@fedekapo6: No it isn't. Not at all: https://www.pcgamesn.com/ark-survival-evolved/ark-survival-evolved-pc-graphics-performance-4k
Ark: Survival Evolved PC performance review: barely beta worthy despite nearing full release (31 July 2017)
How to run Ark at 60fps
If you’re planning to play Ark on a mid-range rig, we suggest running the game at Medium settings. On this preset, there’s little difference to High settings, and in motion, you really lose nothing. Setups with a 1070 GPU or better should comfortably be able to run the game at 1080p/ 60fps, though bear in mind you’ll want to turn off ambient occlusion to avoid dips to the low 50s.
You call THAT being in a good place? A GTX 1070 to run the game at 1080p medium settings, almost at a 60 lock? And having to disable AO to actually get a 60 lock? That means the performance is utterly terrible.
And by the way, you can of course drop to low settings to get a bit more performance. But it's not quite a good-looking game anymore at LOW: https://i.imgur.com/mGHbkBQ.jpg Say hello to 2002 quality graphics on the low preset...
@hughesyboozy: "It now has me wondering why it's not coming out at the same time as consoles when it's so polished."
So that the game has enough polish. Believe me, when the developers or publisher themselves already see there are too many unfixed issues, it is definitely true. Great that it's running without issues on your system, but there's a very long list of known issues for the PC version already.
For starters, many people couldn't even boot up the game, because of various errors. The people that could play the game still sometimes ran into issues. And the graphics options are partially a work-in-progress. MSAA isn't finished yet and is super-heavy. And the in-game Vsync reportedly doesn't yet frame-pace nicely.
But hey, a lot of stuff is already excellent. And with the extra time from the delay then can make sure the PC version launches with enough polish.
Edit: played through most of the content of the beta now myself. Performance is excellent. Didn't run into any bugs. But yeah, the forums don't lie. Even though I didn't experience any issues myself, the game clearly isn't ready yet. I haven't even mentioned all the exploits yet. Through an exploit for example it's possible on the PC to play with a mouse but get the controller aim assist. AND in the competitive multiplayer!! Those are things which definitely need to be addressed before launch.
Goodbye to Lucio Ball and the Summer Games I guess. Was a pretty fun bonus mode that I played a lot recently.
Deatmatch and TDM sound like pretty good additions though. Am excited about finding out if they play well and are balanced well. The amount of maps is pretty decent, especially for TDM.
Gamespot reports that these modes are accessed through custom games. But as far as I know, you only have to click on the Arcade instead of Quick Play, and then make your selection. It's a very simple process and the automatic matchmaking system does all the work.
@ArchoNils2: I don't own this game. Don't even own a Switch. But have you tried all the challenges? I heard that after completing the campaign of a world, you can revisit the world and do more challenging stuff.
Also, you can do all the co-op missions, even by yourself. Just take 2 controllers and play by yourself with them if you want to. There is actually an unlockable hard-mode for the co-op missions. Maybe that's were you will find your challenge.
Too bad there is no hard-mode for the campaign. But the challenges are meant as a replacement for that.
But to conclude, the art style of this game COULD be taken as a little bit of a hint: that maybe the game does not intent to be the most challenging SRPG ever. It depends on the skill level of the player whether the game is found challenging. And if you're an SRPG veteran this type of game with this art style isn't immediately going to be something that will really challenge you. The art style and the accompanying sound and musical choices are meant to draw in herds of younger gamers, so maybe they had to take that in mind a little with the difficulty tuning.
@tadejkupcic: To be fair, it's only a 12GB download. That should finish quickly. After that you still have plenty of time to play the beta. There's not that much content in the beta. You will probably quickly finish the beta and then only play the multiplayer part.
It's really cool to see that my question about additional anti-cheat measures was selected!!
But another question in the article has "Submitted by Wiro_" written after it, but that question was actually asked by someone else! It's the question "Do you have a preference for the future of Ark? Do you feel more effort ..." So, I'll give the correct credits here. That question was submitted by Louis.
@eddienoteddy I guess it got mixed up because our comments were so close together. Literally adjacent to each other, with no comments in between.
@sellingthings: For BF1 I bought the Ultimate Edition quite early, since I was hyped about the game.
But BF4, I got that one late as well. I fell for the Premium Edition though, which was double the price of the standard edition. 10 Euros instead of 5 euros. But yeah, not long after, they indeed made all DLC free for everyone. Although it was a limited time offer. So they still sell the DLC for BF4, since the offer has expired.
I bought the Battlefield 1 Ultimate Edition, which was a quite similar package, but priced very very differently. And I should note that most content of this package hasn't even been released yet. So it's kind of a "pre-order" I guess.
This is quite a change in pricing, quite early.
Any advantages of having the Ultimate Edition compared to the Revolution Edition?
@Berserk8989: No, they were not. Never. You just remember that wrong. They were below a copy of the official trailer on a youtube account called "LemonEatingKow". The trailer only has 672 views on that youtube account so far. On the official youtube account (Final Fantasy XV) the trailer has almost 22000 views so far.
Wiro_'s comments