Ocean Distance Nerf. The Island / Shore to the Barrier.

[Cellmember]

Honestly why was the distance nerfed ? Ocean feels so cramped and cheap now. Disappointed.

Shore to the barrier.

MOST NOTICEABLE AREA/ INFRONT OF FOOTPAW BETWEEN WEST 2 AND SOUTH 2 85 LAT 35 LON

[Cellmember]

It is what it is, only the Dev's know what they are/want to do and I realize it'll stay this way unless a mod comes out to restore it etc, just like a couple mods that restore original game elements.

[76561198347171155]

So how is it that the water coordinates still work as before? Don't tell me they changed the scale of the grid because old coordinates for landmarks are still spot on.

[Cellmember]

Messaggio originale di 123:

So how is it that the water coordinates still work as before? Don't tell me they changed the scale of the grid because old coordinates for landmarks are still spot on.

I have screenshots of the area in the title back a page or two, maybe to can compare the two ? See if they are the same to yours ?

[Bain]

why didnt you post a few patches back?

[Cellmember]

Messaggio originale di Bain:

why didnt you post a few patches back?

Why would I do that when the change wasn't implemented ? This thread wouldn't have been started. Logic.

[Rutabaga]

Messaggio originale di Cellmember:

Messaggio originale di Thot Patrol: Shade:

Honestly, does it really matter? The parts of the ocean that you would go to are still accessible, so IF the wall was tightened not much was lost to begin with. Furthermore the motor boat would still see a lot of use, you would only ever use them to get from one area of land to another anyways. This would be a completely different story if a majority of the ocean's edge had a reason to exist to begin with.

It's like removing one of the 3 rideable flyers and saying it doesn't matter because there's still 2 more.

It's to cramped now, either it doesn't bother you or it does, simple.

Not quite, if they removed a creature it would be very obvious. Shrinking the ocean somewhat would be like removing a couple trees in the forests, there is still plenty of ocean out there. Lastly, it simply doesn't look like anything is different. It could just be peoples minds being tricked, you may have not been paying attention to just how much space you had until recently. Even a raft suddenly being out of bounds isn't really new, as it has been something occuring for some time now (I recall hearing and seeing similar last year).

[Cellmember]

Messaggio originale di Thot Patrol: Shade:

Messaggio originale di Cellmember:

It's like removing one of the 3 rideable flyers and saying it doesn't matter because there's still 2 more.

It's to cramped now, either it doesn't bother you or it does, simple.

Not quite, if they removed a creature it would be very obvious. Shrinking the ocean somewhat would be like removing a couple trees in the forests, there is still plenty of ocean out there. Lastly, it simply doesn't look like anything is different. It could just be peoples minds being tricked, you may have not been paying attention to just how much space you had until recently. Even a raft suddenly being out of bounds isn't really new, as it has been something occuring for some time now (I recall hearing and seeing similar last year).

Just an example, something to compare to, even though not a big thing to some people.

[Humpenstilzchen]

I didn´t notice any changes in the ocean and the pictures are completely useless, since they aren´t shot in the same position and angle.
Your pictures are worth nothing.

[axenation]

Messaggio originale di #Sw!zZ.Pii:

Malicious gossip has it that the UE4 is the problem. To me, this is nothing but an excuse. If you head over to the UE4 site and read through the articles, you can find tons of infos about the capability of the UE4 - even for MM-open world games.

On the other hand, if the UE4 really causes problems, then...
I would say WC made a very, very bad decision with the UE4 (a basically free engine) and at the same time having the goal to create a huge OPEN WORLD survival with sh*tload of content and many clients on a server. If the UE4 is really what's limiting the content of ARK right now, I'd say this game is built on a completly unpractical basis.

...

I could be 100% wrong with that - that's just my guess.
-------------------
Regarding performance, IMO it's HIGHLY dependant on the SERVER Hardware used. Maybe you'll come to a point where running 3 servers on a single machine is not exactly enjoyable to play on.... Just maybe.

E: Either way, reducing the map size is not what people consider as "optimization" and I ask myself - for what other reason did they reduce it if not for performance?

You obviously didn't spend much time looking over the UE4 forums...

Most likely a lot of UE4's limitations were not realized in 2014 when work on Ark began. It probably doesn't really matter either way .. all game engines have unique limitations (they're also uniquely good at certain other things as well).

Also UE4 is not "free". It's free until you sell more than $3,000.00 worth each quarter, after that Epic gets 5%. I'm not sure exactly what deal Ark has with Epic, but if they're on the 5% that approximately $200,000,000.00 x 0.05 = $10,000,000.00

If you think $10 million is spare change, then please spread the wealth lol.

[edit: regardless of whether the ocean actually got smaller or not, there's a reason the guys who were making the Valhalla map stopped working on it and started working on a smaller map (Ragnorok)]

[edit2: Lol at the OP ... "BUT MY FPS HASNT CHANGED" .. because they only optimize things that change your FPS? There's a lot that goes on behind the scenes in games that you never see ... like .. Netcode .. which don't really affect your FPS .. but they certainly affect your bandwidth, "lag", server ticks-per-second, etc...]

[Silberfuchs]

The thing is: if the devs really changed the map for performance gain, why would they cut out the ocean of all parts? Because it's at the border of the map?

The ocean always used to be the most barebone of all biomes, and it was never as densly populated as other areas (although I haven't played in some time and don't know how the new sea creatures impact it, but from experience I assume spawns get replaced and not added), so it's the last thing you'd want to cut to gain some performance.

Cutting it anyway for a teeny weeny bit of performance gain, simply because it's easier to cut than the other parts, seems not worth it to me. Although I have seen illogical or irrational decisions from Wildcard before, completely defying common sense.

[Splićo]

Can't say i noticed any changes in underwater/map borders...probably bcz i don't spend much time underwater or nothing has really changed at all...
It would be nice if someone from WC team could come and say;
yes, we have moved map borders
or
no, we didn't change a thing

As i say before...looks damn same for me...

[Ragnorok]

Honestly I checked a few spots that have always touched rocks (formations touches the wall) and I'm just not seeing any difference I went from where the swamp touches the sea on the east to around the corner at Red obi

[Big Al]

I have 2 Tek underwater bases just 10 feet off the borders, right out on the border corners (one NW and one SE) and nothing has changed because my bases are still inside the borders, if WC had moved them, then i would not be able to access my bases anymore. The ocean borders of the island map have not changed at all lol

[simon]

ROFL. Still a funny thread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions_and_the_Madness_of_Crowds

[primobrainlet]

I think I found the issue, I had a few mods installed and redid them all, nothing so I verified game cache and guess what? It fixed