Where Planet Zoo goes wrong

[trebthegreat]

First off I want to premise this on the fact that A, these criticisms are born of love. Not hate. I Genuinely enjoy playing Planet Zoo and I've sunk well over 1000 hours into it on steam(a status it only shares with Crusader Kings and the other paradox grand strategy games like eu4, Stellaris, hoi4. The Warhammer total war trilogy and Civ's 3 though 6). I'm not making these criticisms because I dislike the game. I'm making them because I've spent long enough playing and enjoying the game to feel where I believe I can see where its lacking in my opinion. B, with the release of Planet Coaster 2 its clear now that Planet Zoo is if not shelved, no longer the priority long term. I know a hypothetical Planet Zoo 2 is still a way off so I figured now is a good a time as any to put my feelings and opinions into words.


The CEO vs The General Manager

Planet Zoo strikes me as quite odd as far as zoo management simulators go in that it has remarkably few ways for you to directly interact with what you manage. I dubbed this style as "The CEO". You are the upstairs manager, less concerned with the day to day operating and more on the bigger picture of designing and laying out expansions to the operation, and managing the income and expenditure. This contrasts with what I've dubbed "The General Manager", a much more hands on role where you are actively participating and interacting in the day to day running of the operations as well as the role of "The CEO". Jurassic World Evolution is the best example, you can and when needs be have to actively interact with the dinosaurs, you have to take on the role of the ranger, the security, the vet. This isn't to say "The CEO" is a bad way to tackle management, far from it. Factorio is a prime example of where it works amazingly. But in my opinion, Zoo simulators in particular are where "The General manager" style is almost a tailor made fit. Being honest, Jurassic World Evolution and its sequel are just "dinosaur zoo simulators" and you could argue that since they came out after Planet Zoo you cant really argue Planet Zoo dropped the ball since it was walking for Jurassic World Evolution to run. Except another zoo game does everything Jurassic World Evolution does and more, and is 20 years old. Planet Zoo is in of itself arguably the spiritual successor to the Zoo tycoon franchise. Zoo tycoon 2 the second(and last) game of the series had Zookeeper mode; a first person mode where you could walk around the zoo you built, enter the habitats and directly interact with the animals(refill food and water, wash, heal and in later expansions ride and train them to perform tricks for sea world style shows(it was a different time, not advocating for it. Just using as an example) alongside performing basic maintenance duties like emptying bins and cleaning up litter. Which is why I'm honestly so perplexed by Planet Zoo's utter lack of such interactivity features.

Depth vs Wideness

This is something I don't have words to sum up so ill have to define what I mean.

"Wideness" is content that builds off of what is already functionally in the game, Planet Zoo's DLC's are what id consider 'wide'. They are more building pieces, new animals. They build on and expand on what already exists, giving you a 'wide' choice of options to pick from, Its more of what already intrinsically in the game, Frontier might for arguments sake put Bigfoot in the Next DLC for whatever reason. With an entirely new model, rig, animations and sounds. But even though its entirely new, its built within the "animal" framework of Planet Zoo. Its new content built into existing systems. The ever requested "bird expansion" would be an example.

"Depth" Is content not necessarily linked to the main gameplay loop but compliments it. In a way Jurassic World Evolution's drivable jeeps and helicopters are depth, but much more closely linked to the gameplay than id be comfortable using as an example. A much better example is the camera from JWE2, an almost entirely optional feature you can go full park development cycle without even using that gives you a little bit of cash for taking pictures of your dinosaurs. In the big picture(heh) of things its a near pointless and superfluous feature. But its an amazingly fun little thing to play around with when your just goofing off in your jeep and catch sight of a couple of Brachiosaurs emerging from a forests edge or watch two Tyrannosaurs fighting over something. Its the polish that takes a gem from mearly sparkling to downright dazzling.

Again I don't want people getting the wrong idea, Wide stuff is perfetly fine and legitimate, I love the planet zoo dlcs(Wisent/Alpaca my beloved) and I'm not asking for/wanting less of it.

These are just a few ideas ive had myself/seen floated by people for features to possibly(I wouldnt necessarily advocate or want all the listed ideas its more as an example to get people thinking) add to a sequal;

A photography mode like in JWE2.
The social media idea from Leafs vid.
A basic vet system where you can traqualize and treat your animals.
The Zookeeper/janitor/maintinance mode mentioned above.
An ambassador/mascot animal system(could tie into the socal media system).
A very basic food logistics system like Prehistoric kingdom(Basically all the food for the animals is delivered to you on site to be stored, prepared and distrbuted to the animals).
A custom signage creator with a number of scalable letters and shapes to allow you to create and customize your zoo more.

Simulating a world beyond a zoo

For such a grandiose and ambitious sounding title its actually a fairly simple and straightforward, JWE even touches on it to an extent with with the dinosaur capturing, black market and missions. it all refrences the wider world that exists outside of whatever park your currenly building. Zoo tycoon 2 has a much more relevent example. When playing challange mode you'd ocassonally get requests or offers from outside the zoo along the lines of "The Latvian Leopard Lover Society" are offering you $5000 to take some photos of your leopards doing XYZ" or "Cityburg zoo recenly went bankrupt and this bear needs a new home, if you can keep it happy and comfortable for 6 months its yours to keep". There are like 15 or so of these random events that went from testing out vending machines for drinks/snack companies, to rehabilitating injured wild animals for release that rewarded you money, fame, animals or free buildings/amenities. To be completly fair Planet Zoo does have the trade hub, which works in this way to an extent between players. but I think something like what zoo tycoon 2 does would make challange and franchise modes much more dynamic and fun and hugegly boost the RP potential.

In conclusion Im honestly a bit confused and flustrated with Planet zoo over all, looking back. It makes collosal leaps forwards with the variants, genetics and building systems compared to earlier games yet, simultaneously loses ground in areas that to be honest negativly impact it in my opinion. Its a diamond in the rough, that in my opinion never got a full polishing.

 

[SanRazo]

Man the Zt2 events/ challenges are the biggest thing missing for me. I love and miss that role playing element that my zoo was part of a larger world

 

[slink_v_0000]

The thing I liked least about Jurassic Park Evolution was when I had to drive a jeep or fly a helicopter to advance the plot line. I never was an arcade game enthusiast and I am now older and even slower than I was back then. I prefer Planet Zoo as a management game, and not an action game as Jurassic Park was,

 

[Villanelle]

Good analysis. Wholeheartedly agree with pretty much everything you've said. I also find it lacks gameplay.

I'd love more to be made of conservation. Trading with other zoos/releasing to the wild and earning credits only scratches the surface. Everything happens off screen. So much more could be done with this and make your zoo feel more connected to a world beyond the map grid.

 

[NZFanatic]

Planet games are dioramas. They're lego sets, model railways, sandboxes. The Franchise mode, Challenge mode, Campaign mode, these are the extras. It's not supposed to be gameplay-heavy; the core of the market is people who just want to build. That's why they go "wide" with DLC, as you put it. Their majority player-base doesn't necessarily want new challenges, they want new content. Looking at Planet Coaster vs Planet Coaster 2, the game is still the same, it just has a handful of new features that build upon what was already there.

 

[jcp011c]

Some interesting points.

The main one on this one that intrigues me is the idea of interacting with the world beyond. we already have some challenges for new zoos, but they're pretty much all the same for every new zoo. Having some random optional events would be interesting, but I stress the optional here - if you choose not to partake of a challenge it would cause no detriment to your zoo - other than missing out on the reward you'd get from completing the challenge the zoo would go on as normal.

 

[Mjmannella]

I think that's their point. Dioramas can be the intention all Frontier wants, but the end product becomes rather boring as a result. People usually expect a solid core gameplay loop when they buy a video game

 

[SanRazo]

I think that's their point. Dioramas can be the intention all Frontier wants, but the end product becomes rather boring as a result. People usually expect a solid core gameplay loop when they buy a video game

Yea this exactly. It can still be a “diorama” but have engaging gameplay and role playing elements. The zoo tycoon games did that. If not it’ll get stale after a bit

 

[Villanelle]

Yeah it's not about what the game is or what it was intended to be, it's about what we (those of us posting here, I'm not speaking on behalf of the whole audience) feel is missing.

I love the game, don't get me wrong. But after 1500 hours I pretty much just use it for building pretty things. I wouldn't mind some extra challenges in Franchise mode that take the game part further. I'm not so keep on zookeeper mode (never liked that in other games, felt too cartoonish) but some optional extra modes fulfilling the conservation aspect would be good.

 

[KönigDerKaffeebohnen]

The main thing to keep in mind here is that its 2 different types of players that want Planet zoo to be 2 different games, which is understandable as the game is Marketed for 3 different markets, even if it really caters to just 2 of them, these are builders, Managers and animal enjoyers.

First of i gotta disagree with OPs take on the games depth and what it even is.
The photomode described is a perfect example of a wide addition to the game, a surface lvl feature thats fun to play around with a little but nothing substancial with no depth to it.
Id define depth in how intricate something is, for example to turn the photomode into a deeper mechanic having it interact with other systems like quests and scoring differently for different Poses and picture quality gives it depth. A good example for that is pokemon snap, a game with very basic mechanics that interact with each other in a Way to create lots of depth to the way that you are photographing the pokemons, even if all you can do as a Player on the surface is fast forward, throw bait, throw a ball, play a flute or take a picture.

And id argue that planet zoo is actually a very deep game with lots of depth, but its in the building exclusivly.

You can make a very good argument that this might be the best building game in existance with a level of freedom and variety thats unmatched, with lots of QoL Features that make the progress not just incredibly free but also smooth and easy once you get a hang of it.
Just look at Planet coaster 2 for a game that on the surface has the same qualitys, but is a steep downgrade due to how many both basic building Features like custom Media but also QoL Features are missing that we have in planet zoo.
Planet zoo took its main gameplay and refined it to a point of being unmatched both in depth and ease of play that makes other building games feel very restrictive and clunky in comparison.


But while builders might be the target group that is the most caterd to by a long shot and got by far the best game out of it, they arnt the only consumer base.


Animal lovers got it the next best. Planet zoo prides itself on the best animal Models on the market and after 5 years of dlc and allmost 200 animals being spoiled for choice.
They got caterd to in the wide categord but its here where the depth lacks.
The animals in the game are allrigt in their ai and animation variety, but with the neglect of things like enritchment items and New behaviours being one and done additions to only a handfull of animals means that actually watching them gets repetetive as the animals lack a sense of Individualism.
No wonder that the addition of animal personalitys has allways been the strongest collective wish of that group since even before the Release, as it would actually add some depth to the animals behaviour that differentiates 2 animals of the same species, turning them into individuals instead of just 2 times the same.

Zoo keeper Mode would also mostly cater to a sub group here, those that would like more Player animal interaction.
Feeding, cleaning and healing your animals perhaps even petting them, all of them would be worthless mechanics and wasted ressources for builders and Managers, but people that are mostly here for the animals?
Im sure theyd be loving it.


And lastly and most neglected we got Managers and wow what a not good game this is for them.
The management is bare bones, basic, extremly cheeseable and offers no significant challenge once you got the ball rolling. The hardest challenge for the Player is their own want to interact with the bulding side of the game, as making something pretty has no value to the management but lots of cost.
There are no logistics, both currencies are very grindy, the market inflated, genetics without consequences, staff management bare bones without any specilisation or real penaltys, half the staff has no purpose, the trade Center makes animal storage effortless, water and energy are just ugly buildings with a range, guest needs force food and toilets everywhere and in 5 years there has been not a single meaningfull update to it.


So yeah this games issue isnt that it lacks deepth, its that both its start and all updates indicate clearly that it wants to be a building game first and formost, focusing on the animals second and having next to no interest to be a management game, which would be okay if it wasnt marketed towards all 3 groups.

Ironically planet zoo has been to focused on what it wants to be compared to what it is percieved as without putting in the effort to make clear what it isnt., so as so many times with frontier the problem is communication, not execution.

This isnt to say id be against management Features quite the opposite actually, but saying that the game lacks depth in general is simply wrong, it just doesnt feature it where most people would expect it, because the game as a whole isnt focused on what you expect it to be.

Its a building game first, zoo game second and management sim just in its steam taggs and Bad game journalist articles

 

[RightWhale]

This is a very good write up, and pretty much emphasizes my issues with PZ. As Konig said this is a building game first and foremost, and as someone who loved Zoo Tycoon 2. I really feel that in some not great ways.

If you struggle to build with this game, there isn’t a ton of game left. And despite what people say, sometimes it isn’t entirely feasible to just go back to Zoo Tycoon 2. So I would like for PZ, and future PZ2 to balance it out a bit more. For the builders, animal lovers, and managers.

For your main themes, I agree this doesn’t feel like a Management game. It’s way too big picture, and you cannot get involved with anything outside of building and menus. So I would like that to change.

Now as for the wideness and depths part, I will disagree a little. At least when it comes to what animals they add. While options are nice, I think Frontier focuses way too much on adding certain additions. I am a big bird guy, everyone here knows that. While I agree at base level a lot of animals we build for will be the same, there is a big difference as to what animals keep being added. I would love a second crane and flamingo so I can have some more building options. Yes, their habitats would probably be built the exact same as the flamingo and crane in game. Still, with different, biomes, continents, and inter species bonuses the vibes can atoeast be a bit different. Now let’s say that Frontier added all 6-7 flamingo species, yeah that’s overkill and would just add to the witness part without any variety.

As for the Simulating the world outside of the zoo. I am in 100% agreement. I would like this zoo building game to also be a zoo simulation game. I want the best of both worlds.

 

[slink_v_0000]

Looking at the three groups KönigDerKaffeebohnen described I am not sure where I fall.

I appreciate the building aspect even though I am not really able to make things myself. I love looking at what other people build. Sometimes I download one when they are shared. My eyes go crossed when I try to follow a video, LOL. But I am happy that aspect is in the game.

I love the animals, but I would not enjoy having to feed, water, and pet each one every day. I can get so attached to them that my Trade Center fills up with the ones I am not willing to part with. I still have Siberian Tigers from that contest, the one where my avatar got her shirt with the winged unicorn tiger on it. I caged pairs and let them grow old together, and then rehomed them. I still had piles and piles of their offspring. Anyone want a kitten?

Herd animals, on the other hand, are a resource to be managed. I breed for perfection, but then I am stuck with where to keep the results when I finally get 100-100-100-100 animals. If I even kept just one pair of every animal in the game, I would run out of storage space. As for the management, I'd say the game has it about right. The breeding programs result in perfect animals if I devote myself to it. The genetics are simplistic, but the game's notices are also simplistic. "Inbreeding" in livestock management is just another name for "line-breeding". You have to cull ruthlessly but you can capture the best qualities of an ancestor without the flaws of inbreeding if you do so. And that is how I manage my herd animals. The wilds are teeming with my rejects. No wonder I can never get good stock from Frontier Zoo. For slow-growing species such as tortoises, by the way, the easiest way to cull their offspring without devoting an entire park to one species is to move them all to a new park and then close it. Pull down the fences just before you go. 100 Leaves is a small price to pay for getting rid of hundreds of culls.

The one aspect of zoo management that I hope never to see again in a game I buy is employee relations. There was a time when all the zoo, train, and amusement park games had arcade games where you had to slap the hand on the screen at the right moment to "negotiate" a labor agreement to your satisfaction, on a timer. I hated those games.

I hate all timed game aspects, but in the current Planet Zoo I do not have to play those scenarios. I don't mind that they exist, as long as I can ignore them.

 

[Villanelle]

I am a big bird guy, everyone here knows that.

A big bird guy in a big whale's costume

 

[RightWhale]

A big bird guy in a big whale's costume

My perfect game would be full of sea birds and whales!

 

[Villanelle]

My perfect game would be full of sea birds and whales!

Rightwhale sailed out on the ocean
On a quest to save rare cetaceans
A common eider swam by
And caught his eye
And all he could find were crustaceans!

 

[Leaf Productions]

The thing I liked least about Jurassic Park Evolution was when I had to drive a jeep or fly a helicopter to advance the plot line. I never was an arcade game enthusiast and I am now older and even slower than I was back then. I prefer Planet Zoo as a management game, and not an action game as Jurassic Park was,

From what I remember, it was never necessary from a first person mode? You could assign your jeeps/helicopters to cover those parts of the park for you. That to me is important, that a player has options to achieve the same goal, whether it's from a management RTS-top-down perspective, or a first-person perspective.

Man the Zt2 events/ challenges are the biggest thing missing for me. I love and miss that role playing element that my zoo was part of a larger world

Completely agree! The Community Challenges that Frontier have set up are... fine... I suppose? They could be roundabouted by puppy milling though, which is such a huge shame. Would love more contextual, client-based ones.

Planet games are dioramas. They're lego sets, model railways, sandboxes. The Franchise mode, Challenge mode, Campaign mode, these are the extras. It's not supposed to be gameplay-heavy; the core of the market is people who just want to build. That's why they go "wide" with DLC, as you put it. Their majority player-base doesn't necessarily want new challenges, they want new content. Looking at Planet Coaster vs Planet Coaster 2, the game is still the same, it just has a handful of new features that build upon what was already there.

The thing is, the new challenges are new content. Even if you don't see it like that, they are. Also, I think you're onto something but not the right way. The main element of playing Planet Zoo/Coaster is a diorama simulator, whether that diorama is within the context of a Franchise, Challenge, or Sandbox mode, it's a diorama, but there's no outside forces impacting it. Adding new animals, no matter what the type, whether it's a bird, or a hoofstock, or a reptile, is not "content". It's additions. Sure, a certain animal might not require the same habitat requirements as a previous one, but you're still doing the same thing - building a habitat.

Hence the crux of my video, you build, you finish, you look. You can't do anything else. That to some people is fine, but I would much prefer the addition of some elements - Optional Elements - to improve the game beyond that, because at the end of the day, you can't say that Planet Zoo isn't a game. It is quite literally a video game. But the way that I treat it right now, the way that many other players treat it, is that it is nothing but a Game Studio App that you place and move elements that walk around with prebuilt AI within the context of a map. To me, I would love smaller things to do within the context of the park, preestablished elements that are already present in other Frontier Games that work on the Cobra Game Engine, to be brought into PZ or a PZ Sequel.

My video goes over these all but a Photography Mode since we're already taking photos ingame, just let us have a small monetary or small gameplay reward for it akin to the Social Media concept I pitched in the video. I would love to see this impact gameplay decisions from the player on what animals to add to their park, or having them go back to an old habitat they made before for the context of a challenge.

Even something as simple as a Zookeeper Mode. I know it seems childish and unimportant, but in realistic vision of the game, it's not obtrusive, does not take away from the player who doesn't want this in their game, it's completely optional. I just would love the chance to take care of some of the duties on my own than have the keepers take care of it. It would give the player the "reward" to take care of the tasks themselves instead of hiring a Keeper, Janitor, or Vet, by allowing them to handle the duties themselves at the cost of their own time. It just gives the user another option to play the game in a different style.

Even as previously mentioned, Small Challenges, Quests, or Missions in a Franchise or Challenge park would be so rewarding. Give me a troublesome animal that another zoo is having a hard time with keeping contained and my reward is I get to keep it if it doesn't escape for an hour. Have a goal for me to breed and release a new Tiger Cub to release to a wildlife preserve in India, and as a reward I get higher appeal of my Tigers. Give me a chance to take a picture of an Elephant using a specific enrichment item for a chance to receive a boost in research level for them. As I mentioned, small, tiny trivial rewards that it's up to the player to decide if it's worth their time to go into that camera mode and take care of that task, or if they could find their time more profitable placing down more Food Stalls or the like.

At the end of the day, Frontier can add whatever everyone wants to the game, better herd dynamics, better foliage tools like a terrain brush or scenery brush. They can add scaling or even new animals like birds or manatees, but my point is, if you build for it now (assuming you have the systems correct), you'd be doing the same exact thing once it actually comes out (or, if). But truly at the end of the day, you can place down the items and it would look the same with a foliage brush in concept. You just do it quicker with a brush. You can put together items in a creative way, but you save time if you use scaling if we had it in concept. You can build for a Shoebill right now if you really wanted to, and plop it into a habitat if we do end up getting one. But at the end of the day, I just want functions, events, and gameplay elements that would push this game to a new viewpoint. I've had 3,500 logged hours of this game. Probably another 500 of editing and another 1,000 of modding it. I enjoy this game so much and I know what would allow me the chance to enjoy it more, completely optional small goals for the player to utilize and do while they wait for their money to fill up, or as a way to gain a small financial advantage in the meantime.

My points I'm typing aren't as sharp as I make them out to be in the video I made but alas here it is lol:

Source: https://youtu.be/XyUtftWBYgs


at the end of the day i would never advocate for the game being completely 180'd on itself, outcasting the sandbox players who build just as we do right now, for the sake of minigames and gamification, but i would rather see it as, hey, we know the game can be a bit stiff sometimes, here's a bit of something to help break it up a bit more. would never advocate for the main loop of the game to change but i would love different avenues for it to improve. xoxo <3

 

[Mr-Hyrax 2]

From what I remember, it was never necessary from a first person mode? You could assign your jeeps/helicopters to cover those parts of the park for you. That to me is important, that a player has options to achieve the same goal, whether it's from a management RTS-top-down perspective, or a first-person perspective.


Completely agree! The Community Challenges that Frontier have set up are... fine... I suppose? They could be roundabouted by puppy milling though, which is such a huge shame. Would love more contextual, client-based ones.


The thing is, the new challenges are new content. Even if you don't see it like that, they are. Also, I think you're onto something but not the right way. The main element of playing Planet Zoo/Coaster is a diorama simulator, whether that diorama is within the context of a Franchise, Challenge, or Sandbox mode, it's a diorama, but there's no outside forces impacting it. Adding new animals, no matter what the type, whether it's a bird, or a hoofstock, or a reptile, is not "content". It's additions. Sure, a certain animal might not require the same habitat requirements as a previous one, but you're still doing the same thing - building a habitat.

Hence the crux of my video, you build, you finish, you look. You can't do anything else. That to some people is fine, but I would much prefer the addition of some elements - Optional Elements - to improve the game beyond that, because at the end of the day, you can't say that Planet Zoo isn't a game. It is quite literally a video game. But the way that I treat it right now, the way that many other players treat it, is that it is nothing but a Game Studio App that you place and move elements that walk around with prebuilt AI within the context of a map. To me, I would love smaller things to do within the context of the park, preestablished elements that are already present in other Frontier Games that work on the Cobra Game Engine, to be brought into PZ or a PZ Sequel.

My video goes over these all but a Photography Mode since we're already taking photos ingame, just let us have a small monetary or small gameplay reward for it akin to the Social Media concept I pitched in the video. I would love to see this impact gameplay decisions from the player on what animals to add to their park, or having them go back to an old habitat they made before for the context of a challenge.

Even something as simple as a Zookeeper Mode. I know it seems childish and unimportant, but in realistic vision of the game, it's not obtrusive, does not take away from the player who doesn't want this in their game, it's completely optional. I just would love the chance to take care of some of the duties on my own than have the keepers take care of it. It would give the player the "reward" to take care of the tasks themselves instead of hiring a Keeper, Janitor, or Vet, by allowing them to handle the duties themselves at the cost of their own time. It just gives the user another option to play the game in a different style.

Even as previously mentioned, Small Challenges, Quests, or Missions in a Franchise or Challenge park would be so rewarding. Give me a troublesome animal that another zoo is having a hard time with keeping contained and my reward is I get to keep it if it doesn't escape for an hour. Have a goal for me to breed and release a new Tiger Cub to release to a wildlife preserve in India, and as a reward I get higher appeal of my Tigers. Give me a chance to take a picture of an Elephant using a specific enrichment item for a chance to receive a boost in research level for them. As I mentioned, small, tiny trivial rewards that it's up to the player to decide if it's worth their time to go into that camera mode and take care of that task, or if they could find their time more profitable placing down more Food Stalls or the like.

At the end of the day, Frontier can add whatever everyone wants to the game, better herd dynamics, better foliage tools like a terrain brush or scenery brush. They can add scaling or even new animals like birds or manatees, but my point is, if you build for it now (assuming you have the systems correct), you'd be doing the same exact thing once it actually comes out (or, if). But truly at the end of the day, you can place down the items and it would look the same with a foliage brush in concept. You just do it quicker with a brush. You can put together items in a creative way, but you save time if you use scaling if we had it in concept. You can build for a Shoebill right now if you really wanted to, and plop it into a habitat if we do end up getting one. But at the end of the day, I just want functions, events, and gameplay elements that would push this game to a new viewpoint. I've had 3,500 logged hours of this game. Probably another 500 of editing and another 1,000 of modding it. I enjoy this game so much and I know what would allow me the chance to enjoy it more, completely optional small goals for the player to utilize and do while they wait for their money to fill up, or as a way to gain a small financial advantage in the meantime.

My points I'm typing aren't as sharp as I make them out to be in the video I made but alas here it is lol:

Source: https://youtu.be/XyUtftWBYgs


at the end of the day i would never advocate for the game being completely 180'd on itself, outcasting the sandbox players who build just as we do right now, for the sake of minigames and gamification, but i would rather see it as, hey, we know the game can be a bit stiff sometimes, here's a bit of something to help break it up a bit more. would never advocate for the main loop of the game to change but i would love different avenues for it to improve. xoxo <3

I agree with this so much, I at the very least want to be able to do the task of those EMPTY-HEADED, SLOW MOVING, DIMWITTED, ZOOKEEPERS!!! (I don't know why I got so mad about that I just did).

 

[VetGirl330]

A zoo game simulator has so much potential for to provide deep gameplay. None of this is found in the Planet series.

Let's take the flamingo example. I think three species, Great Flamingo, American Flamingo, and Chilean Flamingo would provide the variety that's needed without becoming too repetitive. Each has a different native range, appearance, and most importantly different climate needs. These difference will dictate which species is best suited to each zoo.
1. Variety. Why do we need variety? Because flamingoes are a zoo staple and found in nearly every zoo. It is incredibly boring (not to mention unrealistic) to see the same species roster in every PZ player's zoo. Building an African savannah complex? Use the greater flamingo. Building a huge South American rainforest biodome? Use the American flamingo. Looking for the most vibrantly colored flamingo to add to your avian collection? American flamingo.
2. Location. Let's make the location that a player chooses for their zoo actually meaningful. Location dictates climate. Chilean flamingoes are far more common in more northern/temperate zoos because they are better adapted to cooler temperatures. That means they can be displayed outdoors in large, well-landscaped exhibits for a longer part of the year and have lower energy costs to maintain the species. When the climate is too extreme for a species it must be kept in indoor holding facilities. Indoor holding can be back-stage utilitarian facilities, or elaborate indoor display areas, such as a glass-enclosed aviary. Indoor spaces are more expensive to build and maintain (heating, cooling, ventilation, electricity, etc). Guests are unhappy when animals aren't on display.
3. Animal Market. Location also influences the animal market. Species are easier to obtain in the native range, and some species are much more prevalent in European vs. North American zoos due to historical reasons. These differences in availability would be reflected in the animal market. You can purchase any animal listed in the market but must pay a shipping fee based on how far that zoo is from yours. A small animal, like a flamingo, costs a lot less to ship than an elephant. The longer the shipping distance the higher the risk of disease or injury in transit. Greater Flamingoes are much more prevalent in Europe than North America.
4. Breeding. I don't know why flamingoes breed like sewer rats in zoo games. In reality flamingoes are challenging to breed in captivity. Flamingo flocks must reach a certain size, and have a relatively even sex ratio in order to breed. Some enrichment items, like mirrors, can help trick flamingoes into thinking the flock is larger and promote breeding. Other enrichment items, like pre-built nests, also encourage breeding. Adding a new animal or scenery to the enclosure, or moving the flock to a new exhibit can disrupt the entire breeding season. Even changing the keeper that cares for the flock can cause them to stop breeding - a good reason to retain your employees!
In the wild flamingoes nest in extremely inhospitable locations were there are no natural predators because ground nests are highly vulnerable to predation. In captivity both the eggs and parents are very vulnerable to predation while nesting. Flamingoes are also easily startled and can trample and destroy all the nests in the colony. Removing the eggs to a new staff facility, Incubation Centre, greatly increases the chance of those eggs surviving to hatching.
5. Guest Interaction. Guests love to interact with the animals; no longer is just viewing them in their habitat enough. Flamingoes can be presented on stage during a bird show, marched through the zoo along guest pathways at a scheduled time of day, or allow guests to feed them from pre-filled cups distributed by the keeper.
6. Diet. Giving the players a choice between different quality diets make sense. The player must find a balance between animal welfare and economics. Higher quality diet improves factors like animal happiness, health, and fertility. In flamingoes diet also has a visual impact. Flamingoes fed a low quality diet without high levels of carotenoids will loose their color.
7. Ethics. A new mechanic could be introduced. Flamingoes and many other large birds have traditionally been pinioned (wing partially amputated as hatchlings) to render them permanently flightless and allow them to be displayed in open-top enclosures.
Advantages of pinioning: open-top enclosures are much less expensive to build, especially for large enclosures; birds can easily be incorporated in mixed species exhibits with ungulates, open-top enclosures allow better sightlines for guests.
Disadvantages of pinioning: ethical concerns of permanently maiming birds, which can lead to animal right's activists protesting the zoo; decreased breeding efficiency; increased risk of birds being injured by trampling in mixed species exhibits.
Advantages of not pinioning: birds can fly, improved animal welfare, improved breeding.
Disadvantages of not pinioning (flighted birds): birds must be housed in completely enclosed exhibits, risk of birds escaping.

Imagine if this level of depth was added for multiple species. We might actually have an interesting simulator.

By all means keep sandbox for the sandbox players. I have always viewed sandbox as kind of a cheat mode for players who don't want to play by the game's rules. Sure sometimes its fun to just play around with the parts without having to worry about money or to test out ideas, but it gets boring quickly and then its nice to have actual gameplay to return to. If I just wanted to make pretty scenery I would do it in a 3D modelling program, like PurePolygons, that allows infinitely more design freedom than Planet ever could.

 

[NZFanatic]

the new challenges are new content. Even if you don't see it like that, they are

I wasn't meaning it literally. By "content" I was referring to the tangible, physical new content - animals and scenery. It was just a phrase to differentiate between what people like OP are talking about and the kind of content we actually get with DLC.

Anyway, I'm all for little things here and there to break monotony, but I also take the game for what it is and don't expect Frontier to deviate from a model that clearly works.

I have always viewed sandbox as kind of a cheat mode for players who don't want to play by the game's rules.

No offence, but that's a weird way to view it, especially given the myriad times Sandbox has been discussed.

The main reason people prefer sandbox mode is because you literally can't build a realistic zoo in any other mode. The requirements for making functioning habitats are generally well beyond what any real zoo is going to achieve. As one example, foliage. Animals do not care where their foliage comes from, except in specific cases such as with koalas which obviously subsist on eucalyptus. A lion isn't going to know that the tree its using as a scratching post is an elm instead of an acacia. Sure, you can still put an elm in in franchise mode, but it's going to impact the overall welfare of the animal, which is super dumb. Space is another thing. Even with sandbox mode you can't actually build a platypus habitat that resembles anything found in real life, because if you go to small the water function is impossible to work with. On the other side of things, in real life it's extremely doubtful that any visitor is going to care that they glimpsed a staff room or "keeper hut", and many zoos actually have their vet clinics as attractions. Can't do that in franchise mode.

Anyway, it's not a "cheat mode", it's a "build mode". It, by definition, cannot be cheating, because it's the whole point of the game; it's the aforementioned lego set. Management is secondary. Building is the game.

 

[paul78]

I also never understood this point of view also. I feel the sandbox player arguably gets the best the game has to offer. On a quick side note frontier originally implemented that strategy on jwe1 and it was a disaster for people who simply wanted to build a hands on dinosaur park. Thankfully frontier learned from this mistake. I’ve tried different gameplay options in planet zoo but simply can’t bring myself to play these. Sandbox is the only way I get to enjoy building a realistic zoo with all options and all animals. As mentioned no zoo has an animals original continental foliage. And the animals involved could care less.