This is a good point. I guess you dont think of things you see as normal as special but others do.
Predicting the remaining dlc content
- Thread starter paul78
- Start date
New Zealand's native animals are still rare enough that seeing them at all is a treat. As an example, we put bird feeders in our backyard, and mostly get sparrows, starlings, greenfinches, and blackbirds coming around, but occasionally we get waxeyes and the odd fantail which are native and far more special to see.
People are definitely entitled to their opinions. Everyone should be able to enjoy the game the way they like, and no one should have to pretend to like something they don't.
I'm glad we all agree on that, at least rhetorically, even though I'm not sure that gets applied very even-handedly. I feel like it gets thrown around selectively and kind of on a surface level. It feels a little odd to see it quoted so often now when it really hasn't been during other times and other contexts. But I guess even the rhetorical agreement is some progress.
Given that agreement, I think it has some deeper implications for this prediction thread about future DLCs.
Personally, I'm very happy with both the SEA pack and the Africa pack. Bought them both the first hour they were available. And if our consensus is that we think there will be both animal packs and scenery packs going forward, then I think we need to acknowledge that this consensus is itself a different pattern than what happened in Planet Coaster, where the coaster-only packs signaled that they were coming to the end of the run. Surely PC was about both rides and scenery too, and both were essential parts of creating a theme park just as much as they are for a zoo.
This leaves me with several questions, relevant to this thread about predicting (guessing, hypothesizing about) future DLCs:
Did the coaster-only packs receive the same type of response/backlash from (some) content creators as the animal packs did? (This is an honest question. I wasn't around back then, so it may very well have been so). This seems relevant because -- in Frontier's current advertising model -- creators are set up as "gatekeepers" by Frontier itself, literally being given "keys" and asked to stand outside the gates to inform, advertise, review, and hopefully promote. That's not an attack or complaint. Youtube is how I first learned about this game to begin with! Just a realistic assessment of the economic ecosystem underlying that relationship. It also doesn't mean that any creator should pretend to like something they hate. We want their honest reviews - the good the bad and the ugly. But it does have implications for the game's future if a large enough number of those creators/gatekeepers/reviewers/advertisers -- and thus the efficacy of that advertising method -- are reacting differently to animal-only packs than they did to similar coaster-only packs in PC.
Again, each creator and player should do what's best for them, and speak honestly about how they're experiencing each DLC. And in thinking about the context of predicting future DLC, it does put Frontier into a bit of a pickle if their advertising landscape has changed from the PC days. Creators opinions aren't just opinions, but super opinions. They're "influencers" as the kids say. So if large numbers of influencers are playing in ways that are different than many players (which is absolutely their right to do), it does have an impact on Frontier's ability to develop the game in ways that please those other player bases. An animal-only pack may be very popular with many parts of the community, but now apparently comes with an advertising risk from bad creator reviews that may not have been the case for coaster-only packs in PC. That's not the content creators fault (they like what they like and dislike what they dislike, and should say so honestly), and probably isn't even their problem to solve. But it is a difference in the landscape of the two games that impacts all of us.
Similarly, in trying to predict/guess/hypothesize about what future DLC might be, it throws some wrenches into trying to figure out whether or how to think of Planet Coaster as a data point. People are fond of saying that we're following a PC pattern for PZ DLC when it comes to predicting the "end" or when speaking to animal folks. But if we're being consistent, it seems like another clear part of that ending pattern in PC was the switch to coaster-only packs near the end. So again, as a predictive matter, why doesn't the Africa pack's return to scenery signal that we may have a longer life span? Why did creators who are builders say so often that the SEA pack meant that they'd have to go "6 months" between getting new scenery, when in reality -- if they really believed that we were going to follow the PC model -- that number would have been more like 9 months or 12 months, since the PC model would have predicted that once we're in coaster-only/animal-only territory, we would have been likely to stay there for a while?
To be clear, that's not a complaint about the Africa pack (which I am enjoying immensely!). And it's not a statement that we should stop having scenery. But I do find it curious that people think there's a clear PC pattern when it comes to the number of animals or the number of DLC -- and think that we need to ground and manage expectations of anyone who hopes for more -- but that we oddly don't see the same rush to ground or manage expectations on the building side. If PC is going to be used to try to predict things (and many people think it shouldn't be), then wouldn't that pattern also predict that we need to expect fewer building options in favor of coaster/animal packs? Why the double standard? Why is one predictive and the other not?
And tying it back to the creator/influencer discussion above, what does it mean for the game (and specifically for our predictions), if large enough numbers of influencers are more likely to flex their power for more pieces, but less likely to do so for more animals? Is that really the balanced approach that animal lovers are lectured about so often? And if Frontier did have the idea to try to extend the support for the game by having a mix of animal-only packs and animal+scenery packs and potentially even scenery-only packs, does the moaning by (some) content creators about SEA (some of which is still going on, even this past week in their positive reviews of the Africa pack), mean Frontier might abandon those plans, hurting all of us in the long run? If the first coaster-only pack had been met with similar negative CC reviews, because the creators weren't really theme park fans but just used it as a building tool, would PC have scrapped the Classic rides pack and had fewer DLC before it ended? If every pack has to be perfectly balanced with building and animals and stick to a pattern and playstyle specifically for content creators, or else risk low advertising, less hype, and even backlash -- then does that mean the game has to end when they run out of ideas for building themes even if more animals were originally planned and possible? Or that the end-of-run coaster-only/animal-only palooza packs of endangered or fan favorite animals that many predicted become less likely?
Does it suggest we should be predicting a different ordering of future packs, with scenery-only or mixed packs being released at times when youtube presence is more powerful? Imagine for example that Frontier has an animal-only pack and a scenery-only pack and a traditional 4+1 pack all in the works, and their economic modeling suggests that they'll all sell pretty well. Do they hold the scenery-only pack until fall, winter, or a holiday when youtube watching is higher, because they now know that -- while the packs will all sell fine regardless among the player base as a whole -- the scenery pack is going to get all the love, and the animal pack more of the hate, from (parts of) the content creator community specifically? If we still think there are more animal packs coming down the road, despite what many creators might prefer, should we expect those to be held for times when youtube viewership is traditionally down? Or is it the reverse of this, placing scenery-only packs during seasons where game purchasing is usually low, so that creators give those a boost, while releasing animals at a time when purchasing is normally high, and thus where negative reviews might not impact actual sales that much?
Alternatively, maybe the changed advertising landscape means that we should expect a complete reversal of the PC pattern, and instead of watching for coaster-only/animal-only packs near the end we should instead be watching for the final packs to be several rounds of building-only packs, so that the creators can go wild with their praise and the game ends on a high note. Therefore assuring residual sales from those disproportionately positive youtube videos that stick around long after development is done.
Again, none of this is meant as an attack on builders or content creators... or anyone else really. I watch a ton of stuff on youtube and love it (as I've said, and as all the creators here already hopefully know). I'm also not saying that anyone should change their opinion or what they do or how they play. Each creator has their own brand, and that's why we watch you all. And I acknowledge that there are creators who do, in fact, play the game in other ways. You just have to look a little harder to find them.
But it would be silly (and ultimately counterproductive to the creators themselves) to pretend that influencers don't have an influence -- somewhere, somehow, to some extent -- or to pretend that theirs is just another opinion, equal to a thought any of the rest of us might have. And therefore it seems we really do have to consider what impact that influence has (and has had, and should have) on Frontier, on the community, and in the context of this thread, on our predictions. And even question where that influence is taking us.
I'm glad we all agree on that, at least rhetorically, even though I'm not sure that gets applied very even-handedly. I feel like it gets thrown around selectively and kind of on a surface level. It feels a little odd to see it quoted so often now when it really hasn't been during other times and other contexts. But I guess even the rhetorical agreement is some progress.
Given that agreement, I think it has some deeper implications for this prediction thread about future DLCs.
Personally, I'm very happy with both the SEA pack and the Africa pack. Bought them both the first hour they were available. And if our consensus is that we think there will be both animal packs and scenery packs going forward, then I think we need to acknowledge that this consensus is itself a different pattern than what happened in Planet Coaster, where the coaster-only packs signaled that they were coming to the end of the run. Surely PC was about both rides and scenery too, and both were essential parts of creating a theme park just as much as they are for a zoo.
This leaves me with several questions, relevant to this thread about predicting (guessing, hypothesizing about) future DLCs:
Did the coaster-only packs receive the same type of response/backlash from (some) content creators as the animal packs did? (This is an honest question. I wasn't around back then, so it may very well have been so). This seems relevant because -- in Frontier's current advertising model -- creators are set up as "gatekeepers" by Frontier itself, literally being given "keys" and asked to stand outside the gates to inform, advertise, review, and hopefully promote. That's not an attack or complaint. Youtube is how I first learned about this game to begin with! Just a realistic assessment of the economic ecosystem underlying that relationship. It also doesn't mean that any creator should pretend to like something they hate. We want their honest reviews - the good the bad and the ugly. But it does have implications for the game's future if a large enough number of those creators/gatekeepers/reviewers/advertisers -- and thus the efficacy of that advertising method -- are reacting differently to animal-only packs than they did to similar coaster-only packs in PC.
Again, each creator and player should do what's best for them, and speak honestly about how they're experiencing each DLC. And in thinking about the context of predicting future DLC, it does put Frontier into a bit of a pickle if their advertising landscape has changed from the PC days. Creators opinions aren't just opinions, but super opinions. They're "influencers" as the kids say. So if large numbers of influencers are playing in ways that are different than many players (which is absolutely their right to do), it does have an impact on Frontier's ability to develop the game in ways that please those other player bases. An animal-only pack may be very popular with many parts of the community, but now apparently comes with an advertising risk from bad creator reviews that may not have been the case for coaster-only packs in PC. That's not the content creators fault (they like what they like and dislike what they dislike, and should say so honestly), and probably isn't even their problem to solve. But it is a difference in the landscape of the two games that impacts all of us.
Similarly, in trying to predict/guess/hypothesize about what future DLC might be, it throws some wrenches into trying to figure out whether or how to think of Planet Coaster as a data point. People are fond of saying that we're following a PC pattern for PZ DLC when it comes to predicting the "end" or when speaking to animal folks. But if we're being consistent, it seems like another clear part of that ending pattern in PC was the switch to coaster-only packs near the end. So again, as a predictive matter, why doesn't the Africa pack's return to scenery signal that we may have a longer life span? Why did creators who are builders say so often that the SEA pack meant that they'd have to go "6 months" between getting new scenery, when in reality -- if they really believed that we were going to follow the PC model -- that number would have been more like 9 months or 12 months, since the PC model would have predicted that once we're in coaster-only/animal-only territory, we would have been likely to stay there for a while?
To be clear, that's not a complaint about the Africa pack (which I am enjoying immensely!). And it's not a statement that we should stop having scenery. But I do find it curious that people think there's a clear PC pattern when it comes to the number of animals or the number of DLC -- and think that we need to ground and manage expectations of anyone who hopes for more -- but that we oddly don't see the same rush to ground or manage expectations on the building side. If PC is going to be used to try to predict things (and many people think it shouldn't be), then wouldn't that pattern also predict that we need to expect fewer building options in favor of coaster/animal packs? Why the double standard? Why is one predictive and the other not?
And tying it back to the creator/influencer discussion above, what does it mean for the game (and specifically for our predictions), if large enough numbers of influencers are more likely to flex their power for more pieces, but less likely to do so for more animals? Is that really the balanced approach that animal lovers are lectured about so often? And if Frontier did have the idea to try to extend the support for the game by having a mix of animal-only packs and animal+scenery packs and potentially even scenery-only packs, does the moaning by (some) content creators about SEA (some of which is still going on, even this past week in their positive reviews of the Africa pack), mean Frontier might abandon those plans, hurting all of us in the long run? If the first coaster-only pack had been met with similar negative CC reviews, because the creators weren't really theme park fans but just used it as a building tool, would PC have scrapped the Classic rides pack and had fewer DLC before it ended? If every pack has to be perfectly balanced with building and animals and stick to a pattern and playstyle specifically for content creators, or else risk low advertising, less hype, and even backlash -- then does that mean the game has to end when they run out of ideas for building themes even if more animals were originally planned and possible? Or that the end-of-run coaster-only/animal-only palooza packs of endangered or fan favorite animals that many predicted become less likely?
Does it suggest we should be predicting a different ordering of future packs, with scenery-only or mixed packs being released at times when youtube presence is more powerful? Imagine for example that Frontier has an animal-only pack and a scenery-only pack and a traditional 4+1 pack all in the works, and their economic modeling suggests that they'll all sell pretty well. Do they hold the scenery-only pack until fall, winter, or a holiday when youtube watching is higher, because they now know that -- while the packs will all sell fine regardless among the player base as a whole -- the scenery pack is going to get all the love, and the animal pack more of the hate, from (parts of) the content creator community specifically? If we still think there are more animal packs coming down the road, despite what many creators might prefer, should we expect those to be held for times when youtube viewership is traditionally down? Or is it the reverse of this, placing scenery-only packs during seasons where game purchasing is usually low, so that creators give those a boost, while releasing animals at a time when purchasing is normally high, and thus where negative reviews might not impact actual sales that much?
Alternatively, maybe the changed advertising landscape means that we should expect a complete reversal of the PC pattern, and instead of watching for coaster-only/animal-only packs near the end we should instead be watching for the final packs to be several rounds of building-only packs, so that the creators can go wild with their praise and the game ends on a high note. Therefore assuring residual sales from those disproportionately positive youtube videos that stick around long after development is done.
Again, none of this is meant as an attack on builders or content creators... or anyone else really. I watch a ton of stuff on youtube and love it (as I've said, and as all the creators here already hopefully know). I'm also not saying that anyone should change their opinion or what they do or how they play. Each creator has their own brand, and that's why we watch you all. And I acknowledge that there are creators who do, in fact, play the game in other ways. You just have to look a little harder to find them.
But it would be silly (and ultimately counterproductive to the creators themselves) to pretend that influencers don't have an influence -- somewhere, somehow, to some extent -- or to pretend that theirs is just another opinion, equal to a thought any of the rest of us might have. And therefore it seems we really do have to consider what impact that influence has (and has had, and should have) on Frontier, on the community, and in the context of this thread, on our predictions. And even question where that influence is taking us.
I would be very dissapointed if we will not get more animal packs because youtubers did not like it. I like to have new pieces from time to time, but I play and stay for the animals. The more we get, the better. I would like to see a switching format (5 animals+Scenery, then 8 animals, then 5+scenery and so on...)
Great post @iloveyourzoos . I don't want to take it apart bit by bit, since I immensly agree with most of what you said anyway.
But I wanted to through this into the round: It's been more or less only a day since I stepped out of my bubble that mostly consisted of builders to this date. And that day alone showed me that there are actually a good numbre of content creators that ARE highly interested in the animals as well and therefore also welcome an animal pack. I guess the "builders only" bubble is only louder because most of them could establish their stand already among Frontier and within the community through the Planet Coaster days. I even think that Frontier themselfs underestimated the importance of a large variety of animals, hence why we got the SEA pack later (more or less 1 year after the request for more animals was very loud due to the SA pack).
And while of course the influencers have an impact on the mood of the community (as recent examples show), I also don't think we should overestimate them. If the SEA pack sold well, and ADFAIK it did, the numbres dictate the future, not the builders only bubble. More versatile gamers reviewed the pack pretty good, as far as I know.
So the only thing that might change, if the numbres are well with animal packs, is Frontiers decision who gets a key. There is always a first time for new CCs within the community.
But I wanted to through this into the round: It's been more or less only a day since I stepped out of my bubble that mostly consisted of builders to this date. And that day alone showed me that there are actually a good numbre of content creators that ARE highly interested in the animals as well and therefore also welcome an animal pack. I guess the "builders only" bubble is only louder because most of them could establish their stand already among Frontier and within the community through the Planet Coaster days. I even think that Frontier themselfs underestimated the importance of a large variety of animals, hence why we got the SEA pack later (more or less 1 year after the request for more animals was very loud due to the SA pack).
And while of course the influencers have an impact on the mood of the community (as recent examples show), I also don't think we should overestimate them. If the SEA pack sold well, and ADFAIK it did, the numbres dictate the future, not the builders only bubble. More versatile gamers reviewed the pack pretty good, as far as I know.
So the only thing that might change, if the numbres are well with animal packs, is Frontiers decision who gets a key. There is always a first time for new CCs within the community.
I definitely feel like these other creators should be given a spotlight. It’s honestly disparaging to hear the big CCs of PZ who hold so much influence just bash something you really preferred and say it sucks and isn’t the right way forward. All I ask for is balance to reflect all sides of the community. Flipping between regular packs and animal only packs is the way forward for me personally
When PZ started basically only two creators were spotlighted. both were friends with the commun ity managers that time. That already imrpoved, I give Frontier that. Who the "big" influencers are is a personal definition, really. SimplySavannah has a good numbre of followers and doesn't bash on the game (or part of the community).
But yeah, even if I'm a hybrid between builder and animal lover and never leave sandbox, I'd appreciate a greater variety in showcases of influencers that also play other modes, have more of a zoo than a theme park background or take a different approach on the game in general. I'm always eager to get to know new people.
I don't think the "influencers" (God, I loathe that word) or CCs have as much power as you think. They are a marketing tool, and I don't really believe they alone have that much pull to actually change the game. The CMs take their opinions into consideration (as they should because their feedback is just as valuable as ours), but they also listen to us, the non-Youtube folk. As far as I recall, none of the more prominent creators actually advocated for more animals, certainly not that much to warrant an animal pack only in their eyes. And that's exactly what we got. It's very clear that the majority of CCs care much more about building pieces and scenery than animals. That is fine on its own, don't get me wrong, but I think Frontier acknowledges that a zoo game cannot sustain its interest for long if its focus is on the building rather than the animals. Personally, I loved the SEA pack, and I also love to build. I think the mixture of those two pack types in the future is the way to go. I think all of us sometimes forget that there are also people who buy this game, who aren't on any social media or aren't as involved as we are. Frontier also caters to those people, which is fine. I also play other games, but I'm not involved in all of the communities of those games.
I just want to quickly address the podcast discussion. I actually had a whole post ready to submit where I disputed some of the things that were said in this thread because they are simply not true, but have decided against it as I don't want to add fuel to the fire. I'm just going to say this: There will always be disagreements within this community and that's perfectly fine! We should have a healthy dialog about the game. There are times I disagree with CC, but that doesn't make them a bad CC. What I do disagree with is belittling your audience. Personally, I believe that the way you say things is oftentimes much more important than the actual message you are trying to send. It is something I strongly believe in, and try to practice it to the best of my abilities in every aspect of my life. It's how we form respectful and nice relationships with other people despite not always seeing eye to eye. To me, that last part of the podcast was rude and condescending. I believe the CCs in question (and their friends) think we "can't take a joke" or are "too sensitive", but to quote @random goat let's not "undervalue what was said there".
Lastly, I don't want to go on and on about this podcast thing so I want to end this post by saying that I believe great things are to come in PZ. I mentioned this when the SEA pack came out, but I think this year is a year when Frontier really started to listen to their community. To me, it always looked like the first year was always set in stone. All of it was predetermined, the DLCs filled the obvious holes in the rooster (jaguar, polar bear, Australian animals, etc.). Now that that is out of the way, they can really start to cater to what the actual players want. Just look at the free updates - they gave us a lot of the things that were on our wishlists. I'm pretty positive about the future, and I am excited about the next pack (even though I'm still having so much fun with the Africa pack!).
I just want to quickly address the podcast discussion. I actually had a whole post ready to submit where I disputed some of the things that were said in this thread because they are simply not true, but have decided against it as I don't want to add fuel to the fire. I'm just going to say this: There will always be disagreements within this community and that's perfectly fine! We should have a healthy dialog about the game. There are times I disagree with CC, but that doesn't make them a bad CC. What I do disagree with is belittling your audience. Personally, I believe that the way you say things is oftentimes much more important than the actual message you are trying to send. It is something I strongly believe in, and try to practice it to the best of my abilities in every aspect of my life. It's how we form respectful and nice relationships with other people despite not always seeing eye to eye. To me, that last part of the podcast was rude and condescending. I believe the CCs in question (and their friends) think we "can't take a joke" or are "too sensitive", but to quote @random goat let's not "undervalue what was said there".
Lastly, I don't want to go on and on about this podcast thing so I want to end this post by saying that I believe great things are to come in PZ. I mentioned this when the SEA pack came out, but I think this year is a year when Frontier really started to listen to their community. To me, it always looked like the first year was always set in stone. All of it was predetermined, the DLCs filled the obvious holes in the rooster (jaguar, polar bear, Australian animals, etc.). Now that that is out of the way, they can really start to cater to what the actual players want. Just look at the free updates - they gave us a lot of the things that were on our wishlists. I'm pretty positive about the future, and I am excited about the next pack (even though I'm still having so much fun with the Africa pack!).
Another Feedback source Frontier probably has an eye on and that should not be underestimated are steam reviews. There might nit be many, but these are the things almost every buyer that is on the edge of getting a pack or not will see - regardless if they are on any other social media plattform. And a request for more animals is quite regular there.
I have to blame myself for thinking in the past that Frontier doesn't really know what the community wants and that they are ignoring a huge amount of feedback. IN hindsight I wouldn't phrase it that harsh - and I am pretty sure Frontier at least lately has an eye on non-official channels as well, without providing an official one on a third party plattform.
The community is big, should be seen as a whole, should not be seperated by dismissing any part of the group and at least contains of forum users, CCs, discord and reddit fans, facebook, instagram and twitter posters and steam review writers. And that's a good thing.
Oh absolutely, I agree. I can say from experience I always check out Steam reviews (and Youtube gameplay) before buying a game.
Definitely agree with all that has been said. My absolute favorite PZ youtuber that I never miss is Party Elite, who has a longstanding franchise series that really explores all the aspects of the game: building and management and watching animals and everything else, and which tries to balance the time and focus on these things without treating any as less than the others. And I'm quite enjoying Simply Savannah's franchise series on Fridays. I've seen several others too, some continuing series and some more limited ones that seem to have ended unfortunately, that have explored the gameplay mechanics too.
Also agree with Frontier listening to different sources and being responsive to them. I'm quite pleased with how many suggestions from the forums have been implemented in recent updates, for example. So maybe it's more the influence that influencers have over the conversation among us die-hards that talk about it a lot than on the game or devs themselves. Sort of setting the "overton window" of what feels possible at any given moment.
At any rate, I am still thinking about and working on a longer list of possible DLC predictions, per the suggestions from earlier in this thread about what we'd like to see not just if we get a few more packs, but what we'd hope for if support continues for longer. So hopefully I'll get that up eventually!
Also agree with Frontier listening to different sources and being responsive to them. I'm quite pleased with how many suggestions from the forums have been implemented in recent updates, for example. So maybe it's more the influence that influencers have over the conversation among us die-hards that talk about it a lot than on the game or devs themselves. Sort of setting the "overton window" of what feels possible at any given moment.
At any rate, I am still thinking about and working on a longer list of possible DLC predictions, per the suggestions from earlier in this thread about what we'd like to see not just if we get a few more packs, but what we'd hope for if support continues for longer. So hopefully I'll get that up eventually!
YES, love him as well. I hope his series goes on for much longer, as it's basically the only reason I'm following him (he is a nice guy, not his fault that I'mnot interested in the other things he plays). And with every episode I feel like I should value the game way more as a whole and not only for building
Love his excitement for the zoopedia as well. So good to see someone really enjoying to learn more about animals.Yea Party is a gem he’s made me appreciate the zoopedia way more. I love having a CC who cares about franchise and management like himYES, love him as well. I hope his series goes on for much longer, as it's basically the only reason I'm following him (he is a nice guy, not his fault that I'mnot interested in the other things he plays). And with every episode I feel like I should value the game way more as a whole and not only for building
I was thinking about my predictions for if we have a more extended support life, and started wondering if maybe the specificity of the SEA pack wasn't just an oddity. Maybe it was a first step to a large pattern.
What if Frontier is planning to do is 4+1+scenery packs for continents, large biomes (arctic), and major categories (aquatic, aviary, nocturnal, etc.), and then do animal packs for smaller sub-regions (like South East Asia).
I know it's clearly premature to assume a pattern based on just 1 animal pack, so it's really just speculation at this point. But it might be a nice way to handle things: Giving plenty of opportunities for different building themes (North America, Europe, Asia, Aviary, Nocturnal, Desert, Tropical, Temperate, Mountains, Wetlands, etc), while also giving them a chance to go deeper into the animal rosters and include some things that have been left out (Sahara, Congo, Madagascar, Amazon, Patagonea, Andean, Caribbean, Japan, Siberia, Himalayas, Eurasian Steppe, Mojave, Bayou, Pacific Northwest, Mediterranean, Bavarian Forest, etc.).
What if Frontier is planning to do is 4+1+scenery packs for continents, large biomes (arctic), and major categories (aquatic, aviary, nocturnal, etc.), and then do animal packs for smaller sub-regions (like South East Asia).
I know it's clearly premature to assume a pattern based on just 1 animal pack, so it's really just speculation at this point. But it might be a nice way to handle things: Giving plenty of opportunities for different building themes (North America, Europe, Asia, Aviary, Nocturnal, Desert, Tropical, Temperate, Mountains, Wetlands, etc), while also giving them a chance to go deeper into the animal rosters and include some things that have been left out (Sahara, Congo, Madagascar, Amazon, Patagonea, Andean, Caribbean, Japan, Siberia, Himalayas, Eurasian Steppe, Mojave, Bayou, Pacific Northwest, Mediterranean, Bavarian Forest, etc.).
I too alsready thought about that. And it would be my dream scenario, actually. I think we'll get a better clue with the next pack. Since Chanté hinted more animal packs in the future and I don't see Frontiers definate road map longer then 1 year, I assume we get an animal pack next. In my opinion that would be nearly perfect to fill out the gaps and justifiys a lot of packs in the future for long term support with relatively low cost for Frontier at the same time.
I believe it's more along the lines of adding new mechanics into the game (deep diving, for example). I believe slightly better performance (my game/s don't lag as much as before, and not near as much as Planet Coaster). Just to name a few
Every game runs on an engine, which is the base code and says what can be done and what cant.
When the engine is updated its either heavily optimised (which would result in things like fewer lags and better framerate) or in the engine being able to handle new stuff, because the groundwork for it has been coded in.
This is ofcourse criminaly simplyfied, but thats should more or less answer your question
When the engine is updated its either heavily optimised (which would result in things like fewer lags and better framerate) or in the engine being able to handle new stuff, because the groundwork for it has been coded in.
This is ofcourse criminaly simplyfied, but thats should more or less answer your question
Seeing as Frontier is hoping to push out JWE2 this year, and how PZ runs on the same "Base" engine as JWE/JWE2 does, they're more than likely updating it to handle new features of code, graphics, optimization, and so on and so forth.
What does this mean for Planet Zoo? Optimization has already been seen, my game runs like a Cheetah now! Other than that, it leads to opportunities for implementing features we've seen from trailers and Devlogs so far - Fully aquatic animals, flying aviary mechanics, etc. I can foresee an Aviary Pack with this information, and hopefully if Frontier loves us a Cetacean / Fully Aquatic Animal Pack.