‘ARK: Survival Evolved’ PS4 Release Held Up By Sony Until It Is Done

INQ: PlayStation 4 owners hoping to see ARK: Survival Evolved on their console soon have a longer wait to look forward to instead. Studio Wildcard provided an update on the PS4 release early Monday morning and revealed an early access release is being blocked by Sony.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Kribwalker831d ago ShowReplies(6)
masterfox831d ago

I'm on Sony side for just common sense reasons,

Developer: I wan't to release this half arse game on your console Sony it has some bugs, crashes, etc, can I release it ?
Sony: Da funk is wrong with you ? finish your damn game first!!!

Seriously if people don't understand this, that's just sad.

830d ago Replies(1)
Z501830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

Sadly, common sense is becoming the exception.

bmf7364830d ago

*cough" Steam Early Access *cough* *cough*

The only good thing to come out of Early Access was Kerbal Space Program, I'll give it that much.

Erik7357830d ago

It would be terrible for Sony to allow this because they have no steam early access system in place. The only way you would of been able to tell this is early access is by reading the description for the game on the psn store which half the people won't see! That's why Sony cant put this on their store, maybe in the future when they have a early access system in place they will be able to do this.

coolbeans830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

Time for the common sense rebuttal: why not just have it available and let consumers decide whether or not to buy this half arse game in its current state?


"Developer: I wan't to release this half arse game on your console Sony it has some bugs, crashes, etc, can I release it ?
Sony: Da funk is wrong with you ? finish your damn game first!!!"

And yet Dungeon Defenders II got a pass.

Christopher830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

People will want their money back and it will increase work for Sony in that regard? It will also be seen as a negative towards Sony that they would "allow" a game that may not work on their system (not that those don't happen already, but more likely with Early Access)? Games with major issues released early could damage a PS4 with poor coding (overheating, unlocked FPS issues such as what Rocket League had in their menus, etc.)?

Personally, I don't believe in Early Access gaming. I think it coming to consoles is a horrible precedence for the systems and they should stick to only releasing full release titles. And, even those darn things are rarely finnished!

coolbeans830d ago (Edited 830d ago )


-"People will want their money back and it will increase work for Sony in that regard?"

This can be easily be remedied with instituting free half-hour or 1-hour game trials. And considering something like Dungeon Defenders II Early Access has been put on their storefront already, I'm not really sure why worries of refunds and workload would suddenly be an issue for them with this one case.

Christopher830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

***This can be easily be remedied with instituting free half-hour or 1-hour game trials.***

Now you're talking about creating a whole new system of 'timed demos' in their system. That's not "easy". Very far from.

*** And considering something like Dungeon Defenders II Early Access has been put on their storefront already, not really sure why worries of refunds and workload would suddenly be an issue for them for this one case.***

True, but I was answering the reason. Don't forget the issues that Ark has already had on PC and XBO so far as far as updates and the like. They might give reason as to why Sony is hesitant with them compared to others (Paragon and Dungeon Defenders II).

Side note: It looks to me like the whole DF2 thing was just advertising since it's never been "finished" and is steal "Early Access" though it is a complete game.

2pacalypsenow830d ago

Because its not up to Sony's Standards

Z501830d ago (Edited 830d ago )


coolbeans830d ago (Edited 830d ago )


**Now you're talking about creating a whole new system of 'timed demos' in their system.**

I described "easily" as phrasing of remedying the issue, not technical implementation. If it's THAT big of an issue to consider, institute refunds tied with game time falling under that limited window I brought up. Pretty sure that's automatically tracked. My main point being: there's surely some undemanding way of instituting a refund system for those instances.


**Because its not up to Sony's Standards**

My entire point was to call into question why said standards should rest on their hands rather than having a more open storefront for consumers to decide for themselves, though.

Christopher830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

***My main point being: there's surely some undemanding way of instituting a refund system for those instances. ***

Sony is archaic in this regards and nothing is easy. We're talking about the company who won't allow you to deactivate a single item via the Internet, but instead you have to deactivate all items at once to do it that way and it can be only once in 6 months.

I'm not saying Sony's side couldn't be a shit ton better, but for how they have it set up right now, it's difficult and archaic. And, Sony isn't known for the best customer service. Sony isn't like MS, they're not a company based around an ecosystem of software that is designed from the ground up to integrate with one another. They should be, but that's just not how it is. They're not a bad company, they're just not a software company like MS.

And, honestly, as long as they remain archaic in their handling of things, I support initiatives that reduce the need to utilize said archaic methodologies. Sure, it would be great if they were more like MS, Google, or Apple. But, they're not, they likely never will be, but they still provide some good stuff.

Godmars290830d ago

Two words: bricked consoles.

coolbeans830d ago (Edited 830d ago )


That's an interesting take. I can't really comment on their deactivation standards or their archaic standards on this sort of stuff overall, so that's a healthy perspective to add. Even if it may not be as practical (currently) for them, I still stand by the principle of the argument as brought up in my first reply.


"Two words: bricked consoles."

You're basically reaching for the extreme here. Early Access isn't inherently something preparing to brick anyone's console. If it were, the million+ who've tried ARK on XJuan would've experienced this already.

Godmars290830d ago


I'm talking about the eventuality of throwing quality control out of the window as many here seem to want.

rainslacker830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

Because there is no guarantee that the game will ever be finished or that the developer will deliver on the promised content. It's not like season pass where the development costs are built into the budget before the game ever starts production, but rather, a game that is just getting made "on the fly", and early access is being used to fund further development....or in the worse case scenario, the developer closes up shop and just has the money, leaving Sony in a difficult situation of having to appease the people who got burned.

If the devs want people to be able to play it, there are methods to get it through compliance, but it would require a restructuring of their release plans, or offering it free as a beta, which is not something they want to do. When they start asking a fee to play the game, then they are responsible for delivering a complete product. Season passes, while similar, have their own guidelines on if they'll be allowed or not, where as these early access type things are sort of a laize-faire approach to releasing content.

I'm not personally against early access programs, but it's not quite as simple as you make it out to be. Steam sees some complaints from the early access program from time to time, and I'd imagine the stuff on X1 will see more as time goes on. The principals behind it are similar to KickStarter, where money is being the consumer....for a product that isn't finished. It's one thing for a publisher to take on this risk because they understand the risks, but for the consumer to do so, they may not understand the risks, and even if they do, they have absolutely no recourse or ownership of the product to ever get it completed or gain some of their investment back....and to me, that's not something that really needs to show up on consoles or be begged for because there are plenty of other ways to release a game that work essentially the same as early release, and are much more structured and beneficial for the consumer.

More in line with the implementation you and Chris are speaking of.

Yes, it could be easy to institute a refund policy for such a thing, but who's going to pay for it? It could be many months or even years before people realize they got burned, and by then, the devs will have received their funds from Sony, and Sony may not be able to get it back. It's basically be money out of Sony's pocket, and there is no reason for them to implement such a policy because of that, nor would I expect any company to do it. Steam allows refunds but you have to do it before they send off the money to the developers which typically falls about 30 days after purchase in most cases...which should be long after the time limit they place on the consumer.

The problem here though, if I'm understanding it right, is that people would want refunds because the game was poor....whereas the refunds themselves could be because people end up not receiving a finished product....both now, and possibly not in the future.


Any release would still have to meet compliance standards, including all updates. Sony and MS make money on all those compliance submissions, and they require compliance testing to prevent things such as bricked consoles. The threshold for errors that simply freeze the system are extremely low, and anything that would brick a console is immediately denied.

shloobmm3830d ago

whoa whoa whoa now you are talking about doing exactly what the X1 is doing. Its a great system that works fantastic and it's allowing these games to earn the money they need to finish them. There aren't going to be any refunds because there is a disclaimer for those who want to buy after the hour trial.

coolbeans830d ago (Edited 830d ago )


"I'm talking about the eventuality of throwing quality control out of the window as many here seem to want."

I've got unfortunate news for you: quality control has been disregarded before Early Access on consoles became a thing. I don't recall seeing a "Early Access" stamp around many of 2014's tentpole releases.


A lot of what you're saying could be ameliorated by one simple thing: more information. Having consumers fully understand the risks incurred from participating in early access can be enough for most to not bother participating in it. But if something like "dinosaur FPS crafting adventure" scratches their itch and they can't wait to get their hands on it, then the tough "buyer beware" adage may be applicable if worse comes to worst for them in the long run--probably after tens/hundreds of hours of playtime with it.

-**Steam sees some complaints from the early access program from time to time, and I'd imagine the stuff on X1 will see more as time goes on.**

Steam surely does. The likes of Jim Sterling and others complain about it quite often; and yet, there still appears to be a sizable market of consumers out there willing to take the financial leap on outside-of-the-box early access titles. You bringing up Kickstarter is another interesting take from the community response I've seen here. Games like Yooka-Laylee and dozens of other popular games can get praised on here for meeting well above their listed goals yet something that's similar-in-principle like this can be reasoned away as good business on Sony's part.

Now I've never suggested there isn't complexity regarding the concept of Early Access; my point is to just let each individual wade through that complexity themselves. Dislike Early Access on all fronts? Don't ever bother with it then. Have standards before you're willing to buy? Let's utilize both the storefront to give adequate consumer protection to a risky part of this market and provide ample information about the team, game's updates, etc. from the best sources. I know this falls into a false dichotomy but between the more democratized version of current steam vs. the heavily-curated one by suits from the past, I see a more beneficial future in the former, for both consumer and developer.


**There aren't going to be any refunds because there is a disclaimer for those who want to buy after the hour trial.**

I'm just throwing ideas out there. I brought up game trails first, then Christopher said the back-end stuff would take a lot of effort, so I jumped to the next best thing. Similar to steam's two-hour refund policy (which I thought extended to early access games too).

harbie830d ago

& 7days to Die (even worse)

rainslacker830d ago

More information certainly couldn't hurt. Can't deny that.

But I do kind of feel it places a lot of faith in the hands of the consumer to know that information, and understand it. Even with big ol' warning signs put up there by Sony, and the user having to go through multiple steps to confirm they understand what they're getting....which would be excessive....there is still that segment which doesn't read or take the time to understand, and still complain when they get screwed over.

Not to say the user base should be denied a desirable feature due to those people, but it's still a headache which unfortunately seems to becoming more and more prevalent nowadays as people expect companies to bend over backwards due to their own ineptitude, and the consumer isn't allowed to be called misinformed or told no nowadays for some reason.

badz149830d ago


the other name for "early access" is "paying game test" which means, you are paying your way into testing unfinished games! "early access" is just a fancy name for it. Personally, I'd rather be paid to test games than paying my way in because I don't work for them. I would like them to work for my money as a consumer, not asking my consumer money so they can make money off the broken piece I already paid for! is't that how it's suppose to be? I remember Johnathan Blow before the release of Braid, where he spent a lot of his own money for his project and it paid off - no BS crowdfunding or early access or whatsoever. The thing is, you shouldn't just go into development when you have no capital and somehow hoping for gamers to pay for the development. it's not even an investment because there's no benefit, it's just a way they can suck you into a paying game tester scheme!

so, why can't they finish up some more of their game and put it on PSN as open alpha or beta test? you know, where everyone can get download it for free and do pretty much the same thing the early access is doing but for FREE? ah...there's no money in it, right? of course they don't want THAT!

Jimneous830d ago

7 Days to Die got through too.

Kurdishcurse830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

Dungeon defenders was probably competent when it came out. Ark on the other hand is not. Early access should be kept to the PC folk that are stupid enough to buy unfinished, unpolished games due to boredom.

There are enough idiots on consoles as it is. This practice shouldve died out a long time ago and the only thing thats keeping it alive is steam.

Mostly because valve are so lazy, they dont mind ripping off money from customers regardless of the games state in technicality. Broken or not, gaben still be gettin his green dough from these games.

trooper_830d ago

Yes, and then we hear articles about Sony releasing half games.

No, they did the right thing.

coolbeans829d ago

@badz149 & @Kurdishcurse

You're throwing reasons about why you have disdain for the practice--much of which I can understand where you're coming from, but that doesn't somehow defeat the open market principle I'm talking about here. You have issues with it should be disallowed regardless of what other consumers have to say? If someone else wants to take the dive (knowing full well the risks) then let them, I say. If you dislike the idea of it altogether you should know you're under no obligation to bother with it.

** I remember Johnathan Blow before the release of Braid, where he spent a lot of his own money for his project and it paid off - no BS crowdfunding or early access or whatsoever.**

Well good for him, I suppose. But who's to say that method would work out in the end for every other developer? What happens to those who only spend their own savings on a game and it doesn't pay out? And who's to say Blow may not have tried dipping his toes into crowdfunding or whatnot for Braid if given the chance today?


**Yes, and then we hear articles about Sony releasing half games.**

Considering we already hear articles about Sony NOT releasing half games (see: here), I'm failing to see your point. Buggier games then several prominent Early Access games like 7 Days to Die can be found on PS4, but blame for that's being passed off to the right people. Opening up the storefront in such a manner shouldn't mean Sony will get blame when there's a more prominent target to take aim at (developer/publisher).

+ Show (17) more repliesLast reply 829d ago
Destiny1080830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

I see both sides, as long as its clearly marked early access and in a early access section in the store ive no problem with that, some developers are flat broke and need something like this to keep going

on the other side, early access are just half finished broken bug infested games which might never get to be finished, oh look we finished another 2% of are game and need to get it retested all over again so it doesn't have catastrophic bugs, sony probably don't have the time to keep retesting potentially hundreds of early access games

georeo830d ago

I remember watching my friend play it on Xbox one, and "I said is it free"? He said no! You had to buy it. And it's not even a complete game yet lol.

KilKarazy830d ago get to play it early, see it all come together, and get $30 off the full version when it comes out for basically beta testing it. Seems like a good deal for me. They're building the game with input directly from a huge group of players.

Z501830d ago

Guess what happens when the game finally comes out and it's trash or you just don't like it. You basically paid money to 'alpha/beta' test a game.

KilKarazy830d ago

@Z501 That argument doesn't make sense. It would be worse to wait for the official launch and realize you don't like it after paying full price. There are clear warnings that you are buying a pre release game. They even offer a free trial. You're literally arguing against a game because it is giving a discount to people to play it before it is ready, and working closely with said community to improve the game for people who pay the full $60 at launch. Why, because it isn't on PS4? Sony's policy is stupid and ruined any chance 7 Days to Die had because they forced them to release the game at retail as if it was a finished product. The game got slammed with bad reviews and I already saw it for half price. The game is an early access game and Sony should embrace these in a digital only Early Access store. No Man's Sky would've been perfect for this, so would Destiny.

Kirchh77830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

No....Ppl should be able to have access to these games while they are being finished if the devs are going to put out trailers. I've seen too many games get cancelled after following it for over a year. At least ppl can get their hands on these games that might possibly never see a legit release. That's why I'm getting an Xbox 1 S this fall. I'll get mods on Skyrim and fallout. Plus get to play Ark and Sea of Thieves when it gets further along. It's no guarantee that they will actually release Ark on ps4 yet. It remains to be seen.

Kaneki-Ken830d ago

I remember that when they announced PS4, PlayStation mention that they wanted to do early access/greenlight but i guess that not happening.

ShowanW830d ago

Early Access has "Free Mode"

I've played some of Ark without paying a dime...

I don't know how it is on PC...
But on Xbox, early access doesn't mandate payment

ONESHOTV2830d ago

masterfox---- you do know what early access is for right ? you do know that it for players to test the game and give feedback right ? wouldn't it be better to have outside feedback than your own devs testing the game and then send it out then say oh yeah don't play the game becuase it's going to have a few bugs so wait for the day one patch. another thing console owners should be grateful they have the chance of helping the devs create the game they want this feature is meant for pc gamers mostly becuase we can record and give feedback fast because we have the programs on pc to do it. so why cry about a program that actually help the devs in the long run

spektical830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

I guess a possible solution would be for Ark to label their game as complete and continually add updates. STV can be argued was incomplete and it was released.

yeahokwhatever830d ago

yeah. ark is a horrible shitshow on PC.

_-EDMIX-_830d ago

I'm all for Early Access to help developers but that is an extremely thin line that being said I agree with Sony as I don't think they want to open the door of games like this releasing half-assed and developers collecting funds and then running away from their title once they get Bank.

People need to really ask themselves what is to stop any developer from Simply up and walking away from their responsibilities if this game becomes a huge running success?

rainslacker830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

It's actually part of their compliance standards. Devs can't released unfinished games. Episodic games have to have each episode completed in full. betas and alphas are allowed, but have to meet compliance standards and have a time limit. Updates can be applied after a release, but go through their own compliance standards testing, and require their own compliance submissions, which cost money to put up on the store after so many times depending on the level of contract the dev/pub has with Sony.

Problem here is that the game is being released as a priced product, and Sony's guidelines require that when a company is charging for a game, that it be complete within their standards. It's like saying, pay for this now, and we'll get you the content when we can. Game updates which improve performance still have to be applied to what is considered a final deliverable product which could play without the updates....although in recent years, that part of compliance has pretty much gone out the window unofficially for both Sony and MS as they don't want to hold up major releases from the big publishers and risk not having a big game on the same day as the competition....but that's a different thing.

Wouldn't really matter if we asked Sony to allow early access, as it's always been against their policy. They may implement it if there is enough demand, but since there is a lot of early access products which never go to completion, I'm not sure it's something worth asking for. If the dev wants it on the console, they can put it up as a beta as often as they wish, but they can't charge for it....which is what this dev wants to do. It's basically like trying to fund the game through sales while it's in development, and that isn't something I feel is a good thing to bring to consoles, since it's hit or miss on PC in it's current form as is.

Erik7357830d ago

You know that it's still in development and it only sucks for playstation because Sony has no green light gaming system implemented for their console so there isn't really a way to tell if its in development by only reading the video game description in the psn store ( which every gamer obviously does)! That's why sony rejected it because they dont have a system in place like Steam and XBL does for this. IT sucks that you don't have the luxury and freedom to pay a game early before its done if you want to. It's basically beta testing and its WAY MORE THAN HALF WAY DONE kid lol.... keep on saying its great but in the end you have less freedom and it sucks.

Godz Kastro830d ago (Edited 830d ago )

Not sure if it's not running properly on PS hardware yet. Runs fiine on Xbox. Game is amazing w frineds

donthate830d ago

People are enjoying this game on PC and XB1 right now. Don't like it, don't buy it. It's funny though, how some games on PS4 has early access, but not Ark.

But as usual, people will protect Sony. Just like how Sony protected you from a good value with EA Access, then they did it again with cross-play, and now they are protecting you again.

I wonder what consumer option Sony is going to protect you from next?

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 829d ago
slate91830d ago ShowReplies(2)
FullmetalRoyale830d ago

It seems odd considering that my friend and I are playing, and loving, 7 Days to Die on PS4, and that game is nowhere near complete.

phantomexe830d ago

Yea loven it too got to day 87.

FullmetalRoyale830d ago

Nice! I think we are on day fifty-two, or so. Very cool stuff.

Rimeskeem830d ago

I think 130 now but not sure. Game is fun.

yarbie1000830d ago

shhh, you're not suppose to mention the hypocrisy

Pongwater830d ago

It's not hypocrisy if one game is substantially less finished than the other. A comparison of recent known issues lists certainly makes it seem as though 7 Days is farther along than Ark.

KilKarazy830d ago

@Pongwater 7 Days to Die on PC is much farther than ARK, 7 Days to Die on consoles is like the first early release of ARK. There's no servers.

Sayai jin830d ago

It's ashame too, because Ark is a great game. I have it on Steam and Xbox One. The game is only $29 dollars since is a pre-release. Sure it has some bugs, but it's not the finished product. They have already stated that there will be bugs, but at the same time they will work on patches, DLC, etc. So people who brought it early will have a full game and will not have to re-buy the game. They already added another big map at no charge.

The game is super fun and addictive.

FullmetalRoyale830d ago

Yeah, it looks cool, and I look forward to being able to try it, myself.

masterfox830d ago

you pay 29 dlls ? and then you said "Sure it has some bugs, but it's not the finished product." ?,

daammmnnnnnnn I just hope other people don't follow this and converts to a trend, imagine other developers seeing and thinking: "Oh look they can pay us for our unfinished product!" , this would be bad really bad for the gaming industry. :/

Gamist2dot0830d ago

Not gonna quote Myamoto's on releasing incomplete games, but we all know the consequences when a game is released prematurely. So I think it's a wise decision to release the game when it reaches Gold status and backed by marketing so that it's published with a bang followed by praised reviews. Releasing an incomplete game followed by low review scores can cripple a game of its potential. It may cost more to delay a game but I would rather risk that route.

Erik7357830d ago

Keep on trying to spin this BS and make it look positive, it sucks that you don't have the freedom to be a beta player for a game if you want to. This game already is FAR ahead in quality with some games on PSN store right now.

RosweeSon830d ago

Ah I gave you an agree by mistake so enjoy but I barely have time for Beta's unless it's a top game but had plenty, Star Wars battlefront, tomorrow's children? New mirrors edge if I have plenty of complete full games to get through tho why do I need demos or unfinished versions I'll just wait for the game to launch... When they've finished it

Kurdishcurse830d ago

If your stupid enough to buy incomplete games....maybe you shouldnt use the words BS in the same sentence as quality. Even the shittiest games on all gaming platforms embarrasses ark when it comes to animations alone. The dino animations are barely PS2 quality. Next time, try hearing yourself before typing. Maybe then youll realize how fictional your points are.

Moe-Gunz830d ago

"Freedom to be a beta player"? Beta and EA is two different things. Paying to play an unfinished game isn't the same as being a beta tester.

Chevalier829d ago

All the Betas I have been a part of have been for free. Not sure how paying for one is beneficial.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 829d ago