ARK Survival Evolved and ARK Survival of the Fittest

You know, this brings up ideas what Phantasy Star could do with its own series. like imagine a Phantasy Star game that is open world and survival based, but instead of caveperson dino style, it would be kinda futuristic like Phantasy Star 1 or 2. and players can choose from various occupations to survive, not just Hunters but also various other things, and people can build communities and eventually cities and stuff. and of course there would be dangerous enemies and things, though its kind of complicated to explain. Anyways, while PC has a lot of surivval games, very few are actually any good, and only one is the greatest at mmo survival and dino themed world.

I read it getting official release in June, it looks to be making faster and more quality team developments than other survival games, in both its PVE and PVP.


http://ark.gamepedia.com/ARK_Survival_Evolved_Wiki

http://ark.gamepedia.com/Survival_of_the_Fittest

https://survivetheark.com/

https://www.facebook.com/survivetheark/

http://www.playark.com/


http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ark...n=hub_platform


http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ark...aign=hub_forum


http://gamerant.com/ark-survival-evo...box-one-steam/

http://gamerant.com/ark-survival-evo...lion-sold-417/

http://www.destructoid.com/ark-survi...m-330326.phtml

http://www.vrfocus.com/2015/08/ark-d...-and-hololens/

I've seen it. My friends have played the current Steam revision for some time.

Sci-fi based MMO games have been a hard sell compared to the fantasy or past-present types. I've been in a number of MMOs that not only tried and failed, but tried and died as said in a popular Sci-fi fiction. "DUNE-STYLE".

The main ones that seemed to survive are the ones more like Elite or Frontier, where it's mainly about the spaceship and not so much on foot aspects. There is one internationally distributed survivor (with both on-foot and ship travel), by virtue of free-to-play, a strong license, and a rather strong update. Star Trek.

Phantasy Star Online 2 would be sort of considered, but not internationally distributed.

But enough of that. Let's talk specifically about survival games.

Survival is an interesting trick as science fiction usually has problems with survival unless it's served kind of like a post-apocalyptic thing. The cushy technologies we usually have in a Phantasy Star game usually put one in the frame that it's not really survival but just some method of merc-like loot to acquire gains. Our only real problems are usually related to getting invaded or terrorized by monsters and/or cursed creatures.

Though I could say that Phantasy Star Nova kind of touched (very lightly) on the survival idea, given you start off with a derelict ship that's kind of trying to rebuild, and thus you are a little less gear capable at the very beginning.

Though again, it's tough to imagine a Phantasy Star where you start off with a pointy stick on the way to eventually getting that Hyper sword of elemental discharge, healing and mass lightning techs, or a massive photon blast laser cannon. It's a privileged universe where even the most economically challenged folk often live way past survival needs.

This is an interesting mental challenge to take, though. Kind of a what if. What would you start off with? What would the technology path take? How to create a consistent basis to an understanding of why we need to research this one thing before getting the other thing? That last one, can be a debatable topic. Phantasy Star Universe *was* the game for which in order to *craft* a Dragon head, instead of just getting a Dragon head, we needed 3 Dragon Tails to create a head. (Because, obviously, that free Dragon Head, one could logically get just in one kill, is way too easy or authentic, I guess.)

Both versions of ARK are terribly optimized and run like shit. Game is a good concept but having such poor performance just ruins it for me. And its not like I don't have a rig that should be able to handle it I mean I am running a 6600k and R390.

ARK Survival of the Fittest Tournament Video (so exciting! Watched the whole thing) :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvJzhOHoako

Quote:

---

Both versions of ARK are terribly optimized and run like shit. Game is a good concept but having such poor performance just ruins it for me. And its not like I don't have a rig that should be able to handle it I mean I am running a 6600k and R390.

---

I think considering a lot of fans still play it to this day on PC and X1, it must be very playable to still have such a huge following. The X1 version itself is already surpassing the amount of users on PC



http://gamerant.com/ark-survival-evo...box-one-steam/

http://gamerant.com/ark-survival-evo...lion-sold-417/

http://www.destructoid.com/ark-survi...m-330326.phtml


And a badly run game wouldn't generate these numbers. It just seems to be resource heavy and all.


http://www.gamesindustry.biz/article...-usd10-million

Quote:

---

This is an interesting mental challenge to take, though. Kind of a what if. What would you start off with? What would the technology path take? How to create a consistent basis to an understanding of why we need to research this one thing before getting the other thing? That last one, can be a debatable topic. Phantasy Star Universe *was* the game for which in order to *craft* a Dragon head, instead of just getting a Dragon head, we needed 3 Dragon Tails to create a head. (Because, obviously, that free Dragon Head, one could logically get just in one kill, is way too easy or authentic, I guess.)

---

lol well I think crafting should be more common sense than grinding for the sake of extra grinding. There is a lot that can be learned from games like ARK, which while doesn't have a perfect crafting system, it is perfect compared to games that exaggerate the materials, time and effort to make something, while at the same time making the better equips reasonable to get without being too fast and commonplace. Not only that, but its survival aspects add value to everything, they really balance things well, and also, it's one of the few games where you can adjust the rules, so the speed on making things can be more to each player's preferences. There is a lot that Phantasy Star themed games can learn from ARK without being a dino clone itself. And it would be cool having a open world Phantasy Star that places gameplay and community survival above narrative. There's already been generations of story driven PS games, something more open would be a better direction for PS.


back to ARK, PS4 is getting SOTF with real cash prizes

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ark.../1100-6439072/

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/ark...f-heads-to-ps4 -with-re/1100-6439072/?utm_source=gamefaqs&utm_medium=partner &utm_content=news_module&utm_campaign=hub_forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saner

I think considering a lot of fans still play it to this day on PC and X1, it must be very playable to still have such a huge following. The X1 version itself is already surpassing the amount of users on PC

And a badly run game wouldn't generate these numbers. It just seems to be resource heavy and all.

---

No, it is a terribly optimized game and runs as such. And I am sorry but running with the rig I have and getting sub 60 fps is a joke. Hell I have buddies who have 980ti setups and it runs just as bad on their rigs. And just because the game sold well doesn't mean it runs well.

Yeah it definitely needs to be optimized more but it is an early access game so they have time to do so. They just choose to put more content in the game at the moment. Most people are fine playing it on lower settings with 30 fps.

It is a fun game to play with friends for a while but it doesn't really hold my attention for long. I'm not sure about a Phantasy Star survival game. It probably would work and look amazing but I don't know. There is enough survival games out there as it is and plenty of spacey futuristic ones.

Quote:

---

There is enough survival games out there as it is and plenty of spacey futuristic ones.

---

ARK is pretty much the only good survival game, though, and PS4 has yet to get one.

Even newcomers are learning to enjoy it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIgWHpAdfew

more experience

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8LL2qf6WWQ

A lot of console gamers are fascinated and wanted a game like this on console. It is not optimized, but for something to be played every day on Xbox One, that foreshadows how much more popular it can be on PS4, and tells a lot how even the current build is very playable for a lot of players, including PC gamers that prefer the console version than their PC build.

Yes they pushed the primary game to holiday season, but Survival of the Fittest is going to be the more popular among the PVP and hardcore survivors that like that version. And the console versions will have naturally less cheating going on.

It can definitely become more popular than Minecraft on console, especially with the more realistic graphics, mature design and immersive gameplay design.

:burger: :burger:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saner

It can definitely become more popular than Minecraft on console

---

Hahaha, in it's fucking dreams maybe.

for some, ARK will be more popular than Minecraft. A lot of console gamers don't even like Minecraft graphics. ARK looks like bloody Skyrim compared to Minecraft, and the gameplay is completely better. It's really no contest that ARK is much more appealing.

why would you pick skyrim of all games...