sure itās speculation, but itās not ājustā speculation - itās opinions based on evidence. Like it or not, the game will end at some point - probably before it becomes unprofitableā¦ itāll be when Frontier has a reasonable belief that projected profits from the resources devoted to PZ are likely to be lower than the profits that are likely to be made by those resources being devoted to something else (or general cost-cutting)ā¦ Many factors, most of which we canāt see, will go into this analysis: the trend of sales, potential new content (and how much it costs to develop) and projections of expected profits from something else (especially if, like a new āplanetā game, many of the same team of designers etc. are likely to be used for to maintain a consistent brand style)ā¦
It was ādoomspeakingā when people predicted the end of the game in 2020 based on fewer packs than PC got bring released (especially in the context of COVID) but, at some point, the probability of the gameās support finishing rises to the point where itās very reasonable to think itās possible,ā¦ at some point it will be probable - where each of those points is is of course speculation, but itās no longer unreasonable to think itās possibly or even probably approaching.
This is very well articulated. Effectively, Planet Zoo is profitable and it will continue to be profitable if they end support. They've seen that trend with PlanCo and acknowledged it as part of their strategy in this year's presentation. If they can add PZ to that roster of "games that we just let sit on the shelf and sell" and then release a new game that will give them a big bump in revenue... That could potentially be really helpful to their bottom line. Still making $X and $Y from PZ and PlanCo... While making three times that (and in addition to that) with a new game. It's a good point.
And there's a counter to it (like everything in these conversations). The game is still selling really well and you can see that bump quite strongly on the day of a DLC release. Each game unit sold is another potential PDLC customer for all the packs in their library. One seems to beget the other when you look at the sales (e.g., day of Oceania pack release both base game and the DLC were in the top 10 on Steam). And by pushing that a little further (even just another year of support) you'd be broadening your player base (as well as getting people "bought in" on Frontier for the next game to come) and potential for profits down the line. Each PDLC released is another bit of content any new players in years to come will likely want to purchase at some point or another. And I just keep thinking about the "ROI comment"...
This is all to say that I agree with you. There's a lot of different factors and ways of looking at this. And, as folks with no inside knowledge, it's all pure speculation that can go in any number of directions - both positive and negative.
But regardless of where we all stand on those things... I think we can all agree that we'd all really
want for the game to receive support for months, if not years, to come! And that there's still a lot of untapped potential for the animal roster, scenery/themes, and features that could be added!
Now if you want to "prepare for the worst" and "keep your expectations low" sure you are free to do that, but trying to convince others of it is just tiresome and annoying specially when it is all based on speculation, so many people constantly trying to excuse this theory by shielding themselves on "being realistic" when as much as you may think it is realistic to go for a pessimistic take it doesn't stop being a theory.
Facts. There's absolutely no harm in "wishing" for something. And verbalizing that, frankly, is just another way of letting the developers know "hey, we're still here, we still care, and we want to support the game in any way possible."
Some people think optimism = stupidity or being unrealistic and being pessimistic = being edgy and intelligent. Whatever floats your boat I guess.
It's a zoo game with virtual animals. It's not exactly high stakes. I enjoy speculating about all the thing this game could include in a perfect world while acknowledging that might not happen. If a few players enjoy talking about how what other people like is invalid and how not wanting to constantly reiterate that the game will end one day (yes, we know)... I guess we all get our stress relief in different ways.
More than that, I think talking about what we
want the game to be only adds to the odds that supporting the game might continue. One of the things referenced in the financial presentation is that the "players demand" the paid DLC packs
and that there is a strong ROI from them. More chatter about the DLCs, what people want out of the game, and so on is just an expression of love and support for the game. And being able to say that X people are talking about that sort of thing on a daily basis certainly wouldn't hurt our case for more content!
And besides, what's the worst that could happen? Support ends and Frontier just has a whole dearth of information they can use to inform how to create a sequel down the line.
Peace pipe anyone? 
www.frontier.co.uk
