Why do the DLC's have so few animals

IMO, the DLC's that aren't the SEA Animal Pack have way too few animals for the asking price. Frontier could easily fit in more species while still keeping a price of $10. The exhibit animals are basically scenery pieces and only 4 animals mean many go unrealized. For example, in the SA pack, many iconic species such as the capybara have been omitted. The Arctic pack is the worst offender as it only includes 4 animals with 1 being just a subspecies.

I know people don't like discussing modders but many, such as @Nicholas LionRider have proved that 1 person (with some assistance) can push out enough scenery for 2 packs. And don't get me wrong, the scenery from the packs is both impressive and quite useful. However, I think that it would be quite easy to add at least a few hotly requested or thematically appropriate species. For example, I'm aware that an avian pack is coming soon and I hope that, given how broad the theme is, we at least get 10 birds. 8 birds would be a disappointment and 4 or 5 would be riot-worthy.
 
Well, happy riot then, I highly doubt we will get more than 4 birds IF an aviary pack is comming, which is likely but still just speculations.

I too want bigger packs, but NOT for the same price. Animations are expensive, so is the good sound work Frontier does. And the work they do in addition to the dlcs also need to be paid. Are you really expecting a two year old game still pays out to be supported just of the sold base games?

I agree that the current dlc model is lacking. Personally I'm asking for more animals on a higher price point so that more devs can work on the dlcs.
 
IMO, the DLC's that aren't the SEA Animal Pack have way too few animals for the asking price. Frontier could easily fit in more species while still keeping a price of $10.
IMO the packs have all been very good value - More animals would be great but it’d be more than fair if they charged more. My perfect scenario wouldn’t be more animals per pack necessarily, but more packs.
I think you’re setting yourself up for disappointment and will have a lonely riot.
 
IMO the packs have all been very good value - More animals would be great but it’d be more than fair if they charged more. My perfect scenario wouldn’t be more animals per pack necessarily, but more packs.
I think you’re setting yourself up for disappointment and will have a lonely riot.

I fully agree.
 
@ OP: Yes and no, as mentioned above.
Yes to more animals per pack or more frequent packs, but "additional" content should be paid accordingly.
I don't think Frontier could do much more to increase their production rate for either animals or pieces unless they increase their staff working on PZ content. And the staff (who are surely very well-trained artists or programmers) need to get paid and profit needs to be gained.
It's not like the devs plan to create dozens of animals and then they only offer a smidgen proportion of those. Given how most of the community is desperate for more animals, that would be a dumb market strategy.
I've said it before but indeed modders like Nick or Leaf have showed us that very decent content can be done if you put effort and resources on it. What that shows is how limited the resources allocated to PZ currently are. I wish there were more resources invested in PZ, but it is sadly not the case.

On the specific case of birds. I strongly believe that, if Frontier ever tries a bigger (and more expensive) DLC formula, that'd be with a potential Aviary or Aquarium pack. If that's the case, I could envision a 10-15 birds pack with a limited amount of building items for 15 €. If they don't go that route, I would bet on a "regular" animal pack with 8 birds and a bunch of aviary-related scenery pieces.
I don't see a 4+1 aviary pack happening because if they add specific aviary pieces (enrichment items, perches and a generic modular aviary set), those would most likely be part of the free update. Including all the aviary pieces in the DLC would pretty much close the door for other potential birds in the future. That would be a poor decision imo.
 
I also want more animals, but I think the price of the DLCs so far is quite good. For 10 € we are not only getting 4 new animals models and some building items (which is what modders can do) but we are also getting new enrichment items, new animations, new sounds and music, news scenarios, modifications of interface, bugs fixing, improvements to previous animals, sometimes new designs for the exhibit box, new path textures, new foliage... Because the content that comes in the free update has to be created and the workers behind must be paid for that too.

Then they also have to pay the translators for all the languages, because as difference in regards with mods, all the content of the dlc/update is released in all languages from the start. It's false that a modder can create many animals on his/her own, the translation is part of the animal and therefore each animals needed several people working on it.

Besides, they have to cover the expenses of marketing and distribution of the game.

So modders do a great job, but Frontier does much more and they must cover the expenses and make profits. I want more animals, and I'm willing to pay more for them because I understand all the hard work that there's behind.
 
Because the content that comes in the free update has to be created and the workers behind must be paid for that too.
This is something a lot of people dont really understand.

Frontier's employees are also working on the content for the free update too. Thats one of the reasons i like to support these dlcs. Standing alone the content of the dlcs could be a bit more, but you also have to see the content all of us get by the free updates. Especially thinking of the fact that PZ doesnt have an ingame shop or something like this to buy cosmetics or other stuff with real money, those dlcs are the only way for the company to still make some money with the game.
 
Last edited:
Personally I see the free updates as what they are: Free. And while, of course the revenue of the DLCs also goes into fund the free updates, I wouldn't go as far as saying those who buy the DLCs pays for everyones free update. No matter if I it is technically true or not, but my point is: I am and will always be very grateful for them.
 
I’d be interested to know if the publicity and buzz of a new DLC plays into the awareness of free updates for those that are lukewarm on DLC and if this manifests as more purchases of the DLC in the long run.

I could imagine a scenario where maybe some of the player base come back to check-out the free update after hearing about it due to the marketing around the DLC and then actually end up buying the DLC after having a gameplay session re-interest them in the game, even if it isn’t their ideal DLC this time round.

While not the case for everyone, they’re fairly affordable spontaneous purchase for many I imagine. Maybe in this way, the free updates and DLC support each other rather than one funding the other.. They seem to have found value in sticking to this paired update + DLC model either way..
 
Last edited:
I also loved having more animals like in East Asia. But we must not forget that animals are not made one day, it takes several days. Example a Wolverine takes less time than a leopard. It is necessary that the size of the animal is well done and also the claws and the color and the ears and nose and the teeth like and also the spots or scratches so it full of things to do
 
IMO, the DLC's that aren't the SEA Animal Pack have way too few animals for the asking price. Frontier could easily fit in more species while still keeping a price of $10. The exhibit animals are basically scenery pieces and only 4 animals mean many go unrealized. For example, in the SA pack, many iconic species such as the capybara have been omitted. The Arctic pack is the worst offender as it only includes 4 animals with 1 being just a subspecies.

I know people don't like discussing modders but many, such as @Nicholas LionRider have proved that 1 person (with some assistance) can push out enough scenery for 2 packs. And don't get me wrong, the scenery from the packs is both impressive and quite useful. However, I think that it would be quite easy to add at least a few hotly requested or thematically appropriate species. For example, I'm aware that an avian pack is coming soon and I hope that, given how broad the theme is, we at least get 10 birds. 8 birds would be a disappointment and 4 or 5 would be riot-worthy.


I 100% agree with you. The game is 45$ and has 75 animals.

The dlc are 3 or 4 animals and 10$.

Anyone who can count can see the dlc are a rip off. But just look at this forum, no one seems to notice....my impression is the PZ community enjoys paying more money for dlc 👍

I remember everyone justifying the soundtrack price ($10 even though it came with the deluxe dlc for free) People don't seem to have any concept of money anymore lmao.

From my experience your concerns regarding the price are literally falling on deaf ears.
 
Frontier could easily fit in more species while still keeping a price of $10.
The thing is, reality is clearly different. If it was really that easy, if it was really that simple, we would have it. Frontier is a large company, they have people who do the math with tons of variables you either don't know, don't care or of don't think of.

If it was so easy to do, wouldn't they have done it?

I know people don't like discussing modders but many, such as @Nicholas LionRider have proved that 1 person (with some assistance) can push out enough scenery for 2 packs. And don't get me wrong, the scenery from the packs is both impressive and quite useful.

I always hate these kind of comparisons. It's apples and oranges. Sure, from afar they look alike, but there still is a difference. I am both a modder and a developer, the first I've been for longer than the latter, but still.

If someone would ask me to quickly make a website for them, I could probably do it in a day or two. If I were to do it within the company I work for, that would easily take a week. Why? Because companies need to do a lot more than what I need to do. I can just go and do whatever I want, for companies you have to do a lot more extra steps. There's planning, there's sprint planning, there's discussing technologies etc. A lot more players are involved, each with different stakes. Real development is always more complicated than one or two persons doing it by themselves. And I know, because I've done both.

Just for a minute think about all the things you don't necessarily think of here. They need to do market research on what the next pack should be. People need to brainstorm and do research on what animals a new pack should have, and whether they are feasible within the time frame. They need to think about whether new features need to be introduced for the animals to work. They then need to figure out how these new features are going to be made. Do current systems need to be changed to allow it? How is performance going to work? They need to research themes. They need to do concept art. There needs to be planning to see how these themes can be split up in individual items. They need to check how two different items are going to interact. If they're a responsible company like Frontier, they check with artists outside their own team to make sure things work (aka the Aboriginal artwork in the Aus pack). I can go on and on.

All of that work doesn't exist when it comes to modding. I can just think of something, do whatever the heck I want to do because I want it, and I don't have to care about all of these variables. I don't need to do market research, I'll just do what I want. I don't need to think about the bigger implications on the game, I just do what I want. I don't need to think about whether what I'm going to do is going to have to be scalable in the future, I can just do what I want. But a company does need to do that. Because they need to make money (all of us do, there's nothing inherently wrong with it) because they have people that they have to pay as well. And all of those people also need time to do their job.

Besides, as much as I really like the work that Nick and quite a few other modders have done, a lot of it is also based on existing assets. On existing textures. On existing models. They can work fast because a lot of the work has already been done for them, But even in techniques there are differences, a lot of modders do photoprojection which is a lot easier and a lot less time consuming than how Frontier (and modders like Monsoon) do their texture work. That doesn't diminish the work other modders do, and it doesn't mean that modders cannot achieve great quality, but people also underestimate vastly how much time goes into modding. And mostly it's those who never ever modded anything in their life that do this judgement.

I honestly just want to say that there's no "proof" that Frontier can do it as fast as modders do and that they're deliberately not doing it. These claims are just based on a very superficial understanding of both development and modding, and no matter how often it gets repeated, it will never make them true.
 
The thing is, reality is clearly different. If it was really that easy, if it was really that simple, we would have it. Frontier is a large company, they have people who do the math with tons of variables you either don't know, don't care or of don't think of.

If it was so easy to do, wouldn't they have done it?



I always hate these kind of comparisons. It's apples and oranges. Sure, from afar they look alike, but there still is a difference. I am both a modder and a developer, the first I've been for longer than the latter, but still.

If someone would ask me to quickly make a website for them, I could probably do it in a day or two. If I were to do it within the company I work for, that would easily take a week. Why? Because companies need to do a lot more than what I need to do. I can just go and do whatever I want, for companies you have to do a lot more extra steps. There's planning, there's sprint planning, there's discussing technologies etc. A lot more players are involved, each with different stakes. Real development is always more complicated than one or two persons doing it by themselves. And I know, because I've done both.

Just for a minute think about all the things you don't necessarily think of here. They need to do market research on what the next pack should be. People need to brainstorm and do research on what animals a new pack should have, and whether they are feasible within the time frame. They need to think about whether new features need to be introduced for the animals to work. They then need to figure out how these new features are going to be made. Do current systems need to be changed to allow it? How is performance going to work? They need to research themes. They need to do concept art. There needs to be planning to see how these themes can be split up in individual items. They need to check how two different items are going to interact. If they're a responsible company like Frontier, they check with artists outside their own team to make sure things work (aka the Aboriginal artwork in the Aus pack). I can go on and on.

All of that work doesn't exist when it comes to modding. I can just think of something, do whatever the heck I want to do because I want it, and I don't have to care about all of these variables. I don't need to do market research, I'll just do what I want. I don't need to think about the bigger implications on the game, I just do what I want. I don't need to think about whether what I'm going to do is going to have to be scalable in the future, I can just do what I want. But a company does need to do that. Because they need to make money (all of us do, there's nothing inherently wrong with it) because they have people that they have to pay as well. And all of those people also need time to do their job.

Besides, as much as I really like the work that Nick and quite a few other modders have done, a lot of it is also based on existing assets. On existing textures. On existing models. They can work fast because a lot of the work has already been done for them, But even in techniques there are differences, a lot of modders do photoprojection which is a lot easier and a lot less time consuming than how Frontier (and modders like Monsoon) do their texture work. That doesn't diminish the work other modders do, and it doesn't mean that modders cannot achieve great quality, but people also underestimate vastly how much time goes into modding. And mostly it's those who never ever modded anything in their life that do this judgement.

I honestly just want to say that there's no "proof" that Frontier can do it as fast as modders do and that they're deliberately not doing it. These claims are just based on a very superficial understanding of both development and modding, and no matter how often it gets repeated, it will never make them true.
Reading this, I feel I made a generalization with my initial thread and I apologize.
 
I don't really mind the size of the packs, they're fair for the price point. However I feel that the SEA animal pack was a bit hamfisted. The malayan tapir and the fact that the pack was entirely mammals(minus the leaf bug) was a bit of a red flag for me. Malayan tapir was a 1 to1 reskin of the baird's (which probably won't be getting fixed), and the lack of habitat (ground dwelling) birds and reptiles is getting a bit old. I probably won't pay for another all animal pack in the future if they keep being "oops all mammals", we have over 70 and there's a lot more interesting and diverse species that could use conservation efforts. Don't get me wrong, the SEA pack had some really good choices, but they were all safe and reused assets, which makes production easier. I'd wait longer and pay more for bigger full on expansion packs that added more niche or interesting species. South Africa pack was a step in the right direction with the introduction of smaller mammal species. Just my 2 cents.
 
I did reach out to a CM about the Malayan tapir and didn’t receive a reply unfortunately. I kinda figured it would go that way but I’m positive it was read and the PZ staff is well aware of the flaws with the Malayan tapir. I do believe they will eventually address the tapirs flaws eventually. At first the fact that it was a reskin didn’t bother me all that much but after some thought I definitely agree the community and the animal itself deserve much better and the talented devs in frontier can definitely make a better representation of this animal.
 
I don't really mind the size of the packs, they're fair for the price point. However I feel that the SEA animal pack was a bit hamfisted. The malayan tapir and the fact that the pack was entirely mammals(minus the leaf bug) was a bit of a red flag for me. Malayan tapir was a 1 to1 reskin of the baird's (which probably won't be getting fixed), and the lack of habitat (ground dwelling) birds and reptiles is getting a bit old. I probably won't pay for another all animal pack in the future if they keep being "oops all mammals", we have over 70 and there's a lot more interesting and diverse species that could use conservation efforts. Don't get me wrong, the SEA pack had some really good choices, but they were all safe and reused assets, which makes production easier. I'd wait longer and pay more for bigger full on expansion packs that added more niche or interesting species. South Africa pack was a step in the right direction with the introduction of smaller mammal species. Just my 2 cents.
tbh, for the Africa pack, I'd have thrown in some cheap, thematically appropriate clones like the dromedary to pad it out. Just seems right ig. Tho you're very right about the roster being very mammal centric
 
tbh, for the Africa pack, I'd have thrown in some cheap, thematically appropriate clones like the dromedary to pad it out. Just seems right ig. Tho you're very right about the roster being very mammal centric
The dromedary would not be a clone - it could use the Bactrian rig but would require new model, new skins, new animations, new sounds, etc., etc., etc.

Do you really think that Frontier have staff that they pay to sit around doing nothing so that, for some reason, they can keep the number of animals at 4 per pack? Why would they do that? More content means more staff and other resources and, therefore, a higher price or less free content.
 
Back
Top Bottom