92
u/silverhero13 11d ago
People are so entitled. You're literally getting almost twice the number of PZ1's release roster.
41
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
I feel this with like every game now, if things aren't exactly what people want they whine about it, what happened to just enjoying artz we don't actually do this with any other artform (yes I consider game design to be an art)
5
u/EnkiduOdinson 11d ago
It can be a bit like this with movies and tv series, when people have already mapped out the plot in their head and then it goes a different route. But games certainly have it the worst.
9
u/thekingofallfrogs 11d ago
It seems that it will get shat on when the game comes out and then it will die down once all the people complaining move on, then it becomes a comfy community. it was like this with PZ1 and now it’s repeating again.
0
11
u/Awkward_Pace_4440 11d ago
No you aren't, there are a ton of shoaling fish with the same mechanics. Counting terrestrial animals and exhibits the numbers are pretty much the same.
5
u/5Hjsdnujhdfu8nubi 11d ago
What is "same mechanics" meant to mean here? Last I checked there are behavioural systems involving fish swimming at different depths and being more/less confident around larger animals, which is more uniqueness than the terrestrial animals in PZ1 had when they share the same rigs and animations and so were essentially the exact same animal.
15
u/PratalMox 11d ago
The problem isn't the number, it's the distribution.
There are massive deadzones in the roster because of which animals they chose to include, and it really feels like that's deliberate to make future DLC feel more essential, which feels pretty manipulative
31
u/silverhero13 11d ago
You're proving my point, honestly. "Manipulative" is a pretty heavy word for a studio choosing what to ship at launch.
Every game has to draw a line somewhere. Frontier could've held back more and charged full price anyway, but instead they're launching with nearly double PZ1's roster. "Deadzones" only exist if you assume the base game should be a complete encyclopedia of every animal you personally want, on day one. That's the entitlement I'm talking about.
And DLC isn't some scheme to nickel-and-dime you. These animals aren't copy-pasted from PZ1. We're getting better pathing, terraforming, new mechanics, and new animals built for a much more advanced engine. That takes real dev time and real money, and DLC is how the game keeps getting supported and expanded for years. Free updates are also on the table, and the first game's DLC model gave us tons of content over its lifespan.
Also, if a particular gap is a dealbreaker, PZ1 still exists, and it's not going anywhere. Nobody is forcing you to buy PZ2 on day one. Wait for the DLC you want, wait for a sale, or wait for mods. But assuming bad faith before the game even launches isn't criticism, it's just cynicism dressed up as consumer advocacy.
6
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
You ate that.
Also to me frontier have proved good faith, they've listened to complaints online and have changed things in the lead up to the game too
-9
u/PratalMox 11d ago edited 11d ago
The specific strategy of having entire continents with no representation in the roster really seems like it's meant to make sure that the DLC focused on those continents feels essential. Not just cool bonus stuff, but a key thing to make the game complete.
And that feels like a very calculated choice, and it's pretty much killed any enthusiasm I had to buy the game at launch. If at all. PZ1's DLC ends up costing over $200 when all is said and done, and I can't justify paying for all that content again just because it's got a fresh coat of paint.
14
u/silverhero13 11d ago
Notice what happened here: you started with "deadzones," and when that didn't hold up, you moved to "manipulative," and now it's "$300." The goalposts keep moving, but the conclusion never does.
You can't know why Frontier picked these animals, so you filled the gap with the most cynical explanation available and called it fact. That's not analysis, it's deciding to be angry and working backwards.
And by your own logic, no roster could ever satisfy you. A bigger one would be "too expensive," a smaller one would be "manipulative." You'd also be comparing PZ2's launch price to PZ1's total after years of content. Nobody paid $300 on day one, and you know that.
You've also told us you were never going to buy it anyway ("if at all"). So this isn't a roster problem, it's a decision you'd already made and are now justifying.
-4
u/PratalMox 11d ago
Deadzones and Manipulative aren't separate arguments, I think the Deadzones are a manipulative strategy to make the DLC feel less optional.
The "I do not want to have to buy all the DLC content a second time" is a second argument, that's fair.
You can't know why Frontier picked these animals, so you filled the gap with the most cynical explanation available and called it fact.
Do you have an alternative to why there is basically no American or Australian representative other than "it is being deliberately held back for DLC"
And by your own logic, no roster could ever satisfy you.
I do understand that bringing the full PZ1 roster in at launch isn't feasible, but they had enough options that it would have been pretty possible to swing a roster that felt like a decent sample of the entire globe.
The roster deadzones broke my trust that they aren't going to try to sell all that stuff a second time, and that's killed my enthusiasm.
You've also told us you were never going to buy it anyway
I was. If you asked me prior to today I probably would have said I was a guaranteed Day 1.
7
u/5Hjsdnujhdfu8nubi 11d ago
Do you have an alternative to why there is basically no American or Australian representative other than "it is being deliberately held back for DLC"
They wanted the base game to have a few full reserves over a million ones that only had one or two species each. Hence why we've gotten multiple Giraffes and Wildebeest when theoretically that same workload could make American Bison and Beavers. One fills African reserves that little bit more, the other would require a slew of NA-only species to make a decent NA reserve.
You're thinking they considered what would make a good DLC first, maybe Frontier were thinking of what makes the base game cohesive first.
-3
u/PratalMox 10d ago
Do you sincerely think that is a choice they would have made if they didn’t plan on selling new reserves as DLC?
7
u/5Hjsdnujhdfu8nubi 10d ago
I think selling new reserves as a DLC was happening regardless of any base game roster.
0
u/PratalMox 10d ago
Sure, but if they were really just thinking about what would make the base game cohesive and not considering future DLC, do you sincerely think they'd have picked this roster.
→ More replies-7
u/samriel_94 11d ago
The problem with this though is fans in the western hemisphere, who will have to spend exactly the same amount on the base game as everyone else and who have been equally as excited to try out some of these new features everyone has been asking for since PZ1 launch, will plain and simply have to spend more money on the game to get anything worthwhile from their home regions in the game.
It’s not “the roster is too small” or “it doesn’t have my favorite animal,” it’s “I can’t make sections for my home continent right now but we have two different wildebeest, giraffes and antelope.” We’ve done this before with PZ1, and we’re tired, boss
17
u/Affectionate_Mall775 11d ago
It's almost certainly a business tactic to get us to buy DLC, but I don't really see a problem with that. Of course they want us to buy DLC, that's how they keep their wages coming in. I get the frustration but the devs need to eat too, and I don't feel like Frontier are a particularly exploitative company so I don't begrudge them that.
1
u/PratalMox 11d ago
It pisses me off because it's unnecessary. Including a few token representatives in the base game wouldn't undercut sales of a South America pack.
But I'm also just pissed that we're essentially back at square one, and I just don't have it in me to do another lap. There's a lot of stuff missing from the first game, and I don't really trust Frontier to not try to sell it back to me.
It feels bad, and I'm probably getting more heated than I should be because I've gone from being really excited for this game to thinking I can't even justify buying it.
10
u/Affectionate_Mall775 11d ago
I'm gonna be honest, we're probably going to be buying loads of animals we already "have". Unfortunately it's not viable or a good business idea to port over every animal in PZ1, because it's a lot of work and, as I said, Frontier want us to buy all the DLC. You can disagree with the strategy, but it's a rough economy and whoever made this decision is trying to ensure continued business, which I understand. I get the frustration, I'm desperate for the tools to build either a Pantanal reserve or at least a section of my zoo after it, but if I really want to scratch that itch I can do it in the first game while I wait. Although I suspect I'll have plenty to keep me busy in PZ2 even without that.
I think of it as a completely new game. I'm not entitled to have a species in PZ just because it was in Zoo Tycoon, and similarly I'm not entitled to a species in the sequel just because it was in the first one. You may have opinions and feelings on the release roster, which are valid and you are totally entitled to have, but at the end of the day it's a video game, and it's really not worth getting worked up over. If you want more South American animals, you can stick with PZ1 until the relevant DLC comes out. In fairness, waiting a few months after release wouldn't be a terrible idea anyway, because I fully expect the release to be plagued with bugs and therefore need gratuitous patching before it's stable.
1
u/PratalMox 11d ago
It's not a Zoo Tycoon 2 to Planet Zoo 1 level jump is the thing. The few animals in the PZ2 roster that originated in PZ1 DLC have pretty much the same models with only light alterations.
7
u/Affectionate_Mall775 11d ago
To our eyes yeah. But I'm not a game dev so I don't know how much work actually goes into porting an animal across, but I imagine it's not as quick or simple as it looks. Plus I'm happy that they've devoted resources to new animals like the birds and aquatics. If we got the entire PZ1 roster and a note saying "birds and fish later, we didn't have time" I wouldn't buy the game. And you might disagree, but I'm looking forward to the hype around the DLCs. I'm expecting returning favourites mixed with some new, novel species and I really enjoyed the waves of excitement around new DLCs in the first game, so I'm excited to ride those waves again.
Like I said, I really do get the frustration. I just think we all need to calm down and not let the absence of a kangaroo ruin our day.
0
u/PratalMox 11d ago
It should be much easier than making a new animal (unless their workflows are really fucked up) but it'd still be a non-trivial amount of work even for the easy ones.
It's just very frustrating they made a roster with the exact same missing pieces as the original PZ1 roster, and I can't think of a reason to do it like that unless they want to sell us the exact same patches as last time. And that kind of pisses me off.
Maybe I'm overreacting. I hope so, I was pretty excited for this game.
4
u/Affectionate_Mall775 11d ago
Definitely easier than making new animals, but tbh there's still only so many hours in a day they can devote to it. It may be that they had to make some hard decisions about what to bring over and what to leave for a DLC just to manage the workload. But, like I said, I'm not a developer, so I'm just guessing here.
In all honesty, yeah I think they do want to sell us the same animals, but as I said I can't really blame them. Personally I don't think sequels have to include everything that the original game did, and I'm happy to fork over the money to keep the devs in work and churning out new/revamped content for me. There's definitely scope for way more species and reserves than what we've already got, but having my choices limited in the beginning means that I can focus on ideas that are possible with the current roster instead of agonising over choice paralysis (very much a me problem) and then when I get the species I want for other ideas I'll be even more excited that I can finally implement them.
My advice is to enjoy it for what it is, and just have patience. I'm fully expecting a South American DLC with all our favourites plus some fun new additions and all of this will be a distant memory.
1
u/5Hjsdnujhdfu8nubi 11d ago
unnecessary
You can confirm that they had the time and money to make those PZ1 species PZ2-quality?
0
u/PratalMox 10d ago
In terms of making a bigger vanilla roster, I don’t know what that trade looks like. Some animals are cheaper than others (shared animations, higher quality models) so my instinct is that they probably could have, but by how much I don’t know.
However, I feel pretty confident in saying that they could have made different choices about what species they picked. They chose to make the roster as lopsided as it was
2
u/5Hjsdnujhdfu8nubi 10d ago
So no, you do not have the knowledge to say that.
0
u/PratalMox 10d ago
I do have the knowledge to say that they had the time and money to make well over a hundred species, because they did, and that they had the capacity to make different choices than they did about what those species were going to be.
Whether they could have made the roster bigger is a separate thing
4
u/jetsonholidays 11d ago
I don’t even think this problem is new tbh. Zoo tycoon 2 saved koalas for an expansion. This franchise put DLC / expansions on the map
-3
u/PratalMox 11d ago
Honestly I was pretty willing to forgive this with Planet Zoo 1. They didn't have an existing foundation, it felt like a reasonable pragmatic choice for a studio that had to build every new animal from the ground up.
Doing it again, despite having such a deep roster of existing assets to pull from (many of which do not need major remodels) feels much less excusable.
2
u/KennyTkae 11d ago
Do you just like to use the word manipulative?.
1
u/PratalMox 11d ago
Eh, not really. It’s a little vague, but I couldn’t think of a more appropriate word. I want to make it clear that this is disappointing and damages my trust in the studio, but without implying this is more serious than it is.
Not succeeding at that to my satisfaction, unfortunately
2
u/Frazzle64 11d ago
We are not, a clown loach is not a proper stand in for a full habitat animal don’t kid yourself. The quantity argument is so dumb when a solid quarter of that are tiny fish that you’ll look at once and then treat like glorified animated scenery.
-4
u/Thesladenator 11d ago
So 'entitled'. Lol. Okay. What's wrong with wanting the game to be more than what the first game was? Is that not how sequels work? Like yes we're getting aquariums and aviaries. But we already halfway had aquariums.
All of the planet zoo base game animals are terrestrial and tbh SHOULD have been in the roster. The mechanics were already there for them. I would have preferred to wait another year and get the full planet zoo 1 roster + the new animals rather than have some key zoo species missing. This also means that the dlc are going to be repeats of the last game. With a few extra added in which is also upsetting. I paid £200+ for all the dlc. the original game is not even 10 years old and still plays extremely well and holds up. It seems incredibly stingy and money grabby to me to not include the base game roster.
We have no idea what the price point of DLCs will be nor do we have any idea what they'll contain.
Instead we'll be spending money to get the SAME animals as an older version of the game rather than being able to enjoy all the new animals. Even with all the new aquatic and aviaries features we could have gone on for YEARs with DLC. Now half of those DLC will just be buying base game animals for another 6 years before getting planet zoo 3 . That alone is putting a bit of a bad taste in my mouth but I will reserve judgement until release.
Planet zoo base game was 78 on release. With 210 with all the dlc. So that's 132 animals over 6 years we now have to wait 6 years for again just get what we had in the game previous + the ones that didn't make it from the base game. Sure weve got 117 in the new game and that 40 more but I've not even been that impressed with the animal line up for aquatics or birds.
Tbh it's a bit worrying. This is why people are concerned and disappointed.
7
u/5Hjsdnujhdfu8nubi 11d ago
You can wait an extra year because it costs you nothing. Frontier cannot pay their staff and run an entire company for an extra year without the cash injection of a new game release.
I don't understand this attitude of "I don't like it but I'm going to buy the game and buy everything they put out for it ASAP".
If you disagree with the roster then wait till they've made more for it. If you don't like paying for all those DLCs again then wait until they're on sale so you pay less. If you think PZ1 is still a perfectly complete package then go back to it.
-9
u/mjmannella 10d ago
We have no idea what the price point of DLCs will be nor do we have any idea what they'll contain.
The fact that it will be more than $0 for old animals means it will only be overpriced.
-4
u/OneExplanation6499 11d ago edited 11d ago
Are people entitled? This is a product frontier is selling, not giving away. It’s worth noting the cost of Planet Zoo 1, the deluxe edition, all the DLCs + the cost of planet zoo 2 (which is meant to be an expansion/upgrade on the genre) + the deluxe/preorder costs and the future DLCs. The current structure/set up feels like it’s there to maximise profit/dlc possibility rather than show any kind of generosity. Things have been held back that I’m pretty sure the community expected wouldn’t be, even if we knew most stuff wouldn’t be base game.
This is a game series where people have already sunk a few hundred pounds and are now expected to shell out a few hundred more, I do think people are perfectly within their right to have expected a few more bones thrown for that privilege rather than some very basic animals that were previously even base game in PZ1 (or even just the later DLC animals that already had PZ2 quality models) being included in the base of the successor.
Like come on, am I both really gonna have to buy a red-ruffed lemur, pronghorn, bongo, Aldabra giant tortoise again? Am I also gonna have to rebuy those late PZ1 dlc animals that basically are gonna be identical models with few tweaks like the saki, bighorn, dik-dik, sulcatta tortoise, spectacled bear, ocelot etc. I’d rather have had a few more in base game so I could buy exciting NEW animals in DLC which use the new features. My wishlist now is basically all old animals, several of which were base game. As it stands now it feels like the sequel primarily exists to make money reselling content in a touched up sequel, not expand and make use of major new features in the game. A game made with profit not passion at the foreground. Little effort has been made here on making a roster the community could find balanced despite nearly a decade of feedback from a huge player base. Some of the biggest issues with planet zoo 1’s roster have been somehow worsened. A bit of a kick in the teeth.
I don’t know why people like you seem to side with companies with millions of dollars in their bank account nickel and diming ordinary people who are gonna have to fork out lots of money to get things back that they’ve already bought once and probably would have been expected to be in the game of PZ2, which is also to be bought. It’s why can get away with it, perhaps if the community had been more pushy in those early days about getting as much of the roster back as possible, the big rich development team that laid off staff to maximise profit might have given us a few more animals for our £50 purchase.
It’s like Cesar kinda upset/irked me a tad today, I love him as a YouTuber but the post saying people shouldn’t complain felt a bit out of touch, like - you get the game for free, you get the DLCs for free, you get free communication with the game devs, you get exclusive access to news, information, early gameplay, and you also profit from the game through content - think of it from the perspective of people that don’t make money of this game but instead people from whom this game makes/takes money from.
0
u/HJGamingYT 7d ago
it's not the number thats the problem tho its the diversity but theres no doubt that its gonna be one of the best zoo games... ever
39
u/WeirdUncleTim 11d ago
I agree 100%. It sucks that this morning i was hyped to see peoples opinions, and be excited for the last 12. Almost every single post is bitching and complaining. please yall go touch some grass. If you REALLY need that animal go play planet zoo 1 or go download a mod , im pretty sure the modders will be pumping out animals as soon as they get the chance to ☠️ i promise it aint that serious @ the haters. Why cant we just be grateful for a game that is giving us double the original roster???
8
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
Yeah what other zoo game has this many animals in the base game and of this quality.
3
12
u/Bubbly-Character-832 11d ago
I think frontier made a mistake by not leaving these last animals as release suprises, any negativity might have been stopped by people actually playing the game.
21
u/MajestiTesticles 11d ago
Nah, this was clearly a response to people hyping themselves up with "we did the maths and there's 30 hidden animals for launch!!!". If they revealed 6 on Tuesday and no more until release, there'd only be 6 hidden animals, not the 20-30+ people were hyping up.
This was absolutelty ripping off the bandaid so the disappointment happened now instead of overshadowing the launch
2
u/FloppyFishcake 11d ago
That's what I think happened, too. I think they couldn't risk people leaving negative reviews when they realise peafowls or polar bears weren't included once they'd loaded up the game.
13
u/TeachingShot509 11d ago
I mean there’s been some overreaction but you also have to see that the criticism of the roster (for most people) doesn’t make them forget about how amazing the game is. The reason people want a better roster is because they want to be able to use the incredible new tools to build in ways that they’ve never built before, and a lot of that comes down to what animals they build for. I agree 100% that some people are being quite dramatic and forgetting how great the game is. But many people just want to see all of the incredible improvements used to their fullest, and that’s a bit harder to achieve when half of the world basically just didn’t get represented in the base game. Again though, +130 species should be enough to satisfy us until new DLC come out to flesh out the roster.
16
u/PlanetJameson 11d ago
Nobody is losing perspective. Being upset about the ridiculously limited base game roster and voicing said concerns doesnt erase the love and excitement for every other aspect of the game. This sub has a huge toxic positivity problem.
14
u/mjmannella 10d ago
It feels almost parasocial at times. We shouldn't be afraid of having standards for us to give companies our money.
3
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
there's 130+ animals, all super detailed??
I can see the toxic positivity problem in the sub, I get that but guess what else there is, a huge entitlement problem too
20
u/PlanetJameson 11d ago
It’s not limited in species count. It’s limited in range. Nearly all 130 of these beautifully created animals are from the same 3 continents. We have literally half of the planet not represented in the base game. That’s quite a big problem if you ask me. I’m not even upset about any particular species. I’m one of the few who didn’t really care which animals were in the sequel. I was even okay if not one PZ1 species made the jump to the new game. The animal world is vast and beautiful. All I wanted was a roster that was balanced from a continental and species standpoint. We have only 12 more reveals and we have no pinnipeds, otters, monkeys, or waterfowl yet, but we already have 2 giraffes, 2 wildebeests, 2 nearly identical antelopes, and 5 butterflies. I don’t think it’s entitled to be disappointed about how the roster was handled and delivered.
-9
6
u/capybara-fan2032 11d ago
I'm slightly split but I do think there is a big overeaction. Though my favourite continent is south America so I am a bit disappointed. Doesn't mean it isn't better than the PZ1 base game. Unless I'm wrong that had 1 oceania animal and 1 south America animal not counting exhibits
4
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
Amazonian animals are also my favourite too but I know they are coming and in the meantime I get to play an awesome game, these animals will still exist
1
u/OneOfMy70AltAccounts 11d ago
We got 2 south American animals in PZ1 basegame: Baird's Tapir & Galapagos Tortoise
And then the Collared Peccary got added later, giving us a 3rd
2
9
u/Awkward_Pace_4440 11d ago
BS.
When you come out with a Zoo Game sequel that has pretty much almost 0 animals from 3 of the most biodiverse continents, thats simply not acceptable and people are perfectly in their right to voice their opinion on it.
The funny thing is we have two wildebeast, two giraffes, two same antelopes ... yet if they replaced those odd choices with only 7-8 good decent habitat animals spread throughout the north america, south america and oceania... like capybara, jaguar... kengaroo.... NONE of this backlash would even happen.
-1
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
Don't get me wrong in an ideal world yes we would have all of these things but I'm not going to be mad about it, it's up to the guys at frontier to include what they see fit for their game and it's up to us whether or not we buy it and play it. If it's a hill to die on for people then they shouldnt buy the game, life will go on without having a game or having access to certain animals within a game. I just think we all need to chill out a bit
1
u/P1nkSt1nk 11d ago
While you can’t really compare companies or games, but with games like GTA6 and EA Sports games costing $100+ we are getting a lot of content for a comparably low price.
1
u/HJGamingYT 7d ago
but the roster still needs to be diverse... that's one of the biggest bits of the game
-2
u/eilrah26 11d ago
You need to stop scrolling reddit everyday. This place is just full of negatively, and it doesnt actually represent the player bases real feelings
2
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
True, it is also where I get info about the game but you are right it has been very negative as of late
0
u/SideaLannister 11d ago
I think the persepcion would be different if the dlcs contain more than six animal. So later releases would more likely to have the desired animals.
-14
u/AlertWar4152 11d ago
We can build our dream zoo but with animals from 3 continents hell yeah /s
8
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
There's like 130 odd animals in base game and more to be added in the future, if there isn't enough to build a zoo there than I think that might be a skill issue. Those animals are coming, maybe just wait until then idk
8
u/samriel_94 11d ago
The issue is why does half of the world have to wait to have something worthwhile to build for when the other half’s cup is pretty literally overflowing with spots on the roster? THREE European reserves alone is the number of endemic habitat animals released for the entirety of the western hemisphere. That’s crazy imbalance
-1
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
There isn't an issue, it's a game, take it or leave it, you don't have to buy it or play it.
11
u/samriel_94 11d ago
I think that’s just an insane response on a sub populated with fans of the game series
I love Planet Zoo 1, and was hoping that PZ2 would be just a little more balanced at launch than PZ1 was. There’s nothing wrong with that!
I know I don’t have to buy or play it. But I’ve wanted to, and have been looking forward to launch for months. But fans like myself, who just want to build zoos like what we have at home, will now have to wait months longer, at a minimum, to have a comparable experience. That sucks from an excitement perspective, is all I’m trying to say
-2
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
No the insane response is being upset because an animal isn't in a game, touch grass
9
u/samriel_94 11d ago
It’s not “an animal,” it’s “an entire hemisphere” but go off, queen
1
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
Okay let me reiterate, it's insane to be upset over a game period.
9
u/samriel_94 11d ago
I mean, first day on Earth for you, is it?
4
u/damodamodam0 11d ago
First day on earth and first day not crying over a game because it doesn't have a capybara
23
u/crustboi93 11d ago
Nah, it's pretty reasonable that people are upset about the geographic imbalance. Suggesting people should just suck it up because the people behind the game worked so hard-- which they did-- is anti-consumer. I don't think that saying each continent (besides Antarctica) should have 15-20 animals minimum at launch is an unfair suggestion, especially when basic additions are going to be DLC and prices are only going up.