It was just a suggestion. If they locked it and made everyone pay for the game again all hell would break loose.
They could ask the players first if they would want them to lock the game.
I give up. Dev's should lock the game for more development....
- Thread starter KaoRu
- Start date
They could ask the players first if they would want them to lock the game.
Same here. I log in to complete the community challenge rewards and then go play something else.
With the food/staff costs, refund mechanic(ridiculous), constantly whining guests and the endless bugs, it's a bit of a slog - reckon the game will be much more enjoyable in 6 months.
Every time I log in after a patch there's just more new bugs; today every animal has to be wild released from the trade center twice before it works (super annoying). Also can't rehome animals most of the time - either doesn't work or disconnects from the server.
Last edited:
I agree it should be locked down and address all the issue for planet, zoo and maybe it would be a good idea to release as early access instead of a full finished game in the first place. At the moment it about the early access point would be design why and bugs/glitch's and they would not have all complaining to fix.
Another maybe add a few new animals if they do locked down to make up for this problem and it would keep people happy in return.
Another maybe add a few new animals if they do locked down to make up for this problem and it would keep people happy in return.
That is a very shallow assumption. For instance I can play the game at x3 the speed all the way from scratch even when starting a new zoo, but there is no fun in that. Can't and don't want to are two different things. Most people just want to relax and enjoy the animals. It is true that some people prob can't keep up but generalizing such a thing is just wrong.
I wouldn't even bother Jacob they only see their argument with the issue as the right one and that's it.
This does rely on a couple of fallacies though. A: The people who do want it changed, will say so in the forum, since they need to be an active part. B: You more readily see posts that do agree with your stance. C: Most people that own and play the game are on the forum (which is false).
There have been quite a few complaints about the time threads in here as far as I have seen. Many are crosspollinating the same people. This may or many not, in the end constitute a lot of people. I do not see that many though. Especially not in comparison to the actual game population.
I agree that the game should have been delayed. I think players would have been more forgiving about that than having to put up with all these bugs.
Not sure they can lock the game now (legally) after we’ve paid for it. Unless, as you say, they sorted out refunds. I don’t see this happening, they would definitely lose a chunk of their sales and when you have investors etc this is just not gonna happen.
I imagine they have to now figure out, after so many patches that have left the game broken still, what is the extent of the work they have to do. The devs clearly are overwhelmed and are trying to resolve things quickly (as opposed to effectively).
I think Frontier should apologise.
I want to talk about communication too: Someone mentioned Planet Coaster and while they did sell that game as an alpha first, I do have to agree that communication from Frontier was so bad. Roadmaps are not ideal sometimes but they should have at least told us what isn’t going to happen (i.e. Weather, water parks and other features). It felt like we were being kept in the dark for years while they supported PC. Every DLC pack was met with excitement and disappointment in equal measure as PC was meant to represent the next leap in that genre of games and yet was missing many of the staples of that genre that always had a connection to the management aspect of the game.
I too have stopped playing Planet Zoo as I was feeling apathetic towards it after hours of not having fun or finding fulfilment. It just doesn’t feel right, like half the the concept is there but not the game. But that’s when it is actually working and not falling apart due to bugs.
Not sure they can lock the game now (legally) after we’ve paid for it. Unless, as you say, they sorted out refunds. I don’t see this happening, they would definitely lose a chunk of their sales and when you have investors etc this is just not gonna happen.
I imagine they have to now figure out, after so many patches that have left the game broken still, what is the extent of the work they have to do. The devs clearly are overwhelmed and are trying to resolve things quickly (as opposed to effectively).
I think Frontier should apologise.
I want to talk about communication too: Someone mentioned Planet Coaster and while they did sell that game as an alpha first, I do have to agree that communication from Frontier was so bad. Roadmaps are not ideal sometimes but they should have at least told us what isn’t going to happen (i.e. Weather, water parks and other features). It felt like we were being kept in the dark for years while they supported PC. Every DLC pack was met with excitement and disappointment in equal measure as PC was meant to represent the next leap in that genre of games and yet was missing many of the staples of that genre that always had a connection to the management aspect of the game.
I too have stopped playing Planet Zoo as I was feeling apathetic towards it after hours of not having fun or finding fulfilment. It just doesn’t feel right, like half the the concept is there but not the game. But that’s when it is actually working and not falling apart due to bugs.
This applies to many fields of life, not only online forums. Many don't raise their voices.
However, imo there's no need to change the time scale of the game. My GUESS is that most of the feeling that game speed is too fast comes from the heavy micro management gameplay, in my zoo I get an alert every 20 seconds while guest happiness is at 92% and animal welfare at 100%.
So I hesitate to post because it feels oddly like I'm rubbing your nose in it which is not my intention. But I just need to say that I have had very few bugs and am enjoying the game. The career mode has been great, I'm building up a nice franchise zoo and whilst I wouldn't mind slightly slower pace for goal orientated play (e.g. career) I think it's paced perfectly (far better than zoo tycoon 2 where every scenario took 10 hours because you had to wait so long for any cash). I'm not saying it to minimise what you are experiencing but just to point out a) that some of is aren't having the same issues and wouldn't want it locked or consider it an unfinished game which suggests b) it's behaving very differently on some rigs than others. So I think your best bet is not to lock the game whilst they fix bugs because they've already said many are irreproducable for them. They can't fix stuff if we can't tell them it exists.
Basically I know it's frustrating but don't assume it's as bad for everyone. Patches will sometimes break stuff and frankly I accept the fact that fixing the game for you might break stuff for me, mean I have to restart my zoo etc. It's annoying but that's what happens. You might wish they had done it differently but this is where we are.
Basically I know it's frustrating but don't assume it's as bad for everyone. Patches will sometimes break stuff and frankly I accept the fact that fixing the game for you might break stuff for me, mean I have to restart my zoo etc. It's annoying but that's what happens. You might wish they had done it differently but this is where we are.
I am neither here nor there on the actual question. I honestly do not feel it is too fast, but at the same time, I also get frustrated with micromanaging exhibitions and short-lived animals like the poor Springbok.
I would rather want to have some form of automation tool for the former though, than a timeslow. (Telling my keepers how many males and females I want, preferably of decent quality throughout, and sell of the rest automatically.)
I spend a huge part of my gametime paused and building stuff though, so my playstyle might also factor into it.
(Edit: I also seem to have a pretty smooth game with few bugs, dunno why I am spared either.)
I would rather want to have some form of automation tool for the former though, than a timeslow. (Telling my keepers how many males and females I want, preferably of decent quality throughout, and sell of the rest automatically.)
I spend a huge part of my gametime paused and building stuff though, so my playstyle might also factor into it.
(Edit: I also seem to have a pretty smooth game with few bugs, dunno why I am spared either.)
Please slow down the time speed of the game.
This has been a major issue to a lot of us during our gameplays of the beta, and now of the full game. As of now, the time speed is still 3 days per second. According to surveys, most players want around 10 seconds per day, with some wanting more. Animal lifespans can't be extended much without...
Slightly off-topic but while you might be enjoying career mode it's one of my absolute pet hates with Planet Zoo.
I loved the ZT2 scenarios, as when completed they unlocked some wonderful themed building sets (amongst other rewards) you could then use in freeplay. As far as I can see there is zero reason whatsoever to play career mode scenarios in Planet Zoo (unless you want the steam achievements) and that is a serious disappointment to me.
I really hope this is something they change in the longrun. I'd like to see some incentive for playing through the campaign.
Last edited:
How is it shallow to use the word "presumably" when the definition is "used to convey that what is asserted is very likely though not known for certain"? It is quite viable and quite logical to presume that those complaining about the speed of the game do so simply because they can't keep up with the game as it was designed. You even support my presumption (albeit unwittingly) when you state "It is true that some people prob can't keep up".
On another note, are you not also making a shallow presumption when you use the phrase 'Most people'. Why is it acceptable for you to make shallow assumptions but not others?
I didn't support your presumption. I just said there would ofc be people in any given population of people having difficulty keeping up but that shouldn't make us generalize it by saying that would be the reason behind every suggestion to slow the game.
As for why I said "most people", that wasn't my presumption either. I'm taking their word for it, true or not. People who want the game slowed down in threads about this topic usually stress out the fact that they can't bond with/enjoy their animals with the current speed of the game.
Don't get me wrong, I don't want the game to be slowed down like some of the extreme suggestions in those threads. That would make the game much worse than it is now.
One more vote that Frontier should work more on the game for a couple of months or so.
This game has a lot of potential, but it has some design flaws and bad balancing. I've never played a game where some parts are that great (the animals for instance) and others so extremely badly made (UI and balancing). During the beta I was already worried that they wouldn't be able to fix those things in time, and well, they couldn't.
I stopped playing like two weeks ago and I hope that at some point the game will be fixed enough to be fun again. I'm patiently waiting, as I'm loving the game idea itself.
Frontier should have considered making this an early access game. I don't think anyone would have complained then.
This game has a lot of potential, but it has some design flaws and bad balancing. I've never played a game where some parts are that great (the animals for instance) and others so extremely badly made (UI and balancing). During the beta I was already worried that they wouldn't be able to fix those things in time, and well, they couldn't.
I stopped playing like two weeks ago and I hope that at some point the game will be fixed enough to be fun again. I'm patiently waiting, as I'm loving the game idea itself.
Frontier should have considered making this an early access game. I don't think anyone would have complained then.
As I said, albeit unwittingly when you stated "It is true that some people prob can't keep up" you supported my presumption. You may not have fully supported my presumption but you did support it even if only in part or to a point. It simply is what is.
Using the phrase "most people" is a declarative statement. By using that phrase in the manner in which you wrote it you are indicating that you are stating a matter of fact. You used no disclaimers such as the word 'presumably' or 'I suspect' or even 'there is evidence that suggests'. Unlike using the word "presumably" there is no built in uncertainty when one declares "most people"! Therefore, the phrase "most people" is much more shallow than using the word "presumably".
Since the claim "most people" is being thrown around left and right by those who believe the speed of the game is too fast it is fair to counter that claim and to demonstrate how that claim is false or that it is inaccurate or that it can't possibly be proven and that that claim lacks justification. Let's look at the numbers that we know.
There are currently about 223,575 registered members in the Frontier forums. Of that number we don't know how many own or play Planet Zoo but we can get a rough idea by looking at the Steam Charts for the game.
By looking at those numbers we can ascertain that there are more than 38,457 people who own and who have played the game. Within the last 24 hours there were 11,631 players who played Planet Zoo. In the last 15 minutes or so there were 6,420 people actively playing Planet Zoo.
For the claim "most players" to be true then more than 19, 613 players must agree that the the speed of the game is too fast. Even if those players only play occasionally they are part of the player base and their voices and opinions count too.
Let's say you only want to count those who played recently (within the last 24 hours). There would still need to be 5,932 players who agree the speed of the game is too fast for the argument "most people" to be true.
For the sake of the argument of those who were playing the game within the 11 minutes of the time I took that screenshot 3,274 of them would need to agree the speed of the game is too fast for the argument "most people" to be true.
The argument in support of the "most people" claims in these forums point to a select few threads. Such as the following:
Please slow down the time speed of the game.
This has been a major issue to a lot of us during our gameplays of the beta, and now of the full game. As of now, the time speed is still 3 days per second. According to surveys, most players want around 10 seconds per day, with some wanting more. Animal lifespans can't be extended much without...forums.frontier.co.uk
If you follow that link and look at how many people clicked the "like" button you should find that a mere 66 people, or less than 1% of the aforementioned necessary people required to justify the claim "most people", actually "liked" that posters contention. Ironically even they claimed "most people" want something.
What we can ascertain and presume from these facts is that the claim "most people" is not remotely close to being true and that it is being used as a false positive for the purpose of convincing the naive and easily persuadable to join a cause. It is misleading people into believing that "most people" agree with something, an argument, that has no basis nor foundation to support the claim. There simply is no evidence whatsoever that supports the claims that "most people" want a slower speed to the game. The fact that most people have not commented at all is a greater indicator that "most people" don't care or they don't mind the speed of the game as it currently is.
That would be me. I don't mind. And I let Frontier decide. I only think people should stop describing it as a bug or glitch.
The only thing I worry for, is that a decrease in speed might also make the game easier.
But if it makes the game more enjoyable for others, it's best for all users.
Also keep in mind the "time issue" was acknowledged by Frontier as "being looked into it", while some here see that as "confirmed it is not correct", which is not the case.
My game is (as far as I can notice) bug free. Not a single crash, never lost money in any of the game modes, market responds (almost) instantly, all animals get their food when needed, no protesters.
Let me emphasize that it doesn't mean there are no bugs, but it appears to be completely random per user.
That's my experience as well. I see some people calling for a roll back to 1.2 which I find particularly aggravating because there were some people for whom the game was truly unplayable before 1.3 whose problems were solved. I know it caused issues in other people's games but it seems really selfish to assume that because your game play is worse that must be everyone's experience. I'm not saying there aren't issues, I'm not saying it's not frustrating expecially if you lose a zoo you've worked hard on and they update the game and it breaks existing saves. But, it seems to me that the sheer variety in the performance experience of this game suggests that leaving Frontier to 'fix the bugs' or saying they should have sorted them all before release is not a good strategy - they are having trouble replicating many which suggests however much internal play testing they did they probably wouldn't find them.
The question of a longer beta period or alpha testing is more reasonable and I don't feel strongly either way. There seems to be no agreed convention within the industry about play-testing, alphas, betas or anything else. It goes everything from Subnautica (2 to 3 years in alpha and beta, awesome game but for some the story was delivered piecemeal across the beta so they never got the full impact) to other major developers who release and don't do much post-release support.
What I would say is that I think the sheer variety of gaming rigs now makes it really hard for developers to do what they did 5, 10 or 15 years ago. Again, not saying that frontier have got the system, the comms or the formula right - I just think what's done is done. Either stop playing the game for 6 months and come back or carry on and risk your work not being viable after the next update. If they do what they did with planet coaster and keep introducing new requested features over 3 or 4 years then there is always your parks will be broken by balancing or other changes.