The shoulder pet of Ark: Survival Ascended causes controversy?
The new Cosmo shoulder pet in Ark: Survival Ascended has generated some minor controversy. As it happens, a community member entered a design contest for the game with a similar creature—the Maevia Eureka leaping spider. Although the spider lost, Cosmo is a re-skinned, reduced variation of the spider, appearing rather similar! Particularly since Cosmo is part of a paid DLC, "Bob's Tall Tales," the community member who created the spider feels a little disappointed about it; their original design would have been free. They felt as though the studio transformed their work into something less cool and that they were deprived of credit for it.
Why is the community offended with Studio Wildcard on this?
Given this, Studio Wildcard is most obviously under pressure. Players are not happy about it since they feel the studio is merely handing some extra paid DLC at them while they wait for Ark 2. Particularly considering that further ASE material would be free in ASA, they believe the company is abusing its patrons. The community member who built the spider feels that their labor was basically stolen and dumped on a paid DLC, which is not a great look for Studio Wildcard.
Is evidence proving Cosmo's basis on the Maevia Eureka spider?
Though Studio Wildcard does not have a formal statement, the community member who built the spider believes rather strongly that Cosmo finds inspiration in their work. Their clear indicator is the brilliant neon coloring of the spider. Though it's not exactly 1:1 duplicate, there are clear parallels.
Will this influence next community projects?
Given this overall scenario, some members of the community are questioning whether it is worth turning in their ideas any more. It's not a very hopeful scenario if their effort could wind up in a paid DLC without credit or permission. The company might have to put more effort into rebuilding the confidence of its supporters and ensuring that, should they be utilized in the game, future entries are correctly credited and paid for.
This speaks to the situation of Studio Wildcard.
Studio Wildcard has come under fire with its community not once but several times. This whole scenario could point to the studio having financial difficulties. Their paid DLC is already under fire, and they're not exactly flush with money. Their reputation will most certainly not be enhanced by this whole Cosmo scenario. Hopefully they will get their act together and begin making wiser judgments!
Is Ark: Survival Ascended's sole problem this-wise?
Not at all, sadly. Since its publishing, Ark: Survival Ascended has drawn significant criticism. Some users believe it's essentially a repackled version of Ark: Survival Evolved rather than the graphical improvement they were looking for. There's also the full "Bob's Tall Tales" paid DLC, which many players believe wasn't nearly worth the investment. Indeed, right now Studio Wildcard's situation is not exactly perfect sailing.
