What are the largest regions of the world totally unrepresented in the game?

[ElectricMonk]

Being an Australian, I’m (bitterly) aware that some regions in Oceania, even quite large regions, have no in-game representation - specifically New Zealand and Tasmania have no habitat or exhibit animals. What other large(ish) regions have no representation?

Edit for clarification: by “no representation”, I mean none, not one, not a single habitat or exhibit animal.

 

[Aidan635]

The first one that comes to mind for me is Central/North Asia. I know there's not a whole lot of biodiversity going on up there but it's worth a few good habitat animals. The next one would probably be the Middle East/Sahara region. I know we already got a pack technically, but only 2 (1 habitat, 1 exhibit) were from there. Other than that, I guess just Australia, South South America, Eastern North America, and maybe the Arctic can use a few more animals.

 

[ElectricMonk]

The first one that comes to mind for me is Central/North Asia. I know there's not a whole lot of biodiversity going on up there but it's worth a few good habitat animals. The next one would probably be the Middle East/Sahara region. I know we already got a pack technically, but only 2 (1 habitat, 1 exhibit) were from there. Other than that, I guess just Australia, South South America, Eastern North America, and maybe the Arctic can use a few more animals.

I agree those regions are underrepresented, but I don’t think any of them are totally unrepresented..? Timber wolf covers most of northern and central Eurasia, for example, fennec fox and scarab cover much of the Sahara, what regions have absolutely no representation at all?

 

[AmyEvans]

I think this is the perfect discussion for my first post. I find the topic of this discussion so interesting, because the game so far has done such a fantastic job in covering a vast number of regions? I guess that is the perfect way to describe it, because we have had continents and specific regions within continents, so Frontier has done a superb job with geography in this game.

Geography is of course only one of the many aspects a zoo covers, the focus primarily being on the animals and plants of these regions and the fragile ecosystems they inhabit.
So for me, justifying the need of yet another line or dot in a map drawn by men is just a little hard to accept. My answer would be that the current and largest unrepresented regions in these game are in fact specific biomes and as such, Rainforests/Tropical forests come to mind. I truly hope we are heading there next.

 

[DragonNTiger]

That sounds like a question you'd need to ask a biologist and a geographer... you define New Zealand and Tasmania as regions, but being islands their landmass and animal options are both much smaller and much more easily defined than say, somewhere in north-ish/central Asia with our non-specific "Timber Wolf" which may not accurately represent the wolves found in that area...

 

[ElectricMonk]

So for me, justifying the need of yet another line or dot in a map drawn by men is just a little hard to accept.

A region need not to have been defined by men - there’s no reason for it to be a political region etc.

My answer would be that the current and largest unrepresented regions in these game are in fact specific biomes and as such, Rainforests/Tropical forests come to mind. I truly hope we are heading there next.

But none of those are a) regions or b) unrepresented - we have animals from all biomes already in the game. What regions/areas/locations (choose your preferred term) have no species at all?

 

[Spiderhawk]

IIRC I don’t believe we have any Middle East representation
Northern Asia has been requesting love
Central America could use some love Only 1 Japan
Hawaii currently has nothing, while there are native birds, bats and ocean animals, there’s invasive animals. The hawaiin monk seal id say could be the representative.
The Lesser Antilles iguana is the only Caribbean.
The Galapagos tortoise is the only Galapagos.
I’d like to see some love to Galapagos and Caribbean one day.
I certainly would like to see Australia and New Zealand get more in the future

 

[ElectricMonk]

IIRC I don’t believe we have any Middle East representation
Northern Asia has been requesting love
Central America could use some love Only 1 Japan
Hawaii currently has nothing, while there are native birds, bats and ocean animals, there’s invasive animals. The hawaiin monk seal id say could be the representative.
The Lesser Antilles iguana is the only Caribbean.
The Galapagos tortoise is the only Galapagos.
I’d like to see some love to Galapagos and Caribbean one day.
I certainly would like to see Australia and New Zealand get more in the future

Middle east has a few (e.g., fallow deer, Bactrian camel) Northern Asia has several species (many in the far north but several further south), Central America has quite a few E.g., jaguar, cougar, etc. and some exhibits) Japan (as you say) has one, so isn't unrepresented. Hawaii is true but very small. Caribbean is certainly a good place to look… do we have anything from Hispaniola or Cuba? I can’t think of one, so they’re both good examples. Galapagos already has one species and is a very small area.

 

[Roxxsmom]

The first one that comes to mind for me is Central/North Asia. I know there's not a whole lot of biodiversity going on up there but it's worth a few good habitat animals. The next one would probably be the Middle East/Sahara region. I know we already got a pack technically, but only 2 (1 habitat, 1 exhibit) were from there. Other than that, I guess just Australia, South South America, Eastern North America, and maybe the Arctic can use a few more animals.

Middle East and the large portions of northern Asia (such as Mongolia/Gobi Desert).

I think the inclusion of some frequently requested animals, such as Arabian oryx and the Przewalski's horse would help there. Also, if we want a leopard subspecies, there is the endangered Anatolian leopard (though I know some folks have also suggested the critically endangered Amur leopard). We are also light on exclusively desert species from north America (though cougars and pronghorn are found in deserts, and prairie dogs extend down into New Mexico). I still want an armadillo and a javelina species, but I think I'm unusual there

New Zealand is also completely absent, though the fact that (aside from marine mammals) their native fauna are nearly all birds (with a just a few bats and small reptiles) probably explains this. If we ever do get aviary birds, I hope we get at least a couple from New Zealand. The tuatara is probably the most distinctive reptile in the world (and one of the rarest, certainly), but they aren't something one sees in many zoos outside NZ itself. They do have some at San Diego, I think, but they are a breeding colony and are not on display. Of course this game also has pandas widely available for our zoos, and they aren't in very many outside of China either. So maybe tuataras should be an exhibit animal at some point?

 

[Antimony96]

Almost every region has at least some representation, outside of New Zealand and the Pacific Islands. If we're asking about under-represented regions, especially those with popularly-requested animals, the best answers are Oceania, Latin America (especially outside the Amazon), the Middle East, and maybe Northeast Asia.

 

[Antimony96]

Eastern North America

As someone who lives in Pennsylvania I'd love at least a couple more to build something like a Keystone Trail, but I don't think any are top priorities after the last two packs. Raccoon, black bear, and maybe an exhibit animal like an eastern hognose snake or bog turtle would be sufficient. I'd also say river otters which are extremely common in Northeastern zoos, but that would have the problem of not having any appeal for European players (and vice versa for the Eurasian river otter), and more people on both sides of the ocean seem to prefer getting the ASCO.

 

[ElectricMonk]

Almost every region has at least some representation, outside of New Zealand and the Pacific Islands. If we're asking about under-represented regions, especially those with popularly-requested animals, the best answers are Oceania, Latin America (especially outside the Amazon), the Middle East, and maybe Northeast Asia.

I guess that’s the question - I’m wondering about what the largest areas are with zero representation (not ‘which regions are under-represented, which Has been discussed plenty) by ‘region’ or ‘area’ I’m not talking about continents or islands necessarily (though the only ones I can think of off-hand are islands)

 

[AmyEvans]

A region need not to have been defined by men - there’s no reason for it to be a political region etc.

But none of those are a) regions or b) unrepresented - we have animals from all biomes already in the game. What regions/areas/locations (choose your preferred term) have no species at all?

I guess my question is why focus on the actual region instead of the habitat ? It is a zoo game, so I would think that Frontier is somewhat emulating their composition within their virtual world. The primary focus of zoos (at least in modern times) is educating their patrons about the needs to protect entire ecosystems from disappearing. It has been determined for quite some time by most zoological leading institutions that very little can be done for species conservation without impacting their natural habitats. So moving away from specific regions in this game and focusing on entire ecosystems would definitely fit in within that narrative.

For example the game visited Europe last, we received some really neat city building pieces, some interesting foliage amongst a few other things, but how exactly did any of it connect with the core message of the game, zoos? Do not misunderstand me, I think the regions were great in bringing a well rounded selection of animals into the game, and maybe just as importantly a fair selection of architectural building components (It would had been very difficult to match these last ones to biomes) It was a necessary path to be taken, but I believe that path is now over, and it is time to move away from it, before the game loses itself into something completely unrelated to its origin.

 

[AmyEvans]

I guess that’s the question - I’m wondering about what the largest areas are with zero representation (not ‘which regions are under-represented, which Has been discussed plenty) by ‘region’ or ‘area’ I’m not talking about continents or islands necessarily (though the only ones I can think of off-hand are islands)

If the question is under representation, then you need to look no further than any tropical forest, just pick the region. In all fairness, zoos in all corners of the world devote a great amount of exhibit space and allocated funds to species found within these quickly disappearing ecosystems and for many good reasons.

I'm hoping that instead of regions (Frontier please if you are reading this) we are heading towards biomes, but if regions are to still be our future source of game content, then I would love to visit the Central American tropics. I understand we already visited North America the continent where the entire Central American region is located, but Frontier's version of this visit felt more like visiting a region instead of a continent. There are more animal and plant species in one single Central American ecosystem than in the entire U.S and Canada combined, amazing when you think about it.

 

[Roxxsmom]

Non tropical areas of South America are also poorly represented.

 

[AmyEvans]

Non tropical areas of South America are also poorly represented.

Agreed maybe a few other biome packs could address that as well. In my opinion if we continue focusing on specific regions, we will never get anywhere before this game fills in the large gaps we currently have.

 

[ElectricMonk]

I guess my question is why focus on the actual region instead of the habitat ? It is a zoo game, so I would think that Frontier is somewhat emulating their composition within their virtual world. The primary focus of zoos (at least in modern times) is educating their patrons about the needs to protect entire ecosystems from disappearing. It has been determined for quite some time by most zoological leading institutions that very little can be done for species conservation without impacting their natural habitats. So moving away from specific regions in this game and focusing on entire ecosystems would definitely fit in within that narrative.

I’m not sure what you mean… ecosystems exist within given regions. The Amazon is a region as well as an ecosystem for example whereas ‘rainforest’ isn’t.. each rainforest in a different region is a different ecosystem - the Congo, the Daintree, and the Amazon are all tropical rainforests but they’re not one ecosystem (but each is a perfectly valid region). The word ‘region’ in no way implies political boundaries it just means a contiguous area of space in many cases these could be whole ecosystems could be a specific part of An ecosystem or could include multiple ecosystems.

For example the game visited Europe last, we received some really neat city building pieces, some interesting foliage amongst a few other things, but how exactly did any of it connect with the core message of the game, zoos? Do not misunderstand me, I think the regions were great in bringing a well rounded selection of animals into the game, and maybe just as importantly a fair selection of architectural building components (It would had been very difficult to match these last ones to biomes) It was a necessary path to be taken, but I believe that path is now over, and it is time to move away from it, before the game loses itself into something completely unrelated to its origin.

Ok, so what regions in Europe (which do not necessarily, or even preferably, conform to political boundaries) have no representation. (E.g., the Mediterranean Sea, the Alps and Iberia are all regions but regions could be either larger or smaller than these.

 

[AmyEvans]

I’m not sure what you mean… ecosystems exist within given regions. The Amazon is a region as well as an ecosystem for example whereas ‘rainforest’ isn’t.. each rainforest in a different region is a different ecosystem - the Congo, the Daintree, and the Amazon are all tropical rainforests but they’re not one ecosystem (but each is a perfectly valid region). The word ‘region’ in no way implies political boundaries it just means a contiguous area of space in many cases these could be whole ecosystems could be a specific part of An ecosystem or could include multiple ecosystems.

Ok, so what regions in Europe (which do not necessarily, or even preferably, conform to political boundaries) have no representation. (E.g., the Mediterranean Sea, the Alps and Iberia are all regions but regions could be either larger or smaller than these.

It seems that if Frontier were to go ahead and focused on any of those regions you mentioned, there would be an incredible amount of other regions that encompass the same biome left unaccounted for. Would it not make more sense to change course and move to something that can breach the gaps in the game a little quicker ? Just an observation. It is of course totally fine if we disagree on this.


No sure what you meant in relation to your question about Europe, maybe I'm not understanding the context of it. In my opinion the European Pack was great because if was only fair to cover the many regions found within this continent, if for no other reason than the great building pieces we received. In my opinion, if the Lynx and the Ibex for example would have been part of a biome pack it would have related much better to a zoo game. At the end the pack was great, but let us leave it at that. If the priority here was a specific region I think Madagascar would have had precedence over any of the packs we received in 2021 with the exception of South East Asia. You can think of a region more important to zoos that does not have a specific dedicated pack in the game ? Yet somehow I do not see a Madagascar pack in the horizon (not that I'm advocating for one) because it would be too specific and leave so many other possibilities for filling gaps in limbo.

If we were to receive a regional pack every week for the next 52 weeks, I would say go right ahead, think of every critical and obscure region in this planet that has some sort of biodiversity, but that is unfortunately not reality. Like it or not, eventually this game's extended support will run out and there is too much content missing from the virtual zoo to be able to justify continuing the path of regions, just my thoughts.

 

[ElectricMonk]

It seems that if Frontier were to go ahead and focused on any of those regions you mentioned, there would be an incredible amount of other regions that encompass the same biome left unaccounted for. Would it not make more sense to change course and move to something that can breach the gaps in the game a little quicker ? Just an observation. It is of course totally fine if we disagree on this.

No sure what you meant in relation to your question about Europe, maybe I'm not understanding the context of it. In my opinion the European Pack was great because if was only fair to cover the many regions found within this continent, if for no other reason than the great building pieces we received. In my opinion, if the Lynx and the Ibex for example would have been part of a biome pack it would have related much better to a zoo game. At the end the pack was great, but let us leave it at that. If the priority here was a specific region I think Madagascar would have had precedence over any of the packs we received in 2021 with the exception of South East Asia. You can think of a region more important to zoos that does not have a specific dedicated pack in the game ? Yet somehow I do not see a Madagascar pack in the horizon (not that I'm advocating for one) because it would be too specific and leave so many other possibilities for filling gaps in limbo.

If we were to receive a regional pack every week for the next 52 weeks, I would say go right ahead, think of every critical and obscure region in this planet that has some sort of biodiversity, but that is unfortunately not reality. Like it or not, eventually this game's extended support will run out and there is too much content missing from the virtual zoo to be able to justify continuing the path of regions, just my thoughts.

Who asked frontier to focus on regions? Who asked for specific packs to represent each region? I am just asking what regions don’t have any representation at the moment. One pack could easily add representation from several regions. E.g., an ‘islands’ pack or a biome pack. I’m not asking about or suggesting packs, I’m asking what places in the world do not have in-game animals. Neither New Zealand or Tasmania, for example, have any representation but I am not asking for or suggesting a New Zealand pack or a Tasmania pack I just thought it’d be interesting to see what areas of the globe have no representation as the game stands right now. Forget about future packs - they are nothing to do with the question.

 

[NZFanatic]

Besides obviously New Zealand, the Middle East is probably the most lacking broad region.