The limit for a single post is 100,000 characters , I had the pain of discovering that in my free update thread and had to remove dozens of entries to just save the post again.
Preparing for PZ2 metawishlist
- Thread starter Stygi
- Start date
which would probably be an issue when there could be thousands of different species on this list
You could reserve several posts at the start of the thread when creating the wishlist to give you space for say 200,000-500,000 characters or simply just hide them from public view on the spreadsheets. I think keeping them on a spreadsheet is the easier method so members don't have to browse through 500+ obscure species with 1 vote.
No need to rush my friend, we have at least 2 years
Let's see what people who have been tagged have to say on the matter. For everything to be managed properly I think there needs to be further discussion and agreements.
I also think having a seperate subspecies and species list (all contained within the same excel document) would be valuable as it allows people to push for a specific subspecies where it matters e.g. which Tiger they vote for but the separate list stops species from getting buried or misrepresented when their votes are split e.g. Tree Kangaroo would have been first on the meta for quite a while if Goodfellow's and Matschie's were counted together. I understand this is a lot of extra work and I would be totally happy to manage this extra list myself if others don't want to
Yeah totally we have a while, but the earlier the list is established the higher the likelihood it will have an impact on the rosterNo need to rush my friend, we have at least 2 years
Let's see what people who have been tagged have to say on the matter. For everything to be managed properly I think there needs to be further discussion and agreements.
I remember seeing other Meta Wishlists that would do those sub-categories under the main category. So something like this...
- Tiger(any) 55
- Siberian 34
- Sumatran 31
- Indo-Chinese 22
Could be a way to keep them in the same list...but maybe you have something different in your head. I'm just thinking that if you have a separate tab in the Excel list it may easily get overlooked.
although I would also want Tiger(all) category as well with this kind of format
I'm thinking there may be some overlap with both the animal and feature meta wishlists as I do have people describing how they want to see subspecies selection, aviaries and aquariums, and the kind of base game animals they want to see in a sequel. I'll be coming up with my own description for all major features as I get more opinions regarding those matters so may help some of the questions with that here.
Thank you for getting the ball rolling and starting this thread @Stygi ! Love seeing that there's already a discussion happening around what should be done with a PZ2 species meta-list.
- This definitely needs to be a team-based project and allow for multiple people to have editing access to a larger data collection point (sounds like people are favoring Excel). As I've mentioned before, I'm more than happy to help in anyway with a potential PZ2 Meta-list, so y'all can count me in on the effort!
- As @random goat suggested, a separate data collection point (Excel, etc.) is probably the best thing for a meta-list of this potential scale. In the same vein of thought, I have been thinking about the best way to collect and easily manage/sort responses, and I think a linked survey might be our best option. If we are wanting all our collected data to be accessible via Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Forms is a great option for running an easy to operate-and-manage survey. Additionally, Forms surveys allow up to 200 questions to be asked. Meaning we could allow users to submit up to 200 species in the survey if we wanted (although something like a 150 species limit is totally reasonable too). Each question in the survey would simply be "Wanted species #blank" and only allow for a user "fill-in" response. This would also take a lot of the unnecessary maticulousness and manual labor out of data sorting for the meta-list organizers, as we wouldn't need to collect wishlists from the Frontier forums and manually add each one to an Excel file. And if we ever wanted to allow for updates or resubmittals, we could request/require voters to add an email address to their survey submission. This would allow us to send a mass email to previous meta-list submitters if we every decided to run another version of the meta-list at a later date.
I also personally have a lot of experience in graphic design (hello Adobe) so if we wanted to uploaded more-visually appealing graphs or charts of the survey's/metalist's results here to the forums for community viewing/discussion I'd be more than happy to create some. I definitely think, as others have mentioned too, that what we upload here on the official forums probably shouldn't include the results of the meta-list in its entirety though. The data we upload here should just include the top "x" voted-for species. And if people want to see all the submittals and responses in their entirety, they can view a linked excel spread of everything.
- As for specific species people can vote for, I don't see why there needs to be any terms or limitations applied. Any living animal species should be considered a viable option for the meta-list. There's no reason for us to force anyone to vote for "x" amount of a certain type of animal and over-compartmentalize. If someone doesn't want to vote for any fully aquatic or "flight-capable" species then they don't have to. And if that's all they want to vote for that's also fine. Because the intentions of this meta-list should strictly be to gauge what people actually want from a PZ2, not what we think they should. Plus I think it'd be overly assumptious of us to try to pre-apply our own reasonings for how Frontier would want to handle certain types of animals in an entirely new game that none of us truly know anything about. Leave it up to Frontier to decide how they want to categorize animals and their mechanics.
Additionally, I think people should be voting for their ideal PZ2 roster in its entirety, including species that might have already appeared in PZ1. This data would help Frontier prioritize what species truly matter to the larger PZ community and where lessons could be learned from their previous decisions with PZ1. I also agree with RandomGoat's point about allowing for subspecies-specific requests when it comes to species that already appeared in PZ1. Honestly, I think it might even be an ok idea for voters to be subspecies-specific for any of their requests, new or reoccurring, if they want. But also each of these votes should still be tallied into the overall species' count with a sub note specifying any subspecies-specific requests and their amounts. It's all useful data and some species can have a large amount of visual variety within subspecies. If somebody has a certain one in mind they should be able to voice that.
To address some of your initial questions/discussion points:
- This definitely needs to be a team-based project and allow for multiple people to have editing access to a larger data collection point (sounds like people are favoring Excel). As I've mentioned before, I'm more than happy to help in anyway with a potential PZ2 Meta-list, so y'all can count me in on the effort!
- As @random goat suggested, a separate data collection point (Excel, etc.) is probably the best thing for a meta-list of this potential scale. In the same vein of thought, I have been thinking about the best way to collect and easily manage/sort responses, and I think a linked survey might be our best option. If we are wanting all our collected data to be accessible via Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Forms is a great option for running an easy to operate-and-manage survey. Additionally, Forms surveys allow up to 200 questions to be asked. Meaning we could allow users to submit up to 200 species in the survey if we wanted (although something like a 150 species limit is totally reasonable too). Each question in the survey would simply be "Wanted species #blank" and only allow for a user "fill-in" response. This would also take a lot of the unnecessary maticulousness and manual labor out of data sorting for the meta-list organizers, as we wouldn't need to collect wishlists from the Frontier forums and manually add each one to an Excel file. And if we ever wanted to allow for updates or resubmittals, we could request/require voters to add an email address to their survey submission. This would allow us to send a mass email to previous meta-list submitters if we every decided to run another version of the meta-list at a later date.
I also personally have a lot of experience in graphic design (hello Adobe) so if we wanted to uploaded more-visually appealing graphs or charts of the survey's/metalist's results here to the forums for community viewing/discussion I'd be more than happy to create some. I definitely think, as others have mentioned too, that what we upload here on the official forums probably shouldn't include the results of the meta-list in its entirety though. The data we upload here should just include the top "x" voted-for species. And if people want to see all the submittals and responses in their entirety, they can view a linked excel spread of everything.
- As for specific species people can vote for, I don't see why there needs to be any terms or limitations applied. Any living animal species should be considered a viable option for the meta-list. There's no reason for us to force anyone to vote for "x" amount of a certain type of animal and over-compartmentalize. If someone doesn't want to vote for any fully aquatic or "flight-capable" species then they don't have to. And if that's all they want to vote for that's also fine. Because the intentions of this meta-list should strictly be to gauge what people actually want from a PZ2, not what we think they should. Plus I think it'd be overly assumptious of us to try to pre-apply our own reasonings for how Frontier would want to handle certain types of animals in an entirely new game that none of us truly know anything about. Leave it up to Frontier to decide how they want to categorize animals and their mechanics.
Additionally, I think people should be voting for their ideal PZ2 roster in its entirety, including species that might have already appeared in PZ1. This data would help Frontier prioritize what species truly matter to the larger PZ community and where lessons could be learned from their previous decisions with PZ1. I also agree with RandomGoat's point about allowing for subspecies-specific requests when it comes to species that already appeared in PZ1. Honestly, I think it might even be an ok idea for voters to be subspecies-specific for any of their requests, new or reoccurring, if they want. But also each of these votes should still be tallied into the overall species' count with a sub note specifying any subspecies-specific requests and their amounts. It's all useful data and some species can have a large amount of visual variety within subspecies. If somebody has a certain one in mind they should be able to voice that.
Last edited:
I'm not active on the forums but I participated on the old meta wishlist like most did, and as it was already said (in better words than the ones I'll use), we shouldn't use PZ1 terms when requesting PZ2 species, the Exhibit and WE systems are the one thing that shouldn't really carry over to a potential sequel, since those are the ones with the biggest room to improve, limiting ourselves and choosing the specific mechanics a species would use is not helpful, we should just ask for the animals we want, and let Frontier decide the best way to implement them following the feedback that has been given in other threads.
I don't see the value in wishlisting something and having to consider the current Exhibits system when choosing, because I wouldn't wanna play PZ2 if that system was kept the same.
I don't see the value in wishlisting something and having to consider the current Exhibits system when choosing, because I wouldn't wanna play PZ2 if that system was kept the same.
I think assuming that we won't get all the animals is the best way to ensure that Frontier won't give us all the animals. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones
There are literally millions of animal species, it's objectively impossible for Frontier to give us everything
I remember reading an article in 2019 about an interview with frontier saying exactly why they couldn't add every animal and limited themselves to 74 animals, I feel some of us forget that limitation and shouldn't expect much more animals appearing in a pz2 base game.
I do expect more than 74 though. At least 100. I would remove some of the base game animals in place of the now DLC animals and left those base game animals for better improved versions to be sold in new DLCs (things like the pandas, snow leopard, the Indian roster minus the peafowl and stuff like that) but i think all of the ABC animals we have now plus the ones from the latests DLCs should be in the base roster of the sequel.
I anticipate whatever comes next
Il let y’all make the rules unless I got something to contribute. These days I got too much going on
Il let y’all make the rules unless I got something to contribute. These days I got too much going on
What I'd perhaps suggest is opening with a "seed" poll to basically get the top... say... 20 out the way to prevent them clogging up lists.
Like, they're just not gonna make a Zoo game without Lions, Tigers, Elephants, Giraffes, Zebras, Hippos, Rhinos, Gorrillas etc
Then after that's wrapped up, thats when you move to personal preference lists?
Like, they're just not gonna make a Zoo game without Lions, Tigers, Elephants, Giraffes, Zebras, Hippos, Rhinos, Gorrillas etc
Then after that's wrapped up, thats when you move to personal preference lists?
I see some suggestions here to restrict the list in (frankly arbitrary) ways such as:
30 regular species.
20 exhibit species.
20 flying birds.
20 aquatic species.
Personally, I think it would be much simpler to not have any restrictions. Let people submit any species. If someone wants only mammals, let them be. If someone wants only birds, let them be. If someone wants only fish, let them be. If someone wants only insects, let them bee.
Why? Because there are always going to be ambiguities. Especially since we don't know what systems we'll deal with.
Are tamarins walkthrough exhibit species?
Are sloths habitat species?
Are iguanas habitat species?
Are secretary birds aviary species?
Are sea turtles aquarium species?
Maybe flying birds and fully aquatic species will be classified as regular habitat species.
Maybe exhibits will disappear entirely or make place for something new.
I don't see any problem if people decide to make separate sublists out of the general meta-list. We can always make separate bird, fish and invertebrate lists out of the metadata if we add a category such as 'animal class/order' or 'exhibit/habitat/other'. This way we can compare apples to apples, fish to fish and birds to birds.
However, I do not think that we need to create artificial restrictions for the giant lists. Sure the list may be dominated by charismatic megafauna while invertebrates drop to the bottom, but so be it. If that's what people want most, let it be. And again, the sub-lists can compensate partly.
I'm not sure if this should be integrated into the META-wishlist, or done as a separate little project.
30 regular species.
20 exhibit species.
20 flying birds.
20 aquatic species.
Personally, I think it would be much simpler to not have any restrictions. Let people submit any species. If someone wants only mammals, let them be. If someone wants only birds, let them be. If someone wants only fish, let them be. If someone wants only insects, let them bee.
Why? Because there are always going to be ambiguities. Especially since we don't know what systems we'll deal with.
Are tamarins walkthrough exhibit species?
Are sloths habitat species?
Are iguanas habitat species?
Are secretary birds aviary species?
Are sea turtles aquarium species?
Maybe flying birds and fully aquatic species will be classified as regular habitat species.
Maybe exhibits will disappear entirely or make place for something new.
I don't see any problem if people decide to make separate sublists out of the general meta-list. We can always make separate bird, fish and invertebrate lists out of the metadata if we add a category such as 'animal class/order' or 'exhibit/habitat/other'. This way we can compare apples to apples, fish to fish and birds to birds.
However, I do not think that we need to create artificial restrictions for the giant lists. Sure the list may be dominated by charismatic megafauna while invertebrates drop to the bottom, but so be it. If that's what people want most, let it be. And again, the sub-lists can compensate partly.
I kinda think this would make sense. Perhaps we could make a separate list/poll where people are restricted to the existing roster. This way we can determine which of the current species are absolutely essential. This could also be done through a poll, although that would require a separate vote for each individual species, which may be extremely tedious.
I'm not sure if this should be integrated into the META-wishlist, or done as a separate little project.
I would make an even 200 maximum animal list with up to:
I don't think substitutions should be allowed, but when the base game roster is announced, there should be an entirely new list once we have a better understanding of what truly is possible and what the major roster gaps would be.
I will also say that the devs have the current lists if they're wondering which animals not already included in Planet Zoo would be popular candidates for a sequel. I don't see a huge rush.
- 100 mammals (sea and land)
- 30 birds (flying and mostly ground/water)
- 30 reptiles (exhibit and habitat)
- 20 fish
- 20 insects/amphibians/other animals
I don't think substitutions should be allowed, but when the base game roster is announced, there should be an entirely new list once we have a better understanding of what truly is possible and what the major roster gaps would be.
I will also say that the devs have the current lists if they're wondering which animals not already included in Planet Zoo would be popular candidates for a sequel. I don't see a huge rush.