Ice bear space requirement

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
 
i know about the changes, thank you. i had even replied to that thread before you linked. its nothing new, not helping. it is still insanely big as others have commented. doesn't make a difference when the "fixed" values are still 15 times larger than other bears.
 
I'm bump up this thread because i think it is one of the biggest issues in game right now. The bears not getting the attention they deserve from the players. I haven't played the game much since I got it, and waiting for the fix to play with my favorite animal. Can we at least have the requirements Halved One More Time? It will still be huge, but not as bad.
 
Should've gone with the refund, if that's one of your biggest issues.

Don't expect it. Most people have accepted this and moved on.
 
I'm bump up this thread because i think it is one of the biggest issues in game right now. The bears not getting the attention they deserve from the players. I haven't played the game much since I got it, and waiting for the fix to play with my favorite animal. Can we at least have the requirements Halved One More Time? It will still be huge, but not as bad.
I never had any issues with them and i have them all the time in my zoo :D so i dont see the problem.. If your guests can not see the animals, than that is not a frontier issue but a player issue, because you can adjust the shape of the habitat so that guests can see them ;)
 
Should've gone with the refund, if that's one of your biggest issues.

Don't expect it. Most people have accepted this and moved on.
You don't have to agree, but that doesn't make it less important. This topic probably has most threads on the entire Planet Zoo forum. And a few are quite recent. Means many people are not accepting the situation.
I didn't refund because I am still hopeful.
 
Meh, I don't think I'll ever get polar bears for my zoo. Their habitat requirements are too large. So... I just don't use 'em in my game. Problem solved.
 
You don't have to agree, but that doesn't make it less important. This topic probably has most threads on the entire Planet Zoo forum. And a few are quite recent. Means many people are not accepting the situation.
I didn't refund because I am still hopeful.
I don't think this topic is among the most threads.. Every now and then a thread pops up. but mostly from the same users. Same goes with the in-game speed, some players still haven't accepted this. When you post a topic about it, you'll bound to find users adding their comment as well.
A lot of people play sandbox, switch off animal welfare and that fixes it for them.

Seen this discussion a couple of times. In recent years polar bear habitats in RL zoos have become a lot bigger. Seen a few examples for 6.000-8.000 m2 for RL zoos.
So it's not that far off.

I agree, the polar bear stands out compared to the other habitats. I do have polar bears in 1 or 2 zoos in my franchise but it looks nicer in themed smaller zoos compared to large zoos.

Don't expect much changes in the current roster of animals. That's something I believe that applies to other situations as well :D
 
Last edited:
I don't think this topic is among the most threads.. Every now and then a thread pops up. but mostly from the same users.
Not at all. I can't think of any other topic that has more threads by different users and more even distribution in time. It has been raised by so many. Its usually same few people who disagree and respond that way. I think its exact opposite of what you observed. I mean its not gamebreaking or a bug, so I can understand you not seeing it as a major problem, its fair that its your opinion but it was brought by many.

Here are some of them after a short search:

and then ton more comments on the two news threads:
 
I have to agree with this, its very hard to make a nice looking habitat for them at the moment because of the space requirment. I have not used the polar bears in any of my zoos, just in the career missions which is a shame, they were my favourite animals from the arctic pack.
 
its very hard to make a nice looking habitat for them
What makes it 'very hard' ?? I mean... You pop up a few barriers in a way that guests can see them at all time (so no squares) and there is litterly no problem :D

Besides: with the arctic pack they mentioned: every animal comes with its own challenges... So there is no problem at all. Yes the space is big, but that is just how it is.. They already halved it and the size is ok now
 
What makes it 'very hard' ?? I mean... You pop up a few barriers in a way that guests can see them at all time (so no squares) and there is litterly no problem :D

Besides: with the arctic pack they mentioned: every animal comes with its own challenges... So there is no problem at all. Yes the space is big, but that is just how it is.. They already halved it and the size is ok now

I said its hard to make it look good not that its hard to literally just place the barriers.

I am not even sure why there are even people who oppose the idea to lesser the requirments - the thing is, for people like you, who are ok with the requirments, even if they lesser it again, you can always make the habitat bigger than required if you agree witht he messege Frontier is trying to make, the animals wont complain when its bigger than required. Other way around, not so much.
 
Not at all. I can't think of any other topic that has more threads by different users and more even distribution in time. It has been raised by so many. Its usually same few people who disagree and respond that way. I think its exact opposite of what you observed. I mean its not gamebreaking or a bug, so I can understand you not seeing it as a major problem, its fair that its your opinion but it was brought by many.

Here are some of them after a short search:

and then ton more comments on the two news threads:

Most of these topics are +6 months old. So yeah, it was a big deal back then.
Some of these even refer to the old requirements before they halved it.
I think it's not an issue for a lot of people anymore.
A lot of people complained about the content of the SA dlc, when it came out. Not even a discussion at this point. (till we get another DLC :D)

We disagree on the requirements, that's fine by me - that's your opinion on polar bear requirements.
I'm surprised that people are able to have an issue for +6 months about such game-mechanics.

Coat variations/Pathing/Australian animals/lag & performance/franchise market/lack of albino/escaping animals are more an issue for many, which seems to be a recurring topic on other platforms as well. Except variations, which mostly is discussed on this forum. Most of these topics have a spike in the amount of comments.

I am not even sure why there are even people who oppose the idea to lesser the requirments - the thing is, for people like you, who are ok with the requirments, even if they lesser it again, you can always make the habitat bigger than required if you agree witht he messege Frontier is trying to make

That basically could apply to a lot of animals. I've seen some people commenting on Nile monitor's space requirements as well. (not a very popular animal)
I think that the overall POV of "I disagree about the space requirements, Frontier should change this" doesn't work for a lot of people.
A lot of people mentioned the AZA with their 500m2 land per animal. When you look at RL zoos and recent built habitats, they are more in line with PZ. (yes PZ requirements are still higher). I've seen some examples of zoos, who have 5.000-8.000m2 habitats. Our local zoo (not a huge one) has polar bears with 7000m2 in total space. So, there has to be more information besides the AZA on which they rely on.
 
That basically could apply to a lot of animals. I've seen some people commenting on Nile monitor's space requirements as well. (not a very popular animal)
I think that the overall POV of "I disagree about the space requirements, Frontier should change this" doesn't work for a lot of people.
A lot of people mentioned the AZA with their 500m2 land per animal. When you look at RL zoos and recent built habitats, they are more in line with PZ. (yes PZ requirements are still higher).
We have to keep in mind that AZA requirements are a bare minimum, so that they don't have to part ways with half of their already accredited institutions. Zoos are always in dire need of money and expecting quick renovations wouldn't be very realistic, so the AZA (as well as other regional associations like the EAZA) increase/improve their requirements in an orderly and periodic manner so their members can cope with the changes. Such organizations have also recently started using a second statistic, average enclosure size, as a soft guideline for their members to set the bar up higher before their next set of minimum requirements update. Hopefully this method will further accelerate ongoing facility upgrades.

For this reason, taking such bare minimum requirements as the only rule of thumb for animal needs wouldn't be very appropriate as this data, particularly enclosure size, is an ongoing process, so the members of such associations can cope and adapt. They even state in their own documents that these figures should not be taken as ideal figures purely representing animal needs, but to serve as a restriction for relatively inadequate facilities. For instance their bare minimum for big cats is approximately 140 sqm. We all know that this figure won't fly in a game where space and money is not as critical as irl.

However it is a good source to start understanding animal spatial needs, to compare and contrast different animals and their need for space. Personally I use AZA figures for ratios to compare PZ and AZA requirements. For instance if the AZA limits tiger enclosures to a bare minimum of 144 square meters, and the one we have in the game is 705 square meters, I use it to compare it with other animals to see if the requirements are too big relatively. The bare minimum figure in the AZA polar bear care manual is 500 sqm. dry land and an additional 70 sqm. of swimming space, combined is roughly 4 times that of the tiger bare minimum. This would correspond to an in-game value of 2280 sqm. for the polar bear. So a minimum requirement of 2500-3000 sqm. of dry land and 500 sqm. of swimming space would be in-line with other animals on the roster and end the discussion once and for all.

Taking this principle into consideration I will be starting a new thread on spatial requirements in the game for all animals that need a revision, outside of the context of particular animals that turns discussions into infinite loops that don't lead anywhere. I had this planned for a while now, but due to my irl schedule I could not.
 
Can't wait to see that info :D
Looks like a very interesting thread.

I consider the bare minimum like something you see in Big Cat parks or people who have an Big Cat hobby. (cages/"habitats" like Tiger King etc.)
And the situation in zoos as the ideal captivity requirements, within their limitations. (I know ideal would be the wild)
Not starting a discussion about conditions in both types, but just ot clarify how your picture/view is when you read a certain word.
When I see bare minimum, I picture a situation like small cages or small habitats - just to avoid fines from animal welfare organizations.

Also a like for using bare minimum and polar bear in the same sentence :D :D
 
Top Bottom