PSA: Alan Wake II Runs on Older GPUs, Mesh Shaders not Required

[Prima.Vera]

Those are good points.
However, can somebody explain how this game engine is good when on an GPU RTX 3080 with a 13700K CPU, you get ~30fps on 1440p res (natively, no DLSS garbage), and WITHOUT enabling RTS ???

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

Does anybody remember the late '90s - early 2000s when you had to buy a new graphics card every year because of new feature sets that made new games not even start on the old card? Anyone?

Also upgrading CPUs, because of games being slow and jerky, LOL. Especially the socket 462 era.

 

[Belfaborac]

Yep. For those who lived through the old days and still remember them, pretty much everything is better, and cheaper, today. Even without rose-tinted glasses.

Well, gaming-wise that is.

 

[ToTTenTranz]

Check numbers at your favorite Torrent site

I don't use torrent nor do I pirate games so I wouldn't know where to look, but the people who do aren't exactly the typical big spender of high-end PC hardware. I should know, I too was once a broke 14 year-old PC gamer.

Which brings us to the initial point: Alan Wake 2 isn't going to be a tangentially relevant game for the people who spend more than $300 on a graphics card, or more than $900 on a gaming laptop. It's not going to sell even a tenth of the Cyberpunk's DLC Phantom Liberty.


Until it comes out on Steam, it's a mostly irrelevant game for the people who spend big money on graphics cards, yet it's probably going to be ridiculously over-represented in benchmark suites because it'll feature in Nvidia's mandatory games review guidelines.
Just like Control before it.

 

[Easo]

Again, "just upgrade your PC" and "anything below 4080 is useless" is something that should not be used together.
Let's assume I would have spent 900 EUR on 4070 Ti and now game director and "some dudes" are saying my theoretical almost 1k GPU is not enough? Wut?

It is quite a bit about software, you know that. If patches actually do improve the performance of all those recently released games with issues then yes, it is software + greed, not the diminishing returns on the photorealistic graphics (debatable in the first place considering the sometimes dated look. Where did that photorealism go there, exactly??).

I know voting with wallet is close to useless, but it seems most have given up and just accepted it that bruteforcing is the only way.

 

[AusWolf]

Again, "just upgrade your PC" and "anything below 4080 is useless" is something that should not be used together.
Let's assume I would have spent 900 EUR on 4070 Ti and now game director and "some dudes" are saying my theoretical almost 1k GPU is not enough? Wut?

It is quite a bit about software, you know that. If patches actually do improve the performance of all those recently released games with issues then yes, it is software + greed, not the diminishing returns on the photorealistic graphics (debatable in the first place considering the sometimes dated look. Where did that photorealism go there, exactly??).

I know voting with wallet is close to useless, but it seems most have given up and just accepted it that bruteforcing is the only way.

Why not just play with no RT and/or medium graphics until you can afford a graphics card that can run the game on higher settings, such as the 5070 or 6060?

Why does everybody want to play everything on Ultra graphics with all kinds of graphics cards?

 

[remekra]

Why not just play with no RT and/or medium graphics until you can afford a graphics card that can run the game on higher settings, such as the 5070 or 6060?

Why does everybody want to play everything on Ultra graphics with all kinds of graphics cards?

Then it's simply better to switch to consoles. Low/Medium settings, but without having to spend 900EUR on 4070Ti or more for 4080/7900XTX.

 

[Assimilator]

Then it's simply better to switch to consoles. Low/Medium settings, but without having to spend 900EUR on 4070Ti or more for 4080/7900XTX.

That would be good, so that the rest of us who actually care about advancing the state of the art in graphics can talk about it, without being drowned out by the babies crying that their 7-year-old GPU no longer runs new games at maximum settings.

 

[AusWolf]

Then it's simply better to switch to consoles. Low/Medium settings, but without having to spend 900EUR on 4070Ti or more for 4080/7900XTX.

Sure, buy it for console, and then buy it again for the next-gen console instead of buying it once and upgrading your GPU when you're ready.

 

[remekra]

Sure, buy it for console, and then buy it again for the next-gen console instead of buying it once and upgrading your GPU when you're ready.

That would be good, so that the rest of us who actually care about advancing the state of the art in graphics can talk about it, without being drowned out by the babies crying that their 7-year-old GPU no longer runs new games at maximum settings.

I already bought it, for my 7900XTX and 7800X3D, I hope that it's enthusiast and that I care about state of the graphics enough, or do I need 4090?
Game is looking great, not denying that. It's hella of a lot inconsistent. I can turn on Path tracing in some parts and get 50-55 fps, while in others I get 20.

I do still think that they could optimize it more, not to run on 10 series cards, but for current gen GPU's, that are not 4090.
I really await the Avatar game that uses new ver of Snowdrop. RTGI on consoles and additional RT on PC, from trailers it's looking great, but I wonder what will be the performance of it.

 

[Punkenjoy]

We all have to put thing into context. You can have Alan Wake 2 run good with a 2-3 year old GPU at the resolution that GPU was targeting. You might not max the details, but the game will still run good and also look very good at low details.


On the other side, you have a game like City Skyline 2 that can barely run at 50 FPS on an empty map on a 4080 with a 7950X3D at 4K at low while not looking really better than the first game.

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

Which brings us to the initial point: Alan Wake 2 isn't going to be a tangentially relevant game

Are we going to have the 2020s version of the video game market crash of the 1980s?!

 

[W1zzard]

benchmark suites because it'll feature in Nvidia's mandatory games review guidelines.

Don’t believe the propaganda from people who never talked to an nvidia employee in their life

I have worked with Nvidia for almost 20 years and I’ve never seen any such guidelines. they never said i must test a certain game in my reviews, only once they asked „why are you still testing control in 2022?“ which is a very reasonable question

Alan Wake 2 is still interesting to include in my tests because it‘s not an unreal engine game. The fact that it’s on egs makes my life much more difficult though. It’s the reason i never looked again at godfall after my initial review. Otoh the way things are going all games will be unreal in a few years anyway

 

[Tomorrow]

That would be good, so that the rest of us who actually care about advancing the state of the art in graphics can talk about it, without being drowned out by the babies crying that their 7-year-old GPU no longer runs new games at maximum settings.

Thats the catch. It's not max settings (refrerring to GTX 1080 Ti without RT at 1080p).

 

[PapaTaipei]

I don't use torrent nor do I pirate games so I wouldn't know where to look, but the people who do aren't exactly the typical big spender of high-end PC hardware. I should know, I too was once a broke 14 year-old PC gamer.

Which brings us to the initial point: Alan Wake 2 isn't going to be a tangentially relevant game for the people who spend more than $300 on a graphics card, or more than $900 on a gaming laptop. It's not going to sell even a tenth of the Cyberpunk's DLC Phantom Liberty.


Until it comes out on Steam, it's a mostly irrelevant game for the people who spend big money on graphics cards, yet it's probably going to be ridiculously over-represented in benchmark suites because it'll feature in Nvidia's mandatory games review guidelines.
Just like Control before it.

It's also relevant to take into consideration how much the game studios is spending on advertising. The sheep mindset is extremely strong and potent. Just look at Diablo 4, despite being a total downgrade it is the most selling game of blizz. Countless examples like that can be made. So ads spending is a massive factor to a game success. Not even taking into account totally fake "video games journals" like IGN etc.

 

[Prima.Vera]

People fail to understand where the problem is. The problem is that the game graphics is nothing special, forget the reviews. The graphics is very washed out and blurry (extremely, if you use DLSS), there is no facial complexion (the faces are actually so blurred, they look like a 15 years old game), it uses fake HDR (which is basically over exposure with very high contrast), while if you try using normal gamma, is just too dark and washed. I don't know, this games looks nothing special, no awe effect, no nothing. You pay top dollar for a video card, only to have 50 fps in 1080P ???
Give me a break ffs.

 

[AusWolf]

The graphics is very washed out and blurry (extremely, if you use DLSS), there is no facial complexion (the faces are actually so blurred, they look like a 15 years old game), it uses fake HDR (which is basically over exposure with very high contrast), while if you try using normal gamma, is just too dark and washed.

Maybe that's part of the artistic style, and the game is not supposed to be super realistic to begin with?

In general, though, I think we've crossed the line where there's no more wow factor in game graphics. They look real enough so that there's no more Half-Life to Crysis level of improvement in the next 10 years.

 

[Tomorrow]

Maybe that's part of the artistic style, and the game is not supposed to be super realistic to begin with?

In general, though, I think we've crossed the line where there's no more wow factor in game graphics. They look real enough so that there's no more Half-Life to Crysis level of improvement in the next 10 years.

Agreed. better lighting or better textures are iterative, not revolutionary.

Where i see the biggest potential improving games in the future are actually not better graphics but better physics and better AI.
Make NPC's smarter and make environments more destructible. What good are path traced graphics if it's immediately ruined by dump NPC's with bad lip-syncing in an environments where everything is static and cannot be destroyed?

I would argue that Crysis's appeal was not just graphics. It was also physics. Being able to cut down trees, take those chucks and use them as projectiles is something that most games these days are still not doing. Some of the greatest and most revered games have used advanced physics like Half Life 2, Crysis and even Dead Space (using enemy limbs as projectiles).

 

[AusWolf]

Agreed. better lighting or better textures are iterative, not revolutionary.

Where i see the biggest potential improving games in the future are actually not better graphics but better physics and better AI.
Make NPC's smarter and make environments more destructible. What good are path traced graphics if it's immediately ruined by dump NPC's with bad lip-syncing in an environments where everything is static and cannot be destroyed?

I would argue that Crysis's appeal was not just graphics. It was also physics. Being able to cut down trees, take those chucks and use them as projectiles is something that most games these days are still not doing. Some of the greatest and most revered games have used advanced physics like Half Life 2, Crysis and even Dead Space (using enemy limbs as projectiles).

One way graphics could improve imo, is if devs found the secret sauce to model skin, wood, fabric, and dirt without looking shiny and glassy. I completely agree about AI and physics, though.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Maybe that's part of the artistic style, and the game is not supposed to be super realistic to begin with?

If that's the case, why is the engine running like pure crap even on the latest hardware??

 

[AusWolf]

If that's the case, why is the engine running like pure crap even on the latest hardware??

A game doesn't necessarily have to be realistic to look good. With that said, I still have to try AW2 out myself, although I think I'll start with AW:Remastered just to remind myself of the story.

 

[Belfaborac]

The problem is that the game graphics is nothing special, forget the reviews. The graphics is very washed out and blurry (extremely, if you use DLSS), there is no facial complexion (the faces are actually so blurred, they look like a 15 years old game), it uses fake HDR (which is basically over exposure with very high contrast), while if you try using normal gamma, is just too dark and washed. I don't know, this games looks nothing special, no awe effect, no nothing.

That's....interesting. I see none of the washed out blurriness you talk about and I think the game looks pretty damn good. That's without even owning the game (nor planning to), just checking out a few YouTube videos. Presumably it looks even better in real life, without YouTube compression. Quite frankly, if you think it looks like a 15 year old game then you must not have been around 15 years ago.

 

[remekra]

It seems that the thing that kill performance at least on my 7900XTX is vegetation when PT is on, OMM that 40 series has probably helps with that. But after I got past the forest part of the game I turned PT on and get 40-50 fps, while using FSR perf. so 1080p internally. Usually that mode has pretty bad IQ but here I find it not distracting, and the lighting looks amazing.

 

[theouto]

Yeah, the upscaling in alan wake 2 is oddly great, maybe due to all the filmic filters hiding the weaknesses of them? Idk, remedy keeps surprising me

 

[remekra]

Yeah, the upscaling in alan wake 2 is oddly great, maybe due to all the filmic filters hiding the weaknesses of them? Idk, remedy keeps surprising me

Yeah I can see all the downfalls of FSR in performance mode, but either because of implementation, or just the art style and heavy post processing it does not stand out and is acceptable for me.
But I can see why nvidia introduced Ray Reconstruction. Without it PT has this so to say temporal or smudgy look. Like you can see that denoising filter its trying its best to smooth the image out when you move the camera or just move in the env. That happens regardless of FSR Quality, native or performance.