Extinct animal DLC

[Mjmannella]

No offense taken. No harm done.

Can you please show me what the profits where of the Extinct animals DLC's of ZT and WLP?

I would like to see some proof of said claim.

Them making a DLC does not mean it's profitable.

Sales figures are unfortunately very scarce for zoo games, I was only able to find sales relating to Zoo Tycoon 2:

• VGChartz says that Zoo Tycoon 2's Extinct Animals expansion sold over 10,000 copies. However, this information is incomplete, as said website also lists the base game selling a meagre 60,000 copies, when it actually sold 2 million copies when it came out. But we could use the VGChartz ratio of 1:6, which isn't terrible.

Yep, i responded by pointing out the other topics.. Go look for yourself…
Burden of proof on me? No, is there a 'Hitchhicker's Guide to the Galaxy' part covering this? No, just your opinion.
Referencing is good enough. Maybe not for you, but who cares?
You demand proof… I don't care about your demands.. Demanding is rude, especially with that tone. And the other part is just rabble, attempt to an argument?

That last part is really enjoying.. This is basically confirming my previous comment. Love comments like that!

I leave at this, don't want to waste my time...

"Judging from most comments on this forum" isn't quantifiable enough. Where are these topics? Could you link to them? Here's a thread with a noticeable amount of forum users wanting extinct DLC.
Are you implying that you having the burden of proof is only my opinion? Not exactly sure how that works out.
And you were the one throwing stones by making claims of rudeness. Don't go and play the victim card now. I wasn't "demanding" anything of you, just asking.

 

[Mjmannella]

From a business POV, you can probably forget dinosaurs. JWE was a licensed game and as such probably carries a non-compete clause.

My personal opinion is that the game should focus on extant (non-cetacean) animals until the pool is thoroughly exhausted. The game's message is about conservation, rather than spectacle.

While it's true that modern zoos heavily focus on conservation, it'd be naive to think they don't care about big-ticket animals like tigers and lions more than niche animals like oprhan salamander or the Gulf Moccasin-shell. There's also the fact that not every living animal can work on a gameplay-level. Good luck trying to find a newborn meerkat on the heatmaps.
And I'd rather this game not be limited to be modern paradigm. I implore the developers to cater to the less conservative requests (as long as they can work with the gameplay, of course).

 

[LoneBlind]

My personal opinion is that the game should focus on extant (non-cetacean) animals until the pool is thoroughly exhausted. The game's message is about conservation, rather than spectacle.

Come on don't throw us under the bus like that in an unrelated thread xD

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jokes aside I genuinely don't see why this is such a controversial/volatile topic. I do think some people need to better commit to just not buying DLC with animals they don't want to include in their zoos. I don't personally care much for reptiles or exhibit animals and would not buy DLC featuring them (unless in a bulk sale) which is my own choice. I would be a little disappointed hearing that was the next DLC because I hoped for other things, but not so much so that I wouldn't want it to exist entirely. If including extinct animals hurts your suspension of disbelief then simply don't buy the DLC with it.

The argument most people are making is a bit of a catch-22 in my opinion. You don't want the option to have them in the game because its not realistic, but you also say it wouldn't sell. So then if it did exist, nobody would buy it because they don't want it, meaning it would be rare to see people using extinct animals in videos and screenshots and such, meaning it wouldn't effect any of you if it came out. I definitely think it would sell and that people would use it, but the "it wouldn't sell" argument feels more like an excuse than a real speculation because those arguments contradict each other.

I just think being anti-diversity is pretty ridiculous. They will definitely be releasing packs of more "normal" species and we know this for a fact. Adding extinct species doesn't really hurt anything and wouldn't take away from that.

That being said, again I don't really care personally for including extinct species. I would buy the DLC if it existed but its not very high on my wishlist. I just think its weird to shoot down others wants to be honest. If Frontier doesn't want to add them and doesn't think they fit the game, they won't, regardless of player opinion. Because it would definitely sell even if it ed some people off.

 

[Balwick]

While it's true that modern zoos heavily focus on conservation, it'd be naive to think they don't care about big-ticket animals like tigers and lions more than niche animals like oprhan salamander or the Gulf Moccasin-shell. There's also the fact that not every living animal can work on a gameplay-level. Good luck trying to find a newborn meerkat on the heatmaps.
And I'd rather this game not be limited to be modern paradigm. I implore the developers to cater to the less conservative requests (as long as they can work with the gameplay, of course).

The financial department may care more for the big ticket animals, but I'd hazard that on the care level, zoos want to ensure the best for their animals, regardless of popularity.

Meerkats could easily work, you would just need to zoom in a bit more to check on them Juvenile warthogs and gharials were already very small, and it wasn't really an issue.

You're of course entitled to your opinion, it's just mine that development time would be better spent on themes of conservation and education. Even if I choose not to buy a particular DLC, it has come at the expense of other things.

 

[Silhouette]

For those using ZT2 as an example, just remember:

An extinct animals/dinosaur DLC at the time would have done well because it was filling an unoccupied space in the market. There was no other game that came close to it at the time, so of course it would have sold well.

However, nowadays there's quite a few dinosaur zoo games, as well as PK that focuses on dinosaurs and extinct animals. There's no space in the market like there was when ZT was out.

Meanwhile there's no realistic zoo game that even comes close to what PZ has achieved. They have that spot in the market claimed, so it makes more sense to focus on that and expand on it, rather than trying to make a DLC that, again, is just going to be in direct competition with other full game titles.

 

[LoneBlind]

For those using ZT2 as an example, just remember:

An extinct animals/dinosaur DLC at the time would have done well because it was filling an unoccupied space in the market. There was no other game that came close to it at the time, so of course it would have sold well.

However, nowadays there's quite a few dinosaur zoo games, as well as PK that focuses on dinosaurs and extinct animals. There's no space in the market like there was when ZT was out.

Meanwhile there's no realistic zoo game that even comes close to what PZ has achieved. They have that spot in the market claimed, so it makes more sense to focus on that and expand on it, rather than trying to make a DLC that, again, is just going to be in direct competition with other full game titles.

The thing is, Dinosaur/Extinct animal games aren't so much a single niche that needs filling and more just...a genre that will always be popular. People love them and will buy stuff with them in it, which is why there are so many out right now. "Meanwhile there's no realistic zoo game that even comes close to what PZ has achieved" This is precisely why people would still clamber to buy an Extinct/Dinosaur DLC if it was included in this game. Not even the games featuring those currently out right now come close to the level of detail and polish PZ offers.

Though I will reiterate this isn't so much me arguing FOR their inclusion, just not agreeing on that line of thinking. I also doubt they will include Dinosaurs at all, if any extinct animals, because of the self defeating aspect of them already having JWE.

 

[Silhouette]

The thing is, Dinosaur/Extinct animal games aren't so much a single niche that needs filling and more just...a genre that will always be popular. People love them and will buy stuff with them in it, which is why there are so many out right now. "Meanwhile there's no realistic zoo game that even comes close to what PZ has achieved" This is precisely why people would still clamber to buy an Extinct/Dinosaur DLC if it was included in this game. Not even the games featuring those currently out right now come close to the level of detail and polish PZ offers.

Though I will reiterate this isn't so much me arguing FOR their inclusion, just not agreeing on that line of thinking. I also doubt they will include Dinosaurs at all, if any extinct animals, because of the self defeating aspect of them already having JWE.

You say none of them come close to the polish that PZ has, but have you taken a look at PK? It looks absolutely gorgeous, the animals with their models and animations are stunning, they have honestly most of the features that PZ does (they're even putting in the ability to custom build buildings), etc. I would argue that when it's all said and done, it will have close to the same level of polish.

And also, knowing your market and your competition is a big part of game development. You have to make decisions based on what will make you the most money, not just based on what people ask for, and at this point that wouldn't be extinct animals. And not to mention considering how controversial this topic is, again, why risk making an entire DLC for if when they can do Australian, arctic, etc packs that they know most, if not all their players will buy?

 

[Mjmannella]

For those using ZT2 as an example, just remember:

An extinct animals/dinosaur DLC at the time would have done well because it was filling an unoccupied space in the market. There was no other game that came close to it at the time, so of course it would have sold well.

However, nowadays there's quite a few dinosaur zoo games, as well as PK that focuses on dinosaurs and extinct animals. There's no space in the market like there was when ZT was out.

Meanwhile there's no realistic zoo game that even comes close to what PZ has achieved. They have that spot in the market claimed, so it makes more sense to focus on that and expand on it, rather than trying to make a DLC that, again, is just going to be in direct competition with other full game titles.

Except Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis came out in 2003, which was still quite popular even after 5 years. If anything, Extinct Animals felt like a parody of JPOG.
And adding Holocene extinct animals won't make it suddenly compete with JWE, and PK is still in its Alpha IIRC.

 

[LoneBlind]

And also, knowing your market and your competition is a big part of game development. You have to make decisions based on what will make you the most money, not just based on what people ask for, and at this point that wouldn't be extinct animals. And not to mention considering how controversial this topic is, again, why risk making an entire DLC for if when they can do Australian, arctic, etc packs that they know most, if not all their players will buy?

Because it would definitely sell, regardless of the controversy. The extinct animal expansion in ZT2 also caused minor controversy, but it still sold like hotcakes. I think the bigger deciding factor is just whether or not Frontier wants them, not if it will make some players a bit miffed. DLC is DLC, if people don't want it they won't buy it. Almost no one is going to refund the game just because they added the option.

 

[Factabulous]

Because it would definitely sell, regardless of the controversy. The extinct animal expansion in ZT2 also caused minor controversy, but it still sold like hotcakes. I think the bigger deciding factor is just whether or not Frontier wants them, not if it will make some players a bit miffed. DLC is DLC, if people don't want it they won't buy it. Almost no one is going to refund the game just because they added the option.

If frontier had infinite devs then yes, but the argument you're making is that the first DLC they should concentrate on after release should be ded animals. Hard sell to make compare with many many other sets of animals

 

[Mjmannella]

If frontier had infinite devs then yes, but the argument you're making is that the first DLC they should concentrate on after release should be ded animals. Hard sell to make compare with many many other sets of animals

I have yet to be convinced that a lesser kudu would net more sales than the household woolly mammoth.

 

[Factabulous]

I have yet to be convinced that a lesser kudu would net more sales than the household woolly mammoth.

It's a Zoo game - people want things that fit in their Zoo. Lots of animals not in the game yet. Unicorns, Dragons and Mammoths can be added later.

 

[Mjmannella]

It's a Zoo game - people want things that fit in their Zoo. Lots of animals not in the game yet. Unicorns, Dragons and Mammoths can be added later.

Which is why extinct DLC never sells, and was never attempted after Dinosaur Digs, right?

 

[LoneBlind]

If frontier had infinite devs then yes, but the argument you're making is that the first DLC they should concentrate on after release should be ded animals. Hard sell to make compare with many many other sets of animals

Going to ignore the rest of the deterioration of this thread but I was not arguing for anything being the first DLC. Maybe OP mentioned that and I missed it but I'm pretty sure we're only discussing the potential for an Extinct animal DLC at all.

Also as I've stated a few times, I'm not personally invested in the inclusion of Extinct animals.

 

[Wren_]

Have fun with your thread - arguing that the best first DLC for a Zoo game isn't more animals that you can see in a Zoo is going to be an uphill struggle

Has anyone actually said that it should be the first DLC anyway...? Sorry if I've missed someone here, but most if not all those I've seen wanting these animals seem to agree it should indeed be a later addition. The original post even started out saying "it shouldn't be the first one they make, because extant animals should have priority-"

EDIT: Oopsie, looks like we thought the same thing at the same time, LoneBlind. Didn't mean to repeat.

 

[Firestar97]

am shure, the dodo istnt extinct, there is some unreachable crevice somewhere, where they survived ^^ so the dodo-dlc will certainly come ^^ and the megathere will join them.

Can you provide a Source?

 

[AlexVonHumbug]

Can you provide a Source?

wow, i didnt expect so few understanding. of course there is no source.

 

[LN]

Sales figures are unfortunately very scarce for zoo games, I was only able to find sales relating to Zoo Tycoon 2:

• VGChartz says that Zoo Tycoon 2's Extinct Animals expansion sold over 10,000 copies. However, this information is incomplete, as said website also lists the base game selling a meagre 60,000 copies, when it actually sold 2 million copies when it came out. But we could use the VGChartz ratio of 1:6, which isn't terrible.

I was not expecting that you would get actual figures. So compliments to that.

10.000 on 2.000.000 is not very much though.

Has anyone actually said that it should be the first DLC anyway...?

To me, that would not matter at all.
Then, maybe in a few years I wouldn't mind.

 

[Paul_Crowther]

Hi all,
This thread seems to have turned a bit hostile in places so we're going to close it here. You are more than welcome to restart the topic, lets just be sure to keep it friendly even if we disagree with one another