bears or the near identical Thomson's gazelle and springboks.

Similarity is all relative. If you are used to something more, you will notice the differences easier. For instance springbok and Thomson's gazelle are morphologically more different than any subspecies/populations in the game (brown bears, tigers, wolves), yet to you they look almost identical. To someone else it can be the exact opposite. Like I said, it's all relative.

chloeismagic · Dec 14, 2019

I wonder how they will treat breeding with timber wolves/arctic wolves, because they are the same species so shouldn't they be able to breed? and then what will the babies end up being, timber wolf or arctic wolf, it would be weird if they couldn't interbreed, they have created a bit of a problem for themselves making them separate animals.

tigris115 · Dec 14, 2019

DrBurrito said:
We already have two different populations of the mainland tiger, so that wouldn't be very different if we had two northern lions, with the exception of habitat in the case of the tigers.

There was a paper that refuted the whole mainland tiger thing. It's still a mess but it ain't 2 subspecies.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982218312144 (probs need scihub)

NZFanatic · Dec 14, 2019

tigris115 said:
There was a paper that refuted the whole mainland tiger thing. It's still a mess but it ain't 2 subspecies.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982218312144 (probs need scihub)

Fascinating read, thanks for sharing.

DrBurrito · Dec 15, 2019

tigris115 said:
There was a paper that refuted the whole mainland tiger thing. It's still a mess but it ain't 2 subspecies.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982218312144 (probs need scihub)

Currently there are two viewpoints on the subject, it is either a single subspecies of mainland tiger or two. Since the single mainland tiger subspecies view has become the generally accepted one for now, I used that one as reference.

However, in science, what is generally accepted changes over time and rather quickly. With most large mammals around the globe "losing" their subspecies every year, we might even have the subspecific genetic difference threshold lowered in the future, you never know.

Plus, games like this don't really have the status or position to debate or pick from alternate theories, thus should go with the status quo for that point in time. After all, if any of it changes in the future, all they have to do is just switch a word or two with any upcoming patch.

NZFanatic · Dec 15, 2019

DrBurrito said:
Plus, games like this don't really have the status or position to debate or pick from alternate theories, thus should go with the status quo for that point in time. After all, if any of it changes in the future, all they have to do is just switch a word or two with any upcoming patch.

You're suggesting that "popularly accepted in the scientific community" and "popularly accepted in general" are the same thing. While I agree that this game should go with the most up-to-date classifications (and change depending on what those are), the tiger question is still entirely up for debate, so it's worth it for Frontier to separate them into their constituent populations (not to mention, some studies are now suggesting the Sumatran tigers belong to a different species entirely, let alone a subspecies).

DrBurrito · Dec 15, 2019

NZFanatic said:
You're suggesting that "popularly accepted in the scientific community" and "popularly accepted in general" are the same thing. While I agree that this game should go with the most up-to-date classifications (and change depending on what those are), the tiger question is still entirely up for debate, so it's worth it for Frontier to separate them into their constituent populations (not to mention, some studies are now suggesting the Sumatran tigers belong to a different species entirely, let alone a subspecies).

That's not at all what I am suggesting. What I said was Frontier should go with what is "popularly accepted in the scientific community" until there is a consensus on the new debate, which can take years.

Crea_TivELA · Dec 16, 2019

The animals are okay for me, even when feels like a recolored version of other animals which are already in the game.

A complete new type of animal which would be the fox needs more time I think and there was not much time for it.
They had to finish a DLC somehow before christmas to release it and it was not their decision to put these animals in the DLC, these are the animals they could finish in the time after release.

Maybe the fox and other missing arctic animals will apear in a second arctic DLC.

I decide if I buy it, when I see the building pieces

I'm not sure yet. Even when the 4 new animals look amiable, it feels a little bit wrong.

I hope they have more time for future DLCs with european, australian and asian animals (and it's not about "just 4 animals" like the discussion in the Update thread showed off... if there would be really new ones like the fox I would be very happy to pay for it... but this way, the animals are already in the game just with another fur, eye color and sounds... with other horns.... and this makes me feel a little bit

).

Oh and the thing with the wolf... to only change the name to euresian would be a little bit wrong too... they can live in the cold yes, but the fur is much fewer, they are more brown than gray, most if them live in european woods not in tundra and they live even in hot areas like spain... since they also hunt other animals, their head shape is a little more pointed... while the gray wolf/timber wolf has a rounder face and muxh more fur, because he even lives in very cold areas (like the artic wolf)... so yes it's weird, but just to change the name,to something other close would be the wrong way... europeans would mind.

So they would have to make more changes to make the current northamerican wolf, european. I don't think they wanted to have it european and changed it later to the gray/timber wolf... we now habe the northamerican one and the artic one... both love the gold windy weather and share some spaces where theycan live... the same goes for tigers, jaguars an leopards... they kind of different, they share kind if the same space, they are all cats... but they are a bit different in size, how they live and what they hunt and how the fur the head, the jaw and theeth look different - the same applies to the various wolf breeds on the different continents (don't forget asia! ^^).

xTosca · Dec 16, 2019

tigris115 said:
tbh, I'd only be down with the Asiatic lion if the West African lion was renamed into a different subspecies as with the current 2 subspecies model of Northern and Southern lions, Asiatics and West Africans would be the same thing.

So what I would do is use the Southern lion as the new name for stock lions and in a later DLC, represent P. leo leo with the Gujarat lions.

This makes no sense. Asiatic lions are definitely not at all the same thing as West African lions. Asiatic lions come from India. West African lions come from Africa. Two entirely different things.

NZFanatic · Dec 16, 2019

Crea_TivELA said:
Oh and the thing with the wolf... to only change the name to euresian would be a little bit wrong too... they can live in the cold yes, but the fur is much fewer, they are more brown than gray, most if them live in european woods not in tundra and they live even in hot areas like spain... since they also hunt other animals, their head shape is a little more pointed... while the gray wolf/timber wolf has a rounder face and muxh more fur, because he even lives in very cold areas (like the artic wolf)... so yes it's weird, but just to change the name,to something other close would be the wrong way... europeans would mind.

Well, you're completely wrong here.

The Eurasian wolf is not distinct from the "timber/grey wolf" - it is a subspecies. The timber wolf, Arctic wolf, Eurasian wolf, Indian wolf, domestic dog, dingo; they are all the exact same species. Morphological differences between the different wolf subspecies are insignificant when talking about wild wolves. You can't say it would be "weird" but also say you're fine with the Arctic wolf being a straight recolour of the timber wolf. They are not separate animals; they are the same animal.