Why would anyone buy the win 10 version?

[MiltoNova]

If u got it for free cuz u own the xbox version, thats good 4 you, but i am talking about steam and ps4 players.

Now, i dont own the xbox or the windows version, so i cant really speak for the gameplay part, but as for graphics, if windows ark is the samething as the xbox, then that means thar you will have horrible fps and graphics and you will get updates late

Now i have played the ps4 version, and it has auto aim, that can be quite game breaking in crossplay, so if u playing ark on pc, dont buy windows, buy steam

[Bombardiro Crocodilo]

What?

[Unholy Eve]

huh?

[MiltoNova]

i am saying, that the win 10 version is ♥♥♥♥ and nobody shout buy it

[SpeedFreak3]

so you say that you don't know ♥♥♥♥ about the windows version of ark and nobody should buy it because you made up some arguments out of thin air.

That doesn't sound right.

[Kevin]

Actually; I am going to disagree with you. I own both copies, the windows 10 version and the steam version. I highly recommend the steam version. The windows 10 version is highly unstable. The windows 10 version also features some things that are worthwhile to invest in such as cross-play. Cross-play servers are currently really empty, but they allow you to play with your wife on two different platforms, and the windows 10 version is under maintenance. I did find out through twitter that SWC is working on it.

I highly recommend the windows 10 version as off right now. Crossplay is a feature that outweighs a ton of things. It will be stabelized if SWC continues to pursuit it as they are.

Please... don't laugh at my desire to play ark with my family of 5 accross an official server. I cannot wait until the windows 10 version is stable though!

Learn UWP. Hit Winkey + Shift + Enter to enter full-screen on UWP applications.

[hehe]

consoles and especially the xbox have dumpster level hardware which is why the frames are low, for computers the sky is the limit so you can get better parts and get a smooth ark lol.

your entire arguement is an assumption that pc and xbox gets the same fps. Lol?

[Jspringy]

Post from someone about something they know nothing about, nothing to see here, move along.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Cute:

consoles and especially the xbox have dumpster level hardware which is why the frames are low, for computers the sky is the limit so you can get better parts and get a smooth ark lol.

your entire arguement is an assumption that pc and xbox gets the same fps. Lol?

No; I know that PC gets way better performance. I mean the cost of a GTX 1080 inside of a console would make the console economically infeasible. Manufactures have to produce things for the average client. I am saying, that purchasing 5 desktops with GTX 1080's is infeesible. 5 xbox's are not.

I really wish Microsoft would also release a few xbox's designed for more performance at the cost of there sales for those who are performance enthusiasts. However, that too would make 5 xbox's economically infeesible just like good quality machines.

At least... it is still playable on xbox. And at least me and my family can be happy together.

Xbox is good for family because of cross-play. :(. performance + cross-play would remove the benefit of cross-play because then I might as well buy five machines. I ain't getting a loan for that!

[Jspringy]

Just an FYI for those of you who like to assume, the win 10 version has all the same graphic options as the steam version. It does not run as bad as the xbone version. I don't know yet how it compares to ark on xbone x.

The only thing it doesn't have that the steam version has is mods.... Yet.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Cute:

consoles and especially the xbox have dumpster level hardware which is why the frames are low, for computers the sky is the limit so you can get better parts and get a smooth ark lol.

your entire arguement is an assumption that pc and xbox gets the same fps. Lol?

Originally posted by Jspringy:

Just an FYI for those of you who like to assume, the win 10 version has all the same graphic options as the steam version. It does not run as bad as the xbone version. I don't know yet how it compares to ark on xbone x.

The only thing it doesn't have that the steam version has is mods.... Yet.

^sorry I missed the synapses there.

Oh! yeah; okay I get where your at. Yes.... the UWP (Universal Windows Program) version of ark is the windows 10 version and the windows 10 version is optimized to run on windows 10 machines. It's buggy:

+ Sometimes all resources do not graphically render
+ Sometimes explorer notes do not splash the note story
+ Sometimes the keys do not like to type in chat and I have to chat in player inventory to get the chatbox working again.
+ I've had few crashes, but all games crash.
+ No cross-hairs when holding down the key '.' (period).
+ WAY Better FPS; it seems like UWP enhances the Direct X experience.

AND

You do have to use winkey + shift + enter to enter true full-screen on UWP. By all means it is still playable on windows. Easily. Its not the xbox version. It is the Universal Windows Version. Xbox is considered a part of Windows now programatically. I actually get higher frame-rates on the UWP version than I do the steam version somehow. But... framerates. It is still highly playable. It is still functional.

BUT

Those are annoyances. It is not broken. Playing ark with a family of 5 on an official cross-play server while we are all logged in is pleasurable and I can look past the annoyances.

JUXTUPPOSE:

Originally posted by ravenispurrty:

PC gets way better performance. I mean the cost of a GTX 1080 inside of a console would make the console economically infeasible. Manufactures have to produce things for the average client. I am saying, that purchasing 5 desktops with GTX 1080's is infeesible. 5 xbox's are not.

I really wish Microsoft would also release a few xbox's designed for more performance at the cost of there sales for those who are performance enthusiasts. However, that too would make 5 xbox's economically infeesible just like good quality machines.

At least... it is still playable on xbox. And at least me and my family can be happy together.

Xbox is good for family because of cross-play. :(. performance + cross-play would remove the benefit of cross-play because then I might as well buy five machines. I ain't getting a loan for that!

SO:

We're happy with the xbox and windows 10 version. Own 5 copies of the game. There isn't much I can do with the FPS that my family is recieving. Not much ark devs can do either. Gaming rigs aren't cheap. That is four more gaming rigs to purchase. Eh; fk that. Thats $2000-$3000 for each person to have a high quality ark experience. I'd rather just share my PC and play the xbox myself if they need the ark experience. I doubt my house can hold that many desks too! lol. As long as SWC keeps working on the UWP version of ark, I won't regret that purchase. The other 4 people in my house do not regret it at all.

[Jspringy]

Originally posted by ravenispurrty:

Originally posted by Cute:

consoles and especially the xbox have dumpster level hardware which is why the frames are low, for computers the sky is the limit so you can get better parts and get a smooth ark lol.

your entire arguement is an assumption that pc and xbox gets the same fps. Lol?

Originally posted by Jspringy:

Just an FYI for those of you who like to assume, the win 10 version has all the same graphic options as the steam version. It does not run as bad as the xbone version. I don't know yet how it compares to ark on xbone x.

The only thing it doesn't have that the steam version has is mods.... Yet.

^sorry I missed the synapses there.

Oh! yeah; okay I get where your at. Yes.... the UWP (Universal Windows Program) version of ark is the windows 10 version and the windows 10 version is optimized to run on windows 10 machines. It's buggy:

+ Sometimes all resources do not graphically render
+ Sometimes explorer notes do not splash the note story
+ Sometimes the keys do not like to type in chat and I have to chat in player inventory to get the chatbox working again.
+ I've had few crashes, but all games crash.
+ No cross-hairs when holding down the key '.' (period).
+ WAY Better FPS; it seems like UWP enhances the Direct X experience.

AND

You do have to use winkey + shift + enter to enter true full-screen on UWP. By all means it is still playable on windows. Easily. Its not the xbox version. It is the Universal Windows Version. Xbox is considered a part of Windows now programatically. I actually get higher frame-rates on the UWP version than I do the steam version somehow. But... framerates. It is still highly playable. It is still functional.

BUT

Those are annoyances. It is not broken. Playing ark with a family of 5 on an official cross-play server while we are all logged in is pleasurable and I can look past the annoyances.

JUXTUPPOSE:

Originally posted by ravenispurrty:

PC gets way better performance. I mean the cost of a GTX 1080 inside of a console would make the console economically infeasible. Manufactures have to produce things for the average client. I am saying, that purchasing 5 desktops with GTX 1080's is infeesible. 5 xbox's are not.

I really wish Microsoft would also release a few xbox's designed for more performance at the cost of there sales for those who are performance enthusiasts. However, that too would make 5 xbox's economically infeesible just like good quality machines.

At least... it is still playable on xbox. And at least me and my family can be happy together.

Xbox is good for family because of cross-play. :(. performance + cross-play would remove the benefit of cross-play because then I might as well buy five machines. I ain't getting a loan for that!

SO:

We're happy with the xbox and windows 10 version. Own 5 copies of the game. There isn't much I can do with the FPS that my family is recieving. Not much ark devs can do either. Gaming rigs aren't cheap. That is four more gaming rigs to purchase. Eh; fk that. Thats $2000-$3000 for each person to have a high quality ark experience. I'd rather just share my PC and play the xbox myself if they need the ark experience. I doubt my house can hold that many desks too! lol.

I too noticed some annoying bugs, some of which you mentioned, however I only play tested it as a client for a few hours. The rest of the time it just ran a dedicated server, which worked flawlessly for 2 people, buuuut that particular map isn't well developed and doesnt have alot of tames yet, so the server load was minimal.

Lol, and let's remember, it is a wildcard product, it's going to need a year or so to be decent.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Jspringy:

Originally posted by ravenispurrty:

^sorry I missed the synapses there... [continued above]

Lol, and let's remember, it is a wildcard product, it's going to need a year or so to be decent.

I have the Ark Software Developer's Kit as Well. It's pretty massive and chunky with code. It also lacks the MVC structure to navigate through the resources quickly. Just opeining the developer kit is a very-pain staking process. 1yr of time to optimize it for both platforms is not bad. Not bad at all. I wish that the devs would redo the source to comply with the MVC structure. It would make so much more organized, easier to work with, and less taxing. Debugging would also take significantly less time.

But; I'm facing a truth here. Ark was not intended to be released at the scale that it did release and as quickly as it did release. I don't think aberration was planned. Scortched Earth may not have been a plan either. Early access did have the agreement that the game may not ever become official and that there are no refunds for purchasing it while it is an EA (early access) product. You can tell by the quality of code and it's ansestors that the origional person who worked on this product took a lot of risks to make this product, and that an official release was not expected. You can tell by there support for the product that they have never managed another MMO. You can also tell that by the way that the product is sold. Ark, itself should be a subscription much like wow. It is also at-least a $100 game without a subscription because of it's real-time play. real-time play is expensive.

And it is exactly that^ which makes the unreal community blossom with people looking to rebuild the game in other variances/themes in a very simular fassion that ark did; but with more of an object structure and to be more then a successful rough draft consisting of tons of concept code.

I think that too is something to take note of; the game of ark is a concept. A successful one. It touched devs everywhere in the unreal communities, and I expect to see more products like it. I expect those products to run better than ark. But we can never forget the legacy that ark had started.

Thank you SWC.You will always be remembered when you go down as a legacy simply for living down a legacy. You will always be in the same-status as the video game DOOM is to me and a lot of other conceptual games. You delivered your purpose. Obviously the Unreal Communities like it.

And if you ever construct a final and not a concept; then that too will be purchased in my house.

Ark also tested a ton of things! a ton of things. Right now as we speak the service providers over the web such as BE, Microsoft XBox Live, and PlayStation Network are working on finding ways to support there gamers through the evolution that is pending the gaming industry. 24/7 games that revolve around real-time and not around the user are ideas that many studios are taking under consideration or being worked on now. So; they've all got to address new standard business standards/sop's to do things like make subscription lags less detrimental to the gamers play experience. Or, anti-cheat CSR's has to respond to appeals quicker and be more accurate while detecting the B.S. and detecting the false-detects within each appeal. Ark pushed us. Ark pushed us all to be better and do better as programmers whether that be a game dev or a service provider.

Concepts are always overly criticized; I mean "Hi! may name is Vista! can I crash at your house tonight?" lol. But the truth of the matter is Vista had predated the release of 7. Much the same, Ark will have predated many games that studios are working on right now. It is just how Maslow's Law applies to software. Facebook dated MySpace... The CEO of facebook regretted writing facebook in PHP because.... no one plans for hollywood. We just do what we enjoy doing. We wish for it, We dream for it, We stride to it, but... when we get there we find out that we did not plan on it. Then, the last challenge:

Try not to be a one-hit wonder because your fans are going to push you, and they are going to push you hard! critisize you, ♥♥♥♥♥ about you, brag about you, enjoy you, grief you, test you, and everything until that rough draft you thought was complete is final. That's why loyal fans are appreciated.

[Creative Cryptid]

Originally posted by Cute:

consoles and especially the xbox have dumpster level hardware which is why the frames are low, for computers the sky is the limit so you can get better parts and get a smooth ark lol.

your entire arguement is an assumption that pc and xbox gets the same fps. Lol?

Ps4 pro easily beats PC

[Kevin]

Originally posted by wyattmilkman:

Originally posted by Cute:

consoles and especially the xbox have dumpster level hardware which is why the frames are low, for computers the sky is the limit so you can get better parts and get a smooth ark lol.

your entire arguement is an assumption that pc and xbox gets the same fps. Lol?

Ps4 pro easily beats PC

Nope... No it doesn't. But your talking to a dev. A Ps4 pro beats consumer-grade PC's. Consumer grade PC's are without SSDS on Raid. Coprocessors, and GTX 1080's or greater. Btw; that is far from consumer grade. Consumer grade PC's and Ps4's also don't have 3 monitors.

[Creative Cryptid]

Originally posted by ravenispurrty:

Originally posted by wyattmilkman:

Ps4 pro easily beats PC

Nope... No it doesn't. But your talking to a dev. A Ps4 pro beats consumer-grade PC's without SSDS on Raid. Coprocessors, and GTX 1080's or greater. Btw; that is far from consumer grade.

Ok, let me rephrase, PS4 Pro easily beats a PC of similar and somewhat higher cost. Obviously, you can spend. $1,200 + on a computer and have it be better, but a Pro easily beats anything under a grand