Pandora's box is open

[VetGirl330]

Three-fingered sloths are very delicate creatures and do not thrive in captivity. Most three-fingered sloths are very likely to die within a few months of being captured and do not live long enough or are healthy enough, to breed."

Sloth Mating: Not as slow as you think - SloCo

It is rare for anyone to witness sloths in the act of mating. What there is to know on the topic, however, can be found in the Slothopedia!

slothconservation.org

I fail to see how you think that the sloth set a new precedent. Frontier has failed to factor realism into their species selections since release.

1) Chinese pangolin. All of the pangolin species have terrible survivorship records in captivity, and there is no self-sustaining captive population.
2) Goliath frog. Never been bred in captivity. Very high mortality rates during capture and acclimatization as with most wild-caught animals. Many specimens injure themselves jumping into barriers because they are easily startled. I personally find it distasteful for Frontier to passively promote and normalize the capture of an endangered species for captive display, especially as this species is still trafficked throughout the world live for exploitative displays like "frog races". It would have been so easy to substitute another large Anura, like the Cane toad, which could have been used to tell an interesting conservation point around invasive species.
3) Titan beetle. The larval form has never been seen, let alone bred in captivity. Maximum possible longevity of adult specimens in captivity is several weeks. All captive animals are harvested from the wild. For every wild caught animal that makes it into captivity alive, there are dozens of animals that were killed during capture and shipping. How does that not constitute poor welfare?
4) Lehmann's poison frog. Incredibly rare in captivity, and extremely difficult to breed due to its unique breeding habits.
5) Pronghorn. Nearly non-existent in captivity outside of its native range because it fares so poorly. It has been hypothesized that it is highly sensitive to temperature or humidity conditions that differ from its natural habitat.
6) Proboscis monkey. High mortality and poor welfare in zoos outside of its natural habitat. There is a thriving colony at Singapore zoo as they are able to source diverse fresh tropical foliage from the surrounding rainforest on a daily basis. Climate and endemic pathogens probably also are significant factors.
7) Wild Asian water buffalo. If you want to talk Pandora's box, there is really no explanation for this species inclusion in the game. If Frontier had the remotest concern for realism there is at least a half dozen exotic bovine species that could have been selected without sacrificing any general appeal. Afterall, unlike the brown-throated sloth the wild water buffalo doesn't have a famous meme.

A frequently requested species that can't be kept in captivity, and that I hope to never see in the game, is the marine iguana.

 

[Leaf Productions]

I fail to see how you think that the sloth set a new precedent. Frontier has failed to factor realism into their species selections since release.

1) Chinese pangolin. All of the pangolin species have terrible survivorship records in captivity, and there is no self-sustaining captive population.
2) Goliath frog. Never been bred in captivity. Very high mortality rates during capture and acclimatization as with most wild-caught animals. Many specimens injure themselves jumping into barriers because they are easily startled. I personally find it distasteful for Frontier to passively promote and normalize the capture of an endangered species for captive display, especially as this species is still trafficked throughout the world live for exploitative displays like "frog races". It would have been so easy to substitute another large Anura, like the Cane toad, which could have been used to tell an interesting conservation point around invasive species.
3) Titan beetle. The larval form has never been seen, let alone bred in captivity. Maximum possible longevity of adult specimens in captivity is several weeks. All captive animals are harvested from the wild. For every wild caught animal that makes it into captivity alive, there are dozens of animals that were killed during capture and shipping. How does that not constitute poor welfare?
4) Lehmann's poison frog. Incredibly rare in captivity, and extremely difficult to breed due to its unique breeding habits.
5) Pronghorn. Nearly non-existent in captivity outside of its native range because it fares so poorly. It has been hypothesized that it is highly sensitive to temperature or humidity conditions that differ from its natural habitat.
6) Proboscis monkey. High mortality and poor welfare in zoos outside of its natural habitat. There is a thriving colony at Singapore zoo as they are able to source diverse fresh tropical foliage from the surrounding rainforest on a daily basis. Climate and endemic pathogens probably also are significant factors.
7) Wild Asian water buffalo. If you want to talk Pandora's box, there is really no explanation for this species inclusion in the game. If Frontier had the remotest concern for realism there is at least a half dozen exotic bovine species that could have been selected without sacrificing any general appeal. Afterall, unlike the brown-throated sloth the wild water buffalo doesn't have a famous meme.

A frequently requested species that can't be kept in captivity, and that I hope to never see in the game, is the marine iguana.

To be fair, most of those are basegame when the game was originally coined as Planet Safari. Things changed and some oddball inclusions have made it in for one reason or another. Platypus is the main one I agree for its inclusion with, due to the nature of the animal being so iconic. Proboscis monkey just because they’re cool. Wild water buffalo I can’t agree with - and my assumption is because it was one of the most popular mods at the time. Planet Zoo has consistently been improving their aspect on “this game focuses on species in captivity” with an oddball here and there. The sloth is one that I just can’t agree with though. Sure it has an iconic face, but two toed are iconic as well.

Saiga, Saola, Kouprey, Shoebill really don’t fit that bill for me that the Platypus or Proboscis Monkey do. Each one has a better in-captivity equivalent that would make a better fit.

 

[FortressDoor]

For things like the proboscis monkey, the platypus, and the pronghorn, Planet Zoo is about creating zoos across the world, not just in Europe or the US. Having the platypus in the game helps make a more realistic zoo based in Australia, same with the proboscis monkey in Singapore. Having animals that can only be kept in their native range helps add some details to those local projects.

 

[macronecu]

from debates i can see there is some puzzle about what pandora's box in this thread signifies
to make it more clear my previous title was "unethical choices wishlist" so the box symbolises ethics, not realism

I fail to see how you think that the sloth set a new precedent. Frontier has failed to factor realism into their species selections since release.

1) Chinese pangolin. All of the pangolin species have terrible survivorship records in captivity, and there is no self-sustaining captive population.
2) Goliath frog. Never been bred in captivity. Very high mortality rates during capture and acclimatization as with most wild-caught animals. Many specimens injure themselves jumping into barriers because they are easily startled. I personally find it distasteful for Frontier to passively promote and normalize the capture of an endangered species for captive display, especially as this species is still trafficked throughout the world live for exploitative displays like "frog races". It would have been so easy to substitute another large Anura, like the Cane toad, which could have been used to tell an interesting conservation point around invasive species.
3) Titan beetle. The larval form has never been seen, let alone bred in captivity. Maximum possible longevity of adult specimens in captivity is several weeks. All captive animals are harvested from the wild. For every wild caught animal that makes it into captivity alive, there are dozens of animals that were killed during capture and shipping. How does that not constitute poor welfare?
4) Lehmann's poison frog. Incredibly rare in captivity, and extremely difficult to breed due to its unique breeding habits.
5) Pronghorn. Nearly non-existent in captivity outside of its native range because it fares so poorly. It has been hypothesized that it is highly sensitive to temperature or humidity conditions that differ from its natural habitat.
6) Proboscis monkey. High mortality and poor welfare in zoos outside of its natural habitat. There is a thriving colony at Singapore zoo as they are able to source diverse fresh tropical foliage from the surrounding rainforest on a daily basis. Climate and endemic pathogens probably also are significant factors.
7) Wild Asian water buffalo. If you want to talk Pandora's box, there is really no explanation for this species inclusion in the game. If Frontier had the remotest concern for realism there is at least a half dozen exotic bovine species that could have been selected without sacrificing any general appeal. Afterall, unlike the brown-throated sloth the wild water buffalo doesn't have a famous meme.

A frequently requested species that can't be kept in captivity, and that I hope to never see in the game, is the marine iguana.

thank you, this was very informative
maybe sloth isnt first unethical choice either
actually this increases purpose of this thread, since i ask people to tell me their most wanted unethical choices

 

[SalamAnders]

For things like the proboscis monkey, the platypus, and the pronghorn, Planet Zoo is about creating zoos across the world, not just in Europe or the US. Having the platypus in the game helps make a more realistic zoo based in Australia, same with the proboscis monkey in Singapore. Having animals that can only be kept in their native range helps add some details to those local projects.

This I agree with. Though I think such inclusions are best to consider when there already is a common in captivity alternative. For the platypus, there is no alternative, so it is good to have. For the proboscis I would have preferred seeing a more "basic" tropical Asian monkey first, to better enjoy the inclusion of the proboscis.

Now we just have a monkey for a very specific type of zoo, without a basic choice for our more common zoo projects.

 

[TheYeti]

May I ask why the shoebill is mentioned in this thread? It's in some zoos around the world (Jurong Bird Park, Pairi Daiza) and in the latter even chicks have hatched from their eggs. Although captive breeding is still rare, zoos are making efforts to improve their knowledge for conservation purposes.

I generally don't think we should have species that do not thrive in captivity at all (Saola, Saiga, Leopard Seal), but I'm fine with those that live in zoos in their native range (Proboscis Monkey, Pronghorn) and the Shoebill seems to even do okay outside of it.

 

[macronecu]

I generally don't think we should have species that do not thrive in captivity at all (Saola, Saiga, Leopard Seal), but I'm fine with those that live in zoos in their native range (Proboscis Monkey, Pronghorn) and the Shoebill seems to even do okay outside of it.

i thought leopard seal and saiga was possible but not common because of other reasons?

guys i'm not an expert on this topic and i started this thread after a google search, please help me break it down (im thinking about splitting my list)
i'm thinking about these categories:

• does not thrive at all
• thrives within native range (climate)
• thrives when has specialized diet
• hot topic in media (welfare)
• illegal to export or conservation program limits
• does not breed or rarely breeds
• is rare because of availability or popularity

i'm thinking in this order from most difficult to least, what do you think? which animal goes where?

 

[abigenius]

For things like the proboscis monkey, the platypus, and the pronghorn, Planet Zoo is about creating zoos across the world, not just in Europe or the US.

Honestly if the game
will only focus on US or Europe would be very unfortunately because in the game there are not only players from those two parts, there are players around the world including me, speaking of Latin America there is a solid base of players and there are many realistic animal options for here as are many animals for other parts of the world, focusing on everyone is good, after all the variety is the best thing about the game

Also, it is a game after all and it has never been promoted as a realistic zoo simulation game, there are many animals that I have never seen in person because they are not viable here due to the climate Or other factors, but thanks to the game I can play with them and create an imaginary zoo of my dreams, focusing only on the realistic would be boring and also there are many common zoo animals in the game, there are few uncommon ones and they are fine, it doesn't hurt the game at all, does it?

 

[macronecu]

So, animals like keas (which aren't very common outside New Zealand, if I remember correctly)

i think you mean kakapo?

 

[Hanged_Stan]

i thought leopard seal and saiga was possible but not common because of other reasons?

guys i'm not an expert on this topic and i started this thread after a google search, please help me break it down (im thinking about splitting my list)
i'm thinking about these categories:

• does not thrive at all
• thrives within native range (climate)
• thrives when has specialized diet
• hot topic in media (welfare)
• illegal to export or conservation program limits
• does not breed or rarely breeds
• is rare because of availability or popularity

i'm thinking in this order from most difficult to least, what do you think? which animal goes where?

From what I've seen there was a leopard seal at Taronga zoo a few years ago. He had to be put down because of prolonged illness though so not I'm sure about their long term viability in captivity.

 

[macronecu]

From what I've seen there was a leopard seal at Taronga zoo a few years ago. He had to be put down because of prolonged illness though so not I'm sure about their long term viability in captivity.

i vaguely remember reading someone explaining leopard seals actually survive in captivity on this forum, but i can't remember where or who
i also vaguely remember @yoav_r explaining proboscis monkey diet issue had been very recently fixed and some other animal's


i found it

Animals that really can't be held in zoo's

Is there some list of animals that really can't be held in zoo's? Like the Leopard Seal and Indri are the MOST famous examples, but are there more? Can you even hold Walrus in zoo's? Or Sifaka?

forums.frontier.co.uk

i would appreciate if @Cynogale bennettii II can contribute to this thread, they seem to be very knowledgeable, sorry for tagging both of you!

 

[TheYeti]

i think you mean kakapo?

Kea is quite a common species that I've seen in various zoos. Only known record of the Kakapo outside of New Zealand is in the London Zoo early 20th century. I would say yes to the former, no to the latter.

 

[macronecu]

Kea is quite a common species that I've seen in various zoos. Only known record of the Kakapo outside of New Zealand is in the London Zoo early 20th century. I would say yes to the former, no to the latter.

yes, i think darth quell meant kakapo but said kea in his description
kea shouldn't even be discussed in this thread i think, if im not missing anything (any issues with kea? @VetGirl330 )

 

[Cocolori]

i thought leopard seal and saiga was possible but not common because of other reasons?

guys i'm not an expert on this topic and i started this thread after a google search, please help me break it down (im thinking about splitting my list)
i'm thinking about these categories:

• does not thrive at all
• thrives within native range (climate)
• thrives when has specialized diet
• hot topic in media (welfare)
• illegal to export or conservation program limits
• does not breed or rarely breeds
• is rare because of availability or popularity

i'm thinking in this order from most difficult to least, what do you think? which animal goes where?

I don't wish to restart any Orca related discussions because I think everyone on the forum probably knows most of the regular posters views on that topic one way or another but please forgive me if I use them to illustrate my own thinking on this just because they are a good example.

I personally don't build realistic zoos and think there should be a balance of weird animals that are less available to the public to see in real life (proboscis monkeys) versus species that allow the realistic builders to stick with zoos of today. I think that makes Planet Zoo a better educational tool. Which brings up the issue of animal welfare in captivity which is where everyone tends to draw a different line from 'it's pixels, we should be able to do what we want' to 'games are a part of culture that influences people, all zoos are bad therefore the game shouldn't exist'. Most of us are somewhere in the middle and my own experience working with captive wild animals also changes how I feel about some welfare issues so there is a personal element as well (no thank you feeding stations, the animals get overfed and over familiar with humans).

In your list of categories I personally would have one that is 'has major welfare issues that will probably never be solveable within a captive environment'. So diet issues would likely be totally solveable with a bottomless budget, as would humidty and climatic conditions. Extra research might reveal that the sloth just needs a particular type of essential oil in their food. However, I don't believe that it will ever be possible to meet the behavioural needs of larger cetaceans in a zoo because of the size of the habitat you would need (not just in two dimensions but in 3 because of the depths they inhabit), their complex social structures and behaviour and need for stimulation and the excellent evidence of their emotional intelligence. This is just me but they ain't in the category of 'no thanks' because of Blackfish. I would have the same qualms about Albatross for example and I've not seen any documentaries about them.

 

[HunterIsCookie]

I don't wish to restart any Orca related discussions because I think everyone on the forum probably knows most of the regular posters views on that topic one way or another but please forgive me if I use them to illustrate my own thinking on this just because they are a good example.

I personally don't build realistic zoos and think there should be a balance of weird animals that are less available to the public to see in real life (proboscis monkeys) versus species that allow the realistic builders to stick with zoos of today. I think that makes Planet Zoo a better educational tool. Which brings up the issue of animal welfare in captivity which is where everyone tends to draw a different line from 'it's pixels, we should be able to do what we want' to 'games are a part of culture that influences people, all zoos are bad therefore the game shouldn't exist'. Most of us are somewhere in the middle and my own experience working with captive wild animals also changes how I feel about some welfare issues so there is a personal element as well (no thank you feeding stations, the animals get overfed and over familiar with humans).

In your list of categories I personally would have one that is 'has major welfare issues that will probably never be solveable within a captive environment'. So diet issues would likely be totally solveable with a bottomless budget, as would humidty and climatic conditions. Extra research might reveal that the sloth just needs a particular type of essential oil in their food. However, I don't believe that it will ever be possible to meet the behavioural needs of larger cetaceans in a zoo because of the size of the habitat you would need (not just in two dimensions but in 3 because of the depths they inhabit), their complex social structures and behaviour and need for stimulation and the excellent evidence of their emotional intelligence. This is just me but they ain't in the category of 'no thanks' because of Blackfish. I would have the same qualms about Albatross for example and I've not seen any documentaries about them.

Yeah, if the biggest issue with an animal is not something that's solvable even in a game setting without annoying the heckles out of people (ergo, look back at when the polar bear released). A game setting allows us to create the perfect temperatures, provide the correct food type for an animal, and even provide the correct means for animals to breed (well, that's really simplified by the nature of the game, but still), but needing a lot of space is just not that great from a gameplay aspect.

 

[ElectricMonk]

Not a fan of adding species that either never do well in captivity, or can’t be kept at all… I’m fine with platypus because they’re kept (and bred) in quite a few zoos (in Australia) as are devils - the main reason platypuses are rare in captivity overseas is that they don’t handle transport well, rather than that they are impossible to keep per se. In the case of devils it is (I think?) a matter of export laws rather than anything else - in any case, both are kept in multiple zoos.
In contrast, the proboscis is (I think?) kept in only one zoo … more to the point, there are a ton of other, much, much more commonly kept monkeys that we don’t have and would have been better choices (though the proboscis would’ve been fine if we’d already had lots of more standard monkeys). … Proboscidea monkeys are great because they are different from other monkeys.. without those other monkeys, they’re less interesting because there’s nothing to compare them to.

 

[Chuditch]

In the case of devils it is (I think?) a matter of export laws rather than anything else

Yeah, currently only post-reproductive devils are being exported, which apparently helps to accommodate for surplus from the Australian breeding program (freeing up space for breeding age devils) whilst also serving as ambassador animals for their conservation back home. Establishing permanent breeding programs internationally would be great in theory but there may be complications with importing devils back into Australia (largely because most would be already past their optimum reproductive age by the time they get out of quarantine), making the conservation benefits questionable.

In any case there are 650+ devils in zoos in Australia so they're clearly a species that does well in captivity and are a staple of zoos here.

 

[synthetase]

Musk Ox. Long-beaked Echidna. Saola. Ethiopian Wolf. Tibetan Fox. Side-striped Jackal. South African Cape Fox. Aardwolf. Sulawesi Palm Civet. Shrew/Rat Opossum. Water Opossum. Moonrat. Tree Shrew (this one is represented just fine but its obscure to me). Not all of them are hard to keep but they are all rare (in captivity) animals I'd welcome in!

 

[jcp011c]

if we ever do get fully marine animals, this leaves itself open to the Great White Shark being quite likely to show up. Despite it being one of the most well known fish species in the world, the fact it fares extremely poorly in captivity was a mark against it. But I think between its iconic recognition and if "not faring well in zoo/hardly ever held in zoo" factors being taken away, it would probably be a given to be included. Again, if we ever get fully marine animals. Or...there's always Planet Aquarium

 

[Veah]

I fail to see how you think that the sloth set a new precedent. Frontier has failed to factor realism into their species selections since release.

1) Chinese pangolin. All of the pangolin species have terrible survivorship records in captivity, and there is no self-sustaining captive population.
2) Goliath frog. Never been bred in captivity. Very high mortality rates during capture and acclimatization as with most wild-caught animals. Many specimens injure themselves jumping into barriers because they are easily startled. I personally find it distasteful for Frontier to passively promote and normalize the capture of an endangered species for captive display, especially as this species is still trafficked throughout the world live for exploitative displays like "frog races". It would have been so easy to substitute another large Anura, like the Cane toad, which could have been used to tell an interesting conservation point around invasive species.
3) Titan beetle. The larval form has never been seen, let alone bred in captivity. Maximum possible longevity of adult specimens in captivity is several weeks. All captive animals are harvested from the wild. For every wild caught animal that makes it into captivity alive, there are dozens of animals that were killed during capture and shipping. How does that not constitute poor welfare?
4) Lehmann's poison frog. Incredibly rare in captivity, and extremely difficult to breed due to its unique breeding habits.
5) Pronghorn. Nearly non-existent in captivity outside of its native range because it fares so poorly. It has been hypothesized that it is highly sensitive to temperature or humidity conditions that differ from its natural habitat.
6) Proboscis monkey. High mortality and poor welfare in zoos outside of its natural habitat. There is a thriving colony at Singapore zoo as they are able to source diverse fresh tropical foliage from the surrounding rainforest on a daily basis. Climate and endemic pathogens probably also are significant factors.
7) Wild Asian water buffalo. If you want to talk Pandora's box, there is really no explanation for this species inclusion in the game. If Frontier had the remotest concern for realism there is at least a half dozen exotic bovine species that could have been selected without sacrificing any general appeal. Afterall, unlike the brown-throated sloth the wild water buffalo doesn't have a famous meme.

A frequently requested species that can't be kept in captivity, and that I hope to never see in the game, is the marine iguana.

Good summary. I can understand the choices of the pronghorn because they probably wanted a companion for the bison and the New World theme, and specially the pangolin due to its great education value as the most trafficked animal, with its matching conservation board, and at least they chose the most common captive pangolin instead of a species with zero zoo presence.
But all the others? What annoys me is that they had way better options without problems.

• Lehmann's poison frog: Any of the dozens of dart frogs more common in captivity? If you want one with black spots to contrast with the golden frog, the green and black poison frog was a great option. And if you wanted one with red and black spots, the Amazon poison frog is very similar to the Lehmann's but with blue legs, so even prettier (and more common in zoos).
• Goliath frog: Apart of the mentioned cane toad, if you prefer a giant true frog over a toad, the better option was probably the mountain chicken, which is struggling to survive in the wild and relying on captive breeding for its future.
• Titan beetle: If you want a giant South American beetle in capitivity, the Hercules beetle should be the choice. Even better, choose any of the big species of rhinoceros beetle or stag beetle that don't come from South America, as it has been since base game the continent with the most exhibit species.
• Wild Asian water buffalo: The obvious alternative is the domestic buffalo, but if you want to avoid farm animals and go wild, the gaur would have been wonderful as an Asian big ungulate.
• Proboscis monkey: Species from South East Asia common in zoos and that could have replaced it in that DLC are the Francois' leaf monkey, the Javan lutung or even the red-shanked douc. However, among these 5 weird species choices the proboscis monkey is the one that annoys me the least, I can't really tell why.