Change Zoo Biome

[Pleo]

Hi everyone! This may sound like a strange suggestion, but I have built a zoo and feel that a different biome would suit it more. If it's possible, I think it would be a neat addition to the game that allows players to see their creations on a different background. Especially for indecisive players like me. Haha.

 

[wilperegrine]

I think part of the realism of zoo management is dealing with the physical decisions you've made for your zoo. You can always blueprint things you've created that work well and then use them in a future zoo in the appropriate biome.

 

[LN]

You could change backgrounds and biomes in Planco after you started a park. Wouldnt mind seeing that in Planet Zoo as well.

 

[wilperegrine]

What if there were simply more background options when choosing a biome? The trouble I have with this suggestion is that you're placing your zoo in a particular biome/location. So to change that, you're either somehow magically turning your Canadian zoo into a desert biome, or you're wholesale picking up an entire zoo and moving it to another location, both of which ruin some of the realism of this simulator for me. One of the challenges of the game is creating habitats for animals taken out of their natural biome. You eliminate that challenge if you can simply change your biome at a whim.

 

[markun]

I would like to change the backgrounds at least. I’d love to make a snowy zoo on the Baltic coast of northern Sweden. There’s snow but there aren’t huge mountains. In fact most cold places where there are populations enough to sustain a zoo don’t have huge mountains looming over them.

 

[wilperegrine]

I agree with this wholeheartedly! There should be more options for backgrounds (and layout, e.g., rivers, coastlines) when creating a new zoo.

I would like to change the backgrounds at least. I’d love to make a snowy zoo on the Baltic coast of northern Sweden. There’s snow but there aren’t huge mountains. In fact most cold places where there are populations enough to sustain a zoo don’t have huge mountains looming over them.

 

[Pleo]

I dunno, I don't see the game in such a serious light I just think it would be neat to have the freedom to see the zoo I made in a different biome. Especially when I spent hours and hours making buildings and structures and placing them so meticulously that it'd be hard to save them as blueprints and place them into another map the same way, at least for me personally. It gets sort of messy and tedious when the buildings you made have pieces that were split from the group and such. Different backgrounds or even seasons would be nice as well.

 

[markun]

Thinking about I’d like to be able to change the biome. I have downloaded a taiga map but would like to have it in tundra for example.

Or at least manually control temperature in sandbox. It’s all very well having snow but the only map where it can stick and have blue sky is tundra. It would make sense to allow colder temperatures and snow on the ground in other biomes.

 

[wilperegrine]

So it would make sense for your desert map to be in the tundra? Or it would make sense for your desert map to be able to have snow year round? Sorry, I'm not following this at all other than to say that it DOES make sense that you can artificially lower the temperature of your entire zoom in any biome with coolers (which are currently available in the game).

 

[markun]

So it would make sense for your desert map to be in the tundra? Or it would make sense for your desert map to be able to have snow year round? Sorry, I'm not following this at all other than to say that it DOES make sense that you can artificially lower the temperature of your entire zoom in any biome with coolers (which are currently available in the game).

Personally I wouldn’t switch a desert zoo to tundra. Specifically I’d like to switch a taiga zoo I downloaded to tundra. Not an especially radical switch.

But this is a game and given we can have pretend digital floating islands in the sky I don’t think switching the biome of a pretend digital zoo to another biome is an especially controversial prospect. I’m not sure why you find it so problematic, no one will force you to use that theoretical option if you don’t want it.

Personally it doesn’t make sense to have to place pretend digital artificial coolers around my pretend digital zoo that is already in a mountainous setting to stop the pretend digital snow from melting.

 

[wilperegrine]

Part of the entire premise of the game is to make suitable habitats for animals in a fairly realistic simulation. Animals are happy (or not) based on temperature and the native biome of the plants around them. Part of the premise of franchise play is to build zoos in different biomes, based on their real world geographic location. Maybe your suggestions make sense in sandbox mode, but it would render several aspects of the game meaningless if you can switch biomes, temperatures, etc. on a whim. We're talking about rules of the game, not just you wanting to switch between tundra and taiga. If you can change biomes in the game, then yes, that means allowing people to make radical changes to effectively render the word 'biome' meaningless.

Why else does this bother me? Because the game is intended to promote conservation and awareness that things like temperature, humidity, and habitat DO matter. Because planning and resource management are integral parts of the game (including the resources one must invest to alter a habitat to make it suitable for an animal). If you can effectively nullify these aspects of the game, then it's just drawing pretty pictures in a 3D space with digital tools. Either your biome choice matters or it doesn't. Personally, I'm glad Frontier Games has created a game that says, "Yes, it matters."

 

[markun]

The fact is we have sandbox mode which makes lots of your points moot. It’s up to you how you play the game and I play it my way. I only play in sandbox. And I can assure you that animals in captivity have no concept of native flora.

Nonetheless, if you switched a biome then animals which were previously content could prove to be unhappy and vice verse.

I won’t labour this point but just because a feature doesn’t fit with your view of how the game should be played doesn’t mean others should also be restricted.

 

[wilperegrine]

Similarly, just because the current structure and premise of the game doesn't fit with how you'd like to play the game doesn't mean the game should be dramatically altered and potentially spoiled for others. This is kind of the point I'm trying to make.

I can see your point of view about having more flexibility when playing in sandbox. I do think more variety in background choice would be nice (especially in sandbox!) But I do wish people would think more about the repercussions of game mechanics, if for instance, the entire biome of a zoo can be changed. It makes more sense to me to make suggestions that give you a lot of what you want without fundamentally changing the game's premise.

 

[markun]

Similarly, just because the current structure and premise of the game doesn't fit with how you'd like to play the game doesn't mean the game should be dramatically altered and potentially spoiled for others. This is kind of the point I'm trying to make.

No one will be forced to take advantage of this functionality. If you don’t want to use it it will have absolutely no impact on your game playing experience.

 

[shirandhak]

A probable alternative would be coolers/heaters you wouldn't need to spam and "decorate" your habitat every few steps with. Especially in a polarbear-habitat. lol
That's just one reason for never building a polarbear-habitat.

 

[wilperegrine]

If you don’t want to use it it will have absolutely no impact on your game playing experience.

Giving players choices they didn't have previously DOES impact their game-playing experience (because choice affects decision-making, especially when it affects the importance of other related decisions); and in a game where you can visit other people's zoos and other people's zoos affect what animals are available on a shared market, yes, it would affect my game-playing experience—and everyone else's perception of the importance when choosing a zoo location.

Not to mention, game functionality. What you describe would be a programming nightmare and rewrite for the way that Franchise currently works.

But it doesn't matter how what we want might affect things for other people, does it?

 

[Dinocanid]

This would be a pretty nice sandbox feature

 

[markun]

Not to mention, game functionality. What you describe would be a programming nightmare and rewrite for the way that Franchise currently works.

So have it only in sandbox. I still maintain it would have no impact on anyone who doesn’t want to use it. And we are now going round in circles so this will be the last have to say on the matter.

 

[NZFanatic]

Part of the entire premise of the game is to make suitable habitats for animals in a fairly realistic simulation. Animals are happy (or not) based on temperature and the native biome of the plants around them. Part of the premise of franchise play is to build zoos in different biomes, based on their real world geographic location. Maybe your suggestions make sense in sandbox mode, but it would render several aspects of the game meaningless if you can switch biomes, temperatures, etc. on a whim. We're talking about rules of the game, not just you wanting to switch between tundra and taiga. If you can change biomes in the game, then yes, that means allowing people to make radical changes to effectively render the word 'biome' meaningless.

Why else does this bother me? Because the game is intended to promote conservation and awareness that things like temperature, humidity, and habitat DO matter. Because planning and resource management are integral parts of the game (including the resources one must invest to alter a habitat to make it suitable for an animal). If you can effectively nullify these aspects of the game, then it's just drawing pretty pictures in a 3D space with digital tools. Either your biome choice matters or it doesn't. Personally, I'm glad Frontier Games has created a game that says, "Yes, it matters."

Except zoos don't mimic biomes, they replicate them.

To be honest I'm fine with the way things are for Franchise players because if you make things too easy it obviously takes away the challenge. That said, if you want to build a truly realistic zoo, the only way you can do that is in Sandbox Mode with animal welfare turned off. Why? Because real animals don't know the difference between a tropical plant or a desert plant or a temperate plant, they just see a source of shade, or a scratching post, or a safe place to go if they can climb. Real zoos also avoid putting real foliage into habitats for animals like great apes or elephants, because it becomes a financial nightmare to maintain. Real zoos exist on a civil power grid and don't require their own generators. Real zoos don't use heaters and coolers in open air, outdoor habitats because animals are far more adaptable to a certain extent than they are in the game (polar bears do absolutely fine in temperate climates, so do reindeer, and Himalayan animals).

Of course, I don't play Franchise. Relying on a good internet connection to play a game just seems silly to me, but beyond that it's a personal choice. Bottom line is, unless your zoo keeps every single species contained in a climate-controlled building of some kind, it's not going to be realistic within the current parameters of animal welfare in-game.

 

[AlexVonHumbug]

Giving players choices they didn't have previously DOES impact their game-playing experience (because choice affects decision-making, especially when it affects the importance of other related decisions); and in a game where you can visit other people's zoos and other people's zoos affect what animals are available on a shared market, yes, it would affect my game-playing experience—and everyone else's perception of the importance when choosing a zoo location.

Not to mention, game functionality. What you describe would be a programming nightmare and rewrite for the way that Franchise currently works.

But it doesn't matter how what we want might affect things for other people, does it?

that would only make sense, if biome related decissions would matter, but they dont, you can place ac erverywhere without energy-cost, because you use wind and solar anyway. biomes are therefore only cosmetic already. i also would like to change the biomes, just to know, how the zoos would look like.