Jump to content

The Closing of Ark: Survival Evolved Official Servers


Recommended Posts

On 4/2/2023 at 7:00 PM, Bates1960 said:

To Wildcard 

I will not be paying for the new Ark game that i have already pay for.  I have been a loyal to Wildcard and Ark from the bata this will be the 4th time that I have restart and rebuild my tribe from the ground up cause of poor actions and distions for your team.  Why do you think that your actions with shutting down a game that ever one pay for to bring out the same game that ppl have already payed for and make your player base pay 50 + of the same game where you can bring out a pach or dlc to do the same thing and keep your player base happy instead of pissing them all off.

I am calling for a boycott of this move and a boycott for the up coming Ark 2.  We as the customer have power and should hold the wildcard accountable for this poor choise that wildcard is making here.   We as a comunity should be banding together and making wildcard put a stop to this 

So put a stop to updating ASE to ASA? Also put a stop to ARK 2?

You do realize (or maybe not), that you paid for ARK 1 (ASE), not ASA or ARK 2, right?

If you want to see the game get better and continue, then they need customers to pay more than once every 5 years or so. Heck, I bought ARK back in 2016, so 8 years ago. I did buy a few DLCs, so a few more bucks from me, but I got a great game for something like $20 a year. So for the price of 5 lattes a year. Pretty good deal if you ask me.

You can boycott all you want. If you aren't paying any more money for ASA or ARK 2, then why would they care? You aren't a customer of theirs at that point. Customers spend more money, which apparently you don't want to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wildbill said:

"So put a stop to updating ASE to ASA?"

"You do realize (or maybe not), that you paid for ARK 1 (ASE), not ASA "

ASA is ASE spelling aside, if WC did not use the ASE code by importing into UE5, then it would be a new game.

ASA is just ASE in a new suit, TheIsland will still be TheIsland but with more polygons, SE is still SE with more polygons.

We are promised fixes, QOL improvements, new interface, loss of platforms, added platforms.  (for 8 years so far)

But it ain't new, those of us with thousands of hours of experience will rush past new players simply because we 'know'  how things work, where things are, which things are important and which are not.... 

The only thing we 'may' have to learn is the new 'snap points' ... which might be all of 10 minutes 

 

and as for money, they could have made tons by adding a fee to migrate from ASE to ASA, and all the minority of official players would have gladly given it ...

And a new map would have been one huge hooray and give more $$$

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/2/2023 at 11:09 AM, ladymarina said:

Hello above been on Ark:Se since 2017.  I have bought all the games , expansions. I'm on Xbox one. I cannot afford to buy another game system. All the years I put into the server, and the game is going to just vanish😭😭😭😭😭.

If you already have the game shouldn't the game be discounted.For the users  that already have all the games? I have all the games. I understand it's going to be in U.I.5 but I still don't want to be on pay for the game all over again. 

What will you do for players on Xbox one or PS4? How will the servers save our dinos buildings etc?

I get it. I'm on an old-gen console (Xbox One) and this isn't anything worth buying a new system (Although I still might do it because of other reasons). But UE5 can only be recognized to it's full potential in those new consoles. Older consoles just aren't powerful enough for optimal gameplay. It's the sad truth. Now, I'd appreciate an optimized version with much of the lag heavily cut down on, and compressed as a whole, but that's too much to ask.

Cheers, good luck, and have a great rest of your day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Griffin998 said:

I get it. I'm on an old-gen console (Xbox One) and this isn't anything worth buying a new system (Although I still might do it because of other reasons). But UE5 can only be recognized to it's full potential in those new consoles. Older consoles just aren't powerful enough for optimal gameplay. It's the sad truth. Now, I'd appreciate an optimized version with much of the lag heavily cut down on, and compressed as a whole, but that's too much to ask.

Cheers, good luck, and have a great rest of your day!

If you've been eyeing a new console anyway, I cant recommend the ps5 enough. It's a big jump from ps4, even when playing ps4 games (Dayz is a great example).

I could never go back to ps4 now. Cant wait til all these Ue5 games that have been in development over the last couple years start finally dropping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Frack said:

ASA is ASE spelling aside, if WC did not use the ASE code by importing into UE5, then it would be a new game.

ASA is just ASE in a new suit, TheIsland will still be TheIsland but with more polygons, SE is still SE with more polygons.

Their first idea of how to port ARK to UE5 was just what you describe. And they thought it was no big deal like you describe and it was going to be free. After they got more familiar with the UE5 engine, the devs realized it wasn't going to be that easy. Also that there isn't any real point in just a straight over port if they didn't utilize the new features of UE5. It does sound like there is quite a bit of stuff rewritten now and many other changes made to the assets. 

I'm thinking it is going to look more like a new game than just the old ARK 1.

Now if you don't believe that, you can keep playing the old game, but of course no more old official servers (this isn't the first time legacy servers have been removed, so no big surprise there).

I work at a company that had to port our code from Linux kernel 4.x (32-bit) to 5.x (64-bit). So no big deal right? Took us over 2 years to do it. So you can think it is easy and they could have done it and they are not being honest with us. Me, I know better and believe them that the way forward is to rewrite quite a bit of the code and charge the customers for it. Any other way would result in failure and the end of ARK. Our company had a similar decision to make. Don't port to the Linux 5.x and watch the company slowly die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2023 at 11:06 AM, wildbill said:

Their first idea of how to port ARK to UE5 was just what you describe. And they thought it was no big deal like you describe and it was going to be free. After they got more familiar with the UE5 engine, the devs realized it wasn't going to be that easy. Also that there isn't any real point in just a straight over port if they didn't utilize the new features of UE5. It does sound like there is quite a bit of stuff rewritten now and many other changes made to the assets.

There's no way that actual game devs thought that. If someone wants to be extremely charitable they might choose to think that WC's management believed this even though the dev's told them otherwise, but realistically even that wasn't true.

UE5 has been known to the industry for years now, the only ways someone could believe this was going to be easy would be if they were deliberately, stupidly, naive (WC is many things, but stupid isn't one of them).

The reality is that WC has known for quite some time that this migration would be a lot of work, you can bet your socks that when JS tweeted that the migration would be free/easy he knew better. This is not something that just snuck up on WC and surprised them, their communications shenanigans are a smokescreen designed as a smokescreen for the fact that they knew how difficult it would be and they're juggling financial decisions behind the scenes that they don't want to fully discuss.

On 4/12/2023 at 11:06 AM, wildbill said:

I work at a company that had to port our code from Linux kernel 4.x (32-bit) to 5.x (64-bit). So no big deal right? Took us over 2 years to do it.

Exactly. Anyone with any experience in the technical world would know better than to thing it would be easy, there's no way WC actually believed that.

On 4/12/2023 at 11:06 AM, wildbill said:

So you can think it is easy and they could have done it and they are not being honest with us.

The "dishonest" part is them pretending that they're surprised by any of this, anyone with common sense should understand that this is something they've been thinking about and talking about internally for months now.

On 4/12/2023 at 11:06 AM, wildbill said:

Me, I know better and believe them that the way forward is to rewrite quite a bit of the code and charge the customers for it.

That's only true if you assume that ARK needs to get ported to UE5. And even if you agree with the argument that it's necessary to do so that still doesn't mean that WC was surprised by this, nor does it mean that the amount they're trying to change for releasing the same game twice in a row is a reasonable amount.

On 4/12/2023 at 11:06 AM, wildbill said:

Any other way would result in failure and the end of ARK. Our company had a similar decision to make. Don't port to the Linux 5.x and watch the company slowly die.

We could talk all day about whether it's necessary to port ARK to UE5, but again even if we choose to agree that it's necessary that doesn't mean the amount they're charging is proportional to the amount of work.

Edited by Pipinghot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Pipinghot said:

We could talk all day about whether it's necessary to port ARK to UE5, but again even if we choose to

agree that it's necessary that doesn't mean the amount they're charging is proportional to the amount of work.

Well the customers will decide. If enough people buy ASA, then it is worth the price. The market will decide.

I'm undecided. I'll wait to see it when it comes out (review videos). I'll decide then, but I'm guessing I'll be buying it.

I will also want to see what the system requirements will be. The biggest cost of any new game is really the PC hardware needed to run it (for a PC gamer). If I have to upgrade my 2 PCs to run it, I might wait a bit longer. Same for the console players. Many might need to buy a new console before they had planned that purchase to play ASA.

Compared to the hardware you run ARK on, $60 is really not very much at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wildbill said:

 It does sound like there is quite a bit of stuff rewritten now and many other changes made to the assets. 

 

The only will fix those things that failed in the import, they will only made changes to the assets that 5 does by default.

Stats will be the same. Dinos will be the same. Notes will be at same GPS. Orbs will be the same coordinates. Caves same location. Flying dinos will still fly, Rex will still roar, dodo's still squawk. metal will be in the same place (get more with axe, than pick), implants will have no new purpose.

Lots new things?  well there will be more polygons..  

"Probably the most significant difference between UE4 and UE5 is the amount of polygons that can be used within the engine. Polygons are the shapes that build meshes inside of the game engine. While Unreal 4 was able to handle a few million polygons, Unreal 5 is able to handle up to 10 billion polygons. This allows you to create vast cityscapes and environments that were not possible before.

Another major difference between the two is the lighting system. In UE4 all lighting was artificial and had to be made to look realistic if that was your goal. Now with UE5 the built in lighting system called Lumen allows for real time realistic lighting just by adding the lights. This system calculates the maths that a real light ray would follow to give off the most real looking lighting possible."

 

 

Edited by Frack
spelling
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think this would burn less if we were allowed to download our dinosaurs off official into single player.  There is no reason why this couldn't be allowed.  If you say it's because cheaters might abuse it, who cares what the cheaters do now there will be no official servers soon.

Reworded, we don't want to buy the upgraded version of Ark because you, Wildcard, will just do this again to us in five to ten years.  We on pve want to save our dinosaurs.  If we cannot trust you to help us save our dinos we invested time in and see the pve'er's viewpoint, which is to save our work not destroy it, how can we trust you wont do this to us yet again?

There is no point in playing a game that does not let you save your work.  I played official not because I liked official.  I played it to keep my dinos safe.  That is why I endured five years of stinky rates I hated.  

I'm happy you are making an upgrade.  But you just don't care about my past work so I cannot trust you in the future.  If I don't buy the upgrade it isn't because I wasn't willing to spend money on Ark.  It will be because you don't respect my pve mindset.  

There is no point in pve if Wildcard pvp's you.  You killed my dinosaurs.  You, Wildcard.

  • Like 2
  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Volunteer Moderator
16 minutes ago, SarahMonette said:

Think this would burn less if we were allowed to download our dinosaurs off official into single player. 

They already said you can:

 

  • Official Servers: With the launch of ASA at the end of August, we will be taking down all Official Servers on Xbox, PlayStation, and PC for ARK: Survival Evolved – at that time, the final save-datas from the ARK: Survival Evolved Official Servers will be uploaded for players to re-host on their own servers or play in singleplayer/non-dedi, as well as slightly earlier snapshots. You will still be able to play on single-player, non-dedicated, player-dedicated, and unofficial servers. ARK: Survival Ascended will have its own fully supported Official Network for all platforms.
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Joebl0w13 said:

They already said you can:

 

  • Official Servers: With the launch of ASA at the end of August, we will be taking down all Official Servers on Xbox, PlayStation, and PC for ARK: Survival Evolved – at that time, the final save-datas from the ARK: Survival Evolved Official Servers will be uploaded for players to re-host on their own servers or play in singleplayer/non-dedi, as well as slightly earlier snapshots. You will still be able to play on single-player, non-dedicated, player-dedicated, and unofficial servers. ARK: Survival Ascended will have its own fully supported Official Network for all platforms.

Nice that you reminded me of that.  How am I supposed to trust them?  Give me one reason!  If there is a record for consoles (unlikely to be functional) then I may say otherwise.  If it was that easy, this option would have been added already.  I don't know they're working on a console save right now or Rather, work is already underway on ASA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Larkfields said:

So the challenge is to create a third-party tool that allows dinos and structures to be transferred from ASE to ASA.

I don't want to leave my dinos behind !

Survivor and Dino  import are no problem , can be done with tools they have, structures are different story due to the differences in UE4 and UE5 polygons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Frack said:

Survivor and Dino  import are no problem , can be done with tools they have, structures are different story due to the differences in UE4 and UE5 polygons.

lmao, the only difference is the common asset format supported by both engine. In fact ARK is using the old 4.2 format despite being based on 4.5 on PC (on console it's another matter.. and yes this reduced space a lot on consoles, not only lowering the texture resolution). Actually they already have the assets in the updated format in the console versions.

If you are talking about nanite you should know that is just software tessellation performed in compute shaders (vertex shader ->compute shaders) instead of the traditional geometry pipeline (vertex shader -> hull shader -> tesselation fixed function -> domain shader), which is actually an old idea (ATI was the first demonstrating it like 10+ years ago?). Nanite is good for balancing details without the LOD issues and lowering the memory usage (if carefully tailored) but it has a cost in performance on older hardware. Structures don't have any issues on this, they are just models like any other stuff.

Edited by darkradeon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2023 at 12:27 PM, wildbill said:

Well the customers will decide. If enough people buy ASA, then it is worth the price. The market will decide.

You're arguing with something I didn't say.

I wasn't discussing whether the price will be "worth the price", what I was discussing was whether the "amount they're charging is proportional to the amount of work", those are two entirely different issues/questions.

On 4/12/2023 at 12:27 PM, wildbill said:

I will also want to see what the system requirements will be. The biggest cost of any new game is really the PC hardware needed to run it (for a PC gamer). If I have to upgrade my 2 PCs to run it, I might wait a bit longer. Same for the console players. Many might need to buy a new console before they had planned that purchase to play ASA.

Compared to the hardware you run ARK on, $60 is really not very much at all.

Agreed, that's true. And if the history of ARK is any indication they will almost guaranteed require lots of players (probably even most player) to do hardware upgrades. Only time will tell, of course, but from where we sit today even the idea that a new release would somehow be less demanding of compute resources sounds like a pleasant fairy tale.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Pipinghot said:

You're arguing with something I didn't say.

I wasn't discussing whether the price will be "worth the price", what I was discussing was whether the "amount they're charging is proportional to the amount of work", those are two entirely different issues/questions.

Agreed, that's true. And if the history of ARK is any indication they will almost guaranteed require lots of players (probably even most player) to do hardware upgrades. Only time will tell, of course, but from where we sit today even the idea that a new release would somehow be less demanding of compute resources sounds like a pleasant fairy tale.

Right, I don't believe the hardware requirements will be less either.

About the price, the only thing that matters to any company that is non-profit, is what the market price to set to generate the most profit. The price is not set by what it is worth based on the cost to develop it. So you thinking they could develop for less is just you wishing they were making the game just for you and not for their actual reason, to make money for Wildcard and also the parent company (and shareholders). So it really isn't relevant what price you think it is worth (which was my original point, but maybe poorly stated). So that is my actual argument, that price is not set by the amount of work needed, but by profit motives. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, wildbill said:

About the price, the only thing that matters to any company that is non-profit, is what the market price to set to generate the most profit.

Yup, agreed, but that doesn't mean we players don't have the right to exchange opinions on these forums about these topics.

WC is going to charge an insulting amount because they can get away with it, and they can get away with it because there are a lot of people who will be willing to spend a bunch of money just to play the same game they've already played... but (maybe) prettier.

P.T. Barnum wasn't wrong...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2023 at 4:06 PM, wildbill said:

Their first idea of how to port ARK to UE5 was just what you describe. And they thought it was no big deal like you describe and it was going to be free. After they got more familiar with the UE5 engine, the devs realized it wasn't going to be that easy. Also that there isn't any real point in just a straight over port if they didn't utilize the new features of UE5. It does sound like there is quite a bit of stuff rewritten now and many other changes made to the assets. 

I'm thinking it is going to look more like a new game than just the old ARK 1.

Now if you don't believe that, you can keep playing the old game, but of course no more old official servers (this isn't the first time legacy servers have been removed, so no big surprise there).

I work at a company that had to port our code from Linux kernel 4.x (32-bit) to 5.x (64-bit). So no big deal right? Took us over 2 years to do it. So you can think it is easy and they could have done it and they are not being honest with us. Me, I know better and believe them that the way forward is to rewrite quite a bit of the code and charge the customers for it. Any other way would result in failure and the end of ARK. Our company had a similar decision to make. Don't port to the Linux 5.x and watch the company slowly die.

dunno if this has been said but people are expecting WC to be able to upgrade to UE5 in 5 months with no delay or 'other' problems..... if they had just upgraded to ue5 WITHOUT trying to add poop then it would have been MUCH easier - christ there is MODS on unofficial running ue5 versions ..... but adding more and more stuff just complicates anything WC is trying to do as always.

I play on official with epic settings - some bits turned down because they are just not needed  / slow the game down too much with ZERO return - it looks beautiful - ue5 WILL look better BUT system hardware will be hammered more as will servers - IF they do not optimize the game its gonna be a mess.

 

meh enough rambling 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of people will buy it anyway.  Most people don't even know about the coming changes yet.  Or they don't check information out of lack of interest. Many players are not aware of the exclusion.  From what I see, many still buy Ark1. officially, Wild Card failed to post the correct information in the relevant stores about the shutdown of the official multiplayer servers, still selling the game as multiplayer.  It's rather not nice of them, the consumer also has the right to know that the game will be DEAD.  Because that's what will happen after the Official Servers are shut down. If they still charge money for the deactivated game (because on the day of deletion the official servers will be shut down) doesn't it mean that our wallets are not interested only in charging the maximum rate for the corrected version. Many of you want to buy (because they have free funds, for example) Which means that the Ark community is not that close to each other.  I do not share the enthusiasm of those who are already sweating to get into ASA PVP even though they are not sure if the game will be on time (here we know from experience that the punctuality of the Wild Card has been lame for years). So far, all the maps contained errors and after the start of these maps, quick fixes such that ARK still does not work like the product I bought, which is not properly. I heard a lot of words like: I won't pay a second time, it was supposed to be free, and so on. And this time they already have $50 / $100 loaded to buy ASA or they are just getting ready to buy it.  I want to see a rushed effect of the ARK1 Transition to UE5 and within 5 months.  Over the years, the Wild Card has not fixed such an important Biebieski screen and you expect ASA in good condition?  At least playable until the first updates due to bugs?  Old-timers with experience and bug-lovers look for bugs in the first place to take advantage of the game and have an advantage. On every map that came out, the activity is the, place for the base, then searching for bugs (I suspect that it will not take many players too much time). The sad fact is that the conquerors of Boss on glichach have been bored on ARK1 for a long time. It's not that I forbid someone to buy ASA, it's your money, your stress during the game.  But buy ASA for a year or a year and a few months for $50 Because you were promised something About ARK2 Early Access.  Hasn't the wild card pressed your trust enough? Still, you're going to buy.  To this day, nothing more is known about ARK2. I do not believe that it will be perfect, after all, why should I buy the same bugs as in Ark1? As for mods: Mods mods and only mods I can't live without them what does MOD mean?  Modifying parts of the game to make your life in the game easier.  Personally, I'd disable the MOD once and for all for this reason: PLAY ON A PURE UNMODDED VERSION WITH EQUAL CHANCES.  I see from feedback that many PC gamers use mods to make their game easier.  Could this be the reason for the Changes in ARK?  It was too easy, the players got bored too quickly.  And long to write.  This is my opinion on the purchase of ASA or ARK2.  I'm not interested in modded games. And I certainly won't pay for a cat in a poke.

 

Edit:

After that, they say that the adaptation or checking the MODOW will be their responsibility to make it reasonably cross-platform, but only 50% for the author?  This sounds like a rip off for just allowing a MOD to play.  another thing ASA consoles will not be supported by mods for now, which means again favoring PC players. It will not be a problem for Mod developers to create them on UE5. Since everything in wildcard works so fast xD do you think mods will be published as fast as their creation? Programmers sitting (probably sitting on ARK2) will not deal with your ASA logically summing up.

 

Know, choose the aspect of the game you want to have an easy or tedious life in ARK1.  I prefer the latter because that's what I wanted to play in Ark1, and many I've played with prefer the style of play that ARK1 offers, which is PVE.  PVP + BS?  simple result you had base xD

Edited by Noffek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats not the point there is no need to pay a price of  a game we already have. 15 dollars maybe but 59.99 no. We can do cloud gaming or they could just have servers on ASA for ASE players too with the normal graphics and also cloud gaming. There  are ways they can do this they don't have to just cut the servers off. As I said before why are we paying like it's a new game it's not. It should be discounted. No one is talking about when Ark 2comes out we will have to pay another 59.99? They haven't said anything to make me feel comfortable with this ending servers thing 😢

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/11/2023 at 11:01 PM, Griffin998 said:

I get it. I'm on an old-gen console (Xbox One) and this isn't anything worth buying a new system (Although I still might do it because of other reasons). But UE5 can only be recognized to it's full potential in those new consoles. Older consoles just aren't powerful enough for optimal gameplay. It's the sad truth. Now, I'd appreciate an optimized version with much of the lag heavily cut down on, and compressed as a whole, but that's too much to ask.

Cheers, good luck, and have a great rest of your day!

That's why I'm saying WC is not even thinking of the players that can't afford new game systems 😢

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the cool things of ARK and unofficial was you could play with player from all around the world (despite character set issues that make missing chars into squares [][]). Even if ARK has a poorly optimised engine, especially for modern hardware, the requirements today are really affordable, especially considering the legacy/EA DX10/SM4 mode (that will not available in UE5). And the big unofficial cluster allowed that.

Edited by darkradeon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ladymarina said:

That's why I'm saying WC is not even thinking of the players that can't afford new game systems 😢

 

While I somewhat agree, you cant play ps4 forever. It's outdated. Ark has run on the old consoles for 5 plus years already. If anything this upgrade is overdue.

The way they've handled the ASA upgrade is clearly a cash grab for Snails pockets, but the upgrade itself is warranted especially with how much of a departure from the established formula Ark 2 is shaping up to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, St1ckyBandit said:

While I somewhat agree, you cant play ps4 forever. It's outdated. Ark has run on the old consoles for 5 plus years already. If anything this upgrade is overdue.

The way they've handled the ASA upgrade is clearly a cash grab for Snails pockets, but the upgrade itself is warranted especially with how much of a departure from the established formula Ark 2 is shaping up to be.

That why I'm saying keep some servers open for Xbox One players and PS4 players. As stated before I can't afford a PS5 or xbox series x (I play on xbox one). So to totally wipe the servers that everyone took years to build isn't cool. Then wanting your players to pay for a game that is old full price like it's a new game? And has said so many false things I don't think so.  There are things that can be done to ensure all players can play. They can upgrade that's not a problem. Just don't makes us pay for a g as me we already have. If it was Ark 2 fine but it's not. They could condense the servers. No confirmation on how this stuff will go down either. Also requiem a plagues take allows Xbox one players to play via Cloud Gaming. So can Wildcard+Snail Games. Wild card can make the performance levels to apply for older consoles. 

Edited by ladymarina
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...