feedback to improve the planet zoo

patopixelado

patopixelado
Make rain/snow visually invisible but still turned on also in campaign mode

Work on pathing

Make staff buildings easier to hide/remove negative reactions when scenery at 100%

Make more no negative effect power sources (yes I'm aware you can bury zoo entrances, but staff keep spawning on them, so it's not fool proof)

Make an option to find terrain in enclosures so you can eradicate unwanted terrain

Make animals vs habitats age separately when you change the aging setting

Give us expanded storage to buy (if I have 10+ zoos, some full of quarantines just to hold animals. There should be enough storage to hold the minimum amount for each animal. IDC if you don't need/want the extra space, people who have played since launch could really use it)

Herding behavior - there's less point behind getting a large amount of a species that needs a herd and them not herding!

Removing the option to sell elderly animals. You can't sell babies or pregnant girls, but people put up elderly infertile adults and if you aren't paying attention you could get a useless animal.

my zoos to be environmentally friendly but the solar panels and wind turbines have such a ridiculously short radius compared to the generators and they look so odd just randomly positioned by themselves. If when grouped together the power range grew exponentially, I think that would help - and it would make more sense to have a solar farm or wind farm than just a random solar panel next to a habitat.

I’d like if I have a zoo in the arctic the guests don’t come in shorts and complain it’s cold. Having clothes based on where the zoo is would be nice.

I would love a color scheme option. I'd rather my guests be wearing neutral colors in most of my zoos

i wanted fixed is when animals are stressed and looking for a place to hide they actually go and hide.

Picking up and moving shy and stressed animals to a hide, for them to start feeling better and RUN OUT is so infuriating!

But I'd really like them to have interspecies enrichment also help to reduce stress for animals. So that way mixing animal species together gives more bonus than just extra enrichment.

Like a lot of zoos especially in America will raise cheetah cubs beside dog puppies (mainly Labradors) so that the cheetah grows up to be very confident and comfortable around visitors due to imprinting on the dog's confidence. Though I extremely doubt we'll ever get Labradors added even in a DLC option lol.


More high altitude, xeric and dry forest plants. Ideally ones with very large ranges so they aren't constrained geographically.

I’m bored of the ugly boxes and it’d be nice to have more control over what goes into them. I’d also love an ant colony update. I really want to create huge tubes of leaf cutter ants everywhere.

graphic options to hide things but they're still around. Zoo Tycoon had the option to hide guests and trees which was great for my old, 90s computer. This game is gorgeous but boy does my laptop struggle and being able to hide them would definitely help. Even when you're trying to click on an item or animal and can't get around the foliage is so annoying!

And more variety with the appearance for exhibit animals, and add some sea creatures. What's the point of having what are essentially giant fish tanks if we can't have fish in them!
 

Xrystal

X
I’d like if I have a zoo in the arctic the guests don’t come in shorts and complain it’s cold. Having clothes based on where the zoo is would be nice.
Click to expand...
Definitely. This annoys me no end. Hey Bob, do you wear that at home in your igloo ? rofl.
i wanted fixed is when animals are stressed and looking for a place to hide they actually go and hide.
Click to expand...
100% And ... have that recovery last more than a few seconds.
Removing the option to sell elderly animals. You can't sell babies or pregnant girls, but people put up elderly infertile adults and if you aren't paying attention you could get a useless animal.
Click to expand...
Agree with the elderly animals. If you can't release or sell for cash, then you shouldn't be able to trade them either. Also ... on the flip side. Assuming the games babies are post wean then is there an ethical reason you can't trade out babies?
 

Xrystal

X
patopixelado said:
live service game is bad ideia imo
Click to expand...
Understandable, but I feel it depends on how they go about it .. a live service is just a continued update process, small or large, and instead of microtransactions for the continued support, the DLCs they currently put out will work in that capacity, although they may have to go back to quarterly releases again.

From wikipedia:
In the video game industry, a live-service game (also referred to as games as a service (GaaS)) represents providing video games or game content on a continuing revenue model, similar to software as a service. Live service games are ways to monetize video games either after their initial sale, or to support a free-to-play model. Games released under the live service model typically receive a long or indefinite stream of monetized new content over time to encourage players to continue paying to support the game. This often leads to games that work under a live service model to be called "living games" or "live games" since they continually change with these updates.

If they don't want to create/update the animal models etc to work with a new incarnation of the game and the game is already designed with updatability in mind, it is possible that this process would work for them. Maybe not in the scale of full on flying or sealife ( if they did want to add that to the game eventually ) , but that depends on what they need to do to make that work and how easy it is to apply it without breaking the rest of the game.

Wow is a live service game - it is going through a major upgrade over the triple expansion series they have told us about. Zones are added with new content regularly. Their monetisation includes both account tools and cosmetics and of course each expansion every 2 years. And the ongoing subscription. 3 money sources there.
Palia is a live service game - it's still a baby compared to wow and still in it's teething phase. They are just releasing their first zone since they went beta. Their monetisation is purely cosmetic with it's shopping mall expanding every update to add more clothes, pets and skins to their collection.

I've been with both early on in their lives. Wow since it was a toddler ( just before Burning Crusade Expansion ) and Palia since it was announced.
Yes, people complain about the monetisation part of the games. Just like they do with Planet Zoo's DLCs, which have been their ongoing monetisation for the game, alongside new purchases of the game. So, in essence Planet Zoo already covers the potential for a live service game ... if they just don't stop working on it and keep adding new content for it.

Seeing as we are in our 6th year ( a year longer than Planet Coaster before it shifted to its second version), depending on whether the 26/27/28 game is Planet Zoo 2 or not, maybe they are seeing if Planet Zoo will function well enough as a live service game or if it needs to be a full new version with a possible new set of animals to make despite making over 200 already for the current game.

I know what I would rather do at this point as a developer (make sure that the animals are compatible with the new version of the game, or, make sure that the game has enough expandability to have more content added to it for as long as people want to keep paying to play it ) they can always shift to free to play after initial purchases go down in price and let the DLCs keep the game alive.

How to make DLCs work, if they did expand this to a full on Free Service Game, or just continue it's current process but just expand the DLC side of things.
1. Animal DLCs - much cheaper but only 1 animal ( either habitat or exhibit or walkthrough exhibit ) - players will only need to buy the ones they want.
2. Habitat Pack DLCs - pretty much what we have now
3. Exhibit Pack DLCs - what we seem to be missing nowadays, considering the world is made up of mainly invertebrates, it's weird we don't have more to add to our exhibit collection.
3. Construction DLCs - adding more variety from the worlds visual designs for those with the creativity to opt into buying to expand their gameplay options.

This is just one of many potential avenues I think they could go down for Planet Zoo. Only one of which I don't like.
1. Continue as we are with purchase and paid DLCs and the odd free update keeping the game alive every x months - almost a Free Service Game
2. Expand option 1 by expanding the game with bigger updates that add content alongside additional DLCs - a Free Service Game
3. Create Planet Zoo 2 but animals and construction pieces in Planet Zoo 1 are compatible with it making our existing DLC purchases still viable
4. Create Planet Zoo 2 along with all new animals and construction pieces, some/many of which they already made for Planet Zoo 1 but need to be recreated as they are no longer compatible
5. Planet Zoo stops being sold, no more DLCs and eventually the servers close down so that Franchise doesn't work and eventually the game itself can't be played anymore.

Option 5 I clearly don't want to happen. I love the game and barring a few years where I was too busy to play games, I have always had Planet Zoo in my game arsenal.
Option 3 or 4 could be where they are going if the new unannounced game they are working on is Planet Zoo 2.
Option 2 is a possibility if none of the above are viable choices for them if they want the Zoo to continue its money making process.
Option 1 is where we are now, but us players not knowing if this is the way forward or not, or just the waiting stage for their next decision on the games future.
 

patopixelado

patopixelado
Xrystal said:
Understandable, but I feel it depends on how they go about it .. a live service is just a continued update process, small or large, and instead of microtransactions for the continued support, the DLCs they currently put out will work in that capacity, although they may have to go back to quarterly releases again.

From wikipedia:
In the video game industry, a live-service game (also referred to as games as a service (GaaS)) represents providing video games or game content on a continuing revenue model, similar to software as a service. Live service games are ways to monetize video games either after their initial sale, or to support a free-to-play model. Games released under the live service model typically receive a long or indefinite stream of monetized new content over time to encourage players to continue paying to support the game. This often leads to games that work under a live service model to be called "living games" or "live games" since they continually change with these updates.

If they don't want to create/update the animal models etc to work with a new incarnation of the game and the game is already designed with updatability in mind, it is possible that this process would work for them. Maybe not in the scale of full on flying or sealife ( if they did want to add that to the game eventually ) , but that depends on what they need to do to make that work and how easy it is to apply it without breaking the rest of the game.

Wow is a live service game - it is going through a major upgrade over the triple expansion series they have told us about. Zones are added with new content regularly. Their monetisation includes both account tools and cosmetics and of course each expansion every 2 years. And the ongoing subscription. 3 money sources there.
Palia is a live service game - it's still a baby compared to wow and still in it's teething phase. They are just releasing their first zone since they went beta. Their monetisation is purely cosmetic with it's shopping mall expanding every update to add more clothes, pets and skins to their collection.

I've been with both early on in their lives. Wow since it was a toddler ( just before Burning Crusade Expansion ) and Palia since it was announced.
Yes, people complain about the monetisation part of the games. Just like they do with Planet Zoo's DLCs, which have been their ongoing monetisation for the game, alongside new purchases of the game. So, in essence Planet Zoo already covers the potential for a live service game ... if they just don't stop working on it and keep adding new content for it.

Seeing as we are in our 6th year ( a year longer than Planet Coaster before it shifted to its second version), depending on whether the 26/27/28 game is Planet Zoo 2 or not, maybe they are seeing if Planet Zoo will function well enough as a live service game or if it needs to be a full new version with a possible new set of animals to make despite making over 200 already for the current game.

I know what I would rather do at this point as a developer (make sure that the animals are compatible with the new version of the game, or, make sure that the game has enough expandability to have more content added to it for as long as people want to keep paying to play it ) they can always shift to free to play after initial purchases go down in price and let the DLCs keep the game alive.

How to make DLCs work, if they did expand this to a full on Free Service Game, or just continue it's current process but just expand the DLC side of things.
1. Animal DLCs - much cheaper but only 1 animal ( either habitat or exhibit or walkthrough exhibit ) - players will only need to buy the ones they want.
2. Habitat Pack DLCs - pretty much what we have now
3. Exhibit Pack DLCs - what we seem to be missing nowadays, considering the world is made up of mainly invertebrates, it's weird we don't have more to add to our exhibit collection.
3. Construction DLCs - adding more variety from the worlds visual designs for those with the creativity to opt into buying to expand their gameplay options.

This is just one of many potential avenues I think they could go down for Planet Zoo. Only one of which I don't like.
1. Continue as we are with purchase and paid DLCs and the odd free update keeping the game alive every x months - almost a Free Service Game
2. Expand option 1 by expanding the game with bigger updates that add content alongside additional DLCs - a Free Service Game
3. Create Planet Zoo 2 but animals and construction pieces in Planet Zoo 1 are compatible with it making our existing DLC purchases still viable
4. Create Planet Zoo 2 along with all new animals and construction pieces, some/many of which they already made for Planet Zoo 1 but need to be recreated as they are no longer compatible
5. Planet Zoo stops being sold, no more DLCs and eventually the servers close down so that Franchise doesn't work and eventually the game itself can't be played anymore.

Option 5 I clearly don't want to happen. I love the game and barring a few years where I was too busy to play games, I have always had Planet Zoo in my game arsenal.
Option 3 or 4 could be where they are going if the new unannounced game they are working on is Planet Zoo 2.
Option 2 is a possibility if none of the above are viable choices for them if they want the Zoo to continue its money making process.
Option 1 is where we are now, but us players not knowing if this is the way forward or not, or just the waiting stage for their next decision on the games future.
Click to expand...

I understand, thank you very much, I learned something new today about all this :D
 

Mjmannella

Mjmannella
Frankly, I don't want a game to exist forever. A game that "never ends" will always be dated by when it was created. Imagine if Zoo Tycoon in 2001 was "live service", it'd still be isometric and use pre-made facilities. All the animals would still be extremely picky, and the game would still be on a grid system for everything.

Sometimes, a game needs to die before we can see the path forward.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom