YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Direct Link
Direct Link
ARK: Survival Evolved has sold massively well for a game that isn't even finished. It has over ninety thousand reviews on Steam—yes, it's sold that well.
The DLC in question is "ARK: Scorched Earth - Expansion Pack". It adds a new map, new creatures, new items and so on. It couldn't have been an easy task considering all that content, which means that was time taken away from actually finishing the game itself to create extra add-on paid content. That doesn't sit right with me, considering I am a customer of theirs myself having paid for ARK personally.
The developers wrote up a blog post:
QuoteScorched Earth: Our original vision for ARK always included the creation of Expansion ARKs, along with the infrastructure and technical systems to transfer data dynamically between live ARKs. We determined that it is more sound to iterate on these systems during Early Access than after retail launch, given the significant risks involved if we didn't "get it right". While that meant unveiling the first Expansion early, it also means an easier time integrating further post-launch Expansions into the ARK network. We understand that this isn't everyone's cup of tea, and we appreciate the enjoyment people seem to be getting out of this initial view of how Expansion ARKs can work. Now that we have the systems in place to support them, we can ensure minimal integration issues with subsequent releases after ARK: Survival Evolved itself has launched.
I can completely understand adding in content during Early Access to make sure they get it right, but, this is exactly what Early Access is designed for.
Now, I can also certainly understand games that may not have sold as well adding in extra DLC to help keep development going, but in this case, it does seem to be a slap in the face for people who purchased the original game.
When you look into it a bit further, as reported by gamesindustry.biz it seems the previous lawsuit against Studio Wildcard (the ARK developer) and Trendy (Dungeon Defenders) was settled by Wildcard paying out around forty million dollars.
So, it seems like this is an attempt to recover some costs, but it will lose them a lot of fans in doing so.
This new paid DLC has seen the games overall rating on Steam absolutely dive-bomb into negative ratings ‒ I'm really not surprised by this!
ARK itself is still a mess when it comes to optimization and performance, especially on SteamOS & Linux. I wonder if they will ever truly put time into it, but not likely.
What are your thoughts? Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
I don't know why they're not "releasing" it, i.e. removing the Early Access tag. While the game is not perfect, it's actually better than many AAA games upon release (Batman Arkham Knight, Bethesda games etc.).
I know people have issues on Linux/SteamOS. I have played only for 10 hours, but the game was running fine. There were some graphical glitches like flares or endless shadows, but the game is improving - or perhaps Nvidia drivers are improving?
They should simply "release" it and move on.
I know people have issues on Linux/SteamOS. I have played only for 10 hours, but the game was running fine. There were some graphical glitches like flares or endless shadows, but the game is improving - or perhaps Nvidia drivers are improving?
They should simply "release" it and move on.
3 Likes, Who?
psppwner300 Sep 8, 2016
wtf dude
1 Likes, Who?
Kwaadpepper Sep 8, 2016
Well i bought the game a while ago, and i don't play it neither enjoyed it, poor performance but mostly, crafting some basic stuff and die, even i'm still not able to craft most basic stuff it requires too much farming, this game is not fun at all.
Last edited by Kwaadpepper on 8 September 2016 at 12:22 pm UTC
Last edited by Kwaadpepper on 8 September 2016 at 12:22 pm UTC
0 Likes
There were some graphical glitches like flares or endless shadows, but the game is improving - or perhaps Nvidia drivers are improving?
Have you actually seen recent improvements in the domain of glitches or performance ? Or just other kind of improvements in general. I happily sunk a number of hours into the game, but calling it "finished" in the state it was in, would be very bold.
1 Likes, Who?
Hm, judging from Xpander69's video it seems playable at around 55-65 FPS (without recording) and still looking rather good.
View video on youtube.com
View video on youtube.com
1 Likes, Who?
I'm glad they are getting called out on this and having their name dragged through the mud, they deserve to be.
Look, I get the lawsuit settlement hirt them and they felt the need to recoup the money right away. That doesn't make this right, though. Paid DLC for a game still in early access is a very dangerous precedent and we (consumers and media alike) need to make damn sure that the message comes across loud and clear "this sort of crap will not be tolerated". We can't allow other publishers and developers to think they can get away with crap like this.
Releasing paid DLC for a title still in active development opens up all kinds of cans of worms. For example, how much of the content in the DLC is content that was originally supposed to be added in to the base game during early access? Also, how much time was taken away from fixing the multitude of serious bugs to make this DLC?
We can't allow thos to become the new standard. DLC and microtransaction practices have already gotten bad enough as it is.
Look, I get the lawsuit settlement hirt them and they felt the need to recoup the money right away. That doesn't make this right, though. Paid DLC for a game still in early access is a very dangerous precedent and we (consumers and media alike) need to make damn sure that the message comes across loud and clear "this sort of crap will not be tolerated". We can't allow other publishers and developers to think they can get away with crap like this.
Releasing paid DLC for a title still in active development opens up all kinds of cans of worms. For example, how much of the content in the DLC is content that was originally supposed to be added in to the base game during early access? Also, how much time was taken away from fixing the multitude of serious bugs to make this DLC?
We can't allow thos to become the new standard. DLC and microtransaction practices have already gotten bad enough as it is.
10 Likes, Who?
Hm, judging from Xpander69's video it seems playable at around 55-65 FPS (without recording) and still looking rather good.
View video on youtube.com
yeah its around 45-60 fps most of the time. goes up to 80 at places. somehow shadows have to be medium, all the rest can be on epic. shadows seem to be cpu bottlenecked(which is super strange) for me.
i quite like the game, lots of new content and much better visuals than with the old map.
i dont really care if its ethical to sell DLC for a early access game or not, i just care about the content im getting for the price and that seems pretty good compared to 90% of Early Access titles
my 2 cents
3 Likes, Who?
Meh, if people are willing to pay for Early Access, I don't see why they wouldn't pay for extra content while in Early Access. They're already playing the game on a regular basis and obviously enjoying it, and an expansion takes time and resources to develop regardless of when you release it. Sure I'd probably focus on the core engine before I started making expansions, but I can see this game being "in development" for years with people playing it. It's not the first time I see MMOs running prolonged betas and releasing new content before hitting their official release, even though it's probably the first time I see them charge for it.
I don't play ARK so I'm indifferent to the news anyway, but I must say that level design looks really sweet.
I don't play ARK so I'm indifferent to the news anyway, but I must say that level design looks really sweet.
2 Likes, Who?
There were some graphical glitches like flares or endless shadows, but the game is improving - or perhaps Nvidia drivers are improving?
Have you actually seen recent improvements in the domain of glitches or performance ? Or just other kind of improvements in general. I happily sunk a number of hours into the game, but calling it "finished" in the state it was in, would be very bold.
i havent seen those graphical glitches with the new map.. 4 hours of gametime only atm, but with old map i can get those glitches within 1-2 hours
0 Likes
raverrebel Sep 8, 2016
Well i bought the game a while ago, and i don't play it neither enjoyed it, poor performance but mostly, crafting some basic stuff and die, even i'm still not able to craft most basic stuff it requires too much farming, this game is not fun at all.
maybe you should try to refund it?
1 Likes, Who?
Nor Mantis Sep 8, 2016
I don't like the idea of expansions while in early access but this game is just so good. For me I look at this game like an MMO. It will never be complete. Like someone here has already mentioned, this game is far better than most AAA games. I have dumped close to 400 hours in ARK and I still crave to play. For me the developers have earned my trust I cannot wait to play the expansion and will be purchasing it soon.
I get pretty good performance 40-60fps depending on where you are at and how much you have built. Most my settings are on high to epic. It runs good for me and I am happy with it. I do see some graphical glitches especially in the water and in caves. But it is not that jaring. When I enter a cave I turn shadows off and it seems to help a great deal. Again a small price to pay for the fun I have. But the game is getting better every update. I am sure it will all be worked out.
So for me the quality and fun factor of this game out weighs shifty practices. I dont like it but I am really happy to see it because I love the game that much. Personally I hope it never leaves early access. It is fun to train the new dino every month. There is always something fresh to see and do. Just remove the early access title and slap on MMO instead.
I get pretty good performance 40-60fps depending on where you are at and how much you have built. Most my settings are on high to epic. It runs good for me and I am happy with it. I do see some graphical glitches especially in the water and in caves. But it is not that jaring. When I enter a cave I turn shadows off and it seems to help a great deal. Again a small price to pay for the fun I have. But the game is getting better every update. I am sure it will all be worked out.
So for me the quality and fun factor of this game out weighs shifty practices. I dont like it but I am really happy to see it because I love the game that much. Personally I hope it never leaves early access. It is fun to train the new dino every month. There is always something fresh to see and do. Just remove the early access title and slap on MMO instead.
2 Likes, Who?
Nor Mantis Sep 8, 2016
Well i bought the game a while ago, and i don't play it neither enjoyed it, poor performance but mostly, crafting some basic stuff and die, even i'm still not able to craft most basic stuff it requires too much farming, this game is not fun at all.
If you are playing single player, self hosted game, you can change the settings to greatly speed up gathering, training speed etc. The game is highly customizable in that way. If you play multi player games find a server with spead up gathering and training speeds. There are a ton of servers that alow fast gathering speeds. I do admit the default is a huge grind fest. I always go for at least 3x gathering and training speed or the grind is insane, especially in single player.
Last edited by Nor Mantis on 8 September 2016 at 2:54 pm UTC
2 Likes, Who?
GustyGhost Sep 8, 2016
After their most recent update, ARK crashes within 20 seconds of loading into the map. That in conjunction with all the Linux-specific graphical glitches has made ARK unplayable for me. Meanwhile, Wildcard wants me to pay for DLC to a broken and unfinished game?
0 Likes
The game is actually quite awesome, but only for this DLC, thumb down too.
0 Likes
ElectricPrism Sep 8, 2016
They put the cart before the horse huh? We see how well that turned out.
ARK is the only game in my steam library that I can't launch on my RX 480 with AMDGPU. Is there anyone in red camp that knows what the fix is? I'm not dying to play but I would like to know if it'll launch or not.
ARK is the only game in my steam library that I can't launch on my RX 480 with AMDGPU. Is there anyone in red camp that knows what the fix is? I'm not dying to play but I would like to know if it'll launch or not.
0 Likes
I agree with Xpander, it isn't much of an issue for me that they are making DLC before a released product. The level of content and overall design beats most current AAA titles easily, the fact they just keep on adding more content plus constant bug fixes makes me wonder if it will ever be "complete".
I agree with skinnyraf and think they should just release it and just continue the development as usual. Although this should have been done before the release of the DLC so that it wouldn't be such a debacle that it has been.
Although it did sadden me a little that they decided to develop for DX12 vise just going with Vulkan. Considering Vulkan will work on all platforms.
I do enjoy the content it has along with the Scorched Earth DLC. I'm surprised it has had this level of development. that fact I've now payed a price for a AAA game and actually gotten my monies worth so far.
on the visual side of things, no matter what settings I've used, I've always gotten visual artifacts when exiting water. these artifacts will linger on for the rest of the game and eventually get so bad I have to restart the game from time to time. The original map has areas where there was once water. you can tell by the VFX when walking on a sandy beach area next to the current water and get graphical VFX of being underwater. once I pass through these areas it will cause the Artifacts as well. This problem is with any and all maps, including the new one. maybe this is less of an issue with newer hardware?
I know the Unreal engine has been a bittersweet experience for Linux since UE went open source. But I think when Vulkan is fully implemented into the engine then this will help a lot with Linux going forward.
I agree with skinnyraf and think they should just release it and just continue the development as usual. Although this should have been done before the release of the DLC so that it wouldn't be such a debacle that it has been.
Although it did sadden me a little that they decided to develop for DX12 vise just going with Vulkan. Considering Vulkan will work on all platforms.
I do enjoy the content it has along with the Scorched Earth DLC. I'm surprised it has had this level of development. that fact I've now payed a price for a AAA game and actually gotten my monies worth so far.
on the visual side of things, no matter what settings I've used, I've always gotten visual artifacts when exiting water. these artifacts will linger on for the rest of the game and eventually get so bad I have to restart the game from time to time. The original map has areas where there was once water. you can tell by the VFX when walking on a sandy beach area next to the current water and get graphical VFX of being underwater. once I pass through these areas it will cause the Artifacts as well. This problem is with any and all maps, including the new one. maybe this is less of an issue with newer hardware?
I know the Unreal engine has been a bittersweet experience for Linux since UE went open source. But I think when Vulkan is fully implemented into the engine then this will help a lot with Linux going forward.
1 Likes, Who?
If they're adding content to Early Access, it should be included with the main game as an update--no separate store spot for DLC, you buy the game you get all updates until it goes "full release." I understand they want money, but if they want to pull this release the game as "complete" and then go nuts.
0 Likes
its just 20 euros game, awesome game. It runs perfect! and we have a native client on linux for our pleasure. To be honest, it's really cheap game for all hours that people play on it. If you check the negative reviews is from people with 500 euros or more. Cam'on how much you paid for each hour of game? 20 euros more? is it a big deal? those people from wildcard shows how to make a game. Without hyping people they released a increible DLC, i bought it and it's just awosome for only 20 euros. It's just increible the work behind that. That guys are working like crazy. Compare it to other games like rust, many copies sold and increible slow developing. Wilcard with half of time they made something big and increible with millions of hours to play. Cry for a dlc is just stupid in that situation.
2 Likes, Who?
Kimyrielle Sep 8, 2016
While I can't understand people not liking a company releasing a DLC even -before- the base game is finished, I don't think it's proper to trash the ratings like that. The ratings are meant to give people an idea how good or bad a game is. They will lose their meaning if they get heavily influenced by factors not part of the game.
3 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me