We Shouldn't be Bound to Animals Only Found in Zoos

[AndyZoos]

There are so many animals not yet in the game, I don't see the point discussing animals which are extinct/not existant, before we have at least a decent coverage of every biome, conteinent and major taxonomical group of animals in the game.

Just some of the groups not yet properly represented in the game:

• contienents:
  • South America
  • Europe
  • Australia
  • Antarctica
• biomes:
  • desert
  • Tundra
  • Alpine/Taige
  • Reef
  • Pelagic
  • Lakes and rivers
• taxonomical groups:
  • anteaters/sloths/armadillos
  • otters
  • foxes
  • all birds
  • amphibians
  • marsupials
  • all aquatic animals
  • all avian birds
  • bats

and that's just from the top of my head. There is already so much potential to add to this game, without mixing it with non existant animals.

This is actually my biggest "argument" against adding animals that aren't typically kept in zoos, extinct animals, cryptids, etc. I get it. People might have fun throwing in a dinosaur or a wooly mammoth or whatever...

But I'd prefer the developers focus their time and energy on filling in the gaps in the current animal roster with real animals before shifting their focus elsewhere. And it's going to take a long while to get there.

If I'm going to have to wait 3 months between each DLC pack, I would much prefer they release packs with real animals for the first 3 years of the game's existence--because that's what it's going to take to really flesh things out if the release schedules holds to what they've been doing for the other games.

 

[Mjmannella]

This is actually my biggest "argument" against adding animals that aren't typically kept in zoos, extinct animals, cryptids, etc. I get it. People might have fun throwing in a dinosaur or a wooly mammoth or whatever...

But I'd prefer the developers focus their time and energy on filling in the gaps in the current animal roster with real animals before shifting their focus elsewhere. And it's going to take a long while to get there.

If I'm going to have to wait 3 months between each DLC pack, I would much prefer they release packs with real animals for the first 3 years of the game's existence--because that's what it's going to take to really flesh things out if the release schedules holds to what they've been doing for the other games.

I’m sorry, but did you just say that dinosaurs and woolly mammoths aren’t real animals?

 

[Mjmannella]

Frontier made a game around dinos, so people can't complain about them, and recently extinct animals do make sense if they have confirmed that some of them did come back in real life. Like most extinct.

Why is it required for declared extinct animals to be found again to be in the game? My whole point with this thread was the encourage people to think outside the reality paradigm.

 

[NL_Mutso]

I’m sorry, but did you just say that dinosaurs and woolly mammoths aren’t real animals?

Personally I wouldn't pick 'real'... We all know about fossils/remains etc...
I think he just picked the wrong word for this and meant to write a different word.. You also knows what he means from the context, of the rest of his post.

TBF, dinos are controversial on this part.. Jurassic Park (the movie) was criticised for their portrayal of certain dinos.. And there are still a lot of theories going around about the actual appearance of a lot of dinos.. Reptile skin/feathers etc... Some researchers yelled that this was a fantasy/unreal look for the dinos..
And I don't know much about the different eras.. But for Woolly Rhinos and Mammoths they found preserved fossils - so that's very much a confirmed look.
But for a lot of animals they assume it looks like their modern day version.. Personally i think it's fair to make such an assumption but from a certain POV it's a theory...

Frontier made a game around dinos, so people can't complain about them, and recently extinct animals do make sense if they have confirmed that some of them did come back in real life. Like most extinct.

Why is it required for declared extinct animals to be found again to be in the game? My whole point with this thread was the encourage people to think outside the reality paradigm.

People have been very vocal about this.. A lot of people don't like the idea about such unrealistic features in this game.
Bringing back extinct animals is currently a unrealistic feature. (Yes, i know about that Ibex but that was a hybrid clone that died within 10 minutes)
In a lot of studies they are trying to recreate a existing close relative and mimic the features of that extinct animal..
So actually not bringing back a extinct animal but try to breed an existing animal with those traits/features.

I know a lot of people consider this as a fantasized (and controversial) feature and don't want fantasy to be included in a zoo game.
For a lot of people it damages the image/feeling of this game or simply want the devs to focus their time to expand the animal roster with current living animals.
I know some pro-extinct people don't understand this feeling but somehow share the same opinion when it comes to mythical animals.

 

[Mjmannella]

People have been very vocal about this.. A lot of people don't like the idea about such unrealistic features in this game.
Bringing back extinct animals is currently a unrealistic feature. (Yes, i know about that Ibex but that was a hybrid clone that died within 10 minutes)
In a lot of studies they are trying to recreate a existing close relative and mimic the features of that extinct animal..
So actually not bringing back a extinct animal but try to breed an existing animal with those traits/features.

I know a lot of people consider this as a fantasized (and controversial) feature and don't want fantasy to be included in a zoo game.
For a lot of people it damages the image/feeling of this game or simply want the devs to focus their time to expand the animal roster with current living animals.
I know some pro-extinct people don't understand this feeling but somehow share the same opinion when it comes to mythical animals.

People complained about the space requirements for the polar bears, which were intended to be realistic. And you know what Frontier did? They halved the space needs.
It's evident that realism is holding the game back more than anything.

 

[NL_Mutso]

People complained about the space requirements for the polar bears, which were intended to be realistic. And you know what Frontier did? They halved the space needs.
It's evident that realism is holding the game back more than anything.

Now you're just making stuff up..

• Thanks for the feedback on the habitat and welfare requirements for the Polar Bears. We will be amending the requirements to 1/2 of their original size. Whilst we strongly believe in the reasons behind the original numbers, we completely understand that some players, in particular our creative builders, would face too many challenges in keeping these amazing animals happy in their zoos. The new numbers will be both more in line with other large animals in Planet Zoo, and in keeping with the overall conservation message of Planet Zoo - whilst also maintaining a gameplay challenge for those who don't want it to feel too easy to run a successful zoo.
  In terms of the original numbers, we did a lot of research into Polar Bear habitats – they are majestic animals that require a wide snowy area to roam, and if they have anything less, they tend to display stress behaviours and in general do not cope well with being in zoos. Planet Zoo is at its core about animal welfare, so we felt giving the Polar Bear the high space and water requirements it so desperately needs to thrive, was in keeping with the game’s main message.

And a copy/paste from google:

Sadly, most captive polar bears are kept in facilities, and often in climates, which are totally unsuitable. Only a very few facilities provide sufficient space for the bears to live anything approaching a contended and fulfilling life. So it is not surprising that many captive polar bears manifest symptoms of extreme stress, such as continually shaking their heads, pacing up and down their enclosures or swimming in a stereotypical fashion.

A lot of sizes would be realistic, if you look at actual sizes in world-wide zoos.. The habitat size for Polar bears is controversial in real zoos as well..
They were going with the conservation/welfare approach on size requirements, a standard which Frontier intended (an idealistic POV).. And only a couple of zoos in the entire world share that same approach. Most zoos have the wrong requirements or have unnatural/high temperature enclosures...

 

[markun]

Do we have to go through the polar bear discussion in yet another thread?

 

[Mjmannella]

The polar bear complaints are proof that realism shouldn't be a prioritized feature in a game. All it did was bog down people's enjoyment of the game, and nobody was worse-off with the reduced sizes.
If people were okay with it 1.1.1 would've never happened.

 

[paul78]

I’m a huge fan of realism in this game. Definitely no mythical creatures and probably no dinosaurs as well. I’d much rather have a dinosaur version of planet zoo as a separate game and I think it would be a huge money maker also. The only extinct animal I’d even be tempted to have is the dodo only because of the statues. Sure Barbary lions and caspian tigers could be cool but I’d rather have them focus on living animals as there’s tons we still need in game.

 

[horse14t]

Guests being so damn negative about everything that doesn't even matter and it makes you not want to try - fine
Birds and reptiles giving birth and not making nests or laying eggs - fine
Guests looking like cartoons - fine
The game encouraging you to create illegal breeding mills for absurd amounts of Conservation Points - fine
A Thylacine or Quagga that could teach about extinction and what we've lost due to our own negligence - BLASPHEMY!

 

[Swjosdotschka]

Guests being so damn negative about everything that doesn't even matter and it makes you not want to try - fine
Birds and reptiles giving birth and not making nests or laying eggs - fine
Guests looking like cartoons - fine
A Thylacine or Quagga that could teach about extinction and what we've lost due to our own negligence - BLASTFAMY!

Apples and oranges to me.

Numbre one: Game aspect that needs improvement
Numbre two: Could have several reasons. One could be hard to programm, another could be that some zoos take eggs away anyway, three could be that there was a time restriction to programm this. The list is endless.
Third: Brand and graphics decision. Plus several thousand realistic looking guests with a lot of detail in a zoo could require a nasa computer.
Fourth: As sad as it is: Extinct is extinct. Bringing it back in a video game doesn't send the message to protect the species we have left for me. It sends the message: "If we extinct something, we can just bring it back with sience!"

More animals like Quaggas on education boards though? I'm all for it. Would be great in front of a zebra habitat.

 

[Nicholas LionRider]

I’d just raise the argument we can’t “afford” the privilege of extinct species considering we don’t even have penguins or African rhinos. There’s just too many species that are still staples in zoos to focus on fantasy wishes. Once the game is finished with modern animals, then frontier can decide on what they wanted to do (extinct, likely aquatic, etc). As of the next year though I just don’t see anything outside of standard animals like penguins, otters, moose, etc. Strictly based on the animal quantity I just don’t think we’ll realistically hit a point to even justify extinct species. A 4 animal extinct pack wouldn’t do them justice and with only 4, good luck making an entire zoo with them. Unless frontier is willing to make radical changes to their current dlc system I just can’t realistically ever see extinct animals.

 

[jcp011c]

I’d just raise the argument we can’t “afford” the privilege of extinct species considering we don’t even have penguins or African rhinos. There’s just too many species that are still staples in zoos to focus on fantasy wishes. Once the game is finished with modern animals, then frontier can decide on what they wanted to do (extinct, likely aquatic, etc). As of the next year though I just don’t see anything outside of standard animals like penguins, otters, moose, etc. Strictly based on the animal quantity I just don’t think we’ll realistically hit a point to even justify extinct species. A 4 animal extinct pack wouldn’t do them justice and with only 4, good luck making an entire zoo with them. Unless frontier is willing to make radical changes to their current dlc system I just can’t realistically ever see extinct animals.

So much this! If they were putting out packs every 4-6 months with 25-30 animals I could maybe see it being a solid argument that eventually we might could get to extinct/non extant animals. but I don't think Frontier is going to go that route, and if we're only going really get 15-20 animals a year, it would make sense it should focus on existing animals and primarily pull from somewhat popular zoo animals.

 

[paul78]

Well the guests are meant to be cartoonishly done as it is a planet series game. Besides they would hamper optimization if more realistically done.

 

[horse14t]

Apples and oranges to me.

Numbre one: Game aspect that needs improvement
Numbre two: Could have several reasons. One could be hard to programm, another could be that some zoos take eggs away anyway, three could be that there was a time restriction to programm this. The list is endless.
Third: Brand and graphics decision. Plus several thousand realistic looking guests with a lot of detail in a zoo could require a nasa computer.
Fourth: As sad as it is: Extinct is extinct. Bringing it back in a video game doesn't send the message to protect the species we have left for me. It sends the message: "If we extinct something, we can just bring it back with sience!"

More animals like Quaggas on education boards though? I'm all for it. Would be great in front of a zebra habitat.

Point 2: Zoo Tycoon 1 and 2 had egg laying and those games are over 10 years old. It's not even hard to code in. All they have to do is change the code from spawning a baby to an egg. Then that egg will have a lifespan and when that's up it'll spawn the actual baby. That's how a 16 year old game did it.

Well the guests are meant to be cartoonishly done as it is a planet series game. Besides they would hamper optimization if more realistically done.

Point 3: Zoo Tycoon 2013/17 had nice looking guests that didn't look as good as the animals but still looked very nice and in style of the game. They also didn't lag the game at all. ZT2 has very low poly guests but they still look like people and fit the game's art style nicely.
PZ guests look very cartoony compared to the rest of the game and out of place. Making a few models that are user friendly, low poly but also fit into the style better would be much more pleasing.

Point 4: As a kid I got interested in conservation because I saw the animals we've lost and will never see again because of our hands (Like the Thylacine and Quagga). Losing the tiger means we'll likely never see the tiger again. Losing elephants means we'll never see elephants again. Having the Thylacine and Quagga only be able to be viewed in games and media but not in real life because we failed to protect them strikes a cord with me.
Look at what we lost, we should strive to do our best to not have it happen again.

 

[leguminous media]

Swjosdotschka said:
Apples and oranges to me.

Numbre one: Game aspect that needs improvement
Numbre two: Could have several reasons. One could be hard to programm, another could be that some zoos take eggs away anyway, three could be that there was a time restriction to programm this. The list is endless.
Third: Brand and graphics decision. Plus several thousand realistic looking guests with a lot of detail in a zoo could require a nasa computer.
Fourth: As sad as it is: Extinct is extinct. Bringing it back in a video game doesn't send the message to protect the species we have left for me. It sends the message: "If we extinct something, we can just bring it back with sience!"

More animals like Quaggas on education boards though? I'm all for it. Would be great in front of a zebra habitat.

You are aware that quagga de-extinction is the only program that is anywhere close to being finished. Yeah they are not really quagga, hence why they are often referred to them as Rau Quagga. More de-extinction is going to happen within the next few decades, it is a paradigm shift that people need to be educated on how to navigate. If they actually made a de-extinction pack properly it could be used to say, hey these are not really quagga, mammoths, or thylacines, but new animals that are approximations of the old ones, hence you cannot just replace extinct animals.

 

[NZFanatic]

You are aware that quagga de-extinction is the only program that is anywhere close to being finished. Yeah they are not really quagga, hence why they are often referred to them as Rau Quagga. More de-extinction is going to happen within the next few decades, it is a paradigm shift that people need to be educated on how to navigate. If they actually made a de-extinction pack properly it could be used to say, hey these are not really quagga, mammoths, or thylacines, but new animals that are approximations of the old ones, hence you cannot just replace extinct animals.

The quagga de-extinction programme was never taken seriously in conservationist and zoological circles. Selective breeding is, by its very nature, unnatural. It was the pet project of basically one guy who originally never intended on it being about de-extinction; he was just trying to see if he could breed zebras that 'look like' quagga by artificially selecting for quagga-like traits. Thus far the project has bred 116 animals, and only 6 even sort-of resemble the quagga. It's not something that should be upheld as an example of "de-extinction".

Anyway, I'm saying this as someone whose favourite animal is the thylacine - I don't want them in the game, at least not until all other options for content are exhausted.

In any case, I doubt we'll ever get an "extinct animals" pack. It's a niche market (extinct animals) within an already niche market (zoo games) within another niche market (creative building simulators). The original Zoo Tycoon did it to capitalise off of the popularity of Jurassic Park and the Walking With... series, both of which were popular at the time of Dinosaur Digs, and Zoo Tycoon 2 didn't include extinct animals until the end of the game's life. Other zoo games, such as Wildlife Park, only included them to try and ride on the Zoo Tycoon nostalgia factor. The idea was only popular among people who already wanted it.

The other point to consider is that whenever this subject is (frequently) raised, ever since the game's launch, the majority answer seemed to always be "No, or at least not yet." If Frontier does indeed peruse the forums looking to see what people are wanting, I'm pretty sure they'd quickly come to the conclusion that while an extinct animals DLC might be worth doing, it probably isn't worth doing until they've filled in more of the glaring gaps in the animal roster.

 

[12344321]

People complained about the space requirements for the polar bears, which were intended to be realistic. And you know what Frontier did? They halved the space needs.
It's evident that realism is holding the game back more than anything.

They halved the space needs for polar bears, therefore chupacabra should be in the game.

 

[Swjosdotschka]

You are aware that quagga de-extinction is the only program that is anywhere close to being finished. Yeah they are not really quagga, hence why they are often referred to them as Rau Quagga. More de-extinction is going to happen within the next few decades, it is a paradigm shift that people need to be educated on how to navigate. If they actually made a de-extinction pack properly it could be used to say, hey these are not really quagga, mammoths, or thylacines, but new animals that are approximations of the old ones, hence you cannot just replace extinct animals.

That actually doesn't take away from my point, it adds to it. What is taught with those "de-extinson" programms is "extinct as much as you like and one day science will bring everything back". Of course there will be always people who will get the impulse to care more for animals that are close to extinson. But some others will not. As to egg laying: How many days does an ostrich sit on their eggs? Serious question. Isn't it even long enough to notice with the current game speed?
And I know I repeat myself, but this is not Zoo Tycoon. It is a different game with a different engine and a heavily detailed build mode that simply can not handle even more to calculate. And again, it is a brand decision. I understand that the style is not for you. I like it. But wether you like the guests or not, it is an argument that has nothing to do with the topic. The topic is extinct animals. The look of the guests don't change opinion on another topic.

And by the way: I would be fine with eggs, I just don't think not having eggs is more of a problem than mammals telepirting next to their mom or no drinking babies. Both are equally unfortunate, both don't change my approach on extinct animals.

 

[NZFanatic]

And by the way: I would be fine with eggs, I just don't think not having eggs is more of a problem than mammals telepirting next to their mom or no drinking babies. Both are equally unfortunate, both don't change my approach on extinct animals.

Yeah, with eggs I'm much the same as you. To me adding in egg-laying only adds an extra step between "pregnant" and "baby" that doesn't need to be there. We don't get to witness the embryos of other animals growing in their mothers' wombs, so why should eggs get special treatment? All the animal babies in game emerge at a certain stage in their life, and it isn't "newborn", and this includes the birds and reptiles. We can assume that the "egg process" occurred some time between pregnancy and the baby appearing in the habitat. Including eggs feels like an unnecessary complication which doesn't reflect any kind of universal zoo practice (zoo practices surrounding eggs tend to vary considerably and depend entirely on the species).