Support us on Patreon
PayPal
For those that enjoy it, the ARK: Survival Evolved [Steam] launch trailer has arrived ahead of the launch next week.
You can see the announcement about the trailer and what's to come here.
I've still yet to see them comment anywhere about the broken water on Linux, so it seems with only a few days left it will launch with that broken. The water is still a rather ugly plain brown texture, which isn't great.
What I am pleased to say, is that the graphical bugs inside caves are indeed fixed. You need a recent version of the NVIDIA driver, at least 384.59 (I tested with 384.69). You also need to ensure you wipe the NVIDIA cache stored in your home in a hidden folder named ".nv" (I just deleted the folder). It's entirely possible the game is just not adjusting the shaders for new drivers. Even though I did the same before, it seems it's a probable driver bug (or recent NVIDIA drivers have a work-around for a game issue).
The bug when you leave the water, with a laser light-show happening is still there, at least for me. It's nice to be able to see actual progress though, so my thoughts on it aren't as bad as before. I still think for a £49.99 game that they need to step up their Linux support.
They won't be using Vulkan any time soon either, as they recently got asked about using Vulkan and their answer was this:
However, it's nice to see them actually respond to and it remain open to doing it.
It seems players on Steam aren't particularly happy with ARK overall. The Steam users reviews are "Mixed", with all the most helpful showing on the Steam store page being negative. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Direct Link
Direct Link
You can see the announcement about the trailer and what's to come here.
I've still yet to see them comment anywhere about the broken water on Linux, so it seems with only a few days left it will launch with that broken. The water is still a rather ugly plain brown texture, which isn't great.
What I am pleased to say, is that the graphical bugs inside caves are indeed fixed. You need a recent version of the NVIDIA driver, at least 384.59 (I tested with 384.69). You also need to ensure you wipe the NVIDIA cache stored in your home in a hidden folder named ".nv" (I just deleted the folder). It's entirely possible the game is just not adjusting the shaders for new drivers. Even though I did the same before, it seems it's a probable driver bug (or recent NVIDIA drivers have a work-around for a game issue).
The bug when you leave the water, with a laser light-show happening is still there, at least for me. It's nice to be able to see actual progress though, so my thoughts on it aren't as bad as before. I still think for a £49.99 game that they need to step up their Linux support.
They won't be using Vulkan any time soon either, as they recently got asked about using Vulkan and their answer was this:
QuoteUnreal 4’s own official Vulkan integration was only like half-functional when I last reviewed it a few months ago. I’ll take a look shortly to see if it’s farther along. Once Epic has got it going fully well (fully matching the functionality and pipeline of DX11 & Shader Model 5), I’d like to try to incorporate it into ARK.
However, it's nice to see them actually respond to and it remain open to doing it.
It seems players on Steam aren't particularly happy with ARK overall. The Steam users reviews are "Mixed", with all the most helpful showing on the Steam store page being negative. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
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.
Power-Metal-Games 24 Aug 2017
Using Vulkan for anything that testing is not possible in Unreal even with 4.17. Yesterday I tested our game that is usually running at more than 200fps, and it couldn't run at more than 30 sometimes falling below 10. At last, everything was complete, just fps made it impossible to play and all that was tested at a very powerful hardware. I can't imagine what would done testing it on some more usual machine.
1 Likes, Who?
A quick scan reveals that SM5 level support is there, but slightly glitchy and very slow. Full support including parallel rendering is still listed as "future".
0 Likes
MasterSleort 24 Aug 2017
Honestly, we don't need Vulkan, we just need a proper implementation of OpenGL to make it work well. Vulkan is a neat concept and hopefully will be great in time but it's not the magic bullet everyone thinks it is. Why is everyone putting so much weight into the Vulkan API as opposed to just wanting games that work well for us?
While I generally agree that games should just work regardless of API, we must understand that OpenGL is not as big in gaming as DirectX. Since both DX12 and Vulkan are somewhat new, there is still a chance that Vulkan could take the throne of the low-level APIs. I know DX12 has already gained some traction, but seeing Vulkan being implemented here and there, is a good sign for cross-platform APIs.
If Vulkan would become the graphics API of choice for most developers, it certainly would make it easier for them to create Linux variants of their games. More importantly, these games would probably be on par with their Windows versions, since they would be able to use the same shaders and not shaders generated by some shader-translation layer.
This brings me back to ARK. If ARK were to use Vulkan and also implement it on Windows, it would probably make it more likely that we will get the same optimizations as they get on Windows, which would make the game work well.
2 Likes, Who?
In the long run I don't think there's gonna be a question if it's either DirectX or Vulkan on MS-Windows either, as all others are supporting Vulkan and the X-Box (why X-Box, it's not about X-Windows!!! or is it??? maybe it's running some kind of heavily modified Linux/Unix version...) is the only one to support DirectX only, it'll be a simple economical decision to move to Vulkan (just remember, when talking about gaming we have to take into acount all consoles and then MS market share is dropping below 50%, so they're not untouchable!). The java-like concept of Vulkan makes the transition easy for most developers, but you have to implement much of the stuff the driver did before on your own. At that point you're conquered with decades(!) of experience/know how. So assuming Vulkan would instantly make anything better on a grand scale is delusionaly naive. But everything needs a starting point; and it is only fair to give the guys a chance... Which also means having to wait for an official release, as most of the drivers need some additional work to get proper support and eliminate overhead that isn't needed anymore. But as there's (supposedly) no OpenGL 5 anymore it surely is necessary for engine developers to focus on Vulkan.
0 Likes
TheRiddick 24 Aug 2017
I think both AMDGPU-PRO and the NVIDIA proprietary driver stacks offer superior performance with Vulkan, with on par Windows level performance if DOOM results under Wine are anything to go by. You can install the Vulkan component of AMDGPU-PRO with the open source amdgpu kernel driver so technically having the best of both worlds.
At present the RADV open source driver is functional but performs worse then OpenGL so people should steer clear of that unless they are doing testing.
So to wrap that up, if they can get Ark with Vulkan happening then both Windows and Linux users will experience parity in performance above that of directx; atm you have DirectX11 kicking OpenGL's ass most the time which isn't a good look for Linux ports if you ask me. We need parity performance with Windows, and Vulkan can deliver that!
Last edited by TheRiddick on 24 Aug 2017 at 6:41 pm UTC
At present the RADV open source driver is functional but performs worse then OpenGL so people should steer clear of that unless they are doing testing.
So to wrap that up, if they can get Ark with Vulkan happening then both Windows and Linux users will experience parity in performance above that of directx; atm you have DirectX11 kicking OpenGL's ass most the time which isn't a good look for Linux ports if you ask me. We need parity performance with Windows, and Vulkan can deliver that!
Last edited by TheRiddick on 24 Aug 2017 at 6:41 pm UTC
0 Likes
We need parity performance with Windows, and Vulkan can deliver that!If you compare OpenGL-only performance on both systems (having same engine and shaders) it is exactly the same. So - if you're experiencing problems - it's either the port that isn't optimal or the engine that is working well only with a (rendering)-specific system. Thinking Vulkan would be some kind of a magic spell that would fix all issues instantly is ... well.. very optimistic... the hardware is one thing (which fortunately doesn't depend on the OS), but the layers/APIs that are the gateways before the hardware are something to consider too.. and they can have a huge impact on what implementation strategy works the best! So the same base and GPU code may behave differently on another platform as the one originally intended. A lot of learning - on both sides, application and OS developers - is needed to get that things to be running at comparable speeds or beyond (and you should allocate a few years for that process to finish). So for now we'll have to stick to OpenGL ports which are close to other APIs performance. Which isn't that bad, as OpenGL drivers are pretty stable in most cases and we get something we can use instead of something we have to debug.
0 Likes
TheRiddick 24 Aug 2017
Thanks for not listening.
0 Likes
I think both AMDGPU-PRO and the NVIDIA proprietary driver stacks offer superior performance with Vulkan, with on par Windows level performance if DOOM results under Wine are anything to go by.
Of course. But when the engine is a DX11 engine, things don't go quite so smoothly. Feral stated quite clearly that bolting Vulkan onto DX11 engine is not efficient. Engines not to be heavily rebuilt to make that happen.
In fact, DOOM 2016 is the only game I can think of where a next gen API had a substantial improvement over it's main API. Maybe ID prepared IdTech for it in advance.
0 Likes
TheRiddick 24 Aug 2017
I'm trying to point out here that VulkanAPI on Windows and Linux performs better then DX11 and OpenGL on either platform. Making it a great choice for system performance parity regardless of API comparisons. A PURE OpenGL game works great, but very few are, most have tacked on OpenGL (eg. warthunder) at best, majority of games are still directx based.
Vulkan would be a better wrapping solution for DirectX then OpenGL, which is what most companies are doing now with their Linux ports, why else would we get terrible performance under Linux in comparison to their directx windows counterparts? (which don't have OGL options)
Last edited by TheRiddick on 24 Aug 2017 at 8:02 pm UTC
Vulkan would be a better wrapping solution for DirectX then OpenGL, which is what most companies are doing now with their Linux ports, why else would we get terrible performance under Linux in comparison to their directx windows counterparts? (which don't have OGL options)
Last edited by TheRiddick on 24 Aug 2017 at 8:02 pm UTC
2 Likes, Who?
Great article. Hope they fix water, and the thing that makes it less playable on radeon than nvidia. I don't have radeon myself, but some of my friends do, and it would be nice for the community as a whole too.
Last edited by Ketil on 24 Aug 2017 at 9:41 pm UTC
Last edited by Ketil on 24 Aug 2017 at 9:41 pm UTC
0 Likes
I'm trying to point out here that VulkanAPI on Windows and Linux performs better then DX11 and OpenGL on either platform. Making it a great choice for system performance parity regardless of API comparisons. A PURE OpenGL game works great, but very few are, most have tacked on OpenGL (eg. warthunder) at best, majority of games are still directx based.
Vulkan would be a better wrapping solution for DirectX then OpenGL, which is what most companies are doing now with their Linux ports, why else would we get terrible performance under Linux in comparison to their directx windows counterparts? (which don't have OGL options)
Vulkan is not magic and if a game developed for DirectX , lots of engineering goes on Dx side ; a Vulkan wrapper cannot provide Windows performance.
Only game you can see the real Vulkan is Doom and upcoming Wolfenstein 2 ( both id Software) , others are not native afaik.
0 Likes
TheRiddick 24 Aug 2017
I never said it was magic, I'm just saying neither is OpenGL. And drivers on AMD's side of thing are not overly great when it comes to optimizations for OpenGL. But we have seen good results from Vulkan, why develop 2 Engine API's and not just 1, focus is best put on Vulkan and not these OpenGL wrappers you're praising.
Last edited by TheRiddick on 24 Aug 2017 at 9:50 pm UTC
Last edited by TheRiddick on 24 Aug 2017 at 9:50 pm UTC
0 Likes
I never said it was magic, I'm just saying neither is OpenGL. And drivers on AMD's side of thing are not overly great when it comes to optimizations for OpenGL. But we have seen good results from Vulkan, why develop 2 Engine API's and not just 1, focus is best put on Vulkan and not these OpenGL wrappers you're praising.
Because not every users gpu's are Vulkan capable. For example ; even some cards on Amd supports OpenGL 4.x but they're not compatible with Vulkan. Being only Vulkan games means they will be outcasted. Same will go for Windows side.
Vulkan's best selling point is ; it is also compatible with Windows 7 and Windows 8. So from this perspective ; Vulkan is advantage but not every card is Vulkan capable. So using two API is a must if you are aiming maximum sale.
Also Vulkan and Dx12 are harder to deal with when compared to OpenGL and Dx11.
You want a fast adoption for it but it is not possible , even for Dx12.
0 Likes
TheRiddick 24 Aug 2017
What GPU's don't support Vulkan? do you mean the ones that can't even achieve playable fps with games that can benefit from vulkan? because those are the games I'm talking about. ARK for example has pretty high demand in GPU specs and uses allot of CPU processing also, it would truly be worth the developers time to ditch all the other API's and stick with Vulkan for cross platform parity and all.
However I do know that Unreal Engine 4 has been slow to adopt Vulkan so its probably partly out of their control, in saying that they have no doubt piles of money to actually do something about it, at least you'd assume so unless they blew it all on coke and hookers?¿
However I do know that Unreal Engine 4 has been slow to adopt Vulkan so its probably partly out of their control, in saying that they have no doubt piles of money to actually do something about it, at least you'd assume so unless they blew it all on coke and hookers?¿
0 Likes
Mountain Man 25 Aug 2017
I only clicked on this article because the front-page thumbnail had a picture of an adorable otter holding a small sphere. Where is that picture in the article!
0 Likes
Did someone try the Ragnarok map? since yesterday I couldn't access the online servers.
0 Likes
Those "half assed implementation of OpenGL" (drivers and/or engines) is the reason why we need Vulkan.It actually isn't half assed.
But every company will tackle the support in their own way with OpenGL.
So what's fast on bugfree on NVidia will be terrible, slow and buggy on AMD and vv, using the same API.
OpenGL is too high end, needs a lot of state trackers, and all you want is do some things very fast.
It's like wasm... It's a reduced use of javascript of which is known that it will result in certain intermediary code, making it a kind of assembly. But it's just a hack on the lack of a low level VM in the browser. So it doesn't always work on all browsers, and the real web assembly is still lagging in functionality because you have no access to the page.
So what I am trying to say, is that while opengl might be nice to program in for small programs, but gles v2 and higher and vulkan have not been developed for nothing.
gles v2 describes a low level engine, you are responsible for maintaining the high level parts. So in that respect, vulkan and gles have a lot in commmon.
You can probably still create an opengl wrapper around vulkan. But what game makers are trying to do is create a vulkan wrapper around opengl for the speed.
0 Likes
Because not every users gpu's are Vulkan capable. For example ; even some cards on Amd supports OpenGL 4.x but they're not compatible with Vulkan. Being only Vulkan games means they will be outcasted.That's not really true. You are confusing vulkan capable with having drivers conforming to the vulkan API. Vulkan is lowlevel, the driver should give enough handles to be able to use the hardware. the T-Mali series should be vulkan capable, but I fear it's just a lack of drivers.
To be clear: all samsung t-mali based phones from 2014 are/should be vulkan capable due to having the correct drivers.
0 Likes
the T-Mali series should be vulkan capable, but I fear it's just a lack of drivers.Meeh... it's a definitive should, but android never got that vulkan upgrade.
To be clear: all samsung t-mali based phones from 2014 are/should be vulkan capable due to having the correct drivers.
https://developer.arm.com/graphics/vulkan
My T760 is hardware capable of conforming to mali, but without drivers no mali. Maybe that's the reason the gear vr sucks on this note 4 compared to the S8+.
But yeah: https://www.khronos.org/conformance/adopters/conformant-products
those are a lot of vulkan conformant products, but since GLES is already lowlevel, UE4 will probably use GLES.
0 Likes
Ah, I nice showcase of how much better vulkan is according to Epic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnKu7MLB7vQ
Actually they don't show anything really, but they do say some important stuff, like with vulkan you can keep everything in the gpu.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnKu7MLB7vQ
Actually they don't show anything really, but they do say some important stuff, like with vulkan you can keep everything in the gpu.
0 Likes
How to install GE-Proton on Steam Deck, SteamOS, Linux
An idiots guide to setting up Minecraft on Steam Deck / SteamOS with controller support
See more from me