Alan Wake 2

Extrapolating from the requirements, it looks like 4070 ti/7900 XT or rough equivalents, will be needed for medium quality, smooth 1440p/60, without RT and without upscaling.
 
Control's requirements were quite high also, while the graphics was mediocre at best despite ray tracing. I'd expect the same here. Maybe by the time the exclusivity is up and it is sold for pennies on steam I'll have a new GPU that will run it decently.

I think Control looked amazing. Lighting (even without ray tracing) and whatnot looked great. Texture detail was also excellent. The micro destruction was also fantastic. Character faces were not the best, but not any worse than games like Cyberpunk, Witcher or recent Assassin's Creed games.

I think Alan Wake looks amazing as well.
 
I think Control looked amazing. Lighting (even without ray tracing) and whatnot looked great. Texture detail was also excellent. The micro destruction was also fantastic. Character faces were not the best, but not any worse than games like Cyberpunk, Witcher or recent Assassin's Creed games.

I think Alan Wake looks amazing as well.
This, and once you enabled raytracing, hoo boy did it look good.
 
I think Control looked amazing. Lighting (even without ray tracing) and whatnot looked great. Texture detail was also excellent. The micro destruction was also fantastic. Character faces were not the best, but not any worse than games like Cyberpunk, Witcher or recent Assassin's Creed games.

I think Alan Wake looks amazing as well.
Then we have a very different definition of amazing.
3573942-control%20review%204.jpg

It looks like a slightly improved Half-Life 2. It isn't bad, but this is not going to make me run to the store for a new GPU to enjoy its "amazing" graphics.
 
Control can look really good in spots especially with the mod from the dev but overall I do not see why so many people say the graphics are great. It has a washed out noisy look to it no matter what settings you use and there were many times I thought it looked pretty bad.
 
Control's requirements were quite high also, while the graphics was mediocre at best despite ray tracing. I'd expect the same here. Maybe by the time the exclusivity is up and it is sold for pennies on steam I'll have a new GPU that will run it decently.
I don't think this game will ever come to Steam. Alan Wake 2 is published by Epic.
 
I don't think this game will ever come to Steam. Alan Wake 2 is published by Epic.
I highly doubt that, they are not going to leave money on the table. They want my money more than I want to play this game.
 
I highly doubt that, they are not going to leave money on the table. They want my money more than I want to play this game.
Then buy it on epic. It's unlikely to hit steam for years... Help support other shops!
 
Then we have a very different definition of amazing.
View attachment 607804


Your screen shot looks washed out. Just look at the character in your screen shot compared to mine. The outlines are very blurry. It looks like you were playing at a very low resolution or had DLSS on performance mode.

Top with ray tracing, bottom without it:

Control Screenshot 2020.11.20 - 17.59.58.79.png
Control Screenshot 2020.11.20 - 17.59.18.03.png


Lighting and textures looked amazing, but when it was in motion it looked even better. For a 2019 game I would put it up there with one of the better looking games.



It looks like a slightly improved Half-Life 2. It isn't bad, but this is not going to make me run to the store for a new GPU to enjoy its "amazing" graphics.

Not even remotely true. HL2 looked amazing for its time, but go back and load it up and you'll see how dated it looks. Even with the current builds with the updated graphics and engine, it looks very dated. This screen shot is not mine, and I am not sure if this is the original build or one of the various graphical updates:

Untitled.jpg


Though I think HL2 despite being so old and dated holds up well, because it pre-dates the later 2000s excessive bloom and color shading. Animations and textures kept it graphically relevant for a while post 2004.

Example, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter from 2007. It had better graphics in many ways but that over done bloom and brown coloring make it look worse overall:

Ghost Recon  Advanced Warfighter Screenshot 2021.10.20 - 19.20.44.19.png
 
Last edited:
I think there a bit 2 issues or aspect to good looking game.

Control films grains effect, lights can look quite good and technically sound (the whiteboard in that screenshot for example, getting close to photorealistic I imagine).

But versus many hundreds of millions affair like Read Dead 2 open world show, Call of Duty, Elden Ring, God of war 2 Red gardens or the nice locations of a Tomb Raider can be a bit bland, people can prefer some Wii game like Zelda to this.

One can think about it this way, if it was a released theatrical movie how much talk would you expect about Control cinematography, set design, costume, etc.... all of this is part of having amazing graphic or not specially now a day.

Could be because I did not go far enough in that game, but I much prefered what Fincher did with the genre with Mindhunter than the Control artistic team.
 
I think there a bit 2 issues or aspect to good looking game.

Control films grains effect, lights can look quite good and technically sound (the whiteboard in that screenshot for example, getting close to photorealistic I imagine).

But versus many hundreds of millions affair like Read Dead 2 open world show, Call of Duty, Elden Ring, God of war 2 Red gardens or the nice locations of a Tomb Raider can be a bit bland, people can prefer some Wii game like Zelda to this.

One can think about it this way, if it was a released theatrical movie how much talk would you expect about Control cinematography, set design, costume, etc.... all of this is part of having amazing graphic or not specially now a day.

Could be because I did not go far enough in that game, but I much prefered what Fincher did with the genre with Mindhunter than the Control artistic team.
Control got a lot of talk about its brutalist aesthetics. There are several "sets" and setpieces in the game, which look incredible. Are definitely from someone with an eye for visual design, set design, framing, etc.
 
yeah I can see this looking really good to some:

0*Ov8bGh_Safojxjh4.jpg
1*G5iaBU_u2UhgsdsmPi9mYA.jpeg


But it will be less for everyone than sunsets and jungles, could see why it is not universally recognize.
 
Last edited:
Your screen shot looks washed out. Just look at the character in your screen shot compared to mine. The outlines are very blurry. It looks like you were playing at a very low resolution or had DLSS on performance mode.

Top with ray tracing, bottom without it:

View attachment 607906View attachment 607907

I literally can't tell the difference. You sure one was on and one was off? The whiteboard has a couple more reflections, but the camera is not in the exact same place either. Not being a smart-a$$, I promise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M76
like this
Apparently this is coming with my new GPU. News to me. I have no idea what it's about since I've never played the series. Are these horror games?
 
Ray tracing has more reflections on the whiteboard, the metal console behind the glass, the fan, and apparently the trash can. Some areas it will show up more than others. But that is how ray tracing is in most games. It still looks good without it, and I suppose if it isn't worth using it you can disable it for more frame rates.

This was probably the best ray tracing show case until Cyberpunk came along, IMO.

Apparently this is coming with my new GPU. News to me. I have no idea what it's about since I've never played the series. Are these horror games?

Alan Wake 1 had minor horror elements but it wasn't very scary nor intended to be. Alan Wake 2 apparently is leaning more into the horror direction.
 
That's unfortunate, am not a fan of horror stuff. I guess it'll just be in the collection for no reason.
 
Your screen shot looks washed out. Just look at the character in your screen shot compared to mine. The outlines are very blurry. It looks like you were playing at a very low resolution or had DLSS on performance mode.
It's not mine, I grabbed it from a gamespot review, I'm not about to install the game just to make a point. But frankly I don't think it is any more washed out than yours, it's only lower resolution. The washed out look is by design in this game.
Top with ray tracing, bottom without it:
I literally had to triple take to even notice a difference between the two. This is what I meant that the game doesn't justify its HW requirement especially for RT.
Lighting and textures looked amazing, but when it was in motion it looked even better. For a 2019 game I would put it up there with one of the better looking games.
I think Starfield looks much better despite having no RT at all, and that was panned for its supposedly outdated graphics by many.
But if we only compare it to older games, then I believe AC Odyssey, Ghost Recon Breakpoint, Metro Exodus, Detroit Become Human, Death Stranding are all better looking than Control.
Not even remotely true. HL2 looked amazing for its time, but go back and load it up and you'll see how dated it looks. Even with the current builds with the updated graphics and engine, it looks very dated. This screen shot is not mine, and I am not sure if this is the original build or one of the various graphical updates:
I was exaggerating, but Control's graphics does remind me of HL2 with its flatness and drab colors. In HL2 everything is a shade of brown, in Control everything is a shade of grey. I don't think you can completely divorce design from fidelity. You can have all the bling like RT and still look unremarkable like Control. True it is one of the first games to showcase RT effects, but it's not a particularly good showcase.
 
If you preorder the game you get 2.50 cents for Epic Rewards something new Epic added to purchases.
The deluxe version looks good but I gotta see what the Base Game does first. I don't think I bought a Epic game since Tiny Tinas Wonderland almost in March 2022.

Alan Wake.jpg
 
Then buy it on epic. It's unlikely to hit steam for years... Help support other shops!

I am going to

1) Not buy it

2) Wait years

3) Buy it on Steam

4) Buy the GOTY edition on Steam, for $5.99

5) Play it most likely max settings with whatever GPU I have then

6) Other stores can support me and give me money, I accept PayPal Venmo and Steam gift cards
 
I am going to

1) Not buy it

2) Wait years

3) Buy it on Steam

4) Buy the GOTY edition on Steam, for $5.99

5) Play it most likely max settings with whatever GPU I have then

6) Other stores can support me and give me money, I accept PayPal Venmo and Steam gift cards
You might die first.
 
So be it

View attachment 608076

PayPal donations will still be allowed
Personally, I feel that Remedy is one of the best developers on the planet. I still like the popular games like Spider-Man or God of War, but the Remedy games are, for me, something really special. Both Quantum Break and Control, in particular, blew me away, and I suspect Alan Wake 2 will be my goty.

I’m not really interested in waiting 3 years to play this game so that I can save some money - and I’m certainly not going to wait for the ‘privilege’ of giving my money to Gabe rather than Tim.

I’m happy to pay full price for this because Renedy is deserving of it.

Support the developers whose games you like. Don’t support those you don’t.
 
Personally, I feel that Remedy is one of the best developers on the planet. I still like the popular games like Spider-Man or God of War, but the Remedy games are, for me, something really special. Both Quantum Break and Control, in particular, blew me away, and I suspect Alan Wake 2 will be my goty.

I’m not really interested in waiting 3 years to play this game so that I can save some money - and I’m certainly not going to wait for the ‘privilege’ of giving my money to Gabe rather than Tim.

I’m happy to pay full price for this because Renedy is deserving of it.

Support the developers whose games you like. Don’t support those you don’t.

Had a blast with Control - Quantum Break was annoying IMO, waiting to play a game inbetween cutscene after cutscene - worse than Kojima MGS memes

Remedy is just another ‘sometimes they make a good game and sometimes they don’t’ developer to me
 
You might die first.
Then it will really be Game Over?

I plan on living a couple more years I'll be suprised it I make it to 60 or 65 really gotta see games like Patheon Rise of the Fallen and Ashes of Creation.
Started taking Niacin last week that stuff is great for keeping BP little or no side effects. I'll be 50 Years old in like a year and 1/2.
 
Then it will really be Game Over?

I plan on living a couple more years I'll be suprised it I make it to 60 or 65 really gotta see games like Patheon Rise of the Fallen and Ashes of Creation.
Started taking Niacin last week that stuff is great for keeping BP little or no side effects. I'll be 50 Years old in like a year and 1/2.
Why would you only make it to 60ish or less? :confused:
 
It's not mine, I grabbed it from a gamespot review, I'm not about to install the game just to make a point. But frankly I don't think it is any more washed out than yours, it's only lower resolution. The washed out look is by design in this game.

It looks a lot more blurry. It is very noticeable on the character.

I literally had to triple take to even notice a difference between the two. This is what I meant that the game doesn't justify its HW requirement especially for RT.

You can say the same for any ray tracing game though. It adds minimal graphical enhancements with a major performance hit. But it is still one of the better ray tracing show cases.

I think Starfield looks much better despite having no RT at all, and that was panned for its supposedly outdated graphics by many.

The lighting and characters look dated, as do the animations and how things react. It doesn't look awful, just not top of the line. And it varies depending on area.

But if we only compare it to older games, then I believe AC Odyssey, Ghost Recon Breakpoint, Metro Exodus, Detroit Become Human, Death Stranding are all better looking than Control.

Odyssey? No. Graphics look good in some areas, bad in others. Character facial animations and lighting/objects look low quality. Of course it is a very different setting and focuses on open large terrian, so hard to compare. I don't have many screens from Odyssey but have a few from Valhalla which is graphically the same. It had many issues like blurriness, take a look at the character and their arm in particular. Very often characters and objects would become pixelated messes in both Odyssey and Valhalla, and if I recall even Origins.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla Screenshot 2021.04.17 - 00.15.02.29.png


Indoor lighting looks outright dated:

Assassin's Creed Valhalla Screenshot 2021.04.16 - 18.37.38.97.png


Very frequently, outside of particular times of day lighting is outright flat and blurry. The characters which should easily standout in the real world blend into the background due to flat lighting.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla Screenshot 2021.04.21 - 00.17.43.10.png


Odyssey had the same shortcomings.

Now lets compare that to Witcher 3, which looks graphically inferior in some ways, but still had clearer, less washed out and in some cases better lighting:

The Witcher 3 Super-Resolution 2018.10.05 - 00.42.23.58.jpg


If clarity, lack of pixelation and blurriness is what you consider good graphics then I'm not sure how you would put Odyssey or Valhalla up there.


I was exaggerating, but Control's graphics does remind me of HL2 with its flatness and drab colors. In HL2 everything is a shade of brown,

I don't think we played the same HL2. Part of the reason why HL2 looks good despite its age is it avoids that. You can see the Ghost Recon screen shot to see what washed out, coloring of brown looks like.

in Control everything is a shade of grey. I don't think you can completely divorce design from fidelity.

You certainly can. A game can be graphically sophisticated, but you might not enjoy the art design. I enjoyed the art design of Control, it was designed to look like a 1960s era government building (which is was in the game). Lots of slab concrete, carpeting right out of the 60-70s and industrial areas. Of course some people might find it ugly, but other people can find bright colors or tropical settings to be ugly. That doesn't mean those games are ugly though.
 
Last edited:
Sedatary Lifestyle PC use
Stress from work
High BP
Drug addictions
Overweight 255 lbs
Took the Jab 3 times
I also regret taking that fucking MRNA vaccine. It was the delivery mechanism itself, MRNA, that has caused the problems. In three or four decades from now, this will be acknowledged.
 
I gave the key that came with my GPU away to someone that asked on here. I don't think I would ever have played it anyway. The closest I came to playing a horror game was some of the segments in Thief 3 and Thief 4, and that was frankly plenty for me.

I also regret taking that fucking MRNA vaccine. It was the delivery mechanism itself, MRNA, that has caused the problems. In three or four decades from now, this will be acknowledged.

I used to use my treadmill very frequently, especially around the period where I got the MRNA vaccine. I only got two doses (which technically counted as one application, it was Pfizer). I noticed after getting the vaccine, I started having oddities while treadmilling (and sometimes outside of it). I wouldn't really be out of breath, but it would sort of feel like my heart skipped a step or something. I still have some of those symptoms to this day, but they're definitely much better at this point (though I'm also not exercising nearly as often at the moment). I do think the vaccine was rushed out, but that's off topic...
 
The hallways of Control can certainly be dull, like any office building.

But as you press into its labyrinth, it becomes a brutalist kaleidoscope. And it can be pretty psychedelic.
 
Plus as added it has a very intentional muted/raised black levels/dull aesthetic - part of the repetitious office/same cubicle after same cubicle/'another monotonous day at the office investigating all this spooky shit' aesthetic/theme of the game - and then all the spooky shit is bright vivid glowing red

That's different than the graphics (tools and tricks/technological presentation of that aesthetic)
 
I gave the key that came with my GPU away to someone that asked on here. I don't think I would ever have played it anyway. The closest I came to playing a horror game was some of the segments in Thief 3 and Thief 4, and that was frankly plenty for me.



I used to use my treadmill very frequently, especially around the period where I got the MRNA vaccine. I only got two doses (which technically counted as one application, it was Pfizer). I noticed after getting the vaccine, I started having oddities while treadmilling (and sometimes outside of it). I wouldn't really be out of breath, but it would sort of feel like my heart skipped a step or something. I still have some of those symptoms to this day, but they're definitely much better at this point (though I'm also not exercising nearly as often at the moment). I do think the vaccine was rushed out, but that's off topic...

I got the weird heart thing after Covid too. It definitely seems to be a thing. It started a couple months after having covid. Went to the doctor, got every test in the universe, said they're quite certain I wasn't dying and lungs and heart appear to be perfectly fine. It went 99% away in the next couple months.

Doesn't seem to have affected my cardio that I can tell. I can hike and run for miles so I assume I've pretty much fully recovered at this point.

According to Remedy’s Lea-Newin, Alan Wake 2 will require graphics cards that support mesh shaders. And, as you may have guessed, both the NVIDIA 10 and AMD 5000 series do not support Mesh Shaders at all.

https://www.dsogaming.com/news/alan-wake-2-is-one-of-the-first-games-to-require-mesh-shaders/

Basically Battlefield 2 all over again like when my GeForce 4600 didn't have Dx9 support and I had to buy a 9600xt.

Godspeed noble GTX 1080, you were too good.
 
Alan Wake 2 sounds even more hardware intensive than Cyberpunk 2077 Overdrive...with mostly dark nighttime scenes I'm surprised it's pushing hardware this much...it's not like Night City with all of its neon lights and bright colors...I wonder if it's really that impressive visually or more a case of poor optimization
 
Alan Wake 2 sounds even more hardware intensive than Cyberpunk 2077 Overdrive...with mostly dark nighttime scenes I'm surprised it's pushing hardware this much...it's not like Night City with all of its neon lights and bright colors...I wonder if it's really that impressive visually or more a case of poor optimization

Lights don't matter much, but Cyberpunk has a big open world with lots of things going on, many NPCs and whatnot. Typically that impacts performance. Normally linear games with small maps run better. We'll see how this ends up soon though.
 
It looks a lot more blurry. It is very noticeable on the character.
Let's say it looks a lot more blurry, it doesn't change that Control does not justify it's HW demand with its looks, on either the gamespot or your own screenshots.
You can say the same for any ray tracing game though. It adds minimal graphical enhancements with a major performance hit. But it is still one of the better ray tracing show cases.
No, I don't think you can. To me there is a more noticeable difference between medium RT and max RT in CP2077 than in Control's look with or without RT on your screenshots.
The lighting and characters look dated, as do the animations and how things react. It doesn't look awful, just not top of the line. And it varies depending on area.
Still looks better than control's characters. And RLY? You pivot to animations and reactions? Now we are really pushing those goalposts around. :rolleyes:
Odyssey? No. Graphics look good in some areas, bad in others. Character facial animations and lighting/objects look low quality. Of course it is a very different setting and focuses on open large terrian, so hard to compare. I don't have many screens from Odyssey but have a few from Valhalla which is graphically the same. It had many issues like blurriness, take a look at the character and their arm in particular. Very often characters and objects would become pixelated messes in both Odyssey and Valhalla, and if I recall even Origins.
Graphics is not animation, but even so I don't recall Control's animations being anything special otherwise I'd have taken note of it. You seem to focus on individual minute details, instead of looking at the big picture. To me graphics is about the overall look of the game, the composition, the art style, how it all comes together to show a coherent and consistent picture. The overall look will always be much more than the sum of its parts.

2018103215849.jpg20181023194224.jpg20181023221427.jpg20181025230335.jpg
Control just tries to make up for its lack of detail and variety with RT lighting, and it doesn't work for me. It sure is superior technically, but the end result is still dreary. Just having RT and higher texture resolution in of itself is no substitute for good graphics design. Everything is just a mass of grey, completely unrealistic.
Very frequently, outside of particular times of day lighting is outright flat and blurry. The characters which should easily standout in the real world blend into the background due to flat lighting.
Characters rarely stand out in the real world unless wearing Hawaiian shirts. You seem to be focused on blurriness, but I don't know what is it exactly that you mean by it. As neither Odyssey, Valhalla, or Ghost Recon looks blurry to me. It looks far more believable and realistic than Control ever does.
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon® Breakpoint2020-4-5-13-59-26.jpg
Now lets compare that to Witcher 3, which looks graphically inferior in some ways, but still had clearer, less washed out and in some cases better lighting
It looks jarring to me. It has no global lighting to speak of just higher res textures, which in my opinion makes it look less realistic than the aforementioned Ubisoft open world games. Typical of the 2000s mindset, where we thought increasing texture resolution in of itself equaled better graphics. But in many cases it just made for a less natural look. This is especially true of fan made HD texture packs, that often made the games look worse by bringing the fakeness to the forefront that was previously disguised by the lower resolution textures.
If clarity, lack of pixelation and blurriness is what you consider good graphics then I'm not sure how you would put Odyssey or Valhalla up there.
You don't see the perimeter of individual leaves of trees as a crisp clear line in reality, the light bounces and mixes, so there is a natural blurriness to it. So making everything so crisp and pixel perfect makes it look unnatural.
I don't think we played the same HL2. Part of the reason why HL2 looks good despite its age is it avoids that. You can see the Ghost Recon screen shot to see what washed out, coloring of brown looks like.
What you call being washed out is the haze that actually makes it look much more realistic than the Witcher 3. It seems you prefer the crisp videogame-y look over more realism. I prefer the more natural overall look.
You certainly can. A game can be graphically sophisticated, but you might not enjoy the art design. I enjoyed the art design of Control, it was designed to look like a 1960s era government building (which is was in the game). Lots of slab concrete, carpeting right out of the 60-70s and industrial areas. Of course some people might find it ugly, but other people can find bright colors or tropical settings to be ugly. That doesn't mean those games are ugly though.
I agree a game can be graphically sophisticated and use the latest and greatest effects and still look unremarkable. And Control very much qualifies for that in my opinion. It might have aimed for a 70s interior design, but it ended up looking like you are viewing everything through a 50 year old faded desaturated photograph.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top