Why does ark require a nasa computer

[Me whne]

why?

[Neonovica]

Um, I have a Lenovo computer and it works fine.

[Me whne]

Originally posted by Natbug234:

Um, I have a Lenovo computer and it works fine.

2 fps?

[#4o4__Sk1LL_NoT_FoUnD]

Originally posted by █▀█ █▄█ ▀█▀:

why?

I don't think nasa only spend 1700 bucks on their pc's

[Forger of Souls]

People asked the same question about...what was the game again...Crysis? When it originally came out. Don't remember if that is the right game though. Basically, it was well over a decade ago, when the game came out, hardware at the time, just couldn't play the game and it's fullest. They literally built the game with hardware that would be made five years or more into the future in mind. I'm not sure if that is the same for ARK. But, ARK runs just fine on my computer, 980 ti (upgraded to this from two 770s), decent six core motherboard, decent 500gb harddrives, and 16 GB worth of RAM. Cost only 4.5k five years ago to make. Today, you'd might spend only 2k to 3k making it now (if not less). So, no, it doesn't require a nasa computer to run, but, yes, it does require some good hardware to run with decent graphics. If graphics is not your concern, you could play it with decent fps with graphics at the lowest.

[JDaremo Fireheart]

i only have a dual core 3.9ghz & 8gb ram and I run it fine. Pretty sure NASA has better computers than I have.

Originally posted by #4o4__Sk1LL_NoT_FoUnD:

I don't think nasa only spend 1700 bucks on their pc's

I spend less than $1k

[Me whne]

Originally posted by JDaremo Fireheart:

i only have a dual core 3.9ghz & 8gb ram and I run it fine. Pretty sure NASA has better computers than I have.

Originally posted by #4o4__Sk1LL_NoT_FoUnD:

I don't think nasa only spend 1700 bucks on their pc's

I spend less than $1k

i have a quad core and it can only run it on 15 fps best

[LightningBug]

I spent $1,200 on my Alienware Aurora, she has six intel i5 8th gen cores, 8 ram, 1 TB disk space, and a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti graphics card. My game typically runs between 40-60 fps, sometimes dropping to 30, sometimes rising to 70+. The computer itself only cost about $1,050, plus 50 for a specific cord I needed and plus 100 for the monitor. I'm pretty sure NASA computers are much better, so maybe your computer is just a potato? :(

(Oh, and I do have fps counter on, and even in rain it can run at least 40. So I'm not just guessing numbers lol)

[Ryeo]

Originally posted by LightningBug:

I spent $1,200 on my Alienware Aurora, she has six intel i5 8th gen cores, 8 ram, 1 TB disk space, and a NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti graphics card. My game typically runs between 40-60 fps, sometimes dropping to 30, sometimes rising to 70+. I'm pretty sure Nasa computers are much better, so maybe your computer is just a potato?

(Oh, and I do have fps counter on, and even in rain it can run at least 40. So I'm not just guessing numbers lol)

$1200 for that? thats a rip off lol

[Sullear]

Your CPU is only a small part of FPS. And the fact you have mentioned almost NOTHING about your setup. How can anyone help you if you dont share info? Lol

[LightningBug]

Eh, I love her anyway lol. She's my dream PC. I love the LED lights and the other specifics I got with it too, so there's that lol. (well no, a NASA would be my dream but I'll never get that)

[Vesuvius]

Originally posted by █▀█ █▄█ ▀█▀:

Originally posted by JDaremo Fireheart:

i only have a dual core 3.9ghz & 8gb ram and I run it fine. Pretty sure NASA has better computers than I have.

I spend less than $1k

i have a quad core and it can only run it on 15 fps best

"Quad core" tells us nothing lol

Whats your actual specs.

[=Sarsante=]

Commodore 64 cant run the game

[My_goat_is_alive]

Originally posted by █▀█ █▄█ ▀█▀:

Originally posted by Natbug234:

Um, I have a Lenovo computer and it works fine.

2 fps?

i use lenovo too and after the tlc stuff ark has been rly hard 2 run. bfore it was fine

[postpaleo]

NASA put a man on the moon with less than a Commador 64. Yes they might have had more than one, but.... The lack of inovation and dependance on tech is easily visable, but so many are still blind.

I don't miss my Vic 20 or the 64, love what we have, but what we did with what we had,
isn't a part of the current . It was kind of the point of Ron Howards movie, Apollo 13.

I wonder what specs NASA runs for puters. Knowing what I see in the VA, I doubt they could even start this game. Don't assume the goverment has even basic computers, by our standards, let alone anything that works together well.

Computers are a big part of modern infrastucture, investing in solid infrastucture has always been wise, if not imparative. It pays for itself, in the long run.

Now kick the soapbox out from under me. :)