Alan Wake II System Requirements Released, Steep RT Requirements Due to Path Tracing

[AusWolf]

I'm just wondering, where was everybody 10 or 15 years ago when you needed a mid-range GPU to just play a game on minimum settings, and a high-end one to play it well (The Witcher 2 and 3)? Sure, GPUs didn't cost above a grand back then, but it's not the developer's fault that they do now, is it?

 

[stimpy88]

I'm just wondering, where was everybody 10 or 15 years ago when you needed a mid-range GPU to just play a game on minimum settings, and a high-end one to play it well (The Witcher 2 and 3)? Sure, GPUs didn't cost above a grand back then, but it's not the developer's fault that they do now, is it?

I'd argue that developers do more/better when there are hard constraints in the hardware, and they do worse when the ceiling is removed. Thats why you need so much storage space, and so much memory just to run a Netflix app. Hundreds of megabytes just to stream a video from a website.

 

[Doffy]

Most optimized game in 2023 be like =

 

[ViperXTR]

Alan Wake 2 | NVIDIA DLSS 3.5 & Full Ray Tracing Technology Overview

 

[Deleted member 234997]

Meh character models and details so we can have Nvidia's tech again. ^ That video.
Everything is showing off lighting .... which looks good, everything else seems a generation behind.

Sad.

 

[theouto]

I will say, at least they have something to show off for what the game requires, no? even without RT, all the footage I've seen from the game looks astonishing, so unlike other games coming out, at least it seems that they have something to show off for it, be it lighting, or insane level of detail (seriously, all the ground cover is insane)

Other games we've seen (specially UE games, 4 and 5) coming out recently are stupid heavy to run while also looking meh

 

[Deleted member 234997]

I will say, at least they have something to show off for what the game requires, no? even without RT, all the footage I've seen from the game looks astonishing, so unlike other games coming out, at least it seems that they have something to show off for it, be it lighting, or insane level of detail (seriously, all the ground cover is insane)

Other games we've seen (specially UE games, 4 and 5) coming out recently are stupid heavy to run while also looking meh

I don't have hardware to run proprietary technology... so it means base game looks and no DLSS.

Not that I will buy this game anyway since it is Alan Woke.

 

[TechHalp]

Is 7900XT/XTX slower in RT than RTX 4070? I think the reason here is

Does AMD offer path tracing support in any form? I think "not yet" is the correct answer? So with path tracing enabled, AMD cards are off the table.

If medium RT enables "path tracing" by default, then with this game here, we have a repeat of what was happening with PhysX 12 years ago. Enabling medium or higher PhysX settings on AMD cards was turning any game in low single digit slideshow. Nvidia is trying again with Path Tracing to make competing cards look inferior.

If something lacks a feature it is inferior, there is no 'making them look like they don't have raytracing'. They could, they decided not to put their money into developing it, stop being an apologist.

A much better comparison is AMD blocking DLSS from their sponsored games on purpose, then modders releasing DLSS on the first day the game comes out. Ahem starfield, immortals of aveum,

I don't have hardware to run proprietary technology... so it means base game looks and no DLSS.

Not that I will buy this game anyway since it is Alan Woke.

So you think it looks bad, yet you don't have a pc that can run it, you've never run anything better looking because you can't, and you actually hate the game because of some pseudo political mumbo jumbo that has absolutely nothing to do with anything that's in the game itself. In your own words...

 

[Deleted member 234997]

If something lacks a feature it is inferior, there is no 'making them look like they don't have raytracing'. They could, they decided not to put their money into developing it, stop being an apologist.

A much better comparison is AMD blocking DLSS from their sponsored games on purpose, then modders releasing DLSS on the first day the game comes out. Ahem starfield, immortals of aveum,


So you think it looks bad, yet you don't have a pc that can run it, you've never run anything better looking because you can't, and you actually hate the game because of some pseudo political mumbo jumbo that has absolutely nothing to do with anything that's in the game itself. In your own words...

I think how I think based on preconceived notions just like you do, yes.

Problem?

I can run RT just fine, just it's not the Nvidia 3.5 DLSS vision they have. You can run DLSS in Forza, how's that working out for ya?

 

[TechHalp]

I think how I think based on preconceived notions just like you do, yes.

Problem?

I can run RT just fine, just it's not the Nvidia 3.5 DLSS vision they have. You can run DLSS in Forza, how's that working out for ya?

Don't need dlss for a 4090. Yea, everyone has bias, but it seems pretty dishonest to judge a story you've never seen on a game you've never played and you're reaching hard.

Regardless whether you're being genuine or not, sounds like a low tier political troll rather than any kind of feedback remotely involving the game

 

[john_]

If something lacks a feature it is inferior, there is no 'making them look like they don't have raytracing'. They could, they decided not to put their money into developing it, stop being an apologist.

A much better comparison is AMD blocking DLSS from their sponsored games on purpose, then modders releasing DLSS on the first day the game comes out. Ahem starfield, immortals of aveum,

I am an AMD apologist? No. You just spread Nvidia marketing. If AMD wanted to block DLSS, no mod would enable DLSS on these games. AMD would have made it sure that replacing FSR libraries would lead to a crash.

 

[AusWolf]

If something lacks a feature it is inferior, there is no 'making them look like they don't have raytracing'. They could, they decided not to put their money into developing it, stop being an apologist.

My 7800 XT doesn't have DLSS. Is it inferior to a 2060 that does? No. My Fiesta ST doesn't have lane assist or adaptive cruise control. Is it inferior to a Toyota Prius that does? No, it isn't. Stop making it look like the lack of a feature automatically makes a product inferior.

 

[TechHalp]

My 7800 XT doesn't have DLSS. Is it inferior to a 2060 that does? No. My Fiesta ST doesn't have lane assist or adaptive cruise control. Is it inferior to a Toyota Prius that does? No, it isn't. Stop making it look like the lack of a feature automatically makes a product inferior.

Yes, in those areas it is inferior. In the area of ray tracing you are inferior. In lane assist and cruise control you are inferior.

Get over yourself and stop taking it personally. Basic logic.

I am an AMD apologist? No. You just spread Nvidia marketing. If AMD wanted to block DLSS, no mod would enable DLSS on these games. AMD would have made it sure that replacing FSR libraries would lead to a crash.

Hmm what do you call an agreement in exchange for money that discourages implementation of DLSS and expects prioritization. Oh I got it, a bribe .

'Frank Azor admitted that such agreements provide for money in exchange for technical support (roughly speaking, AMD, like NVIDIA, pays developers for the appearance of a corresponding die at the beginning of the game), and that AMD expects partners to prioritize its technologies over competitors, but stressed that this does not prohibit the implementation of DLSS in such games.'

 

[john_]

Hmm what do you call an agreement in exchange for money that discourages implementation of DLSS and expects prioritization. .

What do you call an agreement in exchange of money that encourages implementation of excess features available only in one manufacturer's cards while killing the performance in almost all other cards? Oh I got it, a bribe. But I am pretty sure you will give another interpretation here, one that will be at the same time a marketing promotion for Nvidia.

 

[TechHalp]

What do you call an agreement in exchange of money that encourages implementation of excess features available only in one manufacturer's cards while killing the performance in almost all other cards? Oh I got it, a bribe. But I am pretty sure you will give another interpretation here, one that will be at the same time a marketing promotion for Nvidia.

Lmao the "I know you are but what am I argument". Must be sweating hard from all that reaching.

It's not a coincidence every AMD sponsored game is lacking DLSS, yet nvidia sponsored games have FSR. It's not a coincidence modders can release DLSS in 1 day yet studios can't do it in 5 years of development.

There isn't, and will never be an excuse for this. If they wanted good raytracing they could do it, they don't want to. That's your problem, don't buy the card if you can't emotionally handle that. Literally turn raytracing off lmfao. You have the power to solve your own misguided issues in 1 second but you'd rather roll around in a puddle complaining you're wet.

So one last time for the people who don't understand: If you lack raytracing, you are inferior in raytracing. Take that personally if you like.

 

[AusWolf]

Yes, in those areas it is inferior. In the area of ray tracing you are inferior. In lane assist and cruise control you are inferior.

Get over yourself and stop taking it personally. Basic logic.

The question was "is it inferior", not "is it inferior in some areas". There's more than one thing that makes a product a good product, and just because it's lacking in one area, it doesn't mean it's overall inferior. Not to mention, the 7800 XT is not inferior to the 2060 in RT. That's not personal, just fact.

 

[TechHalp]

The question was "is it inferior", not "is it inferior in some areas". There's more than one thing that makes a product a good product, and just because it's lacking in one area, it doesn't mean it's overall inferior. Not to mention, the 7800 XT is not inferior to the 2060 in RT. That's not personal, just fact.

I didn't say it was a bad product, that's you once again taking things personally. A good argument doesn't require misinterpretation on purpose.

You had to go back 2 generations and 2 model tiers lower for a comparison because of how inferior you felt for having this card. At the end of the day you're bending over backwards to justify your purchase.

AMD gpu's have always been inferior, but they are reasonably priced and sometimes that's the better option. They've always performed worse on average and at the end of the day you buy what you can afford, but the fact is that anyone with an unlimited budget would choose nvidia on performance.

Unlike their CPU's, their gpu's offer little to no unique benefits at all and unlike nvidia, they're perpetually playing catchup. Their biggest chance to really set the bar was totally blown this generation when they didn't totally price out nvidia or win on performance. Every single AMD gpu I've ever owned has had software issues which take months to years to fix.

 

[AusWolf]

I didn't say it was a bad product, that's you once again taking things personally. A good argument doesn't require misinterpretation on purpose.

I'm not taking things personally. I'm calling your statement factually wrong and narrow-minded in its nature. There is a difference.

You had to go back 2 generations and 2 model tiers lower for a comparison because of how inferior you felt for having this card. At the end of the day you're bending over backwards to justify your purchase.

I didn't. I could have compared to the 4070 and still made a point. I only compared to the 2060 to make the example crystal clear (yet, you still failed to see what I was talking about).

AMD gpu's have always been inferior

That's where you're factually wrong. Look into the company's history (as well as that of ATi before the AMD merger) and you'll see many good examples (Radeon 8500, 9700, X800, HD 7000 series), as well as fuck-ups on Nvidia's side (GeForce FX series, Fermi). Both companies make good products and mess up sometimes.

Unlike their CPU's, their gpu's offer little to no unique benefits at all

Is being cheaper at the same raster performance level, and sometimes more VRAM not a benefit? Right...

 

[john_]

Lmao the "I know you are but what am I argument". Must be sweating hard from all that reaching.

It's not a coincidence every AMD sponsored game is lacking DLSS, yet nvidia sponsored games have FSR. It's not a coincidence modders can release DLSS in 1 day yet studios can't do it in 5 years of development.

There isn't, and will never be an excuse for this. If they wanted good raytracing they could do it, they don't want to. That's your problem, don't buy the card if you can't emotionally handle that. Literally turn raytracing off lmfao. You have the power to solve your own misguided issues in 1 second but you'd rather roll around in a puddle complaining you're wet.

So one last time for the people who don't understand: If you lack raytracing, you are inferior in raytracing. Take that personally if you like.

Oh my. You are so happy supporting Nvidia, you don't even want to hide it. Of course you avoid giving a real answer to what I wrote.

So, you just bypass that Nvidia is pushing developers to optimize their games in a way that not only makes other cards, even older Nvidia models, look bad, but also make games look much worst visualy in anything not supporting a specific Nvidia feature. In the past it was PhysX, then Hairworks and Gameworks, then RayTracing, now Path Tracing and off course we got pretty fast in a situation where developers are unable to optimize a game and Frame generation is absolutely necessary for smooth...... 1080p gaming with an RTX 4090. This is something happening the last 15 years. When Nvidia promoted PhysX, developers "$$$forgot$$$" how to code physics effects in games and they where totally depended on PhysX. Then they stop knowing how to build their own libraries that work great everywhere, and they where totally depended on Gameworks. Then they decided that moving hair means Hairworks only. They could implement their own solution, they didn't know how. Then we had the tessellation fiasco with a full tessellated ocean under a city!!! Then we got RayTracing that was promoted as a breakthrough, but here we are in today where every tech site out there calls even DLSS 3.0 as mediocry without ray recostraction. Developers are starting forgeting how to code lighting without raytracing. Then Frame Generation is here to make RTX 3000 and below and anything non Nvidia look bad, so optimization just died.
Off course when AMD had DirectX 10.1 and Nvidia didn't, Nvidia pushed for the removal of a patch supporting DX10.1 from a specific game, because Radeon cards where getting a 20% boost in a specific area and that was bad for Nvidia of course.

Anyway, having conversation with someone who finds security and feels superior by supporting the strongest brand and playbacking their marketing messages, probably with a smile in their face, certain that the other person "must be sweating hard" is pointless. And It is long ago I was 15 years old to enjoy conversations with a 15 years old mentallity.

Have a nice day.

PS Modders don't need to offer support, so they can throw anything they want from day 1. Still you avoided the fact that if AMD really wanted to block DLSS they could lock the game on FSR libraries. Nvidia was locking the CUDA and PhysX use by disabling those in case the primary card wasn't an Nvidia one. If someone really wants to block something, they can.

 

[Macro Device]

Can you give me some examples of nvidia sponsorship harming a game?

Disclaimer: not sure if that's nGreedia's sponsorship's what's ruined Cyberpunk 2077 but as of patch 1.61 (November '22), there have been no disgusting issues with FSR. Yes, FSR wasn't ideal but it's never been ideal in any game. As of 1.63 (June '23), FSR has developed extreme trailing behind quickly moving objects such as vehicles. As of now (almost November '23, three patches after), FSR does still burn eyes with this bug. So it's at least for four months already CDPR doesn't even try to bring FSR back to normal. I reported this issue from multiple accounts:

What data are they gathering? I am perhaps a bold paratrooper for not detailedly knowing how game development works but, errr, isn't reverting back to one of the previous states a 0 IQ two-click action? Why is there no fixes in a whole month after this reply?

Anyway, once again, I am not sure it's Huang to blame. 'haps it's just CDPR.

 

[lexluthermiester]

What data are they gathering?

Internal testing. When users send error reports they analyze the reported data and attempt to replicate the situation.

Anyway, once again, I am not sure it's Huang to blame. 'haps it's just CDPR.

Are we still whining about CDPR in a thread about Remedy's game? It is clear that you hate them, but such doesn't belong here.

nGreedia's

Also, really with this? Do we not have more maturity than this nonsense?

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

RT is fine, RT path traced a trillion samples per pixel making sure it runs like utter shit on everything is what's not fine.

The point is there is a way to add RT improving visuals while not making the game unplayable on anything that doesn't have a 2000$ price tag.

That misses the POINT.

Dlss3.5 increase performance 500%


This shitcake is batman, Crysis all over again.

You needed physx or it looked less good.
Or the tesselation power for a hidden sea.

Now we Need an RTX 4090 to hit 1080p native.


My two finger salute for this game is infinite.


Not even in a sale is this turdburger being bought.

I hope only 4090 owners buy in at best and the dev sinks out of existence for this Shit.

Bought fools.

 

[JustBenching]

Disclaimer: not sure if that's nGreedia's sponsorship's what's ruined Cyberpunk 2077 but as of patch 1.61 (November '22), there have been no disgusting issues with FSR. Yes, FSR wasn't ideal but it's never been ideal in any game. As of 1.63 (June '23), FSR has developed extreme trailing behind quickly moving objects such as vehicles. As of now (almost November '23, three patches after), FSR does still burn eyes with this bug. So it's at least for four months already CDPR doesn't even try to bring FSR back to normal. I reported this issue from multiple accounts:

View attachment 318993
What data are they gathering? I am perhaps a bold paratrooper for not detailedly knowing how game development works but, errr, isn't reverting back to one of the previous states a 0 IQ two-click action? Why is there no fixes in a whole month after this reply?

Anyway, once again, I am not sure it's Huang to blame. 'haps it's just CDPR.

DLSS had ghosting issues for - probably a year or so. So neither of them have to do with nvidia, else the DLSS issue would have been fixed instantly, but it wasn't.

 

[Chomiq]

At least if it will run like ass with all the RT features on there will be a valid reason for it.

Nowadays even shitty Unity games opt for DLSS to cover up lack of any performance optimization and look the same as the stuff released 10 years ago.

 

[iameatingjam]

I never had much interest in ray tracing, although based on some screenshots from alan wake, I'm hoping it doesn't get to the point where you have to use ray tracing, just to get the same quality of lighting effects that non-rt based games used just fine 4 years ago. Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself, I thought we'd at least be safe until the next console generation idk. I understand rt is easier for developers and thats fine I guess, as long as the hardware is there to support it, and I really don't think we are there yet.