安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
And honestly theres nothing wrong with opengl, not sure how you got that idea, just remember back when ark came out UE4's opengl support was absolutely ♥♥♥♥, it was a halfassed afterthought, the shaders didnt even work right....and they're still on that old ass engine version!
Also heres a post about going from OpenGL to Vulkan - https://developer.nvidia.com/transitioning-opengl-vulkan
but there is an extremely low chance that ARK will see a DX12 version. not to talk about a Vulkan-version.
*citation needed
*Applied Common Sense
Optional support for things like ASTC based texture compression would also be nice.
I really wish someone (maybe Mesa) would add a "shader language based compression" extension where conventional compression can be run through a GLSL routine. This could be used to add new features to old drivers, and workarounds for absent texture compression algorithms.
Again though, remember, ark is using a very old build of UE4 so ARK moving to vulkan is non-trivial, it would take months of either backporting ue4 changes into their customized codebase or porting ark's code into a newer build of UE4, neither of which I see happening anytime soon.
From people I talked to updating the engine is easier then backporting!
the used UE4 version is 4.5 so it's pretty old