Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park

Your Feature Request / Idea
I know there's a "no wishlist or groups of requests" rule, but I can't think of any other way to present the idea:

Dinosaurs from the book missed in the game

Procompsognathus

Listed as "Procompsognathida", this small carnivore is depicted in the novel as a coprophagist scavenger, the main reason to have them in the park is cleanup since it feeds on dead or dying animals and bigger dinosaurs poop (which modern bacteria can't decompose). They move in large packs, and they kill John Hammond in a similar way their movie twins kill Dieter Stark in The Lost World[. He doesn't suffer as much, since Compys saliva contains a venom that keeps him happy and sleepy (drunk or high?) while they eat him alive.

Some thoughts on how it would fit in JWE:
High social stats, like 5-12. Being a scavenger, it would only feed on meat feeders, that mening it won't hunt goats or other dinosaurs. It could, however, break out and bite the guests if hungry or uncomfortable enough. I imagine 2 possibilities about its size: to make it bigger than its real and movie counterparts (like Troodon size, maybe) or keep it small and therefore make it unable to kill guests (injured guests demands would in this case be cheaper but last longer). I would keep the venom feature exclusive to Troodon.

Othnielsaurus and Hypsilophodon



Listed as "Othnielia" and "Hypsilophodontida", I'm putting this two together because they're very similar. In the book this herbivores are described as semi-arboreal creatures, and the scene where they first appear present a headscratcher (the tour car call their attention using a mating call, but as far as they know all the animals are female...so how do they know the sound?). Later, a lone loose specimen is tranquilized and put back in her enclosure.
Both species were left out from the movies.
Some thoughts on how they would fit in JWE:
The lone loose dinosaur scene in the book make it seems like it would tolerate a solitary lifestyle, but since the first scene they appear in is in a herd they would like high social as well, like Struthiomimus, maybe smaller with a higher comfort threshold. Also, since they're described as "the gazelles of the dinosaur world", I imagine they would be very active: running and sprinting even when just roaming, a real challenge for the aim of the ACU.

Hadrosaurus

In the book, this animals star the stampede scene that Gallimimus did in the movie adaptation. One of them is hunted by one of the T-rex, and another one is seen being killed by a pack of Velocirraptors through the surveillance cameras once all the dinosaurs are freed.
It doesn't directly appear in any movie, but it is in the holoscope data base in Jurassic World.

Some thoughts on how they would fit in JWE:
There are already quite a few hadrosaurids, so I don't have any meaningful contribution other than this dinosaur would be a new canvas for cosmetic skins designers.

Cearadactylus

Listed in the novel as "Pterosaurus", this flying reptiles have their own enclosure, the Aviary, and are highly territorial and agressive.
The original species didn't make it into the movies, but their behaviour was adopted by Pteranodon and Dimorphodon in Jurassic Park 3 and Jurassic World.

Some thoughts on how it would fit in JWE:
In the novel all 6 animals share a pen, but inmediatly attack the characters when they appear. A specific number of social different than 1 (solitary) and an equal number of ideal population would fit this. Being it a flying creature, there are more things to consider: once it breaks out, it could escape and dissapear instead of just roaming around attacking guests. There are other threads about flying reptiles being incorporated in the games either as future updates or DLCs, so I won't go further in the subject.

Euoplocephalus

Listed by inGEN as "Euoplocephalida", this is a big member of the ankylosaurids family, the second biggest after Ankylosaurus itself. It's only mentioned to be in the park, but the protagonists never encounter one so a in-universe description doesn't exist. It didn't make an appearance in the big screen, either.
Some thoughts on how it would fit in JWE:
Similar to Hadrosaurus mentioned above, other armoured herbivores could act as a good guideline, and this new dinosaur is another new opportunity for skins designers.

Microceratus

Listed in the novel with its previous name "Microceratops", this small herbivore is a bipedal ceratopsian that lives in small groups. It hasn't appeared in any movie, but it was present in the Jurassic World promotional website.
Some thoughts on how it would fit in JWE:
It could have a social need, but not too much tolerance...maybe 2-5.

Dinosaurs from the book present in the game

Tyrannosaurus, Maiasaurus, Stegosaurus, Triceratops, Velocirraptor, Apatosaurus, Dilophosaurus and Styracosaurus are the dinosaurs that appear in the original book and are available in the game. My only suggestion would be a new skin for Dilophosaurus, red, black and yellow as it is described.

(change just the colors, keeping the frill and the smaller size from the movie)
 
I haven't read the second novel, that's why I didn't mention it in the first entry, and I'm pretty sure I saw it in another thread in this forum, but there's another possible addition(s?) from the books to the game: the camouflage feature for the Carnotaurus, currently available only for the Indominus.

I mention it now because in the first book, a young wild-born male raptor can change the colour of his skin, but given the scene it's probably not for camouflage purposes.
 
I haven't read the second novel, that's why I didn't mention it in the first entry, and I'm pretty sure I saw it in another thread in this forum, but there's another possible addition(s?) from the books to the game: the camouflage feature for the Carnotaurus, currently available only for the Indominus.

I mention it now because in the first book, a young wild-born male raptor can change the colour of his skin, but given the scene it's probably not for camouflage purposes.
A raptor changing it's skin? I don't remember that at all. I remember the wild ones having different colors than the ones they kept in captivity though... And the Camo Carno's of course.
 
A raptor changing it's skin? I don't remember that at all. I remember the wild ones having different colors than the ones they kept in captivity though... And the Camo Carno's of course.
It happens in one of the last chapters, when they put a tracking device on him to find the nest. Lex nicknames him "Clarence".
 
It happens in one of the last chapters, when they put a tracking device on him to find the nest. Lex nicknames him "Clarence".
That actually does ring a bell. I remember "Clarence", but not the color-change. It's been a while since I read the books, so you're probably right. :D
 
*shrugs* ...I'm usually one for more dinosaurs, but frankly the only critters in this list I'd consider viable is Euoplocephalus and Hypsilophodon...

Procompsognathus and Microceratus are both well under the current minimum size limit... either they'd have to figure out how to make half-meter long animals work or there's no point in adding them really.

Cearadactylus is of course a pterosaur and until pterosaur DLC is seriously considered there's no chance they'll be adding anything like that...

Hadrosaurus is known only from its limbs and bits of other bones... everything else would have to be made up. There are plenty of hadrosaurs known from good remains out there... would sooner see one of them than one so poorly preserved the only thing we can say for certain about it is that it was a hadrosaur.
 
*shrugs* ...I'm usually one for more dinosaurs, but frankly the only critters in this list I'd consider viable is Euoplocephalus and Hypsilophodon...

Procompsognathus and Microceratus are both well under the current minimum size limit... either they'd have to figure out how to make half-meter long animals work or there's no point in adding them really.

Cearadactylus is of course a pterosaur and until pterosaur DLC is seriously considered there's no chance they'll be adding anything like that...

Hadrosaurus is known only from its limbs and bits of other bones... everything else would have to be made up. There are plenty of hadrosaurs known from good remains out there... would sooner see one of them than one so poorly preserved the only thing we can say for certain about it is that it was a hadrosaur.
I made a few suggestions on how a tiny carnivore could work, in the compys section, but I couldn't think on how a tiny herbivore like Microceratus could be interesting.
Any suggestions?

I completely agree with you about Cearadactylus; being a pterosaur its inclusion in JWE would mean a whole lot of new things to add in the gameplay. Leaving the island if not tranquilized soon enough, animals fighting and/or taking down ACU choppers...

As for Hadrosaurus...I don't think the lack of fossil evidence would be such a problem in this context. When Jurassic Park 3 was filmed little was known about Spinosaurus, so the animal in the screen (the very same we have in the game now) is made up of speculations (new fossils have been discovered and JP3's spino became scientifically obsolete, worst case scenario the same thing would happen to Hadrosaurus).

What do you think about Othnielsaurus? (it's the only one you didn't mentioned in your comment)
Is it as plausible as Hypsilophodon?
 
I made a few suggestions on how a tiny carnivore could work, in the compys section, but I couldn't think on how a tiny herbivore like Microceratus could be interesting.
Any suggestions?
As a matter of fact, I actually started a thread about small animals of all kinds... it got buried as most threads do...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/448801-Small-Animals-and-Ideas-for-Adding-Them

What do you think about Othnielsaurus? (it's the only one you didn't mentioned in your comment)
Is it as plausible as Hypsilophodon?
Hmm... possibly... it's not much smaller than Troodon and they made that guy look convincing enough...
 
Microceratus could be interesting if they sized them up about the size of Dracorex, but classified them with the other Ceratopsian dinosaurs, usuing group mechanics as a defense, and , wait for it....poison glads, like poison tree frogs, giving Carnivores a second thought about hunting them.

Poison/Venom is clearly a new direction, and while they certainly shouldn't over do it..you could easily add a couple of dinosaurs with these very natural defenses. ( again, dart frogs, and many species of fish.) A lot of natural animals have poison as a defense from predators. It would make a whole lot of logical sense that something that seems small and harmless would have such a trait in order to survive.
 
Microceratus could be interesting if they sized them up about the size of Dracorex, but classified them with the other Ceratopsian dinosaurs, usuing group mechanics as a defense, and , wait for it....poison glads, like poison tree frogs, giving Carnivores a second thought about hunting them.

Poison/Venom is clearly a new direction, and while they certainly shouldn't over do it..you could easily add a couple of dinosaurs with these very natural defenses. ( again, dart frogs, and many species of fish.) A lot of natural animals have poison as a defense from predators. It would make a whole lot of logical sense that something that seems small and harmless would have such a trait in order to survive.
The thing about that idea is that there's at least some precedence within the franchise for Dilophosaurus and Troodon being venomous... for anything else, the reason to give them venom would probably amount to "because they could"... and if they're really going to create an oversized, venomous Microceratus, they may as well just create a hybrid instead...
 
Again, not exactly. The finding wouldn't have to be "because they could", but, just like with the Dilo and Troodon, the idea that it is very possible natural adaptation that a small herbivore might have needed to survive. It could be JUST like how it was for the Dilo." We now know it was actually poisonous." After all, the multiple fish and amphibians that have that trait naturally don't have it because we played God. So, logically, there should be some herbivores with natural defenses, just like in the wild. Because aside from Armor, all the advantages in game seem to be for the Predators.
 
Microceratus could be interesting if they sized them up about the size of Dracorex, but classified them with the other Ceratopsian dinosaurs, usuing group mechanics as a defense, and , wait for it....poison glads, like poison tree frogs, giving Carnivores a second thought about hunting them.

Poison/Venom is clearly a new direction, and while they certainly shouldn't over do it..you could easily add a couple of dinosaurs with these very natural defenses. (again, dart frogs, and many species of fish.) A lot of natural animals have poison as a defense from predators. It would make a whole lot of logical sense that something that seems small and harmless would have such a trait in order to survive.
So...poisonous Microceratus...a carnivore would fight it (or just kill and eat it, since such a small herbivore wouldn't have a fight animation, like current Struthiomimus) and get poisoned, having its health dropping until a Ranger team administered an antidote (which would have to be researched, and said investigation would require 100% Microceratus genome).

That sounds interesting.
 
The thing about that idea is that there's at least some precedence within the franchise for Dilophosaurus and Troodon being venomous... for anything else, the reason to give them venom would probably amount to "because they could"... and if they're really going to create an oversized, venomous Microceratus, they may as well just create a hybrid instead...
From the Jurassic Park fan perspective, it would be risky to add a third venomous/poisonous dinosaur (actually, there's a difference...in this example, Dilophosaurus and Troodon are venomous, Microceratus is poisonous), but from the Jurassic World Evolution gameplay perspective, it might as well introduce something new (Troodon use its venom to hunt and -eventually- kill other dinosaurs, and Dilophosaurus's venom is just an aesthetic thing, since it doesn't have any effect).
 
From a Jurassic Park fan perspective..Novels and Movies. It's not risky at all. Nature is filled with both venomous, and poisonous creatures. And as both the game, and the novel, and the movie CONSTANTLY point out. NONE of the dinosaurs are natural, they have been mixed with modern day animals FROM THE START. So anyone saying there is no presedent for this kind of adaptations are not only ignoring every piece of canon, but the very theme of the entire series. In my opinion, that should be the direction they take "hybirds", instead of focusing on what weird mashup of dinosaurs they can throw together, they should be thinking outside the box, and like the Indom, come up with creative genetic adaptations and "Evolutions" that modern day animals have that give them distinct evolutionary advantages.

No precedence? When the entire franchise is about the dangers of biological engineering having unforseen consequences, and the dangers of tampering with creatures that are millions of years old and have traits that we may not even KNOW about since all we have are fossils to look at? I'd say that's a ton of precedence AND would build upon the foundations that the game is already establishing.

Unlike aquatic reptiles..which at the moment the game has NO frame work for.
 
So...poisonous Microceratus...a carnivore would fight it (or just kill and eat it, since such a small herbivore wouldn't have a fight animation, like current Struthiomimus) and get poisoned, having its health dropping until a Ranger team administered an antidote (which would have to be researched, and said investigation would require 100% Microceratus genome).

That sounds interesting.
Thank you.
I don't think that has to be the only one.

My other idea was for a Dimetrodon, that has poison spines similar to Foxface fish or Lionfish. Behaving like a Small carnivore, but quadrepedal, it could have a unique dynamic. Unable to catch faster moving prey like hadrosaurs and strutios, it never actively hunts them, but prefers slower movie, defensive animals. In addition, introduce a mechanic that encourages scavenger behaviour, basically having the Dimetrodon become heavily interested in hunting animals that are already wounded, and then it's poisonous spines would be to defend itself only from other predators, who may try to capatilize on their kill/find.

Not only could something like that make real, evolutionary sound logic, it also would add new levels of intricacy to different cages and different ecosystems, just like modern nature. Right now its Small carnos which cant pack hunt, and a ton of large carnos that all fight to the death ( which is honestly sometimes VERY unnatural, as most predators would flee from a fight they are clearly loosing if they can.) Ofcourse, those behaviours can EASILY be explained with all the gene modifications that are ALREADY in the game. Oh, that Carnotaur won't back down from a fight because you gave it the Agressive instincts gene? Makes sense. OH, the raptor you gave the boosted intelligence to is more prone to try and break out? Also perfect sense. Maybe they step the game needs to take is the unintended and, to quote malcolm , the chaotic and unknown chances some of those genes might create. That would make the game far more interesting and replayable, if you could alter a gene to boost lifespan or resilence, but it ends up with a random, unexpected consequence. Suddenly, that individual's population requirements lower, or raise, even if you bred three with Identical genes, one of them is different, and when you realize that a dinosaur that should have been happy, is suddenly 20 minutes later on a rampage, then we would have a game that is more inline with the themes of the series;

Genetic power is the most awesome force the planet has ever seen.
 
From a Jurassic Park fan perspective..Novels and Movies. It's not risky at all.
I meant that the introduction of a third venomous/poisonous dinosaur would make the venom/poison feature seem overexploited.

In my opinion, that should be the direction they take "hybirds", instead of focusing on what weird mashup of dinosaurs they can throw together, they should be thinking outside the box, and like the Indom, come up with creative genetic adaptations and "Evolutions" that modern day animals have that give them distinct evolutionary advantages.
I can't tell if you misspelled "hybrids" or if it's a clever word game about birds being dinosaurs :D
 
Thank you.
I don't think that has to be the only one.

My other idea was for a Dimetrodon, that has poison spines similar to Foxface fish or Lionfish. Behaving like a Small carnivore, but quadrepedal, it could have a unique dynamic. Unable to catch faster moving prey like hadrosaurs and strutios, it never actively hunts them, but prefers slower moving, defensive animals. In addition, introduce a mechanic that encourages scavenger behaviour, basically having the Dimetrodon become heavily interested in hunting animals that are already wounded, and then it's poisonous spines would be to defend itself only from other predators, who may try to capatilize on their kill/find.

Not only could something like that make real, evolutionary sound logic, it also would add new levels of intricacy to different cages and different ecosystems, just like modern nature. Right now its Small carnos which cant pack hunt, and a ton of large carnos that all fight to the death ( which is honestly sometimes VERY unnatural, as most predators would flee from a fight they are clearly loosing if they can.) Of course, those behaviours can EASILY be explained with all the gene modifications that are ALREADY in the game. Oh, that Carnotaur won't back down from a fight because you gave it the Agressive instincts gene? Makes sense. OH, the raptor you gave the boosted intelligence to is more prone to try and break out? Also perfect sense. Maybe they step the game needs to take is the unintended and, to quote malcolm , the chaotic and unknown chances some of those genes might create. That would make the game far more interesting and replayable, if you could alter a gene to boost lifespan or resilence, but it ends up with a random, unexpected consequence. Suddenly, that individual's population requirements lower, or raise, even if you bred three with Identical genes, one of them is different, and when you realize that a dinosaur that should have been happy, is suddenly 20 minutes later on a rampage, then we would have a game that is more inline with the themes of the series;

Genetic power is the most awesome force the planet has ever seen.
Dimetrodon is not only not a dinosaur, but also from a different time period...so I don't think it will ever be added to the game.
Is the poison spines idea your own, or is there any fossil evidence suggesting it? Asking out of curiosity, since it's the first time I hear it.
 
Dimetrodon is not only not a dinosaur, but also from a different time period...so I don't think it will ever be added to the game.
Is the poison spines idea your own, or is there any fossil evidence suggesting it? Asking out of curiosity, since it's the first time I hear it.
And yet Dimetrodon is not only one of the most iconic prehistoric animals known, but apparently they managed to clone one at some point, as the various "models" seen in the Lockwood manor were apparently once living cloned animals that were latter taxidermied, including the Dimetrodon... the fact that it isn't a part of the Mesozoic period shouldn't prevent them from including it; after all, what's really stopping them from adding non-Mesozoic animals really?

As for the poison spines I'm pretty sure that's his idea... I know I have heard nothing about Dimetrodon being poisonous...
 
And yet Dimetrodon is not only one of the most iconic prehistoric animals known, but apparently they managed to clone one at some point, as the various "models" seen in the Lockwood manor were apparently once living cloned animals that were latter taxidermied, including the Dimetrodon...
Really? I've never heard of that.

(...)the fact that it isn't a part of the Mesozoic period shouldn't prevent them from including it; after all, what's really stopping them from adding non-Mesozoic animals really?
At this point, I think mainly "canon tradition". Non-Mesozoic animals have appeared within the JurassicPark franchise before, but only in videogames, comics, toys...we've never seen and likely will never see a Velociraptor fighting a Sabertooth in the next movies.
(And we can't de-extinct Michael Crichton so he writes another book, hahah)
 
Top Bottom