User blog comment:Granditamias/What warrants the adding of a JW:E dinosaur?/@comment-33613830-20190120033854

As for your Dreadnoughtus paragraph, I honestly think that would be its film canon design, but maybe not. After all, there's Deinonychus, with its distinguishable fleshy crest and fleshy ridge on the tail, and I headcanon that to be what the Deinonychus looked like when it was cloned (yes, Deinonychus is on the DPG List). Plus, Deinonychus is often featured in media with feathers, and yet here, it's featured as featherless. As for Dreadnoughtus, its design may or may not be the canon design.

Plus, Rugops and Therizinosaurus, despite being part of the I. rex's composition, aren't in the game; I'd consider Deinosuchus, but would Frontier add a large crocodylomorph to their game?

Well, if the non-film/non-canon dinosaurs look somewhat generic (which they don't, since they look nothing at all to their famous relatives), why not slightly change their designs for the films?

I agree that Concavenator is likely to be in Jurassic World: Evolution, but Frontier's dinosaur selection can be unpredictable (ahem, Archaeornithomimus, Chungkingosaurus, Tsintaosaurus, etc).

Now, small dinosaurs like Compsognathus and Microceratus may have some trouble getting in the game, but I don't think feathered dinosaurs would cause backlash. In fact, there are some non-film coelurosaurs added (Deinonychus, Struthiomimus, Archaeornithomimus, Troodon) and people have no problem with them being featherless, so I think that a featherless Therizinosaurus and Deinocheirus would not cause a problem. Also this can be justified by Jurassic World's reason of the dinosaurs being genetically modified and thus lacking some things their real counterparts (one being feathers).