ARK had an upcoming DLC as part of the season pass. But because a majority of their players had already bought that, and thus less money, they decided to release it as a separate game - through a different company - with the same lead devs as ARK. ATLAS!
imgur.com/cO44LFv.jpg
imgur.com/cO44LFv.jpg
They literally released the DLC as a separate title with a 2 yr early access time line.
This is Steam, so....
imgur.com/9NKNkug.jpg
This is Steam, so....
imgur.com/9NKNkug.jpg
Grapeshot Games is literally the same people as Studio Wildcard / Instinct Games. It was formed as a "sister" company for the sole purpose of foisting ATLAS under the guise of a new game.
store.steampowered.com/search/?develo…
store.steampowered.com/search/?develo…
I'm sure there's a perfectly reasonable* explanation for all this.
store.steampowered.com/search/?publis…
* LOL!! No there isn't
store.steampowered.com/search/?publis…
* LOL!! No there isn't
The part they failed to mention in that "40,000+ simultaneous players in the same world" bs is that aside from being the same engine with some tweaks, not even ARK could handle more than 70 clients (4 on dedicated servers) in a session. At a 200m distance cap.
I know those guys. So this makes zero sense to me why they did this. All they've done now is completely destroyed the goodwill they gained with ARK, even though that game also saw its own level of derision.
I mean a new DLC release at $19.99 would have been just fine I think.
I mean a new DLC release at $19.99 would have been just fine I think.
Back of toilet paper math.
So ATLAS has 225 shards.
Each shard can support up to 150 clients.
So uhm, that's 33,750 clients per server.
No, you're not playing with more than 150 clients at any one time.
Why am I even laughing?
So ATLAS has 225 shards.
Each shard can support up to 150 clients.
So uhm, that's 33,750 clients per server.
No, you're not playing with more than 150 clients at any one time.
Why am I even laughing?
