Does it? I seem to remember it only covering Canada/US East Coast, Europe, and Siberia. Been a while since I checked though. Unless they updated it stealthily?
Completing Zoo Tycoon 2: How far we've come?
- Thread starter yoav_r
- Start date
Anyone with access to the game can check?
Covers the entire range including India, Arabia and Mexico.
Well, there you go. Cheers Callum.
Is caos. Embrace it.
Don't remind me of that abomination...
Kidding, but seriously, I wish it was more consistent
Would be pretty nice to get those in one Pack. What is the third one though? The Sea Otter? I'm used to the Radical Remake Versions of most Zoo Tycoon 2 Animals.
Walrus and Sea Otter (hopefully with Kelp in the DLC or Update) are both Must haves for me
This would be a banger Tundra pack.
If you have ever looked into the mess that is the zoopedia in the zoo tycoon game there is a level of subjectivity both because of changes in classification and just poor practice within the games.
for example at the time zoo tycoon was made the African forest elephant and African savannah elephant where one species the African elephant. s\so when plant zoo added the savannah elephant it was not adding the same animal as zoo tycoon this gets worse when the naming is off such as the lowland gorilla which isnt a recognised name based on the time period it and the zoopedia it likely was supposed to represent the singular gorilla species which again at the time was one species with three subspecies the western lowland eastern lowland and mountain these were directly mentioned in the zoopedia with a focus on the eastern lowland. So for the gorilla you could interpret it as representing all gorilla then planet zoo included one same if it is specifically representing the lowland species which it has half of. But there is also the interpretation that it is specifically the eastern lowland which planet zoo doesnt have. There are plenty of animals like this ones with conflicting names or otherwise conflicting information it is even evident in this thread as the original post just says elephant seal which is the name 1 gave the animal but the zoopedia identifies the 2 species exists and provides the scientific name of the northern elephant seal and zoo tycoon 1 the sea otter is named the sea otter and the southern sea otter interchangeably in the zoopedia making it seem like in represents the subspecies but it only gives the species scientific names.
zoo tycoon whilst every animal has a scientific name this does not make it better one because of taxonomic changes resulting name changes and speciation the worst example I can find is the greater flamingo which at the time the game was made the greater flamingo and American flamingo where one species but 2 separate subspecies under the name greater flamingo zoo tycoon 2s flamingo based entirely off the scientific name is actually the American flamingo but the ingame model and range suggest its the greater. There are also 2 cases of an animal not existing. The gemsbok which uses a subspecies that doesnt seemed to be recognised oryx gazella gazella which was likley a distinction made to keep the gemsbok separate from the east african oryx which was once part of the gemsbok species. The african warthog ingame uses the scientific name phacochoerus,africanus,aetheopicus which is seemingly meaningless at the time the 2 warthog species could of been considered the same species which would have been phacochoerus,aetheopicus with africanus being a valid subspecies name under this method and would have been what we considered the common warthog species now. If you take the name as being a subspecies of common warthog the subspeices name aetheopicus for the common warthog doesnt seem to exist as far as I know but it does for the desert warthog. africanus does exist as a valid subspecies for the common warthog so either they they made up a subspecies got the subspecies name wrong or reversed the subspecies and species name resulting in a completely different species. It is also important that the subspecies given to the gray wolf in 2 is currently debated as being either a red wolf subspecies or its own species the eastern wolf.
Basically yes its almost impossible to write a completely objective comparison but I think this one comes close with the exception that it forgot the mountain gorilla a subspecies of a different gorilla species than what we have ingame I am currently working on a much more comprehensive comparison chart also including the xbox version and the games are a nightmare to sift through.
nothing about the game is consistent dont get me wrong it is far better than pervious zoo games but the fact that i can think of at least 3 animals that have a subspecies name in their zoopedia but it isnt their actual name like the urssuri dhole, northern diamondback terrapin and plains bison and also the fact that they give the king penguin a subspecies that doesnt really make sense.
I think you missed my point.
The choices each individual makes in what animals they want or don't want is always going to be subjective. There is no objective blanket-answer that makes everyone happy. In the case of this thread, the discussion around 'reasonable substitutes' boils down to the OP's own subjective views on what a reasonable substitute is. As I demonstrated, I disagree that there is such a thing as a 'reasonable substitute' because for me, each animal is what it is and it isn't anything else (whether that's at the species level, subspecies level, or subpopulation level).
For example, one might consider the western lowland gorilla a substitute for the mountain gorilla, because they're both "gorillas", but to me the distinction between the two is enough to say that the mountain gorilla isn't covered. I don't want the mountain gorilla, and I one hundred percent disagree with the notion that we should be striving to "complete" the Zoo Tycoon roster, but I'd never consider it complete without the mountain gorilla.
That is my view on it, which is, as every other view, completely subjective and based on my own criteria.
yeah I did miss you point but my idea still stands and I think it addresses the person you were quoting more than it does you. I also fully agree with your statement reasonable substitutes has no objective measure it is entirely subjective. I also agree there is no reasonable substitutes as it is either yes that animal was included or no it wasn't the only expectation being subspecies vs species dynamics.
Last edited:
It's a bit more glaring regarding the wolf. Had they just left it as timber wolf (or gray wolf, as it should've been called in the 1st place), it wouldn't be so weird. But they added the gray wolf type species, then they added 1 (2 if you count the dingo) gray wolf subspecies. So, it's basically repeating the same animal 3 times, on paper.
At least the dhole, terrapin, and bison can get away with it, but the wolf...
To be fair, that was scrapped at your suggestion, for an objective species-level missing list.
Ussuri Dhole doesn't even make Sense in the South East Asia Pack
Ussuri Dhole doesnt make sense in general as its also not kept in zoos.
The reason why it was chosen is most likly that its the nominate subspecies of the dhole
Still makes no sense. It is possibly extcint subspecies/population from Russia (lol)
At least model is burmese dhole. Person responsible for zoopedia copied wikipedia without much thinking.
Didn't even know that