#ark-2
1 messages · Page 89 of 1
you can make a game last a long time by either 1.) having seven years of grind content or 2.) have highly replayable content that's engaging
lazy you mean
theres better ways of doing mutations for dinosaurs
yippeee i love my baby shit green dire wolf!!!!
What would you change so it can be replayable and people don't get bored after a year or two
I asked you what would you do to make it more fun
and you just want less colors
ive already said
This won't work
unsaturating colors does not mean less colors
say if u had the already existing colors?
That won't work, people like satured colors
im talking about those neon, primary colors that make the game look like ass and basically making them more tolerant to look at
but at least there are all kind of colors
if you don't like it, just breed your line with more dull colors
everybody is happy
and instead of having dumb colors you could have genetic skin mutations
IE stuff like albinism, melanism, and more skin patterns on top of the colors
Yeah, I got it. Some people like it
by gutting mutation stacking and "hard timer" mechanics you certainly start on the good path
People that don't like those colors can just make their breed line without those colors
events will help too - games are replayable when the experience feels variable each time
looks dumb, could be better all im saying, some people just dont know whats best for them all im saying
Hey yall
it is correct that many people don't know what's best for them...but arbitrarily removing color options seems a bit odd
im just saying i know a lot of people who wouldnt mind not seeing a neon pink giga on the horizon
I'm not sure if making the end game harder would make people play more. Legit doubt here
I think constant flow of new content is more efficient
wait what? The end game would be easier to access
in both models the end game is accessible
in mode 1 the end game is where "the game begins" and the difficulty ramps up faster along with the grind/rewards
ah ok, you want to gutt "hard timer mechanics"
I've read it wrong
in mode 2 the end game is where people say "oooh time to soft or hard reset" and they get another fun run of being replayable
Interesting, might work
but not for 7-8 years
I still think the best approach would be similar to ark 1
every 1-2 years a new "ancension" with new items, creatures etc
This is kind of my argument too lol
I believe constant wipes on officials could help
As long as it doesnt lead to another planet im fine with ascension
wiped would be required to create resets on official yes
not every month, but every two years
From my point of view, Arat should be the one and only map
maybe a new moon or something
but they should work on Arat only

Pretty sure they might do an ark one and possible poop out new dinosaur updates until a substantial dlc release
I don't like the idea of wiping officials
Like 50/50
As a mod or new mode, maybe
but not for "Vanilla Ark 2"
it would be odd IMO
Would it?
IMO yes
What they did. Finished the environment of the base game and then make a dlc is weird?
i think to be more of a survival game season based wipes would be good
There's a lot of new stuff to create Arat themed
but again, they should be 2 years or something...so plenty of time to end game if you want to
I would be happy with that approach
as long as new content is also a thing
they can make major changes between seasons -> there's your replayability angle
all of this presumes DLC content akin to ark 1 is in the works...it's more the model of the gameplay experience
novelty is a short term buzz...and always will be. If you want retention you have to consider what people are opening your game to do
In that case, I think this would be a good appoach.
Im pretty sure there gonna have several content updates before an actual dlc is considered
And they have telemetry to help. Hence why I believe they know better than us what's popular or not.
imo it's kinda irrelevant the name of the content package...could be patches or DLC
unless by some miracle the game is already finished when it comes out
and market research
Do you remember when they used to publish what were the most killed and most tamed creatures? 😂
on steam 4.7% of players beat the gamma overseer
just to give a sense of what the average ark player does
cause the game is dropped more than it is played xd
very harsh environment for an average person to get into
lots of people I know just never fooled with bosses
This again?
breeding things up for them is a huge gatekeeping move
I can bring you the numbers
Like .5% of everyone who ever bought ark still plays it today
so you will see the numbers are pretty much constant since 2015
steam achievements were actually first created to measure game metrics
to help devs answer "how far does my playerbase get"
Not far xd
Also the fact its gameplay loop is wacky as hell and a lot of ppl dont play the game properly
about half have tamed a creature
What an awesome game!
Tbf i havent done complete note runs on characters in years
Shit is so ass
"properly" defeats the purpose of a sandbox lol
Yiss
just too grindy for the average person probably
Dont get me wrong the game sold incredibly well
amazing idea
too grindy, too many settings have to be changed to make SP work...breeding is pure buns
2015 - 2016 = Average number of players each month
December 2015 32,092.9
November 2015 32,862.4
October 2015 38,020.9
September 2015 35,498.3
August 2015 45,057.0
July 2015 46,764.8
June 2015 42,871.5
December 2016 36,022.8
November 2016 31,316.8
October 2016 32,923.0
September 2016 37,334.8
August 2016 35,210.6
July 2016 39,067.7
June 2016 42,386.9
May 2016 39,182.2
April 2016 35,385.6
March 2016 35,664.0
February 2016 37,747.6
January 2016 39,054.4
I think ark 1 is a fantastic prototype for ark 2
2017 - 2018
December 2017 46,473.3
November 2017 34,137.8
October 2017 37,636.8
September 2017 43,690.2
August 2017 34,847.2
July 2017 41,812.1
June 2017 47,080.7
May 2017 37,352.3
April 2017 42,206.5
March 2017 41,053.0
February 2017 53,134.7
January 2017 46,440.8
December 2018 42,992.1
November 2018 51,906.1
October 2018 29,337.6
September 2018 28,288.2
August 2018 32,497.4
July 2018 45,060.2
June 2018 41,794.5
May 2018 31,404.3
April 2018 34,418.3
March 2018 38,309.2
February 2018 41,956.0
January 2018 49,018.1
Holy wall-text
These all look the same and doesnt contradict my main point at all
Now compare to 2022 - 2023
Last 30 Days 47,355.8
February 2023 49,562.0
January 2023 59,718.1
December 2022 54,575.7
November 2022 47,157.6
October 2022 45,094.3
September 2022 45,744.3
August 2022 56,890.5
July 2022 86,926.8
June 2022 97,224.1
May 2022 44,795.4
April 2022 46,642.8
March 2022 38,219.7
February 2022 50,184.1
January 2022 61,978.7
a massive game that sold really well but was never able to keep the playerbase with those sales
because its not that good of a game
Do you see major changes there? You can check 2018-19-20-21 also
man, look above
Like, to be fair it did double it's playerbase from what it originally had
the base is pretty much the same
No other than society as a whole becoming more home oriented
I wouldnt be surprised if most other big games didnt have the same sort of growth
ARK is also in the 21st place of most played games on Steam
After almost 8 years
because what thats like… 7 -8 years
and he keeps saying the base is diminishing LOL
i wonder how much is console players migrating to pc
Doesnt really count HOW long a person has played the game
GTA5 is 13th place.
With actually less of a playerbase then ARK had two months ago
ark is a massive success of a game in its own right, of that there's no question
console ark experience always seemed less spectacular than pc
it's one of the most successful indie games of all time
GTA is on another league, man! LOL
True
Not even rockstar expected those numbers after 10 years
A successful game, not a good one
Doesn't matter how long someone plays a game for, it matters on how many players are currently active.
what defines "good"
I know
With those numbers, how can you say it's not good?
Eh?
My point was ARK surpassed GTA's current 50k two months ago. Which says a lot about ARK
people just like play a bad game?
Doesnt really matter if someone buys it anyways, plays it till the point of no refund, hates it, drops it
Said 90% of eveyrone whose played ark over its lifetime
Made a shit ton of money though
sure sure, we are saying the same thing, I'm just agreeing with you
it is hard to find ark players that joined after 2018 at least here
i don't think ark has any more of that than any other game
It's hard because you are finding those numbers in your a** 😂
given the player trends too
MOST games have a huge chunk of players with low play time
And if they dropped it, they wouldn't be in the player-count.
i dont think most games over 5 years old have their bulk playerbase from around launch
this might be more true for complicated sandbox games like ark
so, does this trend hold for rust?
A game thats able to excel above basic gaming standards. Able to make a majority of people like said genre. But all games cannot make everyone love it
oh ark 100% did that then
^
Player count means nothing when they already have the money???
Sony and Microsoft are just burning money on ark (license was renewed both on PS Plus and Game Pass for another 3 years) because they love WC. 😂
ark and rust are the only relevant games in the sandbox survival genre
there's valid argument that a good game must be polished and have a coherent gameplay loop - and it's fair to say ark lacks that
minecraft does not count
true
rust doesnt have nearly as much content
Ark only excels in its concepts
but if the argument is that going above the basic genre and redefining it into a household name people love...ark slam dunked that
yes, that it has these concepts is its biggest benefit
Another game thats like ark… the isle
In terms of its success
no other game has it
still sold a lot and is up in the concurrent players rank
isle is far from ark
yes because it hit a massive boost in popularity from streamers
it's nothing like ark
a dinosaur game that captivates a large audience but doesnt live up to expectations
But makes money anyways by feeding off of a new genre
it literally is
the isle is a giga flop compared to ark
I do think if there was another game like ARK, then I honestly don't think it would be that successful.
they both have dinos and that's about it LOL
dinosaur game is not as specific or as relevant of a category as you imply
Yeah but it made shit tons of money!!!
the isle is basically a larp game
jurassic park is a dinosaur game, the gameplay loop is as far from ark as is physically possible
and when I tried it...100 CCU
None of you heard what i said
I said isle and ark are virtually the same in terms of success
money is what everything needs to make
No, we can't hear.
We read
i suspect it defined the genre as "don't make another game like the isle"
isle has like 10% the playerbase lol
The isle never came close to ark in terms of popularity lol
i am holding X to doubt they had the same fiscal success. Source?
dino game > great idea > releases > brand new genre > everyone buys it > drops it > doesnt matter because its already made a lot of money
Not at all
But yes in terms of functionality and gameplay ark is a better game, duh
And ark is much bigger
Its the same financial pattern
and Ark is present on all platforms
I think you are making that up lol, the isle had significantly less sales than ark. I bet ark currently makes as many sales as the isle at peak lol
i do think ark should have been way more popular tho
30 million
even on mobile
selling a product for money is a pretty good financial pattern
i dont understand why not many people irl ever get into this game
there's no comparison whit those 2 games for starts one youre a human the other youre the dino
No
Ark
Owner estimations
18.41 M .. 46.03 M on reviews (30-75)
~23.61 M by PlayTracker
~15.72 M by VG Insights
~18.85 M by SteamSpy
I never said they make money, only that they made the same business decisions
bro none of you understand
up to 46 millions
So from what I can gather, The-Isle has a estimated of 22Mil of what it made.
While ARK currently has 270Mil.
Yeah none of you got it
THe isle:
2.13 M .. 5.49 M on reviews (35-90)
~897.1 k by PlayTracker
~1.33 M by VG Insights
~2.09 M by SteamSpy
you're arguing the financial loop is the same
they aren't on the same league
which...I'm not sure what other loop you have? People make games to sell them
this isnt relevant as a loop
Yes
all games are theoretically just pitching cool ideas and making money off them
show me any alternative loop in ANY other game
of sales of new copies. I bet ark now makes more sales than the isle ever did
whether that idea is dinosaurs or battle royale or building, doesnt matter
Not talking about sales, same business practices
@untold ingot
they are all companies existing in capitalism lol
if you dislike that loop, blame the system
Yes but both games have terrible execution with the same concept
game design is in fact an industry...so again I'm just not sure what the issue is
you sell a game to get sales
execution is terrible across literally every game that isnt a 5-100 hour single player experience
Preying off of ppl who liked that idea
Also, If I remember it right Microsoft and Sony are paying some millions to keep the game on their gaming services (game pass and ps plus)
or fps clone
it's not preying if there's no deceit tho
literally every unique game has "terrible" execution
their money flow isn't just the game, but also DLCs and other services
thats the thing about being unique, its hard to implement
nobody lied with ark's content...it's all there and it all works as advertised (jank and all)
That's not at all preying.
Yes thats what arks goal was? Initially
the isle is preying off people if they bought it in EA expecting humans that never came
but from my memory ark never really did that
find 1 game with good devs
It was to get into a trend when people where heavily interested in dinosaurs, since the new Jurassic-World series was coming out.
But that's not 'preying' that's 'marketing'
that isnt nintendo shit or fps clone
There are ripoff games of the isle that do better than the isle lol
or story game
Everything WC promissed on the EA release is there. But they've showcased some stuff that they never delivered, which isn't really promissing.
thats literally 80% of games in the market rn, they have such simple mechanics its absurd to expect games that do something interesting mechanically to be as reliable as they are
They actually delivered more than promissed
good marketing i agree. The isle released in the same window
They both gained a lot of revenue except had terrible execution
minecraft has terrible execution at this rate
although ark is working itself out of that hole
It has nostalgia and kid friendly, that helps it a lot
Minecraft is a......different story.
if the single best game by sales and in its content and scope is terrible execution the bar for decent execution is way too high
or a good game if ur an artist i guess
youre expecting botw on a game that has multiplayer
minecraft is easily the greatest game made in its generation
That's my whole point here. People think it's a bad game just because they don't like it.
My internet went off for a split second, so I had to reset my Discord.
Fun
I never played Minecraft, but I would be crazy if I said it's a bad game.
I have 4 k hours in ark xd, i just think it could be better
it can
Of couse it could/can
its just that ark is legitimately a special game
But it doesn't mean it is bad
True
Eh….. i will say bad is harsh but theres simply too many issues
its really hard to find anything like ark, so youre stuck with devs literally creating the genre as they go
I agree, and I will never forget my memories with it.
But honestly, the survival-mode is pretty shitty and outdated, while other games have done it better.
they are only half exaggerating when they say redefining the genre, cause most game devs are scared shitless away from making games like ark
The forest
like 4 games you can list off
I think people should just try to understand what happened there. Ark is simply too complex. It was never a possibility to fix all the issues.
agree the "survival" experience is no longer the appeal it used to be. But it's been far eclipsed by the possibilities in other areas I'd say
The-Forest is a good game, but it doesn't have the same features as ARK does.
conan, rust, forest ig? havent played it or seen much of it
It was a rushed game that couldnt be entirely fixed really
the forest is far smaller in scope than ark
still playable
But they accumulated so much money they can do it right + a tv show
conan and rust are the closest ark analogues I've seen
I can name 10's of games that took years to be developed and also have bugs
conan died and rust is just fps survival xd
Cyberpunk being one of them
Actually, The-Forest is a great example of a succor to Minecraft's survival. 
If I recall right, the inspiration of the game's survival aspects where inspired by Minecraft.
They have to be like… enjoyable though
skyrim for example
Skyrim is a meme.
Well, if ark wasn't enjoyable I wouldn't have 14k hours on it
Cyberpunk is arguably enjoyable, but the bugs make it hard to play.
It's an infinite cycle of BS
true
ark does generally get a lot of dlc money from long running fans
" Every game has die hard fans but those dont make the bucks
otherwise dlc model wouldnt work as well, cause i just dont see that many legit new players as compared to people moving platforms
like everyone on ark mobile transferred to PC
broken dreams? I think it's actually just pieces and ideas thrown in so WC could see what happened
It did
different companies, but the game is basically the same.
But not with die hard fans
selling almost 50 million only on steam?
yep
ark has a huge volume of die hard fans...
being on game pass and PS plus for years?
im guessing a lot of player rise on steam is migrants from console
right? LOL
you can't get 100% retention on a game...that bar is pure lunacy
Any big game does, ark couldve been 3 times bigger if it solved itself
Okay, can we switch this back to ARK-2 instead of talking about ARK's revenue?
it should have been 10x bigger but normal people are normal and dont like investing time into noth8ng
Its ark
rip dreams of bob city on official
Ark 2 when? Third person only? Where's gameplay and roadmap?
Will ark 2 have dinos?
My uncle said yes
will ark 1 have dinos 🧠
Hopefully we get the roadmap this Friday.
i say no
Can you ask your uncle if Ark two is selling well?
30 dinosaurs tops for ark 2
I'm going to cry internally if it's on the fucking last day
same and valid
It will be
next game awards
you know what? 03/31 is a friday 😂😂😂
The amount of people already wishlisting it will be promising for sales
That's what I said, yes.
Thanks for repeating what I said. 
Big game big hype
Will it be good though? Who knows
2 billion copies at least?
or it will be a flop
ark2 is all i need
Aye, if it isn't good. That's a good time for me to move on from ARK, like how I moved on from Fallout 4 and 76.
Easily 
Literally why i only care about this franchise and shitting on it
you need to do what minecraft did
if its bad im just done from games alltogether
get popular with influencers by making community content extremely accessible and user friendly
actually no
Actually, let me take that back.
I'll stick with ARK-1, since it's getting the UE5 upgrade.
ARK-2 can rot if it's shit.
arks quality literally goes up if more people play
That's a skill issue on their end
?
I hope your game will crash every 5 minutes running on UE5
I have a 3060, so I doubt it
Not the gpu, but the engine
ill get around to completing this game if ark2 doesnt exist
UE5 runs just fine
but itd need to be BAAAAD for me not to go to ark2
I hope it will be poorly implemented and it will crash constantly
plus wildcard will basically die if ark2 flops i think
Not for Ark 1, it will crash a lot
We should all move to ark 2
I'm betting 200$ UD that it'll be fine
Hell no.
at least as far as unique games go
Just trolling, man
“Unique game”
Basically caveman elden ring
Nah, I'm not backing up now.
200$ on the table.
which could be good
But... Ark came first?!
Ark 2!!!!
So it's the other way around I guess
@past wind 🔫 Give me the money.
no, Im poor
i dont think elden ring came after ark 2!!!
Elden-Ring in fact, did not come out after ARK-2
Ark 2 is the second interation of ark
That has no relations to each other then the barebone basics of the gameplay from the first game, and the story.
the concepts are the same
He said that:
“Unique game”
Basically caveman elden ring
its the concepts people care about
I don't get the point
Yep.
It would be.
while there will be differing mechanics, ark1 and ark2 have the same hooks
the same reasons people play these sorts of games
when a game says “souls like combat” is clearly getting inspiration from, souls like games
Or Conan. 
Really? 
better than now
And PvE for the Aratai's.
On paper
We also don't know if the souls-combat will be intergrated to creature combat
i wouldnt be surprised if dinosaur control schemes were also souls like
Bosses are even more shitty
even when ridden
tho yes, making pve threats relevant in ark2 will be significant
and world events
just get 20 capped rexes and let them kill the bosses
it means bob gameplay is more prevalent and relevant as well
and better ai
and bob gameplay is what people come to ark for
The new ai will also improve the pve gameplay
better traversing
Everything the game needs to be good
everyone wants to rp as a goofball with a spear avoiding getting eaten by dinosaurs and other players
nobody ever cared about being a superhuman technowizard
i honestly think when they say “souls like” your going to be more distracted by pve than pvp
except people who sold their souls to the game
Which is fine
Getting assaulted by dinosaurs and then ppl every now and again ruin ur day
Like souls….
That's very true, but at some point we needed more. The Tek Tier release was the first ark concurrent player count went above 100k.
People want new stuff
🤮
yes
but the new stuff needs to complement what new players are looking for
not make it irrelevant and nonexistent
as it is now on offi
apparently people were looking for it
which is what ark was originally based around
Most of arks base game dinos
at least the new players
brachi in itself replaces diplo, bronto, and titano
i think people just heard that ark was cool again and brought friends
ark was never about the pre-historic period
tek was always there
thats why 100k didnt stick and it goes back down to a little more than before at like what, 40k?
thats lore, not the game advertised
Im pretty sure they didnt have a story when it came out xd
100k was the peak. Last year the peak was close to 250k
felt like it atleast
yes but whats average playerbase because peaks are outliers
Fjordur basicly doubled arks player peak on steam
Like I've said earlier, player base (average) went up, not down
It better not. I want more than 1 type of sauropod
yeah
Id rather have a sauropod that actually works and functions like an animal rather than a mindless drone thats almost useless copy pasted 4 times
it went up by like 10k
but people keep saying it's dropping
every 2 years ish
Average is between 40 and 50k over the last 7 years in steam
its not, at least not steam
Well, for average concurrent players, that's huge
The two aren't mutually exclusive lkl
there are games from AAA studios that can't hold those numbers
thats also masked by people switching platforms tho
this isnt all ark sales, this is just steam
steam is the only complete ark experience
Unless you have numbers to back this assessment, I can't take this into account
because of its diverse mod and unofficial options
And at least giga has a decent chance to be normal sized?
Since the show is being made alone side it and the giga was small in the trailer
Possibly could be good size in ark w???
Brachi just works, the 3 sauropods do not
i only have anecdotes of mobile pvp players moving to steam
Amarga is fine, id rather have amarga than bronto or diplo
I mean, MS and Sony have renewed their licenses with WC. So I would say it's pretty popular on the consoles also
and a little bit about some console players doing the same
mobile is shit
i mean, its 40-60k last i checked on xbox and ps
console versions are ok
Mobile just further emphasized how much ark makes xd
switch was shit, but it's way better now
mobile games make dumb amounts of money
not ark
it's not WC tho
grove street tried to make ark super arcadey and with mtx
Oh true
it's another dev studio
eventually when poorly thought out transfers hit it all went downhill
especially since it doesnt have the capacity to host enough people
never ending server shutdowns
Yeah, that was a real flop
the game was too small
its a fear i have for ark2, if it doesnt hit it wont have enougu players
and ark pvp without enough players is worthless
Isnt that what the game is trying to fix?
It being pvp based it kinda what ruins it
More pve allows for more wiggle room
i mean yeah if it wasnt pvp based the pve could supplement this or bypass this issue entirely
yeah
There will still be pvp no way there wont
I just think the more pve content will keep people entertained for longer
While also making it less toxic
No, ark2 is not trying to fix pvp by making it pve lol
Don't count on it lol, pvp is the same the world around, no matter what game you play lol
toxicity is tthe same
I think if they stick to their word and its more pve based the game cant really suffer
well it can if its bad
i just found out something about ark 2
but on paper sounds more engaging than straighr pvp all the time every day
With the only pass times being breeding and farming
and… i guess mini games but thats farming with extra steps
It's not their word saying it is pve based, that is an interpretation people have placed on their words lol
did you just watch clickbait youtubers?
in extinction there was hexagonal text all over the citty wich u could read with a tek helmet some texst mentioned arat and arat prime / the planet of ark 21
Isnt is literally on their page though?
That there will be pve, yes. Assuming it will be mostly pve is erroneous
Um, you mean the notes?
i was searching the text cause i found out with the tek helmet u can read it but noticed its all gone and found out about that
I assume it's gonna a be a more healthy 50/50 split. Compared to ark 1's more pvp focused design
no i mean literly hexagonal text wich could be decyphered that was floating all over the citty
Yeah i think it being more pve is something that holds weight just depending on how much its forced on the player. With pvp being a side product
messages like : This is a level 5 alert. Arat Prime have gone silent. and a Priority Communication recieved: Arat Prime is locked down.. and stuff
i mean there is literly a old youtube video named yellow holo banners translation and the arat messages are at about 1:30
Yeah, that is talking about the gen2 space station, not the planet arat
oh is that colony ship really called arat prime? funny that we crash on arat then xD
The station they sent it out of yeah I am pretty sure
maybe they name the planet after the ship's name
damm i thought i found something cause i translated that stuff in like 2019 and posted pics on my server and now the name ARAT just rings a bell ^^
Yeah, if ext gave clues about ark2, you know there would be a whole discussion on that lol
oh wait the ship was searching for a habitable planet but also said at the end we reached our destination.. so it was planned to go there but also searching for more i guess
Rockwell hijacked it and made it go there
i mean all the text is gone .. not in the game anymore xD
The point of the ending was that it finally found a habitable world.
maybe we just called the planet arat then.. i just found it strange that that name was mentioned once on the extinction holograms
Arat-Prime is the name of the launch-station for the Genesis-ship, and Arat is the planet/moon.
Not uncommon to name something after the thing that helped discover something.
yeah probably right well sorry if i mentioned it then but also thanks for that
In a realistic scenario shadowmanes could be in ark 2 just because they can be tamed by people. So it would totally be possible for a small population to survive on the untainted ring
and could be on arat
But i highly doubt it
I’d say any argument that says “it can or can’t be on ark 2 because lore” is BS and doesn’t matter
I know
Ark 2 lore can, in about 3 seconds, be written to justify any creature WC wants to see
Idk i dont think itll be in the game ever
Entirely boils down to what WC wants to see
I think the only dlc creatures likely to return could be wyverns
Oh pls no
Though i love shadowmanes the best
Because ark does cats dirty and installed a marsupial imposter
That is cool… but lost its charm
And saber is so fucking mid
and again think saber and thyla should switch niches
Making thyla the climber assasin and just make saber the bleeder bruiser
Instead of making thyla do everything
I’d rather see an actual panther/jaguar style cat
i like wall climbing
me too i voted for lion and cheetah
i dont like bloodstalker mobility
But i doubt thatll happen without some cc creature vote nonsense
too fast for my rig 💀
If i had the power of a cc… i may or may not would influence a cat to be picked 💀
Ark needed an insect
But did it need a sky giga…
i wish beetle got picked
So the winner was a good one for sure. But it would be nice to revisit felines
I agree an insect works too
Ark 1 balance being borked = surprise?
Sky giga? No
I’m down for a sky giga to be hilariously broken and end PvP instantly
i say we hand ark 2 over to shifter he will make it better lol
Its not about that its just terrible game creativity
Bug that does everything
Swims, generates resources, flies, picks up things, big so does decent damage probably
I assume WC is going to appraise that and won’t make it do literally everything
Probably
I believe approximately 0 of the cc creatures are 1:1 additions
It was never about the abilities, something people seem to forget rather conveniently
And thank god for that…I don’t trust people for diddly to pick abilities intelligently
Well thats like half of the reason to pick it
All you have to go off of the creature vote is the animal and what is does roughly
big bug that does everything? Appeals to every toddler
That's almost never the way to look at it
it is
I can't with this guy any more lmao
People should be voting based on the concept being pitched. They should not be voting based on “how it’ll make me more OP based on the post”
Most vote based on it looking cool
i think rhygnio looked ugly
Its this creature, and might do this? Thats it
and the beetle concept was way cooler
Like thats not even wrong
Most people went buck wild voting for charchar and it’s got basically no difference from a giga
yeah
Brings “dinosaurs are only for kids” to the table
looks dumb too
charchar is like mid, rhynio absolutely trash
The fact an insect won is a huge sign that the community is interested in something unique
It’s not about you agreeing if it looks cool
The creature won the vote lmao. People NOT you thought it was cool
yes but it ultimately paints an image that a good chunk of people, do not agree with
For whatever reason that tickled their fancy, they believed the concept of a diving beetle niche held by an artistic impression of an ancient insect would be the best new addition to ark
Kids
I believe game shouldnt hold votes at all for something that changes the landscape of the game so much
I’m confused why kids have anything to do with this. If your playerbase is mostly kids and you ask the playerbase to vote…
I know thats partly what i do not like
The fact you can vote in the first place
And it wasnt even something you could do in the game
You don’t want WC to include content voted for by the community?
mmmm…. Not dinosaurs no
What would you want to see the community vote for?
Stand back Bruce I need to know
I'm losing braincells reading this chat, have been for roughly the past 4 hours, I'm standing allllllll the way back
quality of life changes, Maps, controversial mechanics. Events.
Things that people can agree on easier without causing so much of an issue
And stuff like that can actually be done on seperate sites
You lost me at “easier to agree” and “controversial mechanics”
Those are definitionally opposed concepts
stuff thatd actually fix the game
I don’t know how to break it to you, but players have some of the worst understanding of how to fix a game you could ask for
You do NOT ask players to decide how to solve your game design problems. You ask them for feedback and/or testing but that’s it
and let the people who make the game decide what characters they put into their game because that is mostly a design choice in its best form
I can agree with that
What characters are to be added is one of the least punishing things to crowd source, because WC still controls the game design
Which is why i circle back to. Shouldnt be allowed to community vote at all
I think the community should where it makes sense be able to provide feedback to a developer
the community is just there to offload brainstorming time
I prefer low stakes votes where the dev can just backtrack if the winner is boaty mc boat face, but the ark ones are pretty dang strong
plus people like having a say in their games
Yeah but clearly ark ones in the past are influenced too much by content creators and such
Not charchar and kinda rhynio i can understand that
Some really awful ones I’d kill to never see in ark 2 would include polls about how to buff and nerf…etc
Why do it to begin with when some people like that hold so much power?
As I described to Bruce, I see that as completely normative activity to drum up support for something
As long as no bribery takes place, and ideally as long as ranked choice voting persists…let people talk however they want
beetle losing 3 times got me [REDACTED]
Ye
This last batch had some amazing choices tbh
Just dont do it at all…. I think the team itself can pick better than any nominee can
Probably the best lot of picks of any of the votes
sky giga
Issue not found
i think the fact that the cheetah got as far as it did kills me when beetle didnt even get 4th in ranked
issue was always there
The land giga is pure buns from a design point of view
What makes sky giga any better 💀
The fact that it's not even confirmed to be a sky giga lol
An insect alone is more interesting than a scaled up therapod
^
Just like ark 2 like nothing else to go off of but concept
It only has one label
Especially if it’s the first ark creature capable of diving from the air into the sea…which no other mount can do
itll be some sort of flying glass canon
I doubt it will do that
which makes its role similar to wyverns but itll have some cool ability
Other than Astros lol
def wont be able to pick up sea creatures
I’d argue astros aren’t really diving so much as floating wherever they want
Stupid space dolphins
astros are just being stupid
I mean, fair lol
literally the biggest fuck you to any form of early ark that exists xd
If ark was any other game, (even in ark) I would say Astros are pretty epic lol
It definitely doesn't fit the narrative for ark2 I think
Astros would have worked if the movement didn’t make me want to kms
any dlc creature is usually ok at the least
I actually like astro movement lol
i want movement to be within an order of magnitude of bob sprint
better than most playdoh ass base game dinosaurs
Many of the base ark creatures were pretty dang good when released
You mean the 7 year old ones? Well duh they would be lol
Kinda unfair to compare a 2015 creature to a 2022 one tho
the tlc for stego and mammoth was nice
i want 3 official maps made total with each map being highly modifiable in order to perfect each as a singleton experience instead of needing 20 maps each with like 6 notable features
i think we will see a similar map system as ark1 tho
I wish TLC had continued for all the base creatures
the rex looked way better after its tlc
Sabers was lame
and yeah. i wish the meg got one at least for its model and movement
poor plesi never got their smile fix 😭
mutton chops and its wiggle walk is kinda silly
ark foundation being more flexible would be so good tho
They probably didn't put the whole team on doing tlc lol
None of the sea creatures got 0 love
meg
its tlc made it amazing
imagine being able to rework maps in days or weeks to add in new content
it got a bleed debuff
The shark?
yeah
looks like crap?
Sharks are op now lol
like new building assets
i can take 12 decent megs and pwn moeder alpha
good its buffed i guess
Still looks like poopy
its fat
For an actual megalodon sized creature there would need to be more ocean. (wc pls take hint)
kinda yeah
no thx
plesi needed serious tlc
i want more land
it's ugly and it's just a budget mosa
i would sacrifice most oceans for more land content since they can make decent land content
thats what ppl afraid of ocean says
more kinds of passive fish
if oceans could be cool and stuff the sure
but i say they cant be unless you do some really interesting stuff
like, imagine an ocean spawn thats just huge section of the eden ring shattered into bits with broken drop pods being what you spawn from
its mostly shallow, 20-100 ft deep, but as you venture out you see a shelf and it drops to an unknown depth
shallow oceans are based
Will they actually do that though
Ocean segments of ark maps are the worst shit ever
swim out, tiny shallow part, immediate drop off
i think the devs can do basically anything they want if the game is built flexibly enough
that being said oceans might be inpossible for them to manage and they might scale back oceans entirely
their probably wont be tameable ocean creatures other than animals that live on the surface
?
like…. If its primitive the only thing you could do is hold ur breath
its an alien planet
thats like earth?
i… guess
Idk if that was a thing it probably would have to be collected and used one at a time idk
well you had that diplo dino for air
well i never met someone that tame one but i did just to see 🤣
If there was like a reason for going in the ocean he wouldve been better
like more of a reason
the thing about going primitive is that its an aesthetic thing and recognition that tek type end game lead to too much power creep imo
Sure
the first thing is more of a given, the latter im pulling out my ass, but i think its reasonable
Gen1 and fjordur be like
I just see it hard with a more gritty game for players to be chilling at the bottom of the sea
Like honestly the ocean seems like an entire dlc for ark two
If dlcs are based on regions
like possibly have giant maps in diverse regions but the environment is centered around one similarity
IE the base game being focused around tropics
Maybe an ocean one?
Ice maybe
gotta wait to see no other choice really
i kind of think that way because the trailers and concepts just look like humid/hot environments
Idk expect anything really that lacks in futuristic tech
So did early trailers for ark 1 lol
Yeah but this game is hopefully tied to one planet
well planet as moon/s 🤣
plus they might bring a story that ppl manage to make a teleport back to earth
but they did add enviroments over time in ark 1
there's so many ways to go
I think the initial map for 2 might be mostly complete because they werent as tied down like the first game
And idk adding new gameplay changing environments like say the ocean seems like a good usage of dlcs
Im find with doing anything
Just no more space halo bullshit
Nah, more space-halo bullshit
I love space halo dinosaurs survival
NOOO9
YEAH!!
Yeah woo
Ew
Why not both
Exactly
I come to ARK for the progression of going from caveman to high-technology, not just caveman.
If I wanted that, I'd just play Far-Cry: Primal.
i wouldnt be surprised if ark 2’s lore is that theyve lost that technology due to the destruction of the ship
And the farthest you get in terms of guns are muzzle loading esc functioning guns
And those guns being more realistic in terms if damage
and being more hard to use
There's thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people on board the ship that fell onto the planet.
They preserved these people to help better whatever civilization will come from the ship.
If not one of them know how to make basic weapons beyond a spear, then they've failed in this whole plan.
And then later down the line in updates we get like actual guns
If they do DLC-based progression, I'd be down for that.
Like i dont mind guns but i want them to be harder to obtain
That's what tek originally was, before they fucked it up with Extinction. 
idk im hoping guns are just super hard to get
Since idk makes the entire point of souls combat pointless to integrate
if there something i can get willy nilly
Id like half of it to be you finding damaged firearms and repairing them
To be fair, there's some powerful bows in Elden-Ring and their power doesn't negate everything else.
and further down the line being able to make guns yourself with enough tinkering and skill of finding guns
So, hear me out.
It's already confirmed we're getting salvaged-tek as upgrades for weapons/shields with the new concept-art
Yeah but even though it might function like a souls game it seems more grounded and believable than magic
Bloodborne have gun
True
With the possible addition of firearms later-down the line. What if they added functioning tek-based components on existing tiers, then have it as its own tier?
Like being able to create a assault-rifle, but replace the led-based bullets with Element-based bullets.
Or a tek-scope instead of a normal holo-scope.
I dont think ark is as whimsical
Yes whimsical
idk hard for me to imagine using bows or guns like those games if its survival based too
Guns even more so
bows? Yeah probably
Well like Surv said, Bloodborne is one.
And the gunplay is from what I've seen pretty good
Right.
Wait, so are we talking about the balance, or the general feel/gameplay of firearms in ARK-2 with its souls-like combat?
bloodborne guns are as in your face as any other weapon
Is what i mean
so like everything is basically a shotgun as you dance around enemies
im talking about general feel
Ahh, okay I have an idea.
Ranged weapons other than kind of bows might still function like a third person shooter more or less
Kinda like…deadspace maybe?
horizon
idk
So, firearms would be pretty damn OP if autolock was allowed on them.
So gameplay/fell wise, I think it'd be best to have to feel like Gears-of-War without it's covering system. (or maybe with)
Yeah that too
Or The-Division.
Honestly, there's a lot of third-person shooters they can take inspiration from
Ye
Red-Dead 2
For melee it either leans like a souls game or quite possibly for honor
And gunplay could lean more towards Gear-of-War-esc gameplay.
Though, obviously it'd need to be balanced out.
Cause souls combat works in the sense of enemy ai and large monsters (like monster hunter)
Its pvp is… ok
For honor mechanics might function better against players. Albeit that game has horrible balancing
Bola's already make you 'trip' in ARK. So they could allow it that you drop your equipped item might help that.
You sneak up to someone with a rifle, and you bola them and take their rifle before they could pick it back up.
Mmm
If their stationary not really
if its realistic…. Running yeah
But it probably isnt that complex
Well, if their stationary, a bow to the head from the bushes would be valid too.
Yes
How might swimming work I'm guess ranged weapons, running and swimming will be like ark 1 in 3rd person
I doubt most weapons would work in water
Theyd atleast have on basic attack in the water
Talk about toxic lol
Welcome to PvP
I mean, that type of mechanic already exists in ark1 with whips lol
It's the most annoying thing ever
Yeeeep.
Just combine the two. 
I am in favor of removing both lol
Annoying? Yes
Efficient? Yes
Mix both
Nah, being able to disarm enemies may be annoying when you're on the receiving end, but it's very useful and practical when on the receiver end.
True, but it's really annoying lol
Getting out of lava cave to get swarmed by 27 bobs with cloth and whips is a nightmare lol
Oh, very much.
But it's funny when you're whipping everyone else and taking their weapons. 
It's only worse when they have clubs and whips in tandem
Yeah, and with some more thinking, I do think it'd be better if the bola only disarms you with 'heavy' items.
Or maybe have a sling-option for firearms/weapons, but it takes up a important slot you could use for something else.
I think bolas should at most trip, but not immobilize
Possibly stop your movement for a second as you trip, and drop any heavy weapons you had in your hand, then being able to pick up your weapon again in the span of maybe 3-4 seconds?
3-4seconds is way too long in a pvp fight
2-3
. 25 or. 75
Trip you but then a mini game to take it off
You have to also take into account of the time it takes to pull back a bows string
Bolas are a problem in ark1, mostly because of lag. It becomes an rng fight with bots getting a lucky throw then an easy kill. It's a pretty dumb mechanic for a pvp game
...what?
Giga will be rex sized
Ew
Because the show
I want my comically large Giga
ew
the trailer
Trailer for what?
The animated series, or ARK-2?
Animate series
When was there a giga?
Which i hope corresponds to downsizing of the new giga
It fights the trex
Also, the Animated-Series is only half canon
it looks like a giga
It's a rex
I can visibly see its crests
Yeah, rexes have those too
And has three fingers
I think you mean QTE but yes, that's not a bad idea honestly and would mimic the panic of, well, untangling the bola from your ankles lol
That's a rex
It's no use, he's a strange one
Its not
Bruise, can I get your input roll quick?
Can you go to the newer Animated series trailer and go to 3:16 and tell me if that's a giga or a rex
idk what else it could be
A rex
three fingies
Semi-canon
but theres a rex next to it that has 2 fingers
That's a Yuty
That's a rex
It does NOT look like the fucking indo-rex
Way too fat to be the indo-rex
Indominus-rex is also a original Universal creature.
Wildcard wouldn't have the license to it.
Quills
It's white cause it's feathers
Not saying it is an i rex but it looks like it
The dino on the right of the bridge is a yuty, y'all are both wrong lmao
We're talking about both
you actually think i am genuinely Considering it being an i rex
I'm saying the one of the left is a rex, and the one on the right is a yuty
Yeah, that's correct
Fuck it, two against one.
It's a rex vs a yuty.
Moving on
Looks so weird though with no feathers
It does have feathers
on its head thats it
For sure an indom Rex
They're not going to draw every single feather on it, since it's an 'animation'
Uh no shit
Again, ignore like pretty much everything this guy says @stray elm
I have an issue of wanting to prove others wrong for my own ego, so it's hard.
This man says nothing else but just shitting on me
Is this still going on lol
He do be like that
Raq, I want your input on this.
Can I dm you?
He's a contrarian article of women's hygiene, you won't be able to prove anything to him
Sure
Does the left guy look like a rex, and the right a yuty?
You have said nothing useful this whole time
Idc if other people object my points but you just came in with nothing to act that way
this is literally the whole point of this channel is to debate and come up with ideas/speculate
Yeah, for ARK-2
Everything ive said pertained to ark 2 in some fashion
If you wanted to talk speculative for the animated series, then #ark-animated-series exists
I've been here reading your trash takes for the past 6 hours, get real
I mean, it has feathers, and I really doubt they wod put a Dino that is not in game into the show in a major role, so it has to be a yuti
I have just as much reason to be here as you do
i only brought the animated series up because idk i thought it could be a revamped giga that represents it in the new game
It has a crest that both Rexes and giga's have.
The fingers don't matter since it's an artistical difference.
It's too chonky to be a allo, and it's body is too compacted to be the length of a giga.
Yeah but id love to hear your input big man
I've already said all there is to say, scroll up. Don't be lazy
There's literally almost nothing left to debate, ask anyone else here
You just were being a shitter when the chat died wdym
Not that you saying to remove colors for mutating that every other person here likes is a debate, but I digress
I'm talking months, bud
Been here debating everything under the sun for like the past year almost LMAO
Yeah cause i can have share my opinions on what i think would be a better option for THIS game
Everything ive said pertained to this game and it correcting its mistakes with the first game
Simply removing things because you don't like them and have no evidence it would make the game better isn't a valid opinion lol
But its deagged along because theres nothing better to do with this chat
So why message?
Bro i never said remove it
your just bringing up random shit to fit into your narrative
You literally just admitted there's nothing to do in here
I am just baffled this argument is still going on lol
No I said theres nothing else to do but conceptualize a game and debate here
which is the only reason im here because i want to talk about making a good game
Youre not debating though, you are expressing ideas that have been talked into the ground and not listening to anyone else lol
Again, removing features is hardly making a good game, lmao
well lets be fair guys this game will not do well if it has the same issues as ark one with all the cheaters
You didnt read all of that part then
I wanted to respond with that one Community gif, but the bot wouldn't let me. 😦
Oh for sure, better anti cheat has been mentioned hundreds of times here and better happen or the game will crash hard once UE5 gets cracked
I know which one you mean, lol
Yeah cause i dont sit in here everyday being an ark stan? I have better things to do and when i get bored i chat on random things
You expect me to know everything ever said here? And percieve to talk with me about it for the entire day?
Yes.
Trve
What’s the topic?
I don't know anymore lol
If you have a take to propose, look up the keywords in the search function (I know what you're going to say, "discord has a search function?" Yes.) and see where it went the last 500 times it was likely brought up
Have a debate, not an argument lol
Literally have been this whole time except im the enemy because i have different takes
and also idek how you tell a debate from an argument when its text only
Back your talking points with facts, not fictions, and if there are not facts, be reasonable when people disagree
That’s not allowed here. You gotta agree with pikmin and spartan
Several times, I saw bull "facts", like "90% of people hate this", etc etc.
I agree on that on certain things but when you talk about the concept of a game you literally cannot do anything but speculate
Speculation is fine, but don't assume the community just because you don't like something lol
I feel like i had a farily well grasp with my 4k hours somewhat, wrong or not idk
But my takes in the quality of the 1st game still stand. I criticize it heavily because in a general gaming sense its mid
And its best to take what was wrong with the first game and fix it no? If something doesnt work dont do it
I dont understand why bringing up Flaws is irrelevant when speculating the upgrade
oh but i didnt know they were already talked about! I can Search it!! Tbf im too casual