Hixbot

I don't mean regular cosmetics I mean custom cosmetics. Even if you change setting to not get them after respawn, it is still there.

So due to the custom cosmetics counting as holding items, while being unable to drop them, we can't transfer characters to Scorched Earth when set to transfer only characters without items. This has actually been a problem since before scorched earth release, but kinda figured that would get resolved by now. Only way to play it is to create a new character.

How can you release a crunch and not mention the massive graphics issues on the PC version from the last patch?

^^ This right here, can someone tell us WHY the changes to female character were necessary?

Does anyone know the reason they changed the female character? What is the justification?

I posted the most simple of bugs in that section months ago. That the steam version "whistle passive" keybind does not whistle passive (it whistles attack my target). We've have had many patches since then and that tiny problem wasnt fixed. It's pretty clear they aren't seriously looking at that section, because fixing a bug like would require fixing only a single line of code.

The video tab isn't revealing what variables you are actually changing, but from what I can tell there is not true AA OFF. These console commands help reveal what is going on. r.antiAliasingmethod 0 off (no option in the video tab will do this, try it, this is how terrible the game looks with no AA, this is the messy image that is being fed to the technolgies below) r.antiAliasingmethod 1 FXAA (no option to do this in in the video tab, always looked terrible) r.antiAliasingmethod 2 TAA (before the update this looked better than it does now, but it always was pretty poor, and now it's completely awful, this is sensitive to the r.ScreenPercentage command) r.antiAliasingmethod 3 MSAA (no option to do this in the video tab, always looked terrible anyways) r.antiAliasingmethod 4 TSR/FSR/DLSS (this will use whatever upscaling technology you select in the video tab, and is sensitive to r.ScreenPercentage) All options in the video tab use r.antiAliasingmethod 4, native option uses TSR. TSR with r.ScreenPercentage 100 is heavy on performance but does a good job cleaning up the image. DLSS with r.ScreenPercentage 100 is the same thing as DLAA, it does a very good job cleaning up the image but is very heavy on performance. The problem was before the last update, DLSS did a pretty good job in quality mode (r.ScreenPercentage 75) and did alot help with performance but now its a huge mess. BTW, I'm on a 4070 and I used to get resonable performance with DLSS quality mode, but now it looks too awful to play. If I use DLAA it looks good, but performance is unplayable. Basically the last update made the game unplayable.

I dont get it. i put alot of effort to make my character appear a certain way, and they just wiped that away.

To get hardware Lumen (Ray tracing) turn global illumination to Epic. DLSS is now in the video tab, but as mentioned in this thread, it looks terrible unless you use DLAA, which hurts performance. Other AA options like FSR and Native (TSR) only look decent if you use 100% render resolution which is hard on performance. All upscaling options that can boost performance such as DLSS, FSR, and Native below 100% look like absolute ass since the last update.

In motion the specular reflecions sparkle and shimmer excessively creating noisy pixels everywhere. It's truly awful.

With DLSS enabled this turns on DLAA. For DLSS quality mode you should use r.ScreenPercentage 75. The problem is it looks worse than it did before the last update. In motion there is far more ghosting, and everything is oversharpened. I'm not sure what the update did to break DLSS but the game looks terrible in motion now, especially when panning scenery.

Why was my post merged with this thread? I made a post about dlss.

I find DLSS is behaving different, everything is oversharpened and ghosting.

What in good god are you guys doing "fixing" the ability to change the imprint care requested with a cryo? Of all the major bugs, this is what you "fix"?! Was this supposed to be pushed down to un-official servers, because we certainly don't want this in our cluster.

The game is developed using Unreal Engine 5. Direct coding isn't necessary when you use a 3rd party engine with development tools provided such as blueprints. Other than that, almost all game coding is C++. Blueprints Visual Scripting in Unreal Engine | Unreal Engine 5.0 Documentation

ASA graphics look decent on ultra but even a 4090 struggles to keep it above 30fps (not counting frame generation). To get a tolerable framerate on current gen consoles, they will need to lower the graphics to the point it will look worse than ASE. And that's just taking about GPU performance. No amount of the lowering graphics will help the CPU. The main thread bottleneck on UE5 is infamous. I think Wildcard made a bet on UE5 as it's going to simplify their workflow, without considering how poorly optimized the engine is, especially for a massive detailed game like Ark. We are going to end up with a situation like ASE on last gen Xbox One, it will perform like garbage until the next generation. We are finally at a point where ASE performs at 60 fps on current consoles and mid range PCs. Way too soon they decide its time for a graphical remaster. I'd wager a guess that the delay for PS5 certification is due to poor framerate. It's true that there has been many PC games that have performance issues that the console version does not. That is typically because they are poorly optimized ports of console-first developed games. I'm not sure that is the case with ASA, but it would be lovely to be proven wrong with a rock solid framerate on console.

So are console gamers going be happy with dips to 20fps AND shader compilation and traversal stutters because that's what the PC gamers are experiencing now on far more powerful hardware. Let's remind ourselves how fantastic ASE looks on current gen consoles even in performance mode (stable 60 fps), is ASA going to be an upgrade, or a massive downgrade?

I guess it's too much to ask for 60fps on Series X. Seems like a downgrade.

Is gamma adjustment still a thing? I mean they fixed the poor lighting, right? right?

Would it not make sense to wipe the servers when they merge, I mean otherwise Steam players will have had much longer to build up.

Wasn't the intention to move to UE5 for better performance? I need to lower settings that the graphics look worse than they did than in ASE and half the framerate. I bet the console version is delayed because they can't get a smooth 30fps from it. Meanwhile ASE worked at 60fps on XSX/PS5 and the graphics were good enough. If they wanted to make quality of life changes to the game they could have done that. Instead they "remaster" it in UE5, but it is no secret that UE5 performs like hot garbage on even the best hardware.

You cannot access the xbox console-only servers from PC. Only the Xbox/PC servers have this. If you are talking about cloud play from PC, then yes you can access the Xbox console only servers, but that is because you are playing the xbox version from xbox hardware streamed to your PC. (you have nothing installed on your system and cheating capabilities is exactly equal to playing on Xbox and Playstation)

The post reads that it's the former. If xbox/ps players crossplay without PC, why is that an issue for you?

Can private servers enable movement leveling that players can choose to use on the survivor/dinos? Or can private servers only adjust movement speed parameters, without the option of a leveling mechanic?

I don't understand the need for ASA at all. Just put all development effort into Ark 2. In the meantime ASE has decent graphics and performs well on mid-range PCs and current gen consoles. A complete UE5 remaster and trickling in content we already played over the next few years sounds like a complete waste of development time.