Dinosaurs and extinct animals DLC

People seem to have a hard time understanding that planet zoo is not zoo tycoon 2 or 1, it doesn’t have the same creators, nor the same message. “Spiritual successor” Yes, to zoo tycoon XBOX in 2013. Not zoo tycoon 2004.

I don’t think the devs are going to add Dinos to this game, sorry. Luckily there’s another game that is a dinosaur zoo game, Prehistoric Kingdom.
 
I'm not buying dlc for 1.263.113 species :p

In most discussions (steam/reddit/this forum) a lot of people are against it and a lot who don't mind it, but won't buy it.
So there's a very large group not willing to buy this...

I agree with Aero-Bubbles, why the constant comparing with ZT1/ZT2?, that was a different developer.
Zoo Tycoon (XBOX 2013) (PC 2017) is Frontiers work...

The Prehistoric Kingdom has been said a lot.. They have a lot of extinct animals from a lot of different era's (also Holocene, they released a list).
I know, they want then en now combined but that's a very small market..

Don't expect PZ to add DLC when a different developer basically makes the same game with those animals.
In some aspects more detailed: Baby/juvenile/adult stages and different coats/skins.

And for dinos, JWE... Has been said many times..

Same goes with fantasy/mythical/marine animals (big marine), same arguments back and forth...
But even more people are against fantasy/mythical animals..
 
Prehistoric Kingdom?
Edit on-topic:
I have nothing against extinct animals, but I'd rather see more present day animals first. I would LOVE to see a unicorn (cryptid) or extinct animal added in for April fools though!
Yup! That's the game I was thinking of. Thanks!

People seem to have a hard time understanding that planet zoo is not zoo tycoon 2 or 1, it doesn’t have the same creators, nor the same message. “Spiritual successor” Yes, to zoo tycoon XBOX in 2013. Not zoo tycoon 2004.

I don’t think the devs are going to add Dinos to this game, sorry. Luckily there’s another game that is a dinosaur zoo game, Prehistoric Kingdom.
Yeah, Prehistoric Kingdom looks great so far! A jump ahead of JWE with some similarities to Planet Zoo...

One of the biggest differences between Planet Zoo and the Zoo Tycoon games (ZT1 and ZT2) is the current "standard" for DLC packs.

The extinct animals pack included 30+ animals, ~3 new fence types, 15+ new buildings/scenery items, ~6 new feeding items, ~6 new enrichment items, and ~10 new plants. It was a massive pack. And you can't expect something of that size from a DLC these days.

And given the realism of Planet Zoo? You would need these new things to make the new animals "work" within the "rules" that the developer has put in play for the game. You would need new feeding items, new plants, new facilities to accommodate the specialized research, different/specially trained staff to care for them, and Frontier would likely want to include a whole mess of new scenery items and building pieces. It's a whole lot more complicated than giving players living animals, many of which could be implemented without any additional game mechanics or building pieces. I just don't see it happening on the scale that would be required for it to really work well within the game's construct.
 
Yup! That's the game I was thinking of. Thanks!



Yeah, Prehistoric Kingdom looks great so far! A jump ahead of JWE with some similarities to Planet Zoo...

One of the biggest differences between Planet Zoo and the Zoo Tycoon games (ZT1 and ZT2) is the current "standard" for DLC packs.

The extinct animals pack included 30+ animals, ~3 new fence types, 15+ new buildings/scenery items, ~6 new feeding items, ~6 new enrichment items, and ~10 new plants. It was a massive pack. And you can't expect something of that size from a DLC these days.

And given the realism of Planet Zoo? You would need these new things to make the new animals "work" within the "rules" that the developer has put in play for the game. You would need new feeding items, new plants, new facilities to accommodate the specialized research, different/specially trained staff to care for them, and Frontier would likely want to include a whole mess of new scenery items and building pieces. It's a whole lot more complicated than giving players living animals, many of which could be implemented without any additional game mechanics or building pieces. I just don't see it happening on the scale that would be required for it to really work well within the game's construct.
Maybe if Frontier says there’s enough oks (not just yes/no ratios) for larger expansions, they’ll make the commitment to making them.
 
Maybe if Frontier says there’s enough oks (not just yes/no ratios) for larger expansions, they’ll make the commitment to making them.
I'm sure we'll get some "bigger" DLC packs (e.g., an Australian pack or an arctic pack with 3-6 new animals, 1-2 new enrichment items, new plants, and a themed building set feels feasible). Some will probably add new game mechanics and features and these will primarily add parts related to those new mechanics/features (e.g., the aviary system people are hoping for, volumetric swimming) and animals that utilize them (with more added via additional DLC at a later date). But I don't think that we'll get anything that matches the size of the original ZT1 and ZT2 expansion packs in terms of scope and new features in a single given pack.

If we get expansions that size, I would be happy but I don't think it's going to happen. It doesn't scale.... The standard for PlanCo was a decent sized pack with a few new rides, themed/scenery items, and maybe another few bits and pieces for $10.99. Expansion packs for ZT2 were, what? $20-$30?

It was just a different time. And, realistically, the only reason those packs were so big was because they were going to be shipped out to stores and sold as one unit to make it "worth it" for somebody to go out and buy the new content. Now, it's the norm for developers to release a slow and steady stream of smaller DLC packs over a period of several years. Which makes sense. You keep people talking about the game regularly, give old players something new (to keep them playing and talking about it), and you probably grab new people with each new DLC that is released.

It definitely makes more sense in the current climate to do that compared to just releasing a massive expansion pack once a year or so.

Again. I think it would be nice to have those bigger packs. I really do. But I don't anticipate that ever happening just based on what the norm is across the board for management games these days and what they have done with PlanCo and JWE to date.
 
I'm sure we'll get some "bigger" DLC packs (e.g., an Australian pack or an arctic pack with 3-6 new animals, 1-2 new enrichment items, new plants, and a themed building set feels feasible). Some will probably add new game mechanics and features and these will primarily add parts related to those new mechanics/features (e.g., the aviary system people are hoping for, volumetric swimming) and animals that utilize them (with more added via additional DLC at a later date). But I don't think that we'll get anything that matches the size of the original ZT1 and ZT2 expansion packs in terms of scope and new features in a single given pack.

If we get expansions that size, I would be happy but I don't think it's going to happen. It doesn't scale.... The standard for PlanCo was a decent sized pack with a few new rides, themed/scenery items, and maybe another few bits and pieces for $10.99. Expansion packs for ZT2 were, what? $20-$30?

It was just a different time. And, realistically, the only reason those packs were so big was because they were going to be shipped out to stores and sold as one unit to make it "worth it" for somebody to go out and buy the new content. Now, it's the norm for developers to release a slow and steady stream of smaller DLC packs over a period of several years. Which makes sense. You keep people talking about the game regularly, give old players something new (to keep them playing and talking about it), and you probably grab new people with each new DLC that is released.

It definitely makes more sense in the current climate to do that compared to just releasing a massive expansion pack once a year or so.

Again. I think it would be nice to have those bigger packs. I really do. But I don't anticipate that ever happening just based on what the norm is across the board for management games these days and what they have done with PlanCo and JWE to date.
Honestly I'd rather see DLC with 5 animals (obviously with plants, fences, themed building items, etc) every 3 months, than 1 expansion per year with 20 animals. I mean, I'd actually prefer to see them add free animals on a regular basis and then larger paid DLC, but this is Frontier, and that isn't happening.

I think my main point of contention is that they'll probably overprice the small DLCs. IMO they should be £8-9, especially if they are adding animals that can reuse skeletons/meshes from the current animals (so things like polar bears or jaguars), rather than entirely 'new' animals (things like kangaroos or penguins). I'm going to guess they will probably be £12-16 at launch (I'm guessing at £3-4 per animal added).

They could be cheaper though; the non-campaign JW:E packs weren't too bad. If they did something like a bear, lemur, etc pack that added 3-5 different related species (can reuse a lot of assets already in the game), we might see some cheaper DLCs. Will have to see what they go with for their DLC themes.

They know they can get more money by releasing smaller mini-DLC packs, so no good reason to hold back completed content to package into a larger expansion (unless it's something that requires a lot of extra work like birds or marine enclosures). Did they do a season pass type deal for planet coaster? Can't see one on steam.
 
Last edited:
There's a lot of traditionally-minded people here. Believe me, I've tried to persude people to being more open about DLC possibilities. I haven't been able to change anyone's views unfortunately.
I'm not going to pick a side, but it seems rude to act like they are being completely irrational to not want this.
And why we as a players should want limit the possibilities. If someone want to have dinsaur in a zoo... where is a problem? Another one can just simply don't buy this DLC...
Same here; people are saying no because it would be the devs spending time on this instead of living animals that they want. Nobody is just trying to crush people's dreams.
 
Honestly I'd rather see DLC with 5 animals (obviously with plants, fences, themed building items, etc) every 3 months, than 1 expansion per year with 20 animals. I mean, I'd actually prefer to see them add free animals on a regular basis and then larger paid DLC, but this is Frontier, and that isn't happening.

I think my main point of contention is that they'll probably overprice the small DLCs. IMO they should be £8-9, especially if they are adding animals that can reuse skeletons/meshes from the current animals (so things like polar bears or jaguars), rather than entirely 'new' animals (things like kangaroos or penguins). I'm going to guess they will probably be £12-16 at launch (I'm guessing at £3-4 per animal added).

They know they can get more money by releasing smaller mini-DLC packs, so no good reason to hold back completed content to package into a larger expansion (unless it's something that requires a lot of extra work like birds or marine enclosures). Did they do a season pass type deal for planet coaster?
I'm with you here too. A slow roll out of content over time will give folks time to mess around with and explore the new additions to their library rather than get overwhelmed with a wave of new additions all at once. Free animals/skins would be nice too, but I think that will be very limited (if it happens at all). The price schemes you mapped out make sense to me too. I'm not sure how much things costed for PlanCo at launch because I'm new to the series but... Ideally, for me anyway a pack of animals would be ~$3/£3 per animal and larger packs with multiple animals, new items, new mechanics, etc. I would be willing to pay a bit more for £9-£15 / $12-20 depending on the content added.

A season pass would be a great idea, assuming they gave use some inkling as to how frequently (and how much) content would be added. I'm honestly hoping they go buck wild with content for this one (a la City Skylines or the Sims) because it honestly requires a bit less creativity than PlanCo and it's less restrictive (e.g., no licensing) than JWE. "What do people want? Axis deer and foxes? Okay, cool. Go make them." That's not to downplay the work that will go into those things, but just saying it's not like they need to map out whole new themes, etc. for every single animal that they add.
 
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: Kai
A season pass would be a great idea, assuming they gave use some inkling as to how frequently (and how much) content would be added. I'm honestly hoping they go buck wild with content for this one (a la City Skylines or the Sims) because it honestly requires a bit less creativity than PlanCo and it's less restrictive (e.g., no licensing) than JWE. "What do people want? Axis deer and foxes? Okay, cool. Go make them." That's not to downplay the work that will go into those things, but just saying it's not like they need to map out whole new themes, etc. for every single animal that they add.
I'd like to see some species themed DLC idea myself. If the whole team is working on the same type of animal (bears, lemurs, foxes, whatever) presumably it's easier to troubleshoot. We would be more likely to get some specific enrichments for those species, and they could add a bunch of matching sculptures, signs and building pieces based around the animals.

I also like the idea of themed DLC (polar, sahara, jungle, amazon, etc) mainly because that would allow the devs to add a bunch of matching plants for each biome along with the animals (and more themed building pieces).

Nothing against them adding random animal DLC, but that's something I feel would work better in a game that was just adding free content intermittently (Ark comes to mind). If they were adding 1 animal, 3 plants and 10 building pieces per month as free bonus DLC, random would be really interesting.
 
I'd like to see some species themed DLC idea myself. If the whole team is working on the same type of animal (bears, lemurs, foxes, whatever) presumably it's easier to troubleshoot. We would be more likely to get some specific enrichments for those species, and they could add a bunch of matching sculptures, signs and building pieces based around the animals.

I also like the idea of themed DLC (polar, sahara, jungle, amazon, etc) mainly because that would allow the devs to add a bunch of matching plants for each biome along with the animals (and more themed building pieces).

Nothing against them adding random animal DLC, but that's something I feel would work better in a game that was just adding free content intermittently (Ark comes to mind). If they were adding 1 animal, 3 plants and 10 building pieces per month as free bonus DLC, random would be really interesting.
I think we're getting off-topic for this thread, and I posted this elsewhere but... I really do think the best way to flesh out the roster effectively would be to do a mixture of themed and/or regional DLC packs (with animals, matching plants, building/scenery pieces, maybe a new enrichment or food item if relevant to the animals being added), larger packs that add new mechanics (aviaries, different exhibit sizes), and species themed packs.

If they were to do free and/or super-cheap content, I could see it being something fairly simple. Or an animal that could very much serve as a stand-alone (really, any African mammal comes to mind at this point or a Bengal tiger).

Anyway. This is all to say that even with the current game the roster feels very incomplete. It would take a significant amount of DLC effort to make it viable within the current game as it stands.
 
Last edited:
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: Kai
I think we're getting off-topic for this thread, and I posted this elsewhere but... I really do think the best way to flesh out the roster effectively would be to do a mixture of themed and/or regional DLC packs (with animals, matching plants, building/scenery pieces, maybe a new enrichment or food item if relevant to the animals being added), larger packs that add new mechanics (aviaries, different exhibit sizes), and species themed packs.

If they were to do free and/or super-cheap content, I could see it being something fairly simple. Or an animal that could very much serve as a stand-alone (really, any African mammal comes to mind at this point or a Siberian tiger).

Anyway. This is all to say that even with the current game the roster feels very incomplete. It would take a significant amount of DLC effort to make it viable within the current game as it stands.
We have gotten Siberian tigers...
 
I for one would definitely like to see a prehistoric or extinct animals DLC for this game. I have yet to buy this game. Such a DLC would push me over the edge to buy it.

The argument that you can get prehistoric animals in JWE is pretty much invalid since that is a very different game and it solely focuses on non-avain dinosaurs (with the single exception of Pteranodon as the only pterosaur.) We most likely won't ever see other prehistoric animals like mammals, birds and amphibians in that game.
Jurassic World is also not known for it's accuracy.

Even a DLC of just "recently" extinct animals would be amazing. The Dodo, Thylacine, Quagga and even Gigantopithecus are all animals I'd love to see in a game like this. Many animals such as the woolly mammoth and woolly rhino also shared it's environment with mega fauna still alive today. It's the same ecosystem except that we've lost part of it.
The conservation theme can still apply since you can show the amazing variety of the natural world in a game such as this and emphasize the importance of retaining the species we still have.
And the chances are that some of the species featured in this game will be extinct in the next 50 years. Don't just show what we can lose, but also what we've already lost. This would be a great teaching opportunity.


Putting something like this in a DLC also makes it optional. People who don't want extinct animals in the game don't have to buy such a DLC.

/rant
 
I for one would definitely like to see a prehistoric or extinct animals DLC for this game. I have yet to buy this game. Such a DLC would push me over the edge to buy it.

The argument that you can get prehistoric animals in JWE is pretty much invalid since that is a very different game and it solely focuses on non-avain dinosaurs (with the single exception of Pteranodon as the only pterosaur.) We most likely won't ever see other prehistoric animals like mammals, birds and amphibians in that game.
Jurassic World is also not known for it's accuracy.

/rant
I don't devs warm up to the idea: "if you add this dlc, I maybe buy this game + dlc" :D. 15-20 years ago they were more about expansion packs but nowadays a different developer picks up that part. I don't expect devs to add such extensive dlc, a lot of people aren't willing to pay $50,- for dlc. (or even worse the Sims4 approach)
They rather make an entirely new game. Prehistoric Kingdom fills in that gap. I think Marine animals have more chance for this, and I think those chances are slim. I know some people want to mix old/new but that's a very small market.

JWE's game mechanic focuses on researching/cloning fossils, from that POV it wouldn't be that different.. Even reviving extinct fossils is a similar theme.. You can disagree about the era but JWE doesn't pick animals from the Jurassic era only.. And no, I'm not puttin dinos and extinct animals on 1 pile, there's always 1 or 2 people who create that assumption, just to create a made-up argument.. A lot of people said it, but PK looks like the mix of JWE and PZ with quite a few animals from the requested extinct dlc - I would recommend keeping an eye out for that game - even in pre-alpa looks good, very promising and some detailed features.

Even a DLC of just "recently" extinct animals would be amazing. The Dodo, Thylacine, Quagga and even Gigantopithecus are all animals I'd love to see in a game like this. Many animals such as the woolly mammoth and woolly rhino also shared it's environment with mega fauna still alive today. It's the same ecosystem except that we've lost part of it.
The conservation theme can still apply since you can show the amazing variety of the natural world in a game such as this and emphasize the importance of retaining the species we still have.
And the chances are that some of the species featured in this game will be extinct in the next 50 years. Don't just show what we can lose, but also what we've already lost. This would be a great teaching opportunity.
(Wildlife) conservation is actually to prevent species from going extinct.

Extinct animals would be a great teaching opportunity for some people, but most people only care for the zoo part in Planet Zoo. (even don't care about the level of management of PZ).
Those are 2 different interest/passions.
I think if you ask people on the street or players of PZ: what a Thylacine, Quagga and Gigantopithecus is, they don't know but also don't care about this.

Putting something like this in a DLC also makes it optional. People who don't want extinct animals in the game don't have to buy such a DLC.
On most forums people don't want the dev to focus on such DLC but on DLC a lot of people care about. When some people ask for mythical/fantasy animals, suddenly the pro-extinct players start to act the same. And some people consider -cloning/reviving/creating hybrid- exctinct animals as sci-fi and doesn't belong in this game.
 
I think if you ask people on the street or players of PZ: what a Thylacine, Quagga and Gigantopithecus is, they don't know but also don't care about this.
This exactly is the core of the problem. And that's where such a DLC can come in to make people care about it.

For example: The general public didn't know or care much about Spinosaurus before a fictionalized version was shown on the big screen in Jurassic Park 3. Now there are plenty of Spinosaurus fans of both the fictional and real-life/extinct counterpart. Such a depiction has spawned a genuine interest among many. While it's often better to make something accurate, even a heavily fictionalized version of something real can spark interest in the real subject. I'm just picking this dinosaur example from a frankly not very good film because it's an extinct animal, but the same is true for many subjects. A film about WWII can do the same.

A game about keeping a zoo with conservation as a core theme is ripe for this. Yes, conservation is about preventing animals from going extinct. But extinct animals are very much an important part in understanding ecosystems and what makes them healthy. These animals can show us about parts of current ecosystems that are now lost and why that's a problem or why that has changed said ecosystem. Extinct animals and their ecosystems aren't just an important part of understanding conservation. I'd say it's almost essential.

And the lines are already blurring. How many animals in the game right now will be extinct in the next 50 years? And cloning extinct animals is something that will likely happen soon in the real world too. The Pyrenean ibex went extinct in 2000. But it was at one point cloned after it went extinct. Sadly this clone died shortly after.

I can see the point of having animals like dinosaurs or other ancient animals not exactly fitting the style of the game. But I see only good reasons to add more recently extinct animals such as those from the last ice ages since they already fit the conservation theme very well and would be a fantastic teaching tool. And of course they can short a greater variety of the wonderful shapes and sizes nature presents. So ye, people should care about the Thylacine, Quagga and Gigantopithecus and an optional DLC is a great way to introduce them to people.
 
There's no core problem... Maybe you (and some others) have a connection/interest with some eras/extinct animals/ecosystems but I don't think you understand that a lot of people don't share your interests/concerns. That's fine but dont expect people that hey should care about that personal interest.

I think you're expecting way too much from people from just seeing a movie. I even forgot most about JP3 - haven't seen that movie in years.
Same goes with WW2 movies, almost nobody will check/research the movie's subject after they seen a movie.
It's more likely you'll watch a certain movie because you already have an interest.

Maybe this is very different per country, i don't know.
I know some interest are huge in the USA but almost non-existent in Europe. (and otherwise as well)

Understanding ecosystems etc. is maybe interesting for some people but FAR from (almost) essential.. (maybe for researchers/scientists)
Even people who want extinct animals just want to have fun with these animals - the educational value is almost never mentioned.

People just want to play/enjoy a game for entertainment/relaxation.
I bet most people haven't read the zoopedia entries for a lot of animals. Just the statistics for building an habitat and other info for age/group size etc..

And people who don't care about extinct animals, won't buy the DLC and will never be introduced to those animals.
The overall opinion I've seen in a lot of topics, a lot of people will not buy this for many different reasons
 
A game about keeping a zoo with conservation as a core theme is ripe for this. Yes, conservation is about preventing animals from going extinct. But extinct animals are very much an important part in understanding ecosystems and what makes them healthy. These animals can show us about parts of current ecosystems that are now lost and why that's a problem or why that has changed said ecosystem. Extinct animals and their ecosystems aren't just an important part of understanding conservation. I'd say it's almost essential.

And the lines are already blurring. How many animals in the game right now will be extinct in the next 50 years? And cloning extinct animals is something that will likely happen soon in the real world too. The Pyrenean ibex went extinct in 2000. But it was at one point cloned after it went extinct. Sadly this clone died shortly after.
The question I'd be asking is why it's better to add an extinct animal vs animals listed as extinct in the wild - for example, the scimitar-horned oryx, Père David's deer or Spix's macaw. Surely those species would emphasise the threat of extinction just as well, and still stand a chance at survival via reintroduction.
 
Top Bottom