1st week of March.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Alan Wake PC | Tech, performance and information thread
- Thread starter derFeef
- Start date
1st week of March.
likedamaster
Member
A lot of great features but not optimized well, in my opinion... or maybe it's my x1600 monitor causing low fps. 
plagiarize
Banned
A lot of great features but not optimized well, in my opinion... or maybe it's my x1600 monitor causing low fps.
i don't think it's a case of lack of optimisation. i think it's a case of the game doing a lot at once. again, remember the game couldn't hold 30 fps at 540p with certain effects being done at half that resolution on the 360.
it's not like this thing was rock solid at 720p like RE5 or Dead Space 2 (say).
A lot of great features but not optimized well, in my opinion... or maybe it's my x1600 monitor causing low fps.
On gamefaqs (yes, I know) someone said something about the game running best on 285.62 Nvidia drivers. I have no idea if it's true or not, but its worth investigating more I guess.
Thanks. Going for the Steam edition then, just saw that the physical release will be 20 more expensive, ugh.
metareferential
Member
Downloading.
It's a shame that already a lot of users are having performance issues. Benchmarks suggested otherwise (even knowing how results may vary between different setups).
It's a shame that already a lot of users are having performance issues. Benchmarks suggested otherwise (even knowing how results may vary between different setups).
plagiarize
Banned
best not go there. some people do have high connection speeds.
It's called fiber connections, you should check it out.
Downloads 8gb in 30 minutes, phew.
Yeah not available where I live, or at least at my region where I live - Stuck with 2mbit
plagiarize
Banned
i wish they'd bring fiber over the bridges to Cape Cod, but it's not looking like it's going to happen any time soon, but that's off topic.
is it maxing out your GPU or CPU by the way? the draw distance sliders put more CPU load onto the game. if your maxing out CPU try bring those down a bit.
that you can crank a game beyond a high end system doesn't make it poorly optimised i don't think. the game cranked is way beyond the 360 version. graphically it's up there for PC imho.
hah, watch it run like shit on my PC and me completely change my tune in a couple of hours
Im on 4mbit [25$ per month, unlimited download], four more hours to go. I will be playing it around midnight here in CET timezone.
Sadly i am limited to crapy goverment owned ADSL line. Privatly owned cable companies [none in my reach] are offering three times faster speeds for the same money.
Sadly i am limited to crapy goverment owned ADSL line. Privatly owned cable companies [none in my reach] are offering three times faster speeds for the same money.
Sorry to sound rude but can we stop pretending this game is some sort of graphical monster? At maxed out settings, it barely even touches other games running at similar or even lower settings. So many terrible textures, 3D models are pretty bad, animations are flat, water looks weird and the "distance" is basically just huge slaps of simple polygons. Oh and the vegetation is also very underwhelming. It all comes together to create a nice image, artistically but a graphical powerhouse it's not.
Even in the start nightmare sequence where everything is covered in black, fog and there's no real distance to draw the game is just chugging along.
And it's completely maxing out my GPU, CPU is barely hitting 15-20% throughout.
what is your pc setup?
jediyoshi
Member
i7 2600k @ 4.5
580GTX Twin Frozr II/OC
8GB of Ram
Good reply, except I can download a metric ton of high res textures and mods and the game was always running 60FPS ( Vsync ) locked.
This just looks underwhelming and does it at terrible framerates.
Cjdamon042
Member
Well I was about 5-10 minutes away from playing, but for some reason it randomly started the download again from 0%...and is now downloading slower than it did before. Got over an hour left now.
Slightly confused lol
EDIT: Ah ok, restarting Steam fixes that. Thank god.
Slightly confused lol
EDIT: Ah ok, restarting Steam fixes that. Thank god.
Same thing happened to me right now! I was not near completion, but download is restarted with crappy speed.
Turn something down then and still have a far superior version of the game compared to the 360 version.
I love when a game is graphically taxing above the power available, you dont always need to max everything.
Ciastek3214
Junior Member
You never fail to deliver.
plagiarize
Banned
well sorry to be rude back to you then, but what the hell do you think your GPU is doing? it's real time lighting a 2k draw distance to a very high quality. when the vegetation starts blowing around moving, when the best weather effects i can remember roll in... that's where your GPU is being taxed.
assets wise, yeah, they aren't the best, but you have to completely ignore everything else to expect that this game should run like butter.
the only other game i can think of that lights this scale of environment and this amount of vegetation in real time to this standard of lighting is Crysis 1. max everything out in Crysis 1. do you run the game locked at 60 fps?
Yes, that was my goal when I spend thousands of dollars to maintain my PC, just to get a version that's better than the 360 equivalent. Not to get a high framerate, superior IQ and a performance on par with every other moderately optimized game out there.
First thing I did, never tested it with 4x
2k draw distance, how naive are you? There's NOTHING OUT IN THE DISTANCE. In the nightmare sequence IT'S ALL BLACK, THERE'S NOTHING. If they are rendering advanced lighting on textures that are not visible and are hidden away, that's why the game is running so shit.
When you are in daylight, the distance are simple polygons, there's nothing being drawn out there except a few houses and some simple trees, game development 101.
And vegetation in the game is horrid. I know you're excited about the game but stop throwing out this completely stupid arguments. This game is in no way comparable to Crysis.
Not 8x?
Need more infos, FPS and so on. "Runs like shit" isn't doing it for me. Have you played it on the 360 btw?I have pretty much the same spec as you, I also spent a lot of money, I cant say to much until i have tried it myself, but if its hitting 100% gpu, then its doing something to a much higher degree than the 360 version.
plagiarize
Banned
the same is true of crysis though... and the texture resolution and the number of polygons in those distant objects don't really have anything to do with doing lighting calculations over a much bigger area.
the engine renders things to a distance of 2k. that isn't an opinion. you'll soon see that there are levels where you can see something really far away that you seamlessly move out to.
Not 8x?
Not much to say, FPS is all over the place, even in cramped places with not much to draw it seems to be sluggish. It'll bounce around 25-40 FPS and in some scenes it'll shoot up to 50. I will say that I'm playing on a 30" monitor, so my resolution is much higher but I still maintain my stance that this game has nothing that warrants the low performance, it does nothing no other game hasn't done.
And yes, I've tried playing the 360 version for an hour or two. The low resolution and the blur got to me.
Also, you need to bump up the mouse sensitivity quite a bit because it's really working against you.
IcyBlueStrawberry
Member
You really didn't think that information was relevant from the beginning?
Yes, every other game in the world runs fine except this game, MUST BE THAT MONITOR!
People are way too defensive over a poorly optimized game that doesn't even look that good from a graphical standpoint ( Artistic style is nice )
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=35197434&postcount=2339
Downsampled however
Just fired it up for a little bit before I get back to work and the performance seemed ok.
Min FPS: 36
Max FPS: 76
Avg FPS: 51
Have the AA set to 2x but since I'm playing on a HDTV it's not a big deal. Do you guys think I should set FXAA to high or just leave it off?
Specs:
i5 2500k @ 4.0
6950 Twin Frozr II
8GB of Ram
Min FPS: 36
Max FPS: 76
Avg FPS: 51
Have the AA set to 2x but since I'm playing on a HDTV it's not a big deal. Do you guys think I should set FXAA to high or just leave it off?
Specs:
i5 2500k @ 4.0
6950 Twin Frozr II
8GB of Ram
IcyBlueStrawberry
Member
Some games that run like shit at 2560x1600 are much better at 1080p from what I've seen.
EDIT: I'm not defending the game at all, I'm just saying that you got a few people worried because they assumed you were playing at 1080p.
Domstercool
Member
Weird, I have FXAA on high with my 6990 card and all settings maxed (I have to turn blur off though as there's some weird arse shadow bug with the enemies where the shadow blurs all over the screen, lol) and I get solid 60fps with vync on. Supposedly the game doesn't work well with crossfire cards too.
plagiarize
Banned
he'd need to push 16 times the pixels of the 360 version to run at 60 fps. 16 times!
do people think Alan Wake ran at 540p on 360 because 'lol'?
edit: yep. maths is fixed.
Weird, I have FXAA on high with my 6990 card and all settings maxed (I have to turn blur off though as there's some weird arse shadow bug with the enemies where the shadow blurs all over the screen, lol) and I get solid 60fps with vync on. Supposedly the game doesn't work well with crossfire cards too.
apparently AMD put together a fix for crossfire that has them at about 60% scaling. not sure what drivers that's part of. SLI is currently borked but i understand crossfire is not, at least not with the right drivers (or profile perhaps).
you should be ok...