I really love the JP franchise starting with the books and I do work with parks and nature conservation and loved the design-ideas of the JPW park, as it constantly reminds me of the real thing. You did a great job on that. The movies are much to clean.^^
The only thing, what really bugs me is the not up to date dinosaur designs.
I think it is a missed opportunity, even from a game perspective to not go with the current research or even take a step ahead.
You made a genetic monster DLC. Why not going with feathers? Could be optional.
What is a stand out for me is the size of the Torosaurus in comparison to the Triceratops.
With the Pachycephalosaurus you can see the relation of the regarding dinosaurs even if they run still by other names. But I can not even put a Triceratops in there, because that looks to me like a 2 meter big baby next to an adult.^^ That is to me like in old movies where a cheetah runs through the picture and everybody cries: Leopard.^^
As I bought the game I thought you will go with the 3 different departments in 3 different directions, so that you can go with the park by 3 settings:
Entertainment – where you have the movie versions and monsters and pet zoos and whatever (everything that is fun with dinosaurs)
Security – a kind of military/hunter park; with safaris and cage fights (the brutal aspects of nature etc. that serve humans in a kind of SciFi direction)
Science - that focus on the natur-scientific perception (where we are dealing here with animals that are complex organisms)
I would have been very much interested in the last aspect of course^^, but even if that is never going to happen, that would still work with the current game.
The decoration DLC will come, but I think more about the habitat/park requirements.
Like:
Where does the food come from?
In JP you have a hole in the ground. In reality there are truck loads of food that have to be prepared.
There are multiple options of a whole infrastructure (even fictional ones).
Who takes care of the habitats?
That are man-made biotope, like a fish-tank. Some fish-tanks might not care if you leave them for 6 month; but that can go wrong very fast.
Then dinos require grassland or forest.
Yes, animals can adjust, but nobody gets onto the idea to put the polar bears into a forest in a zoo.
There could be multiple forest options, swamps, grasslands (savanna), deserts etc. with another infrastructure for plants you have to research.
And finally entertainment and that is a huge option for behaviour (even fictional ones).
How do the dinosaurs clean themselves? Mud pits? Water? Trees got broken down?
How long does it take for a predator till he knows his habitat?
You have animals with horns. The possibilities you can do in a game with this, based on reality.^^
We come up constantly with stuff to entertain animals, even in zoos, that go into a different direction and try to avoid as much contact to humans as possible.
And in that realistic-frame context:
At the moment the game does not reward you if you do something for your dinos.
You need the minimum requirements to not have them run amok. That is your reward.
But what is the reward if you go the extra mile?
That is like if that would be a zoo, you put a tiger in a tiny cage, modify it genetically and the tiger is happy.
And the one that builds a tiger habitat so that we will still have tigers on planet earth, gets even punished, if the dinos do not see each other.
JW is contradictory to our whole wild-life conservation and treatment of animals.^^
The first game, at least gave that feeling a little bit, that we are still dealing here with animals. They rewareded you if you put the right plants up and the dinos worked if you let them run free.
It is a of course a game and fiction and the franchise went its way, but that is, to me, a missed opportunity and I take my chance (my brother is a big elite fan and of your company and told me you look through the boards) to voice it.^^
Thank you for your time.
The only thing, what really bugs me is the not up to date dinosaur designs.
I think it is a missed opportunity, even from a game perspective to not go with the current research or even take a step ahead.
You made a genetic monster DLC. Why not going with feathers? Could be optional.
What is a stand out for me is the size of the Torosaurus in comparison to the Triceratops.
With the Pachycephalosaurus you can see the relation of the regarding dinosaurs even if they run still by other names. But I can not even put a Triceratops in there, because that looks to me like a 2 meter big baby next to an adult.^^ That is to me like in old movies where a cheetah runs through the picture and everybody cries: Leopard.^^
As I bought the game I thought you will go with the 3 different departments in 3 different directions, so that you can go with the park by 3 settings:
Entertainment – where you have the movie versions and monsters and pet zoos and whatever (everything that is fun with dinosaurs)
Security – a kind of military/hunter park; with safaris and cage fights (the brutal aspects of nature etc. that serve humans in a kind of SciFi direction)
Science - that focus on the natur-scientific perception (where we are dealing here with animals that are complex organisms)
I would have been very much interested in the last aspect of course^^, but even if that is never going to happen, that would still work with the current game.
The decoration DLC will come, but I think more about the habitat/park requirements.
Like:
Where does the food come from?
In JP you have a hole in the ground. In reality there are truck loads of food that have to be prepared.
There are multiple options of a whole infrastructure (even fictional ones).
Who takes care of the habitats?
That are man-made biotope, like a fish-tank. Some fish-tanks might not care if you leave them for 6 month; but that can go wrong very fast.
Then dinos require grassland or forest.
Yes, animals can adjust, but nobody gets onto the idea to put the polar bears into a forest in a zoo.
There could be multiple forest options, swamps, grasslands (savanna), deserts etc. with another infrastructure for plants you have to research.
And finally entertainment and that is a huge option for behaviour (even fictional ones).
How do the dinosaurs clean themselves? Mud pits? Water? Trees got broken down?
How long does it take for a predator till he knows his habitat?
You have animals with horns. The possibilities you can do in a game with this, based on reality.^^
We come up constantly with stuff to entertain animals, even in zoos, that go into a different direction and try to avoid as much contact to humans as possible.
And in that realistic-frame context:
At the moment the game does not reward you if you do something for your dinos.
You need the minimum requirements to not have them run amok. That is your reward.
But what is the reward if you go the extra mile?
That is like if that would be a zoo, you put a tiger in a tiny cage, modify it genetically and the tiger is happy.
And the one that builds a tiger habitat so that we will still have tigers on planet earth, gets even punished, if the dinos do not see each other.
JW is contradictory to our whole wild-life conservation and treatment of animals.^^
The first game, at least gave that feeling a little bit, that we are still dealing here with animals. They rewareded you if you put the right plants up and the dinos worked if you let them run free.
It is a of course a game and fiction and the franchise went its way, but that is, to me, a missed opportunity and I take my chance (my brother is a big elite fan and of your company and told me you look through the boards) to voice it.^^
Thank you for your time.
