Attractiveness & Statistics

[FunnyLiz]

There are two topics that bother me right now:

Attractiveness of the different Animals:
I understand that a tiger is more popular than a flamingo, but why should i place flamingos in my Zoo?
I placed them in a nice corner in my Zoo but all of the visitors only want to see my tiger. Better than the tiger is the lion. So then all of the visitors want to see the lion. Why should I keep the Tiger in my Zoo anymore? Its a pity that the "unpopular" animals have no value than the popular. Visitors often walk past the unpopular animals. What about Baby-Animals? There is no effect in the attractiveness if an "unpopular" animal gets a baby. So why should I place them in my Zoo? Is there a way to balance this better? Make Baby-Animals more worthier. So also the Flamingo can have a lot of vitisitors!

Statistics:
I want so see more Details of my Shops. What kind of Product is sold the most? What is the effect of making my Frites more salty? There are no Informations about this? Is there a way to manage my shops better with more informations? This should be possible i think!

It would be great if this things will be included in the Game !!

 

[Roxxsmom]

I've had trouble understanding why baby animals are so unappealing to guests, since they are big draws in real-life zoos. I guess there's a conflict between setting up baby animals to have a higher appeal than they will once mature and the programming which allows individual animals to build more appeal the longer they are on display. Still, some species never seem to get many viewers, even after being in the zoo for years, and the larger the zoo gets, the more certain enclosures seem to get ignored. I set up a gorgeous wolf enclosure, similar in concept to the "wolf woods" at the Brookfield Zoo in Chicago, but even with a skyway station right there, restrooms, snack bars etc. nearby, it was mostly tumbleweeds and crickets along the viewing paths and areas. I've found guests are really indifferent to zebras, antelope etc. unless there are also giraffes or elephants in the enclosure with them.

It does help if you situate the less popular animals closer to the zoo entrance, or en route to more popular exhibits. Some guests will stop to look at the peacocks or flamingos if they are walking by. But of course then you get an issue with crowd congestion, and the flamingos are really shy and always get stressed if they are in a central area. I think animals that are both shy and low appeal are more trouble than they are worth if you are playing for economics, except for your own aesthetic design purposes. Many real-life zoos have gorgeous ponds filled with flamingos and other waterfowl near their entrances, but my attempts to re-create this haven't been successful (because the flamingos are constantly stressed, even with screened areas they can hide and lots of do not disturb signs).

One problem with my wolves, in hindsight, was they were near the outer boundary of the zoo. Restrooms, snacks, and souvenir shops nearby help, but if an exhibit is out of the way, few guests have the "energy" to get all the way over there. I also noticed that one of my zoos seems to have better guest flow since the advertising boards became available. Unfortunately, an animal's native draw doesn't seem to me to be altered much by an interesting habitat design (such as a large enclosure that allows the animals to behave more naturally) in this game.

Anecdotally, setting up billboards near the entrance that are linked to further-out exhibits seems to be increasing traffic in the more peripheral parts of the zoo I've played most since the recent DLC, so I may go back to my zoo with the unsuccessful wolf exhibit and see if billboards change the issue. Still, I am still struggling to find the best balance between having viewing galleries and paths that are off the main walkways (to avoid crowd congestion) and having those side galleries and paths completely ignored by guests.

 

[Cocolori]

I personally quite like that the game reflects real life in this sense - having worked in a few real animal collections I can say that there are animals who are more of a draw and some visitors will spend most of their visit concentrating on the lions, tigers and bears (oh my!) or other iconic species. In Planet Zoo I do find the guests are distracted by less 'exciting' animals in a way I think is pretty realistic - wandering past the pangolins and deciding to explore their enclosure. One aspect they probably can't code in which is what happens in real zoos is that guests will also gravitate to the animals who happen to be awake, doing stuff and near the viewing areas. If a gorilla is sat asleep not doing much but the capuchins are going crazy then a crowd will build up at the capuchins as people get bored fast at the gorilla's enclosure. Unfortunately I doubt that can be coded in because the pathing decisions are resource intensive. I imagine the baby thing would be problematic because if you made them loads more attractive a) the species with large groups that always have babies would always have massive crowds and b) by the time the guests got across the zoo to see some of the more rapid ageing species they would probably have aged up!

What I would like to see is a stronger influence of favourites on guest behaviour - it feels like they should prioritise the animals they really want to see a bit more. Eventually in Planet Coaster they introduced guest traits (thing like thrill seekers who would want more extreme rides). I would love eventually if PZ included something like this so you could have 'reptile enthusiast' who would get more happiness, donate more and be attracted to reptile species or 'exhibit lover' as someone who wanted to see all the small critters. That would reflect real life where the majority of people go to see the big ticket animals but some weirdos (like me) ignore some of them and have their own preferences.

 

[FunnyLiz]

I've had trouble understanding why baby animals are so unappealing to guests, since they are big draws in real-life zoos. I guess there's a conflict between setting up baby animals to have a higher appeal than they will once mature and the programming which allows individual animals to build more appeal the longer they are on display. Still, some species never seem to get many viewers, even after being in the zoo for years, and the larger the zoo gets, the more certain enclosures seem to get ignored. I set up a gorgeous wolf enclosure, similar in concept to the "wolf woods" at the Brookfield Zoo in Chicago, but even with a skyway station right there, restrooms, snack bars etc. nearby, it was mostly tumbleweeds and crickets along the viewing paths and areas. I've found guests are really indifferent to zebras, antelope etc. unless there are also giraffes or elephants in the enclosure with them.

It does help if you situate the less popular animals closer to the zoo entrance, or en route to more popular exhibits. Some guests will stop to look at the peacocks or flamingos if they are walking by. But of course then you get an issue with crowd congestion, and the flamingos are really shy and always get stressed if they are in a central area. I think animals that are both shy and low appeal are more trouble than they are worth if you are playing for economics, except for your own aesthetic design purposes. Many real-life zoos have gorgeous ponds filled with flamingos and other waterfowl near their entrances, but my attempts to re-create this haven't been successful (because the flamingos are constantly stressed, even with screened areas they can hide and lots of do not disturb signs).

One problem with my wolves, in hindsight, was they were near the outer boundary of the zoo. Restrooms, snacks, and souvenir shops nearby help, but if an exhibit is out of the way, few guests have the "energy" to get all the way over there. I also noticed that one of my zoos seems to have better guest flow since the advertising boards became available. Unfortunately, an animal's native draw doesn't seem to me to be altered much by an interesting habitat design (such as a large enclosure that allows the animals to behave more naturally) in this game.

Anecdotally, setting up billboards near the entrance that are linked to further-out exhibits seems to be increasing traffic in the more peripheral parts of the zoo I've played most since the recent DLC, so I may go back to my zoo with the unsuccessful wolf exhibit and see if billboards change the issue. Still, I am still struggling to find the best balance between having viewing galleries and paths that are off the main walkways (to avoid crowd congestion) and having those side galleries and paths completely ignored by guests.

On the one hand, I think it's good that you have the same problem as me. But it's a shame that we have to deal with all of this. I will of course continue to place unattractive animals in my zoo. Just because I think they are loveley too and have to be placed in a zoo. But I think that the guests should also appreciate these animals and not only when they are on their way to an attractive animal. A flamingo or dingo is also worth paying attention to. In any case, this should still balance in the game.
Thank you for the hint with the billboards. I will also test it!!

 

[FunnyLiz]

I personally quite like that the game reflects real life in this sense - having worked in a few real animal collections I can say that there are animals who are more of a draw and some visitors will spend most of their visit concentrating on the lions, tigers and bears (oh my!) or other iconic species. In Planet Zoo I do find the guests are distracted by less 'exciting' animals in a way I think is pretty realistic - wandering past the pangolins and deciding to explore their enclosure. One aspect they probably can't code in which is what happens in real zoos is that guests will also gravitate to the animals who happen to be awake, doing stuff and near the viewing areas. If a gorilla is sat asleep not doing much but the capuchins are going crazy then a crowd will build up at the capuchins as people get bored fast at the gorilla's enclosure. Unfortunately I doubt that can be coded in because the pathing decisions are resource intensive. I imagine the baby thing would be problematic because if you made them loads more attractive a) the species with large groups that always have babies would always have massive crowds and b) by the time the guests got across the zoo to see some of the more rapid ageing species they would probably have aged up!

What I would like to see is a stronger influence of favourites on guest behaviour - it feels like they should prioritise the animals they really want to see a bit more. Eventually in Planet Coaster they introduced guest traits (thing like thrill seekers who would want more extreme rides). I would love eventually if PZ included something like this so you could have 'reptile enthusiast' who would get more happiness, donate more and be attracted to reptile species or 'exhibit lover' as someone who wanted to see all the small critters. That would reflect real life where the majority of people go to see the big ticket animals but some weirdos (like me) ignore some of them and have their own preferences.

That is the point! It should be possible that a visitor really wanted to see an animal, he should go there. No matter how far the way is. In Zoo Tycoon 2 there was the Point "Favourite animal" the guests wanted to see this animal, regardless of whether it was a beaver or a lion. I still miss that a lot in the game and I hope that will be added. It just has to be possible that even less attractive animals have their worth. Of course, it's similar to real zoos. But I want to build my dream zoo here and I would also like to be able to have a habitat-highlight in the zoo where an attractive animal does not necessarily live in. Like Roxxsmom`s wolf enclosure. That just has to be possible in the game. For example with the photo hotspots like in Planet coaster. So you can create attention to other habitats.

 

[Roxxsmom]

One thing that may be missing from games in general would be the variance in individual preferences. It's true that more people overall want to see the gorillas, pandas, and lions than the warthogs, hyenas, flamingos etc. But there will always be a small percentage of people who love one or more of the less exotic or "charismatic" animals because, well just because. I don't know enough about programming to say if it's feasible to have some kind of a randomizer for individually spawned guests, so a handful will always adore a particularly unpopular animal and go straight for that enclosure or exhibit.

I do wish the exhibit animals were more of a draw in the game. In real zoos, "reptile houses" are very popular, but the ones I've created have generally been mostly crickets and tumbleweeds with very few donations. Maybe having several exhibits in proximity could produce some sort of "collective" draw that wouldn't occur with one all by itself.

 

[Kolikokoli]

That's why I only keep "unpopular" animals lol, I love me some flamingos.

 

[Roxxsmom]

That's why I only keep "unpopular" animals lol, I love me some flamingos.

Me too. They're gorgeous. I still remember an article about how zoos handle hurricanes from a few years back. They have to improvise very quickly to shelter their animals safely. In one big storm many years back, a zoo in Miami put their flamingos in one of the public restrooms/lavatories, and the birds were fascinated with the mirrors. The picture of them jostling one another to get to the vanity area is pretty funny.

I linked the article in case anyone is interested. Disaster preparedness is actually a part of the accreditation requirements for zoos and aquariums. Uh oh, I hope I didn't give the developers any ideas for future game features. Now I'm thinking of Sim City and the various disasters that always seemed to descend, just as you got your city in the black and operating smoothly.

npr article on zoos and hurricanes