Hot takes for planet zoo

[The Aardvark]

Not exactly a hot take, but I kinda want to spit-ball an alternate reality. Suppose that instead of our annual freebies, we instead got a Deluxe Animal Pack at launch with these 8:

• African Leopard
• Black-&-White Ruffed Lemur
• Collared Peccary
• Komodo Dragon
• Pygmy Hippopotamus
• Red Deer
• Thomson's Gazelle
• Malabar Rose Butterfly (also includes the Walkthrough exhibit)

How many people would've bought this?

Definitely a MUCH better deal than the real deluxe edition.
The real draw of paying for the deluxe edition was access to the beta, but after the game was fully released the excessive price for deluxe edition felt less and less justified. Only three animals, one of which is not even that exciting (the Gazelle), somehow cost more than a standard DLC with 4 habitat animals, 1 exhibit animal, and dozens of building pieces... And I don't feel like the soundtrack and wallpapers justify that 12 buck price tag

 

[Captain Callum]

Not exactly a hot take, but I kinda want to spit-ball an alternate reality. Suppose that instead of our annual freebies, we instead got a Deluxe Animal Pack at launch with these 8:

• African Leopard
• Black-&-White Ruffed Lemur
• Collared Peccary
• Komodo Dragon
• Pygmy Hippopotamus
• Red Deer
• Thomson's Gazelle
• Malabar Rose Butterfly (also includes the Walkthrough exhibit)

How many people would've bought this?

Most likely the same amount of people but given the price of the deluxe pack, people would of actually got value for their money. The cost of £12 or so for the 3 animals currently is pretty pathetic. The downside though... the african leopard, collared peccary, red deer and butterfly would of suffered from the usual base game issues.

 

[RightWhale]

I’m hoping that if we get more DLCs free exhibit animals become more of the norm. I miss the representation. I get exhibit boxes are clunky and are glorified statues, but when the SouthEast Asia Pack and Arid Pack came out I at-least felt a bit better when they weren’t 100% mammals. Sure the leaf bug and snake aren’t a good excuse for no bird or habitat reptile, but it was something.

I just wish the exhibit box got more love. I wish it had naked mole rats, I wish it had fish, I wish we got ants, and do I need to mention the Cobra? Like everything in PZ you don’t have to love it, but I LOVE the fact that the small animals not normally in zoo games at-least got a nod. At least this game has some insects, amphibians, and smaller reptiles. Not to mention turtles are so important to conservation and we still only have the one.

And do I also need to mention the birds in the WTE?

 

[Topaz Star]

I agree, to me exhibits are also an easy way to crank up the species count in my zoos, which makes my zoos feel more realistic. Because who really goes to zoos with only like 10 species?

 

[RightWhale]

I agree, to me exhibits are also an easy way to crank up the species count in my zoos, which makes my zoos feel more realistic. Because who really goes to zoos with only like 10 species?

My computer might explode with 7 habitats, exhibit boxes really helps make my zoo feel bigger. I can always put down a “reptile house” to increase my species and animal count while sparing my PC.

 

[Utahraptor Arcanus]

My unpopular opinion of the week is that people don't care about subspecie level of difference or diversity, This show by how little people mention that the african buffalo or wild boar should be specified considering how different some subspecie are from the animal ingame. The cats and brown bear only get a pass to be split because they subspecies are well know.

 

[Mjmannella]

My unpopular opinion of the week is that people don't care about subspecie level of difference or diversity, This show by how little people mention that the african buffalo or wild boar should be specified considering how different some subspecie are from the animal ingame. The cats and brown bear only get a pass to be split because they subspecies are well know.

That and carnivoran bias, as I've belaboured for years

 

[Markiz]

My unpopular opinion of the week is that people don't care about subspecie level of difference or diversity, This show by how little people mention that the african buffalo or wild boar should be specified considering how different some subspecie are from the animal ingame. The cats and brown bear only get a pass to be split because they subspecies are well know.

They do care, just not consistently. This has been brought up before, but I can't seem to see the issue. I care about specificly Siberian Tiger being in the game, because I'm well "acquainted" with it.

I am not that well versed with Wold Boar subspecies so I'm fine if subspecies isn't specified.

Opinions don't need to be measurable by an objective standard to be valid.

 

[Utahraptor Arcanus]

They do care, just not consistently. This has been brought up before, but I can't seem to see the issue. I care about specificly Siberian Tiger being in the game, because I'm well "acquainted" with it.

I am not that well versed with Wold Boar subspecies so I'm fine if subspecies isn't specified.

Opinions don't need to be measurable by an objective standard to be valid.

But that's part of the issue: People don't care about the diversity itself of visuals those animals posses, they care about the label. People knowing what a is Siberian tiger is what make them care about the division, while the same can't be said about the boar.

In other words, other than popularity, why those two:

must be separed, but those three:

can be the same animal?

 

[Doran]

My unpopular opinion of the week is that people don't care about subspecie level of difference or diversity, This show by how little people mention that the african buffalo or wild boar should be specified considering how different some subspecie are from the animal ingame. The cats and brown bear only get a pass to be split because they subspecies are well know.

Remember Alaskan Moose?
European players use it like nothing, but himalayan brown bears is THE problem. Literally word used in zoopedia is more important factor to these people than actual animal featured in the game.

 

[Marvinb]

i think the wild boar is pretty obviously supposed to be the central european subspecies, even if its not stated anywhere. Just because of how it looks and the fact that there are only other european animals in its interspecies enrichtment, no asian or african species

 

[Marvinb]

Remember Alaskan Moose?
European players use it like nothing, but himalayan brown bears is THE problem. Literally word used in zoopedia is more important factor to these people than actual animal featured in the game.

I mean to be fair the in game himalayan brown bear looks nothing like the european one. The grizzly is one if seen alot of people use as a stand in

 

[Markiz]

But that's part of the issue

First off, I think that's root of our disagreement. I don't see it as issue.

People don't care about the diversity itself of visuals those animals posses, they care about the label. People knowing what a is Siberian tiger is what make them care about the division, while the same can't be said about the boar.

Some people might, other people do care about diversity but came to care for that through the label.

In other words, other than popularity, why those two:
must be separed, but those three: can be the same animal?

Why "other than popularity". Yeah other than popularity, no bigger reasons, but popularity is huge factor. And whether it's positive or negative factor is up to opinions.

But sure, other than popularity, it's not that tiger "must" be separated, I don't think game would suffer too much without subspecies, but they're popular enough, so why not do it?

 

[Iben]

People don't care about the diversity itself of visuals those animals posses, they care about the label.

Yes, and? It's perfectly fine not to care about one animal and care a lot about another more hyperspecific animal. That's not a problem, that's just people being human.

We're not machines. We're not robots. We don't have to rationalize everything we do. We don't have to be consistent in everything in our lives. We can just want things because we want it. We have different tastes, different needs, different things that we've got emotional connections to, etc. etc.. All absolutely fine.

Now Frontier, they have to do the market research. They have to find some "objective" measurement to a degree out of the big sea of our subjective opinions and wants. Not because of some higher noble goal or anything, but because they have to find a happy median so they as a company keep making profit. But us? Nope, we don't have to adhere to that at all. We can just want whatever the heck we want.

Maybe that's my hot take. Not all discussions should be debates. The outcome doesn't have to always be "my choice is right and yours is wrong". You can grow and learn as a person by looking at other people's perspectives even when you don't agree with them. This incessant need to rationalize our choices leads to absolutely nowhere because we're 6 years in and barely anyone has changed their minds; all we do is just have the same old "debates" over and over and over and over again.

 

[Doran]

Keep cooking Utahraptor. Keep cooking.

Someone should make a thread, in which we are going to explore hidden by Frontier subspecies choices.

 

[Milurian]

Not exactly a hot take, but I kinda want to spit-ball an alternate reality. Suppose that instead of our annual freebies, we instead got a Deluxe Animal Pack at launch with these 8:

• African Leopard
• Black-&-White Ruffed Lemur
• Collared Peccary
• Komodo Dragon
• Pygmy Hippopotamus
• Red Deer
• Thomson's Gazelle
• Malabar Rose Butterfly (also includes the Walkthrough exhibit)

How many people would've bought this?

I would of bought it for the komodo and pygmy hippo the same reason I bought it originally

Remember Alaskan Moose?
European players use it like nothing, but himalayan brown bears is THE problem. Literally word used in zoopedia is more important factor to these people than actual animal featured in the game.

This is exactly why i am in support of only species level additions because a generic version will make most people satisfied

 

[Utahraptor Arcanus]

Some people might, other people do care about diversity but came to care for that through the label.

So, don't you agree that they are defending it for the label? not because they actually care about the differences?

Why "other than popularity".

Because my entire point is that popularity is the only thing holding the division despite it making no sense for consistency or logistically to have the two tigers be separeted for small things while buffalos with literal different colors, horns and biomes to be stuffed into one single animal.

But sure, other than popularity, it's not that tiger "must" be separated, I don't think game would suffer too much without subspecies, but they're popular enough, so why not do it?

I don't mind the subspecie separation, but i find it pure nonsense that the main factor for separation is... popularity i guess, which doesn't explain why the chimp passed the test, but the white rhino didn't.

Yes, and? It's perfectly fine not to care about one animal and care a lot about another more hyperspecific animal. That's not a problem, that's just people being human.

We're not machines. We're not robots. We don't have to rationalize everything we do. We don't have to be consistent in everything in our lives. We can just want things because we want it. We have different tastes, different needs, different things that we've got emotional connections to, etc. etc.. All absolutely fine.

It's obviously not a problem of it's own, but i'm specifically refering about the fact that many people, instead of being honest and just say it, use diversity as a excuse, when that's clearly not the reason.

Maybe that's my hot take. Not all discussions should be debates. The outcome doesn't have to always be "my choice is right and yours is wrong". You can grow and learn as a person by looking at other people's perspectives even when you don't agree with them.

Mind ya, but this was never a "my choice is right and yours is wrong", i simply exposed my opinion on a matter, you guys answered, and we have been simply talking about it.

I'm not chaging anybody mind, so i might aswell just voice my hot take in a hot take thread.

 

[Milurian]

My unpopular opinion of the week is that people don't care about subspecie level of difference or diversity, This show by how little people mention that the african buffalo or wild boar should be specified considering how different some subspecie are from the animal ingame. The cats and brown bear only get a pass to be split because they subspecies are well know.

fyi the african buffalo is specified its marked as the cape buffalo in the zoopedia and "afrcian buffalo" is often more associated with that subspecies than the forest buffalo which almost always gets referred to by its subspecies name from those who know it exists.

 

[Utahraptor Arcanus]

fyi the african buffalo is specified its marked as the cape buffalo in the zoopedia and "afrcian buffalo" is often more associated with that subspecies than the forest buffalo which almost always gets referred to by its subspecies name from those who know it exists.

I wasn't aware of this, it's kind confusing cuz Iirc, the zoopedia range show the whole specie and the name is confusing.
Glad to know the cientific name is at least corret.

 

[Iben]

It's obviously not a problem of it's own, but i'm specifically refering about the fact that many people, instead of being honest and just say it, use diversity as a excuse, when that's clearly not the reason.

I don't think they use diversity as an excuse. I think you're just expecting people to be consistent about it across all animals when they don't have to be. That's what I meant with not needing to rationalize things, because it always falls apart Even the people who are wholeheartedly convinced they're being rational in all their choices aren't, even they have "arbitrary" reasons for some of the animals they want.

Mind ya, but this was never a "my choice is right and yours is wrong", i simply exposed my opinion on a matter, you guys answered, and we have been simply talking about it.

I'm not chaging anybody mind, so i might aswell just voice my hot take in a hot take thread.

Yeah that's on me, I should have specified I meant it more as a general remark on the state of discussions here than specifically to what you said.