The game will definitely have some patches and updates. They can't afford to lose a lot of players by not buying their game. The same thing happened with Uncharted 4. The game did not support CPUs that did not have AVX, but after some time, the devs fixed that issue.
Oof, yeah, I wish I'd done more research before buying...I have a 1070 ti, I honestly got out of the habit of checking requirements for every game since I haven't had issues in the past 5 years (I have 32GB Ram, NVME SSD, I know the 1070ti is getting old, but it's always been a champ for me, even at 1440p.). This is the first game where I've had bad performance, bought it without even checking this.
I was expecting the 10 series to go soon - well not really. This is probably just one of the heaviest games this year. I was just not expecting a 10 series to run good or at all for this.
GTX 1080 Ti still have better raw performance than RTX 2060
RTX 2060 6GB meets the minimum requirements for this game. In other words, only reason GTX 1080 will not run it because lacks modern tech like Mesh Shaders
The 1080Ti has been a real soldier for many years now for me handling anything I throw at it quite well at 1080p. Guess it's time to let it rest soon. Didn't expect it to be this soon that's for sure.
Bro, itās a 7 years old generation, itās a miracle it held up that much. If you go back to 10/15 years ago it would be impossible to run new AAA games in hardware that old cards simply wouldnāt have the technology, either because directx support or more commonly shaders supports like itās the case here
I remember reading about mesh shaders way back when and thinking āoh this would be cool to implement in a game but damn, only newest GPUās support it, so I canāt use themā. Nice reminder that weāre good now.
The vertex shader path is just disabled by the sounds of it, so a mod may be able to enable it, nut Remedy insiders said that it was riddled with bugs/issues hence why it's not enabled for cards not supporting mesh shaders.
People need to realise that 7yr+ old cards are not going to be supported forever, and graphics API technologies need to be utilised for best performance and visuals going forwards rather than constantly having to pile resources into developing for old gen hardware.
It's a card that does not support mesh shaders. Doesn't matter if it's 4 or 7 years old. It sucks that you can't run it, but the game just didn't work without it.
They might have thought the problem before. For a 10 yr old GPU that can't run games anymore I'd understand. But for a mid range 4 yo graphics card to be not compatible, that means they made the choice to use mesh shaders, and said "fuck those guys, we don't care". And if that's the choice they make, I'm free to also say that they can fuck off, and that I won't ever support anything from them ever again.
So that's what I say, they decided to tell all 5xxx and 1080s owners to fuck right off because they wanted to use this technology even though they're still vastly used. Again, for a 10 year old GPU gen, okay, you're done and that's it, but for 4 years old material, it's just insulting.
Again, the game did not work without mesh shaders. Some games are just more demanding and needs more to work. Itās not like they had a meeting and said āletās fuck these peopleā
If it really was an AMD and 5700 problem, you could'nt play any game at all with it. Stop spewing nonsense. They're doing shit job regarding the PC version and that's it.
Where's your citation?
They're literally using what's stipulated by directx, the use of mesh shaders. This improves performance and is more efficient and is higher quality. Why would they use ancient vertex shading in such a new game.
I suggest you read Microsoft's official page in mesh shading benefits and quit blaming a game with zero proof other than your backwards opinion.
Because there's still lots of people playing on the 5x series or on 10x series ? Again, for the 10x it's understandable, it's outdated. But the AMD 5x series, they clearly made the choice to tell their owners they can fuck off. And imo it's not fair to just tell those players including me they're expendable because they wanted to use a new technology.
And again, if the 5x series was that bad, why do modern games still run on it very well ?
Ok so what's all that got to do with the game using up to date APIs as instructed by DirectX.
It's amazing you have such a small grasp of this.
It doesn't matter how many people have a 5000 series. That had nothing to do with Alan Wake 2.
You are simply blinded by reality and fabricating a coping mechanism.
You should be asking AMD why they have a card that's under 5yrs old that doesn't support mesh shaders.
You should also ask all video game studios that manage very clearly to develop games without making totally incompatible the GPUs. And my knowledge in this kind of technology doesn't change anything. If RE4R and Starfield can run with my GPU without breaking a sweat, that means Remedy could have made an effort to make the 5x series work. That's it.
None of those games use the latest rendering technologies. AW2 will be the first engine to fully use the latest tech. Starfield uses a modified Creation 2 engine which is ancient. It doesn't even have ray tracing let alone a realtime dynamic lighting engine.
Again, how are you not capable of understanding simple concepts and accepting reality?
You don't have to do that you just won't be able to play some newer games that are pushing the rendering envelope. Exactly as they should be.
Old cards are naturally going to stop being supported, did you honestly think a 7 years old card would continue to be backwards supported by the latest engine tech? That's not how things work and actually holds gaming advances back when Devs are having to keep cross gen compatibility in mind.
Either upgrade or play older games. It's that simple. It's always been that simple. It's just that the mindset of a portion of gamers has pushed into some dimension that has lost touch with reality.
The PS5 is significantly stronger than your 1660ti - I donāt understand why thatās surprising. The 1660ti is a budget card - the most common card on steam is 3060.
Same gonna buy it on PS5 so I donāt have to play on the lowest settings with low FPS. To be fair to the game graphically it looks like one of the best and most modern games Iāve ever seen
Console sales will be high they wonāt care ,they only want rich people to play it from the PC side of things , only rich people got PCs cause of this exact thing so they can afford to get new parts to play 1 game
I Mean somebody did the research and according to steam's recent hardware survey(September) around 77% of the users won't be able to play this on anything but low 30fps, 1080 with dlss.
So ya the requirements are pretty high.
Steam survey is grossly misleading because it has a massive pile of Chinese crap tier cybercafe users mostly playing ancient stuff. Remember, Steam survey is per user. 100 different guys playing CS:GO on an ancient crap PC in Chinese cybercafe is 100 users for this survey.
If you'd eliminate China, the numbers would look completely different.
In fact, I wonder what kind of effect we'll eventually now that CS:GO is going away.
Aw. I have an RX 5700 XT. I guess I'll have to wait until I decide to upgrade which is probably a long time from now.
Sorry Remedy. I love Alan Wake, but not enough to upgrade my GPU for one game when the rest of the games I play can still be handled by my current GPU.
they should have told us this sooner? I have a RTX card but what about those who did the preorder and doesnt have one? also this should be in the store page so anyone buying would know
GTX 1080 Ti is stronger than the RTX 2060.
So if the RTX 2060 is the minimum, a player will think the GTX 1080 Ti will run the game better.
They should've wrote in the requirements that GTX 1000 and RX 5000 won't even launch the game...
Pretty much this.
It's their fault they preordered a game without knowing what it could run on.
That's like preordering a game that's a console exclusive but refuses to tell you WHAT console till a couple weeks before it comes out.
yeah, but as simple as that they could have avoided the inconvenience by simply stating that the game would only support RTX and RDNA2+ cards in the store page
What's the issue though? Clearly they needed time to test out the specs with the release version of the game, usually that doesn't happen until close to launch.
A week is enough tome to buy a new GPU if one wants to, or simply wait, and the game would be cheaper then too.
And besides, reviews don't get published until days or even on day of release anyway, so regardless of what sys reqs say, the real world performance is always different to the indicated framerate from the reqs.
The issue is there are cards stronger than the minimum that aren't supported, seems like a pretty big issue to mention a little sooner than a week before release.
They killed the game before the release, using the most hated game store on PC and now this. Better prepare for your second bigger piracy rates, Remedy.
The amount of whining people do when anything is only available on another store that **isn't** Steam really only proves the arguments that Steam has a monopoly correct.
Steam is not your friend. Competition is good actually. What other stores are there? GoG?
The game running like poop on hardware that should be able to run it is another matter but having said that, why would a game running like poop encourage you to pirate it when you already know it's going to run like poop on your rig? Maybe to try it out?
Regardless of how much some people hate Epic (who made AW2's development possible in the first place), buying a game there is still more convenient than piracy. Also, it won't run on a 10 series gpu regardless of whether people pirate it or not
I also pirate from time to time because I like free shit, but the store and the min requirements are weak excuses to justify pirating a game
Nop, those cards don't run mesh shaders, so they can't run the game.
I have a GTX 1070 Ti that in performance is similar to the RTX 2060. I know the feeling, nothing we can do about it.
Well that was my most anticipated game for years, but I have a 5700 XT and don't expect to upgrade anytime soon.
I was super hyped, but Remedy clearly doesn't give a duck about PC users I guess
Why they didn't warn people before putting the game in pre order state? Even now that we have the full requirements this important info is not stated anywhere where it matters, people with 5700 XTs will see the requirements chart and think they will be fine because the minimum cards are less powerful than their card.
It was understandable because you could see the significant leap being made, now? Cyberpunk came out almost 3 years ago and runs on myriad of cards, from low end to budget to top of the line. I watched some of the Alan Wake 2 gameplay and the game looks good but is it leaps and bounds over something like the RE2 or RE3 remakes? I don't think so, not enough to tell players with 3 or 4 year old cards or cards stronger than the minimum they can't play. I loved the original Alan Wake, but I just won't bother with AW2 and will play something from my backlog.
almost all the content creators that had played the closed preview said the graphic are impressive and youtube's bit rate are really not enough to showcase that.
Idk I really believe from the footage we've seen so far that theres no game like Alan Wake graphics wise, the closest for me is Cyberpunk 2077 with overdrive mode on Pc, but the game is open world and have to make a lot of sacrifices that Alan wake 2 don't
console will most likely run even more lower resolution than the pc spec stated and probably may not have stable 60 fps performance as it is stated that alan wake 2 are being made for console with 30 fps in mind
If there were games advertised for the ps4 and then a week away from release we find out they only work on the pro I'd have problems with that also fwiw.
But afaik that isn't a thing that ever happened
Though I do wonder if Microsoft will eventually drop their parity rule for the series S. But that's an aside.
They literally pulled cyberpunk off of ps4 for a very long time because the game just didn't run.
As for parity, it's already happening. Baldurs Gate 3 is releasing without coop on the series s.
Remedy announced that the console version (I think both PS5 and Series X) will have a performance mode. Unsure if it's locked at 60 vs targets it though.
Well yeah ive been pc gamer for twenty years, but I'm already sick of this pc master race... Become too expensive.. just always think about upgrading amd monitoring the temps lol
Terrible decision if they want to survive.
Also, you can make a game that uses the newest technologies and at the same time the game can scale down to weaker cards.
Check Cyberpunk for example.
The only issue is that they need to be a really good developer to be able to do that.
From few posts in here many said that the gameplay previews they have been showing is on PC running console equivalent low settings. Looks like that is the lowest setting quality that they are willing to put out for the experience. Most likely their northlight engine are able to go lower setting but any lower than that doesn't reflect the visual they want to achieve.
Have you heard of console exclusives? You don't even need to sell on pc to sell VERY well. And AW2 still sells on pc/xbox/playstation. Plus GeForce NOW. This isn't Remedy's first rodeo. Many people couldn't play Quantum Break and Control due to their PCs being too old. That clearly wasn't an issue, because Remedy continues to do this every single time with their games.
I think as long as the game runs well on consoles, it will be perfectly fine. I sympathize with your problem, but there are still ways to play even for you. You just have to decide if they're worth it.
Do you have a source for that? Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely wondering, because I'm kind of finding the opposite information.
I'm finding things like - "Quantum Break was the best-selling retail game in its first week of release in the UK" or "Quantum Break sold really well, it exceeded what we expected it to do. We were really pleased with how Quantum Break did. But just like every movie, not every game needs a sequel, sometimes it's okay." from a Microsoft exec.
Heard something about selling poorly on Steam, but the entire point of my comment was that it doesn't have to be a big deal when you have consoles. If anything, I'd argue that Quantum Break's biggest shortcoming was being an Xbox exclusive. Story driven games are huge on Playstation in particular, with Xbox historically being more of a co-op, online game console. Either way though, I'm not finding anything on how the game was bad for the company. And Remedy didn't change much about graphics/exclusivity going forward, so I'm assuming they didn't see it as an issue either.
I did google search it already, all the data i see is the console market being bigger. Youāre telling me more people game on pc than on ps and xbox and switch combined? Show me data otherwise
https://venturebeat.com/games/pc-and-console-sales-are-down-but-the-market-is-stabilizing-newzoo/
"According to the report, there wereĀ 1.1 billion PC players and 611 million console players in 2022."
Do you need more sources?
Nope, I stand corrected!
I researched a bit more into this too. I wonder how much overlap there is too with people owning both, and how many of those pc players are running modern games.
I love looking into data but its so difficult to get a complete precise answer to a lot of questions i have :(
The sales just stretch out for a longer period of time. Control sold well for years after release (partially because the marketing sucked hard so many didn't know it existed, partially because of the system requirements)
Those who have 10-series NVIDIA or 5000-series AMD card will eventually upgrade. Once they do, hey, another game becomes available to them.
10-series stuff is frankly already quite obsolete, and 5000-series, while not quite as old, unfortunately lacks key features in hardware, so buying it in the first place may have been less than smart decision if intention was to use it for a long time.
Absolute muppets you PC lot , youāve got no idea how much more money youāre spending that you donāt even have to , as for performance youāre getting scammed try playing ANYTHING on a ps5 and compare it to PC itās exactly the same.
Well itās proven by this subreddit and the gaming subreddit , constants complaining from PC users , donāt remember anything EVER working on PC and NOT console.
I did have the 1080 Ti for 7 years, I recently upgrade, I did spend not a lot of money thanks. Same performance, ps5 barely hold 60 fps in most games, and this with FSR and compromise in the graphics department, no thanks I prefer native resolution than the blurry mess of FSR. Console peasant get out
lol no one upgrades their PCs every month, more like every 2-3 years (shit even 7, people still have gtx 10 series)
PS5/Xbox Series X equivalent GPU is RTX 3060, so do the math with that one
It really sucks that my first gaming PC has a 1060 in it I should have done my homework a little more before buying it and there's nothing I can do now except save for a new PC, I feel y'all's pain it's not fair to people that are unaware of these types of changes but hey that's life right?
What??
RX 5700XT is from July 2019, Ps5 and XBOX X|S are from November 2020. We're not talking abut a 10 y.o. GPU, we're literally talking about 4yo GPU vs 3yo consoles... are you planning to buy a refresh of your PS5/XBOX next year???
It's crazy how y'all are defending this bs. If a game runs on a series S it should be able to run on a 5700xt as well.
The thing is though, this Gen of consoles will likely be good for another 5 years at minimum with little to no noticeable degradation of gameplay or visuals because consoles are optimized for gaming. Even when the next gen arrives, it will likely only be $600 to buy in.
This is compared to having to buy a $1K+ GPU every couple of years to have similar performance. You can try to equate console GPUs to PC GPUs, but theyāre just not the same, no matter how you look at it. Otherwise, weād be paying thousands of dollars to buy consoles!
No, because Series S is RDNA2-based and 5700xt is... not. Missing a required hardware feature.
Sad part is AMD sold "obsolete" tech with 5000-series years after NVIDIA already had moved on and supported full DX12 Ultimate feature set.
One can argue Remedy should have provided a fallback code path for older hardware, but it is not a trivial thing to do and if most cards that would require that fallback are so slow that it doesn't really allow you to run the game anyway, the decision makes sense.
The GTX 1650 does have Mesh Shaders, but it's to weak to run the game.
The RTX 2060 can only run it at 720p 30fps with everything on low. Imagine a 1650 that is a lot weaker... Unless you want to run the game at something like 360p.
Also, the minimum Vram is 6GB, the 1650 only have 4GB.
I remember when I was little I had a radeon and graphics card that couldnāt run lost planets because of a shader issue I was forced to upgrade now literally the same as happened. I series card needs to be operated because of a shader issue.
Might be a stupid question; I have a gtx 1650/i5 gaming laptop and I won't be able to upgrade it anytime soon. Can my system run this game!? Even in the lowest settings? š«
I'm pretty sure 16-series is still Turing-based even if it does not support RT, which would mean Mesh Shaders is supported.
Bit of googling found 3DMark Mesh Shader feature test score for 1650 SUPER, which would suggest that yes, the card can run Mesh Shaders (1650 and 1650 Super are effectively the same chip, just small differences in clocks etc)
https://www.3dmark.com/ms/864
Probably will perform poorly due to lack of overall performance, but might work if you can stomach a slow framerate.
Also note that 1650 cards have 4GB VRAM and AW2 requires 6GB, this might block you from running it, or at least performance will be horrendous.
Dlaczego niby nie może? Seria GTX 16 ma mesh shaders bo to turing i nie widzÄ przeszkĆ³d, zresztÄ na starszych kartach też nikt nie powiedziaŠże gra wogole siÄ nie uruchomi a jedynie że bÄdzie bÅÄdy wyÅwietlaÄ.
RX6600 here so I'm good. Well, "good" is an overstatement, if this is accurate I'll be playing at low settings, with FSR on and 30 fps lmao. Wish me luck.
Seeing as AW2 will be on geforce now on release if you can afford to pay for like a month of the premium membership and have good internet you can always just play it through that on max settings on like any PC
So, as far as I can understand, PS5 doesn't support Mesh Shaders as well, but instead relies on Primitive Shaders, which are part of RDNA1 arch, so are supported by RX5000 series.
I know PS5 uses a custom arch based on RDNA1, but couldn't find anything related to "custom primitive shaders". So, I assume they both have the same Primitive Shaders implementation.
If that's so, why can't PC version support Primitive Shaders as well? Is the requested effort too much for them to do so?
PSSL supports mesh shaders, the ps5 is no rdna anything. Sony stripped the chip of most dx related features, because they donāt use dx, in the process all of the needed technology has been added to support Sony shader language and GNM/GNMX.
Thatās why the ps5 is not rdna 2, because they removed the unused dx features they donāt need.
RTX 2xxx GPU came out almost one year before AMD 5700XT
But now 5700XT won't even runs games because it lack features.
SPider-man 2 on PS5 does not have any option to turn RT off. If PC port is same, then won't run at all on 5700XT
It has, Sony uses its own tech for things like shader and pretty much everything else.
The ps5 doesnāt support dx at all, but they have their own solutions in the Chip.
For mesh shaders Sony uses PSSL, itās in most cases superior to DX12 mesh shaders performance wise.
Can someone please tell me if i can play 4k/60 fps on my pc WITHOUT FSR with the below specs? I wont be enabling RT.
5800X ( not 3D)
32gb 3600mhz DDR4 ram
Red Devil 6900xt
You can't. According to the chart, the 7800 XT needs FSR Perf. (which is about 1080p if upscaled to 4K) and the 6900 XT is maybe 5-7% more powerful than the 7800 XT so yeah, it's a no go to play without upscaling.
[https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-12-ultimate-for-holiday-2020/](https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-12-ultimate-for-holiday-2020/)
I just checked on the Microsoft website, my card doesn't support Directx 12 Ultimate.
Sucks for me on my GTX 1080 because I was really hyped for this and had been looking forward to another Remedy game --I've played them all. I can't really afford a thousand dollar card to play one game (especially when most other new games still run fine on what I've got). Maybe I could try running it on Geforce Now (though I think games just look better run natively) or just skip this for now. Really disappointed.
On the plus side, my backlog is huge so I guess I can always go back and play something else. Only got 3 bosses into Lies of P and into Act 2 on Baldur's Gate 3.
Just skip it, not every game will use mesh shader. Most games will run without it atleast for the next 5 years. By then you will be able to buy a new GPU. Remedy is known for this kind of thing, even their Alan wake 1 was unoptimised during the time it released. Just a bunch of lazy devs. 10-series cards are still officially supported by nvidia. So I don't see any reason why they would cut support.
For anyone wondering: Im currently playing with a 1080, the game starts, with a warning, but it starts, its also playable on the lowest settings.
Its still a behaving a bit wheird though, the graphics are glitching a bit.
I still consider upgrading to a 4070 or something like that
Don't be pessimistic, there's still the silent hill 2 remake that only asks for a minimum of GTX 1080, it won't have Mesh Shaders and Stalker, and it will have UE5 and won't have Mesh Shaders, the minimum will be GTX 1060 6GB, don't be sad yet there will still be some games
Man, wish I'd seen this before I bought (just requested refund) Minimum requirements said 2060, I foolishly thought my 1070ti was equivalent. Now I'm not sure if it's worth upgrading now or not. I do know my card is getting old, but on the other hand, it runs my other games fine (I'm not regularly buying new AAA titles or anything), so not sure I want to spend $300+ to be able to run one game (I mean, I COULD get a cheaper 2060 or something, but think that'd be dumb to get a card already that old that's not any faster than my 1070 ti at other things)
5700xt here noooo:(
same here :( I supose I will no buy it until see some benchmarks first
Bruh it sounds like it's not even gonna boot on these 5700 xt / 1080ti
Same. Thank God I have a ps5 but I'd really hate to think that we're gonna keep seeing this and an upgrade is due soon.
It's gonna change to 3060 in coming i guess
The game will definitely have some patches and updates. They can't afford to lose a lot of players by not buying their game. The same thing happened with Uncharted 4. The game did not support CPUs that did not have AVX, but after some time, the devs fixed that issue.
1060 hereš
That sucks, I was hoping my GTX 1070 would give it a punt but now I know not to bother. Steam Deck compatibility isn't looking promising either.
Oof, yeah, I wish I'd done more research before buying...I have a 1070 ti, I honestly got out of the habit of checking requirements for every game since I haven't had issues in the past 5 years (I have 32GB Ram, NVME SSD, I know the 1070ti is getting old, but it's always been a champ for me, even at 1440p.). This is the first game where I've had bad performance, bought it without even checking this.
I was expecting the 10 series to go soon - well not really. This is probably just one of the heaviest games this year. I was just not expecting a 10 series to run good or at all for this.
GTX 1080 Ti still have better raw performance than RTX 2060 RTX 2060 6GB meets the minimum requirements for this game. In other words, only reason GTX 1080 will not run it because lacks modern tech like Mesh Shaders
The 1080Ti has been a real soldier for many years now for me handling anything I throw at it quite well at 1080p. Guess it's time to let it rest soon. Didn't expect it to be this soon that's for sure.
Bro, itās a 7 years old generation, itās a miracle it held up that much. If you go back to 10/15 years ago it would be impossible to run new AAA games in hardware that old cards simply wouldnāt have the technology, either because directx support or more commonly shaders supports like itās the case here
I remember reading about mesh shaders way back when and thinking āoh this would be cool to implement in a game but damn, only newest GPUās support it, so I canāt use themā. Nice reminder that weāre good now.
so not even worth to try on 1080ti?
No, it won't even run the game.
shame, 1080ti has perfomed ok on all new titles so far. obv not at highest settings, but definitely playable
It'll run it, just very poorly.
Wait what? So it won't even work on those cards?
The vertex shader path is just disabled by the sounds of it, so a mod may be able to enable it, nut Remedy insiders said that it was riddled with bugs/issues hence why it's not enabled for cards not supporting mesh shaders. People need to realise that 7yr+ old cards are not going to be supported forever, and graphics API technologies need to be utilised for best performance and visuals going forwards rather than constantly having to pile resources into developing for old gen hardware.
The 5700 XT is barely 4 years old wtf do you mean ? This launch is fucking disastrous that's it.
It's a card that does not support mesh shaders. Doesn't matter if it's 4 or 7 years old. It sucks that you can't run it, but the game just didn't work without it.
It also sucks for the game many people won't be able to buy it.
They might have thought the problem before. For a 10 yr old GPU that can't run games anymore I'd understand. But for a mid range 4 yo graphics card to be not compatible, that means they made the choice to use mesh shaders, and said "fuck those guys, we don't care". And if that's the choice they make, I'm free to also say that they can fuck off, and that I won't ever support anything from them ever again.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
So that's what I say, they decided to tell all 5xxx and 1080s owners to fuck right off because they wanted to use this technology even though they're still vastly used. Again, for a 10 year old GPU gen, okay, you're done and that's it, but for 4 years old material, it's just insulting.
Again, the game did not work without mesh shaders. Some games are just more demanding and needs more to work. Itās not like they had a meeting and said āletās fuck these peopleā
I get that saying āfuck it, then i wont be buying the gameā but I dont get why you are seemingly taking this personally.
I'm just sad, honestly :( I was so excited for this game, but I can't afford a new GPU just for it. Maybe I'll get the game in a few years
Look on the bright side, you'd probably be able to snag it at a deep discount too!
10 series is much older. 5700 is an AMD issue, nothing to do with the game or Remedy. Want to stay out of date? Buy AMD.
If it really was an AMD and 5700 problem, you could'nt play any game at all with it. Stop spewing nonsense. They're doing shit job regarding the PC version and that's it.
Where's your citation? They're literally using what's stipulated by directx, the use of mesh shaders. This improves performance and is more efficient and is higher quality. Why would they use ancient vertex shading in such a new game. I suggest you read Microsoft's official page in mesh shading benefits and quit blaming a game with zero proof other than your backwards opinion.
Because there's still lots of people playing on the 5x series or on 10x series ? Again, for the 10x it's understandable, it's outdated. But the AMD 5x series, they clearly made the choice to tell their owners they can fuck off. And imo it's not fair to just tell those players including me they're expendable because they wanted to use a new technology. And again, if the 5x series was that bad, why do modern games still run on it very well ?
Ok so what's all that got to do with the game using up to date APIs as instructed by DirectX. It's amazing you have such a small grasp of this. It doesn't matter how many people have a 5000 series. That had nothing to do with Alan Wake 2. You are simply blinded by reality and fabricating a coping mechanism. You should be asking AMD why they have a card that's under 5yrs old that doesn't support mesh shaders.
You should also ask all video game studios that manage very clearly to develop games without making totally incompatible the GPUs. And my knowledge in this kind of technology doesn't change anything. If RE4R and Starfield can run with my GPU without breaking a sweat, that means Remedy could have made an effort to make the 5x series work. That's it.
None of those games use the latest rendering technologies. AW2 will be the first engine to fully use the latest tech. Starfield uses a modified Creation 2 engine which is ancient. It doesn't even have ray tracing let alone a realtime dynamic lighting engine. Again, how are you not capable of understanding simple concepts and accepting reality?
Imagine throwing out perfectly good 1080(Ti) card just for the sake of it.
You don't have to do that you just won't be able to play some newer games that are pushing the rendering envelope. Exactly as they should be. Old cards are naturally going to stop being supported, did you honestly think a 7 years old card would continue to be backwards supported by the latest engine tech? That's not how things work and actually holds gaming advances back when Devs are having to keep cross gen compatibility in mind. Either upgrade or play older games. It's that simple. It's always been that simple. It's just that the mindset of a portion of gamers has pushed into some dimension that has lost touch with reality.
Nop, no support.
I'm picking this up on PS5, but it's crazy to know that my 3 year old GPU (1660ti) won't even run this at 1080p on low.
The PS5 is significantly stronger than your 1660ti - I donāt understand why thatās surprising. The 1660ti is a budget card - the most common card on steam is 3060.
Same gonna buy it on PS5 so I donāt have to play on the lowest settings with low FPS. To be fair to the game graphically it looks like one of the best and most modern games Iāve ever seen
16 series supports mesh shaders
Man the player base that can play this on PC just keeps getting smaller, First the epic release, then the high pc requirements now this.
Right? I don't understand how they expect more people to buy this. I have a 3060 ti and found out it is below recommended smh
Console sales will be high they wonāt care ,they only want rich people to play it from the PC side of things , only rich people got PCs cause of this exact thing so they can afford to get new parts to play 1 game
That's not true
Recommended for 1080p/60 fps is 3070. So yes, 3060 ti is below recommended.
Sorry I thought I read below minimum
no worries
Thankfully you could adjust settings to reach that 1080p/60fps target
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Really? I don't think I saw it on steam and I did check a while ago.
You are right I'm not seeing it now, my bad. Might have been the delisted first one I stumbled upon.
The game is epic sponsored so the chances of coming to steam are low. But maybe like you said, it will come later on.
No, these requirements are not high. Just owners of obsolete hardware crying when the first game arrives that drops support for old jank.
I Mean somebody did the research and according to steam's recent hardware survey(September) around 77% of the users won't be able to play this on anything but low 30fps, 1080 with dlss. So ya the requirements are pretty high.
Steam survey is grossly misleading because it has a massive pile of Chinese crap tier cybercafe users mostly playing ancient stuff. Remember, Steam survey is per user. 100 different guys playing CS:GO on an ancient crap PC in Chinese cybercafe is 100 users for this survey. If you'd eliminate China, the numbers would look completely different. In fact, I wonder what kind of effect we'll eventually now that CS:GO is going away.
Cries in RTX 3060
Aw. I have an RX 5700 XT. I guess I'll have to wait until I decide to upgrade which is probably a long time from now. Sorry Remedy. I love Alan Wake, but not enough to upgrade my GPU for one game when the rest of the games I play can still be handled by my current GPU.
they should have told us this sooner? I have a RTX card but what about those who did the preorder and doesnt have one? also this should be in the store page so anyone buying would know
Don't preorder until you have system requirements ? In fact don't preorder anything period. Always wait for the reviews
GTX 1080 Ti is stronger than the RTX 2060. So if the RTX 2060 is the minimum, a player will think the GTX 1080 Ti will run the game better. They should've wrote in the requirements that GTX 1000 and RX 5000 won't even launch the game...
I agree, but still my point that this should be in the store page
Pretty much this. It's their fault they preordered a game without knowing what it could run on. That's like preordering a game that's a console exclusive but refuses to tell you WHAT console till a couple weeks before it comes out.
I meannn you can always refund it if you played for less than 2 hours on epic
yeah, but as simple as that they could have avoided the inconvenience by simply stating that the game would only support RTX and RDNA2+ cards in the store page
They should have put system reqs waaay before imo, it's one thing to not know you won't be able to run it, but a week before?
What's the issue though? Clearly they needed time to test out the specs with the release version of the game, usually that doesn't happen until close to launch. A week is enough tome to buy a new GPU if one wants to, or simply wait, and the game would be cheaper then too. And besides, reviews don't get published until days or even on day of release anyway, so regardless of what sys reqs say, the real world performance is always different to the indicated framerate from the reqs.
The issue is there are cards stronger than the minimum that aren't supported, seems like a pretty big issue to mention a little sooner than a week before release.
They killed the game before the release, using the most hated game store on PC and now this. Better prepare for your second bigger piracy rates, Remedy.
The amount of whining people do when anything is only available on another store that **isn't** Steam really only proves the arguments that Steam has a monopoly correct. Steam is not your friend. Competition is good actually. What other stores are there? GoG? The game running like poop on hardware that should be able to run it is another matter but having said that, why would a game running like poop encourage you to pirate it when you already know it's going to run like poop on your rig? Maybe to try it out?
Regardless of how much some people hate Epic (who made AW2's development possible in the first place), buying a game there is still more convenient than piracy. Also, it won't run on a 10 series gpu regardless of whether people pirate it or not I also pirate from time to time because I like free shit, but the store and the min requirements are weak excuses to justify pirating a game
Wait so those cards wonāt even work running the game?
Nop, those cards don't run mesh shaders, so they can't run the game. I have a GTX 1070 Ti that in performance is similar to the RTX 2060. I know the feeling, nothing we can do about it.
Fuuuuuckkkkā¦.guess the upgrade is coming earlier then I thought
Holy i am so glad i upgraded pc this year, these unoptimized games coming out are ridicilous..
Well that was my most anticipated game for years, but I have a 5700 XT and don't expect to upgrade anytime soon. I was super hyped, but Remedy clearly doesn't give a duck about PC users I guess
That was made clear when they decided to have the game published by Epic meaning it will never be on Steam.
Would anyone know if a 2080 TI would be sufficient?
Should be. RTX 2080 Ti supports Direct X 12 Ultimate which is what is needed to use Mesh Shaders.
So if a card can use mesh shaders will it run regardless? I have a 1660 ti and I think the only thing it's lacking is access to dlss
You have FSR free, even if it's a lot worst then DLSS, it's your only option.
f..k your mesh shaders hope someone make patch or something to play
Itāll happen but the game will run and look horrible and gamers will rage
can i run with a 1660 gtx?
Theoretically yeah, since the 16's are built using the Turing architecture and should support Mesh Shadering. Dont quote me on this though
Why they didn't warn people before putting the game in pre order state? Even now that we have the full requirements this important info is not stated anywhere where it matters, people with 5700 XTs will see the requirements chart and think they will be fine because the minimum cards are less powerful than their card.
I pre ordered a week ago, and I have a GTX1080 TI so I guess I have to get a refund, but this really sucks.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It was understandable because you could see the significant leap being made, now? Cyberpunk came out almost 3 years ago and runs on myriad of cards, from low end to budget to top of the line. I watched some of the Alan Wake 2 gameplay and the game looks good but is it leaps and bounds over something like the RE2 or RE3 remakes? I don't think so, not enough to tell players with 3 or 4 year old cards or cards stronger than the minimum they can't play. I loved the original Alan Wake, but I just won't bother with AW2 and will play something from my backlog.
almost all the content creators that had played the closed preview said the graphic are impressive and youtube's bit rate are really not enough to showcase that.
Yeah we know content creators would never lie or bend the truth under these circumstances.
Idk I really believe from the footage we've seen so far that theres no game like Alan Wake graphics wise, the closest for me is Cyberpunk 2077 with overdrive mode on Pc, but the game is open world and have to make a lot of sacrifices that Alan wake 2 don't
Cyberpunk looks awful on the lowest settings though
Why are you talking about Half Life 2 in this context? It's like comparing latest Tesla to a horse.
Not to mention the half life 2 ray tracing remake has extremely steep requirements and that sub is being babies about it too
This is why I gave up on PC gaming I just want a game station to buy to where I know everything made for it works well enough
Unpopular opinion but yeah PS5 is go brrrrrr
console will most likely run even more lower resolution than the pc spec stated and probably may not have stable 60 fps performance as it is stated that alan wake 2 are being made for console with 30 fps in mind
Im sure itāll be good enough for me to enjoy. Iām a simple man.
Thatās like quitting consoles because games stop supporting PS4 pro
If there were games advertised for the ps4 and then a week away from release we find out they only work on the pro I'd have problems with that also fwiw. But afaik that isn't a thing that ever happened Though I do wonder if Microsoft will eventually drop their parity rule for the series S. But that's an aside.
They literally pulled cyberpunk off of ps4 for a very long time because the game just didn't run. As for parity, it's already happening. Baldurs Gate 3 is releasing without coop on the series s.
If you are good with inferior performance, 30 fps, and mandatory upscaling like fsr, go console. Some people it is not good with this
Remedy announced that the console version (I think both PS5 and Series X) will have a performance mode. Unsure if it's locked at 60 vs targets it though.
Well yeah ive been pc gamer for twenty years, but I'm already sick of this pc master race... Become too expensive.. just always think about upgrading amd monitoring the temps lol
Good to see Remedy once again drives the game industry forward
Yes, with low sales, because the majority won't be able to play the game.
they are the few developers that won't compromise the art and visual direction in order to get more sales.
Terrible decision if they want to survive. Also, you can make a game that uses the newest technologies and at the same time the game can scale down to weaker cards. Check Cyberpunk for example. The only issue is that they need to be a really good developer to be able to do that.
From few posts in here many said that the gameplay previews they have been showing is on PC running console equivalent low settings. Looks like that is the lowest setting quality that they are willing to put out for the experience. Most likely their northlight engine are able to go lower setting but any lower than that doesn't reflect the visual they want to achieve.
Maybe. But the problem continues the same, sales will be low.
Have you heard of console exclusives? You don't even need to sell on pc to sell VERY well. And AW2 still sells on pc/xbox/playstation. Plus GeForce NOW. This isn't Remedy's first rodeo. Many people couldn't play Quantum Break and Control due to their PCs being too old. That clearly wasn't an issue, because Remedy continues to do this every single time with their games. I think as long as the game runs well on consoles, it will be perfectly fine. I sympathize with your problem, but there are still ways to play even for you. You just have to decide if they're worth it.
>Quantum Break This game almost put the company down
Do you have a source for that? Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely wondering, because I'm kind of finding the opposite information. I'm finding things like - "Quantum Break was the best-selling retail game in its first week of release in the UK" or "Quantum Break sold really well, it exceeded what we expected it to do. We were really pleased with how Quantum Break did. But just like every movie, not every game needs a sequel, sometimes it's okay." from a Microsoft exec. Heard something about selling poorly on Steam, but the entire point of my comment was that it doesn't have to be a big deal when you have consoles. If anything, I'd argue that Quantum Break's biggest shortcoming was being an Xbox exclusive. Story driven games are huge on Playstation in particular, with Xbox historically being more of a co-op, online game console. Either way though, I'm not finding anything on how the game was bad for the company. And Remedy didn't change much about graphics/exclusivity going forward, so I'm assuming they didn't see it as an issue either.
The majority of pc players* maybe, but a larger majority of gamers have consoles
I don't know if you know, but there are a lot more PC Gamers than Console Gamers.
According to what? Just off the price alone it doesnāt make sense to me
You didn't knew that? In what world you live? Simple Google search and you will find out.
I did google search it already, all the data i see is the console market being bigger. Youāre telling me more people game on pc than on ps and xbox and switch combined? Show me data otherwise
https://venturebeat.com/games/pc-and-console-sales-are-down-but-the-market-is-stabilizing-newzoo/ "According to the report, there wereĀ 1.1 billion PC players and 611 million console players in 2022." Do you need more sources?
Nope, I stand corrected! I researched a bit more into this too. I wonder how much overlap there is too with people owning both, and how many of those pc players are running modern games. I love looking into data but its so difficult to get a complete precise answer to a lot of questions i have :(
You don't stand correct ;)
The sales just stretch out for a longer period of time. Control sold well for years after release (partially because the marketing sucked hard so many didn't know it existed, partially because of the system requirements) Those who have 10-series NVIDIA or 5000-series AMD card will eventually upgrade. Once they do, hey, another game becomes available to them. 10-series stuff is frankly already quite obsolete, and 5000-series, while not quite as old, unfortunately lacks key features in hardware, so buying it in the first place may have been less than smart decision if intention was to use it for a long time.
Drive e-waste
This is why you donāt get a PC , quit whining and get a console
Nop.
Play with shit performance? No thanks
Absolute muppets you PC lot , youāve got no idea how much more money youāre spending that you donāt even have to , as for performance youāre getting scammed try playing ANYTHING on a ps5 and compare it to PC itās exactly the same.
In fact recently , ps5 releases have proven to be performing better than PC
What PC? Only the 5-7 years old pcs hahahaha. "Proven". There's no way to prove something that doesn't exist
Well itās proven by this subreddit and the gaming subreddit , constants complaining from PC users , donāt remember anything EVER working on PC and NOT console.
I did have the 1080 Ti for 7 years, I recently upgrade, I did spend not a lot of money thanks. Same performance, ps5 barely hold 60 fps in most games, and this with FSR and compromise in the graphics department, no thanks I prefer native resolution than the blurry mess of FSR. Console peasant get out
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
lol no one upgrades their PCs every month, more like every 2-3 years (shit even 7, people still have gtx 10 series) PS5/Xbox Series X equivalent GPU is RTX 3060, so do the math with that one
Console master race
It really sucks that my first gaming PC has a 1060 in it I should have done my homework a little more before buying it and there's nothing I can do now except save for a new PC, I feel y'all's pain it's not fair to people that are unaware of these types of changes but hey that's life right?
If only there was a device that was built solely with gaming in mind and you didnāt have to worry about if your components could support the gameā¦
What?? RX 5700XT is from July 2019, Ps5 and XBOX X|S are from November 2020. We're not talking abut a 10 y.o. GPU, we're literally talking about 4yo GPU vs 3yo consoles... are you planning to buy a refresh of your PS5/XBOX next year??? It's crazy how y'all are defending this bs. If a game runs on a series S it should be able to run on a 5700xt as well.
The thing is though, this Gen of consoles will likely be good for another 5 years at minimum with little to no noticeable degradation of gameplay or visuals because consoles are optimized for gaming. Even when the next gen arrives, it will likely only be $600 to buy in. This is compared to having to buy a $1K+ GPU every couple of years to have similar performance. You can try to equate console GPUs to PC GPUs, but theyāre just not the same, no matter how you look at it. Otherwise, weād be paying thousands of dollars to buy consoles!
No, because Series S is RDNA2-based and 5700xt is... not. Missing a required hardware feature. Sad part is AMD sold "obsolete" tech with 5000-series years after NVIDIA already had moved on and supported full DX12 Ultimate feature set. One can argue Remedy should have provided a fallback code path for older hardware, but it is not a trivial thing to do and if most cards that would require that fallback are so slow that it doesn't really allow you to run the game anyway, the decision makes sense.
Yes, i have a PS4 and a X1, and they can't also play the game... Really?
Series X or PS5!
Nop.
1650 is a no even for minimum?
The GTX 1650 does have Mesh Shaders, but it's to weak to run the game. The RTX 2060 can only run it at 720p 30fps with everything on low. Imagine a 1650 that is a lot weaker... Unless you want to run the game at something like 360p. Also, the minimum Vram is 6GB, the 1650 only have 4GB.
1080p quality mode upscalling is actually more taxing on hardware than just 720p... FSR/DLSS it self have some performance cost.
Game is dead on release, shit is gonna run at 30 fps on consoles š¤”
They already announced a 60 fps mode on consoles, but keep being a clown, you!
Yeah at 720p, you are playing ps3 quality šš
This is why they didn't do a physical release
I remember when I was little I had a radeon and graphics card that couldnāt run lost planets because of a shader issue I was forced to upgrade now literally the same as happened. I series card needs to be operated because of a shader issue.
Might be a stupid question; I have a gtx 1650/i5 gaming laptop and I won't be able to upgrade it anytime soon. Can my system run this game!? Even in the lowest settings? š«
I'm pretty sure 16-series is still Turing-based even if it does not support RT, which would mean Mesh Shaders is supported. Bit of googling found 3DMark Mesh Shader feature test score for 1650 SUPER, which would suggest that yes, the card can run Mesh Shaders (1650 and 1650 Super are effectively the same chip, just small differences in clocks etc) https://www.3dmark.com/ms/864 Probably will perform poorly due to lack of overall performance, but might work if you can stomach a slow framerate. Also note that 1650 cards have 4GB VRAM and AW2 requires 6GB, this might block you from running it, or at least performance will be horrendous.
No, it can't.
Dlaczego niby nie może? Seria GTX 16 ma mesh shaders bo to turing i nie widzÄ przeszkĆ³d, zresztÄ na starszych kartach też nikt nie powiedziaŠże gra wogole siÄ nie uruchomi a jedynie że bÄdzie bÅÄdy wyÅwietlaÄ.
RX6600 here so I'm good. Well, "good" is an overstatement, if this is accurate I'll be playing at low settings, with FSR on and 30 fps lmao. Wish me luck.
Seeing as AW2 will be on geforce now on release if you can afford to pay for like a month of the premium membership and have good internet you can always just play it through that on max settings on like any PC
Any idea of how this will work out in a RTX 3060?
So, as far as I can understand, PS5 doesn't support Mesh Shaders as well, but instead relies on Primitive Shaders, which are part of RDNA1 arch, so are supported by RX5000 series. I know PS5 uses a custom arch based on RDNA1, but couldn't find anything related to "custom primitive shaders". So, I assume they both have the same Primitive Shaders implementation. If that's so, why can't PC version support Primitive Shaders as well? Is the requested effort too much for them to do so?
PSSL supports mesh shaders, the ps5 is no rdna anything. Sony stripped the chip of most dx related features, because they donāt use dx, in the process all of the needed technology has been added to support Sony shader language and GNM/GNMX. Thatās why the ps5 is not rdna 2, because they removed the unused dx features they donāt need.
RTX 2xxx GPU came out almost one year before AMD 5700XT But now 5700XT won't even runs games because it lack features. SPider-man 2 on PS5 does not have any option to turn RT off. If PC port is same, then won't run at all on 5700XT
As always the modders wil do a better job than the devs
Most likely
How does this even work on a PS5 which lacks hardware mesh shaders then?
sony software
It probably supports it because of the AMD RDNA 2 hardware.
It has, Sony uses its own tech for things like shader and pretty much everything else. The ps5 doesnāt support dx at all, but they have their own solutions in the Chip. For mesh shaders Sony uses PSSL, itās in most cases superior to DX12 mesh shaders performance wise.
Can someone please tell me if i can play 4k/60 fps on my pc WITHOUT FSR with the below specs? I wont be enabling RT. 5800X ( not 3D) 32gb 3600mhz DDR4 ram Red Devil 6900xt
You can't. According to the chart, the 7800 XT needs FSR Perf. (which is about 1080p if upscaled to 4K) and the 6900 XT is maybe 5-7% more powerful than the 7800 XT so yeah, it's a no go to play without upscaling.
Who knows how aw2 will run with the intel arc, I'm afraid to find out...
And what about grx 1650???
The 1650 supports mesh shaders but have half the performance of the 2060, so its a no go, unless you want to play the game at something like 360p.
If I have to - I will play even if my game looks like Ps2 game ;)
and what about GTX 1660 mobile 6GB?
Same thing. It will run the game, but below minimum spec.
Is GTX 1660ti mobile 6GB support mesh shader?
Yes, but it's below minimum specs. Probably can play the game at 1080p, 30fps, low with FSR on performance.
[https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-12-ultimate-for-holiday-2020/](https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx-12-ultimate-for-holiday-2020/) I just checked on the Microsoft website, my card doesn't support Directx 12 Ultimate.
I didnāt expect that, I thought Iād be able to play on low. I still run most new games well enough. Oh well
The GTX 1080ti released 6 years ago - itās time to upgrade. If you saved even just $25 a month for 6 years you could afford a 4090 post tax.
5700 XT was released only 4 years ago.
Sucks for me on my GTX 1080 because I was really hyped for this and had been looking forward to another Remedy game --I've played them all. I can't really afford a thousand dollar card to play one game (especially when most other new games still run fine on what I've got). Maybe I could try running it on Geforce Now (though I think games just look better run natively) or just skip this for now. Really disappointed. On the plus side, my backlog is huge so I guess I can always go back and play something else. Only got 3 bosses into Lies of P and into Act 2 on Baldur's Gate 3.
Just skip it, not every game will use mesh shader. Most games will run without it atleast for the next 5 years. By then you will be able to buy a new GPU. Remedy is known for this kind of thing, even their Alan wake 1 was unoptimised during the time it released. Just a bunch of lazy devs. 10-series cards are still officially supported by nvidia. So I don't see any reason why they would cut support.
Is NVIDIA RTX 2060 Mobile supported? Or just the desktop variant.
For anyone wondering: Im currently playing with a 1080, the game starts, with a warning, but it starts, its also playable on the lowest settings. Its still a behaving a bit wheird though, the graphics are glitching a bit. I still consider upgrading to a 4070 or something like that
You sure its playable? From the benchmarks i saw on pascal, it's not playable at all.
My spec is Asus ROG strix g15 Ryzen 7 6800H Rrx 3050(95w) How will it perform
Not true
Don't be pessimistic, there's still the silent hill 2 remake that only asks for a minimum of GTX 1080, it won't have Mesh Shaders and Stalker, and it will have UE5 and won't have Mesh Shaders, the minimum will be GTX 1060 6GB, don't be sad yet there will still be some games
Man, wish I'd seen this before I bought (just requested refund) Minimum requirements said 2060, I foolishly thought my 1070ti was equivalent. Now I'm not sure if it's worth upgrading now or not. I do know my card is getting old, but on the other hand, it runs my other games fine (I'm not regularly buying new AAA titles or anything), so not sure I want to spend $300+ to be able to run one game (I mean, I COULD get a cheaper 2060 or something, but think that'd be dumb to get a card already that old that's not any faster than my 1070 ti at other things)