St1ckyBandit

On 4/18/2024 at 10:54 PM, invincibleqc said:

Tried the following?

 

Wait... no thread closure and banishment to the bug section?

Joe will not stand for this

Dont worry, Joe will be visiting very soon my dear.

21 hours ago, PrimalNacho said:

Do I think that Rag will come out in time? No

Do I want extra content for Rag ei: a custom boss, new creature, new locations? Yes

Do I know if Wildcard has a massive ace up their sleeves for Rag? No

This is what I do know:

Rag is getting the gigantoraptor, which is not new content by the time it drops

Rag is not part of the tall tales dlc thus no new items of the sort(which were locked behind a cash wall..)

Presumably coming in Q4 2024 but with Wc who knows.

My og post stated that Rag needed more based on the info that has been given, not less and I pointed out the importance of a new creature to said Ark. 

People who bought the base game where stuck with a remodeled island for 5 months and many started to drop out, due to lack of content, and, since Rag has no payed expansion then I don’t believe Wc will put much effort to it…and tbh I hope I’m wrong on this last point.

 

Agree, but every map needs new content. It cant just be the remastered map itself. 

I personally think youre underestimating Rag. People love it. It's routinely right near the top in favorite map votes and discussions I've seen over the years.

WC must be aware of its popularity and it would be a mistake not to capitalize on the hype it'll get.

However, Rag is massive. It was unfinished when it first released. The map is varied and its going to take a long time to upgrade.

To me its sort of pointless to even speculate about a map thats probably not coming until 2025. With WC, I try to just focus on whats immediately in front of me. Lets hope and pray the Center comes without too much of an additional delay

18 hours ago, PrimalNacho said:

I get what ur saying, but there won’t be anything new to rag other than it looking prettier. Why is this a problem? Since it takes quite a while to revamp maps, were going to get a map that although most people love, there won’t be anything new to it. With no new content players will quickly find themselves bored by the map and will have to await x amount of months till new content releases. 
 

Idrc on which ark the Gigantoraptor ends up in as long as rag has new content. 

I dont see how you can say that for sure given how frequently wc changes things around. Rags probably not coming until 2025. Thats plenty of time to do another creature vote or add an all new original creature like they did with the oasisaur. 

And how do you know Rag wont have new content or map changes to make it feel fresh? SE certainly did. A lot of speculation and conjecture being passed as fact here.

I find this thread ironic given OPs avatar. 

1 minute ago, TheTrueSpider said:

Why? The raptor was already voted in for rag and you’re getting probably at least a year of it being on island, if that’s not long enough then you’ll probably never tame the one you want anyway

Why not? Rag should 100% get a new creature now that the gigaraptor has been used up as WC's bandaid for screwing up the center launch.

5 hours ago, Marsella3 said:

PS5 player here. Just want to say I’m really enjoying Scorched Earth! You folks went all over for the new content. Thanks for all the hard work! Excited to check out The Center in a few weeks . 

In spite of all the incessant complaining I do on here, I agree, they really did knock SE out of the park. It looks amazing. 

SE in ASE was a slog. The color pallette was so bland, just endless tan with a few dark rocks mixed in.

SE on ASA feels more like a mountainous map than a desert if you take away the border dunes. A desert could easily be (and most times is) very one-note but SE is varied and interesting across the whole map. I dare say its the best desert environment I've seen in a game yet.

The sandstorm is pretty epic.

I love the wild elevation swings in the dunes. Makes them feel more natural.

The cool blue hue at night is so flipping well done. My base is in the trench, which is just visually outstanding, especially with the fiery red lava contrasting with the night blue.

The island was good but SE blows it out of the water imo. Cant wait for the center.

If they could just chill out with the storms every 5 seconds, it would be basically flawless imo.

10 hours ago, Joebl0w13 said:

I too like consuming products or services without paying for them. 

I havent payed for a UFC PPV in a decade. 

Lol

13 hours ago, FlorianWind9 said:

I mean, I do get it. But, I'm not entirely sure if you got my point.

If I were in charge of Ark then on PVE servers there would be no-build zones built into every single cave, a good distance around every single cave entrance, a good distance around every Obelisk, a good distance around every built in spawn point, and a good distance around areas with a high density of important resources and creature spawns. This is because, PVE servers and single player are what is meant to allow the majority of a video game's player-base to have access to reaching endgame content. If this is what you want out of the video game; if access to a wide range of content is what you want to see and play; then PVE servers and single player are where you should go in a game like this. (Unfortunately I know that PVE on Ark is not fully designed this way and is another thing that wc/sg have failed in.)

But, PVP servers is where people should go when experiencing endgame content is not their ultimate goal. If your ultimate goal is to have the most challenging experience, then PVP is where you should go. Restricting things in PVP takes this unique challenge away.

If you do not want this challenge, then my question would be why are you on a PVP server? It's a question that people on my original server asked new players countless times back in the good old days.

The answer almost always was; "Because on PVE they pillar everything off and slot cap the tames. At least on PVP we have a chance of blowing other peoples' stuff up so we can open up space for ourselves."

This is why pillaring and slot capping tames should not be allowed on PVE servers and is one of the things wc/sg have failed on.

But, if this is a person's answer then why should they complain when the different rules of a PVP server work negatively against them as well? If you want the extra freedoms that a PVP server provides over a PVE server, then you should be willing to accept when those freedoms become negative towards you as well. 

The thing with Ark ever since the very beginning when pertaining to this subject comes down to how wc/sg have handled the game with concern to its multiplayer servers. They never truly thought through how people would receive and play this game. So, from the very start they didn't code the game with PVE or single player in mind. When they finally did decide that the modes should be differentiated and split, they had a difficult time implementing coding that would specifically affect one but not the other. So when things were balanced for PVP, PVE got negatively affected. (Example: Flyer Speed Nerf) When things were balanced for PVE, PVP got negatively affected. (Example: Creating Tame Slot Caps and Build Radius Limits) Creating no-build zones and dealing with the pillaring and tame slot capping on PVE became something they couldn't realistically do because those things would drastically affect PVP in a negative way. Since A.S.A. is just a copy/paste of A.S.E.'s coding, then the same still applies today.

If PVE servers truly were PVE, then the majority of the game's player-base would not need to even think about PVP servers if they wanted to experience the game's endgame content. The extra struggle to get to that endgame content on PVP is what should make PVP different from PVE on any multiplayer game. 

I like to fight people. I like to raid. I like to defend from raids. I like PvP.

Just because I see a glaring issue with how the game is structured doesnt mean I want to abandon PvP altogether. 

The very nature of PvP makes getting to end game more difficult. We dont need additional astronomical barriers like we have now. Again, all it does is screw over 90% of the playerbase and there's a very simple solution. 

4 hours ago, Zeldei said:

Because 10 dollars now is less than 30 now. Really that simple.  Even if everyone eventually buys all of them for the same money later, the same money now is always better than the same money later.  Especially when quarterly earnings reports come rolling in. If you need more money sooner rather than later, it doesn't help if people give you 10 dollars a year from now. 

Companies also like bundles to encourage you to stick around to make use of what you bought. Retention mechanic in addition to insurance. Even if you do leave, they got the money ahead of time. 

There is no real moral issue here unless they fail to give you what you bought. You either want it and buy it or you don't want it for that price.  No one is forcing you to do anything and you will live just fine without it. I have it and there is nothing so life changing that I couldn't do without it. It has a few new mechanics, some cool cosmetics, but that is about it.  If 10 dollars per map is some kind of financial dealbreaker, you probably should not be worrying about playing ark anyway.

It averages to like 10 dollars per map and most people who enjoy the game are going to play the maps and get em all anyway. 

10 bucks isnt going to make or break anyone. Its the principle.

I understand WHY they do it. Its more profit now. Cmon bruh its snail we're talking about here. Shi would try to sell a ketchup popsicle to a women in a white dress.

It's just an underhanded way to squeeze us for all they can before asa completely runs into the ground.

If they were confident they could deliver a worthwhile product on time they wouldn't need to charge us for stuff thats not coming until next year. All this tells me is they know the games teetering and they need to cash in now while they can.

3 minutes ago, Joebl0w13 said:

To remove damage done by an exploit. 

What exploit?

16 hours ago, FlorianWind9 said:

That's exactly my point. 

On PVE servers where everyone is "supposed" to be friendly and your only challenge or danger should come from the game's creatures, not other players, then the caves should absolutely not be buildable. Pillaring also should not be possible or any kind of blocking in any way. PVE is meant to allow the widest range of people access to the entire game.

On PVP however, your main challenge in the gameplay is meant to come from other human players. Alpha tribes blocking things is supposed to be part of the challenge in pvp. PVP is not supposed to be easy. Yes, it sucks. Yes, it's difficult. Yes, it is unfair. But, that's what PVE is for.

Back in the glory days of Ark when I first began playing soon after it released in Early Access, I intentionally chose to play on a PVP server because the freedom and challenge from that mode and from the other human players would make the experience feel more real and immersive. More like in real life where people can be mean; destroy your stuff; block you from things; take you prisoner. There were many times where I was harassed by people; where people destroyed my stuff and killed my creatures; where people killed me; where people knocked me out and took me prisoner; where I wasn't able to access certain areas because of stronger people blocking my path.

But do you know how wonderful the stories were that came from all that?

How exciting and interesting the experiences were because of those things?

How terribly boring it would have all been if on a PVE server where those things couldn't have happened?

I played on that server for 2 years, and I didn't get to experience the bosses or even most of the caves until about 1 1/2 years in. Can you imagine the excitement and satisfaction once I finally did get to? How boring and tedious would it have been if I'd been able to note XP my way from level 1 to 100 in a day and then expert gather resources to get the artifacts in 1 or 2 more and then defeat all the bosses a week later? Instead the suspense built up over 1 1/2 years. I had to work hard during all that time. I had to build my way up until the Alpha tribe on that server let me into their tribe. All the trust and personal connections built over all that time. And all the exciting stories of hardships along the way.

Back in those days, the Alpha tribe could completely block access to the Obelisks and they were the only way to do the bosses and when transfers first came also the only way to transfer in and out of a server. So cool to finally gain access to the sacred Obelisks and gain such abilities. The Alpha tribe used one of the Obelisks as a prison center where those deemed hostile to the server were kept knocked out and fed under 24/7 watch by various wardens. The sneaky ways those prisoners used to try to escape; the cunning involved. The vigilance needed to keep the prisoners locked up so they wouldn't harm the server. Just so much excitement and nuance and suspense and intrigue that no longer is truly possible in the game; and mostly never was on PVE. 

You start restricting things in PVP, and you take all that away; which they already have long ago. Making the game easier for the masses only takes away the excitement and challenge for those who truly have the will to survive. 

Anything that prevents most of your playerbase from reaching endgame is bad design and needs to be reworked.

On Fjordur, the cave in the dragon trench was initially the only spot players could farm element. So naturally, people blocked it off and kept all the ele for themselves. There was major backlash and wildcard ended up adding additional ele spawns so one tribe couldnt easily prim lock everyone else. So there is precedent for a very similar issue.

It's really no different here, just replace ele with artifacts. 

To suggest people should have to raid not 1, not 2, but 3 different very strong caves just to have access to the boss fights on SE is utterly ridiculous. I don't care that much if the caves are buildable or not, (I'd prefer they werent just because some of them are really cool looking and a blast to fight through with your friends) just take the artifacts out of them.

It's a very easy, simple, win-win solution. The alphas get to keep their caves and no one is prim locked.

I live in the wyv trench and I've seen one flying over it a few times as I was coming and going to base. Weird place for a bee.

10 hours ago, Mysfytt said:

I Agree. Its an optional Mod - why are the engrams locked into my engram list if don't have it installed? Why am I getting items that the so called Mod is supposed to add to the game if i don't have the Mod installed? Other Mods do not show up in your game when you have not downloaded them, such as the gigaraptor saddle etc - so why is this one? Because its not actually a Mod - its a money grab by the game to bully and force you into paying for the map through content that probably should be standard issue anyway.

If you are going to call it a Mod then let it behave as one - sure, advertise for people to buy it - but don't bully and force us to have it yet make it unplayable until we pay to break the money-wall (which is a huge amount for those of us in other countries where the exchange rate is a thing).

 

It's disgusting behaviour.

The oasisaur should absolutely be standard content. Probably the shovel too. This expansion was originally marketed as a cosmetic pack. It's absolutely not.

The shovel, train, cart, and oasisaur all introduce new gameplay mechanics that in some cases drastically alter what you are capable of in-game (like bringing tames back to life).

Plenty of games like Rust and Warzone offer true cosmetic packs and rake in tons of revenue. Just another lie and predatory practice from snail/wc.

5 hours ago, Zeldei said:

ASA was always advertised as just ark with a graphical, UI, and QOL update. Being surprised that it is, in fact, what it was advertised to be is a strange complaint.  That is like buying flavored bottled water and complaining it's just water with flavoring. 

Nothing wrong with paid DLC. Workers don't work for free and businesses aren't a charity. They need to show a profit.  Takes money and time in manhours to update all the maps, much less create new content. No one is ripping you off. Bob's Tall Tales amounts to roughly 10 dollars per expansion, which you don't need to buy.  The additions made are pretty good for only 10 dollars. 

As for ARK 2, a lot of people didn't care about it as it was advertised as "not ark as you know it." People wanted ARK, not ArkSouls. 

Then why not just sell the SE BTT for 10 bucks. Why package it with content for maps that in all likelihood wont be coming until 2025. It's a scummy predatory practice.

On 4/8/2024 at 7:24 PM, FlorianWind9 said:

I'm not exactly sure what that has to do with pvp, but the funny thing is that if you ask the next person they'll tell you that caves should be buildable on pvp servers. 😛

Caves being buildable or not buildable has more of an impact on pve servers. I think most would agree that on pve caves should be unbuildable as building in them completely blocks access to end game content.

On pvp servers though, most tend to want the freedom to build anywhere they want; since the option of blowing things up is always a possibility. I remember back when they first started debating this decision of making them unbuildable or increasing damage dealt to structures; most of my tribe mates wanted them to just leave the game alone. 😛

Restricting things on pvp servers always made the game more problematic and less immersive. 

Completely disagree. All allowing the caves to be built in does is make sure that 90% of players never get to experience them or the boss fights because the 2 or 3 alpha tribes take them all over and lock everyone else out. It sucks.

I've beaten 4 or 5 of the bosses and thats solely because of the artifacts on crystal isles being out in the open.

If WC insists on players being able to build in caves, then the artifacts need to be taken out of them.

Not to mention it also locks players out of taming certain animals only found in caves like beetles and arthros on the Island and snails on SE.

Again it wasnt that bad on ASE because of crystal isles, but on ASA it's a huge problem

Only WC moves things up to delay them again lol.

The Easter launch made no sense from the get go. 

Just get the damn map out on Monday ffs.

43 minutes ago, TheTrueSpider said:

Pipes were never an issue tho, they didn’t prevent building for other tribes, they could go through the air, and you could snap yours to someone else’s to prevent everyone having to pipe across the map

the railroad seems big enough to warrant preventing other people building near it, as it’s something you travel on, you don’t want other tribes blocking it

it definitely can’t go through the air

and it probably won’t have shared snapping cuz otherwise people would just be able to block you by putting a train in the middle of your route

The only way I see the train being useful is if it can carry unlimited or at least an astronomical amount of weight. Maybe have the tracks go from your forge to a nearby metal mountain. Of course it would still get outclassed by a teleporter but could be a decent primitive option with the right set up.

It's gonna be hard to protect though.

18 minutes ago, Pipinghot said:

Oh god, I just time travelled to 2017.

^Thats probably the biggest problem with ASA.

It's hard to feel like the franchise is being pushed forward when these bugs from basically the games inception are still around.

We'll see if Scorched can buck the trend but I wouldn't bet my tek rifle on it.

9 hours ago, FlorianWind9 said:

I understand and hear your criticisms/concerns, but please allow me to paint from a different perspective.

If you go to my profile and look back through the comments I've made you will know how I feel about wc and sg. And how I feel about A.S.A. So you will know that I do NOT speak from a favorable bias towards them. 

I am a writer and my favorite thing is stories in all medium. I also consider myself to be a very harsh critic of others' writing; especially story-telling; or artistic expression in general. 

So then; firstly, I am comfortable enough with myself to admit that Helena and Victoria's relationship is not my favorite thing. For Helena's character as a personality I much preferred in A.S.E.'s early days when I assumed that she was a very self-assured, independent, single individual with no romantic desire. The passionately nerdy yet fully capable character expressed in her original explorer notes was a much better fit for her character.

However, we learned long before the animated series that Helena had a female romantic interest in her original life; so if that's a problem now then you don't have an issue with the animated series, but instead an issue with wildcard's Ark story as a whole. Which may be the case for many and truly is a valid opinion as wc and sg aren't the best of writers.

Me personally, if I had decided to pair Helena with a romantic interest in her original life then I think I would have gone with an effeminate male to compliment the passionately nerdy yet fully capable character that I would have given her. In effect, the personality roles expressed in the animated series would have been reversed in my version with Helena being the stronger personality.

That all being said; I am an extremely harsh critic of woke and cringe and hate these things in stories, but I did not see such things expressed too deeply in the first episode. There were a few cliché, somewhat "cringe", moments; mostly dealing with the Parasaur and Dodo dino friends that just seemed far too coincidental and unrealistic, but they are a minor part to the story and even so the cliché events could technically be possible the way they were written; just very unlikely; soooo, they get a pass.

Otherwise however; whatever your perspective might have been concerning the various characters' personalities, actions, and dialogue...none of it seemed forced or out of place.

I was very confused and somewhat disappointed that Helena's relationship with Rockwell was far more antagonistic than the explorer notes expressed. That's not supposed to happen until they get to Aberration. I'm very confused now how they could ever possibly have an intellectual friendship relationship like they do in the original Ark story. I kinda feel like they went a bit too fast into the action with the first episode, but that's their choice I suppose. Likewise, I was confused that Nerva's personality was so reasonable and docile compared to the explorer notes. However, these personalities and how they acted are actually very accurate to how they should be for their characters and if they chose to rewrite the story a bit to speed into the action a bit faster, then they did it the right way. 

As for the "Men Bad" feel to many of the characters, this is actually where I place a lot of surprised respect for the writing. You see, whoever wrote the first episode I just watched clearly has a keen eye for detail in story-telling. To you, the characters may have acted in a woke "Men Bad" formula. However, if we are being accurate, they acted exactly as they should have acted for what their characters were. You have to remember that every single one of those characters lived during a time period where the thought of a woman being knowledgeable or capable was fantastically unheard of. (Aside from very few and specific instances in their history.) So the various ways in which they acted and reacted to Helena was spot on for each of their respective time-period perspectives and personal personalities. These characters do not represent a woke expression but instead stand true to their time periods and the characters' personalities. Nothing felt forced or out of place. 

In-fact; looking closely to notice the detail of the dialogue, the detail of the background pieces in the artwork, the detail to the various characters' personalities and facial expressions as well as how they acted and reacted to each situation; it was all spot on and didn't feel forced or out of place in any way. The attention to detail for the diverse time-periods, cultures, and social stations that each of the characters came from is very well done.

As for the protest scene in the second episode, well, you have to remember that 1) Victoria as a character was very active in protests and activism so you're gonna have to expect that for her character. and 2) As for the specific scene; if they wanted to incorporate a protest scene into the backstory to show this aspect of these characters in their backstory, then they couldn't have picked a better example as the "White Australia Has A Black History" thing was a very big and important issue of the time period in Australia if you didn't know or don't remember. So again, it feels appropriate to the characters and not forced.

As for the flashbacks in general, I didn't particularly feel like they worked entirely well here. I feel like if it was me, I would have started the story, the episode, from the flashbacks one after the other and then not gotten to The Island until after showing her death. Keep the story in chronological order, rather than showing intermittent flashbacks.

However; this is purely a story-staging choice of the writer and personally speaking even though I felt it didn't quite work right in this animated format, to be completely honest if I myself had written this story in book format then I probably would indeed have written it this way by starting from waking up on The Island and then having intermittent flashbacks to give that mysterious feel to the story. I feel like this mode of story-staging works better in written form than animated form. Even so, how they staged the flashbacks and where they placed them in the story did feel right so the overall flow of the story didn't feel too interrupted by the flashbacks or that the flashbacks felt forced. If this was their choice of how to do it, then they did do it right. 

Now then. Allllllll this winding review aside; I can't believe you didn't call out the show for the ONE THING THEY DID DO VERY WRONG!

Which was what?

Which was what THEY DID to the VERY BEST CHARACTER of the ENTIRE SERIES right away in the FIRST MOMENTS of the FIRST EPISODE! 

BOB IS THE VERY BEST CHARACTER OF THE ENTIRE SHOW!

The first few moments with him genuinely made me laugh and if a story can do that then I know it was written well. And all betrayed extremely sad feelings aside, how they did handle what they did to him was admitably handled perfectly and if I had chosen to speed into the action of the story early on then what they did is probably exactly how I would have also written it. 

P.S. I am somewhat angrily irritated that Helena did not have to deal with the GIANT SIZED ants and dragonflies that I had to deal with when I first started Ark. The ants and dragonflies showed in this first episode were normal sized. I feel like things are a little bit unfair here as if I had to deal with their terrible deadly giant pincers then I think she should have had to deal with them to! 😛

I liked Bob overall. It was a fun nod to the noob stage of ark. But they chose to make him a misogynistic guy from 1940s on purpose.

He started "mansplaining" the island to Helena and expressed she would die without him. He then gets shot in the face when he's about to decry her for being a woman professor.

This dialogue is not by accident. The writers clearly wanted the audience to cheer the death of the misogynistic male character.

Every male in the 1st episode (Bob, Dominus, Rockwell) is either a jerk or a ruthless killer. Every female is a hero that is pushed further in the 2nd episode with the addition of Mei Yin and Helena's mom.

Tomb Raider is one of my favorite games ever. Furiosa from Mad Max is one of the coolest most BA movie characters ever. My character in ASA is female. I enjoy well done hero female leads as much as the next guy.

The problem is when there is no balance and one sex is entirely depicted as good while the other is bad. So far this series has the nuance of a sledgehammer when it comes to building the characters personalities and showing duality or the conflicted nature of people.

Maybe thats a lot to ask for in the first episode or 2 but I could have a lot more patience if the show wasnt so blatantly spamming FEMALES ARE STRONG THEY DONT NEED MEN SEE SEE GUYS.

"WHITE AUSTRALIA HAS A BLACK HISTORY"

The protest scene in the 2nd episode was cringe af.

The first 2 episodes establish 2 things, Man bad woman gud and White bad, black gud.

Add ark to the list of franchises that pander to the woke ideology. 

1 hour ago, Zeldei said:

Too much complaing about woke lol

You are too predictable.

Agreed.

Any complaining at all about woke is too much, because that divisive nonsense shouldnt even exist in something like a flippin ark cartoon. 

One thing I did like is how brutal Rockwell is portrayed. Feeding the kid to the Trex was awesome, one of the best scenes. Didn't think they would actually go through with it, but they did and it delivered. Rockwell is 1000% the best character on the show so far.

12 minutes ago, MMaas said:

Thanks for the heads up.

[Note to self: Don't get a subscription to streaming service for this, it's appearantly not Cyberpunk or Witcher s1 quality level.]

Dont take my word as Gospel. Its just my opinion after all. 

However it does seem like the show has fallen into the all too popular trend today of use a beloved IP to cram some woke crap down our throats (halo,LOTR, etc)

Maybe I'll give the other episodes a try (there were 6 in total) because it was fun to see dinos, armor, and weapons from the game.

Watched the first 2 episodes. Kinda meh.

The scenes of Helena's backstory in modern times were all either cringe or boring.

It's clearly a vehicle for woke feminism. Women are strong. Women can do everything a man can do blah blah blah.

One such scene has her at a protest where someone's holding up a sign that reads "WHITE AUSTRALIA HAS A BLACK HISTORY." So I guess throw in the anti-white agenda as well.

Shame. The scenes where they are on the ark were enjoyable (except the broodmother, what the hell even happened?), but I doubt I'm gonna watch the rest of it. If the first 2 episodes work this hard at establishing a "men bad, men cause problem" feel to the show, I'm sure it'll only increase the further the show runs.

No thanks.