Alan Wake 2 [XBSX|S, PC, PS5]

Can someone explain to me why, and this isn't just an issue with Alan Wake 2... but some games seem to have issues with video playback cutting back to real time. There's always some big god damn stutter.. Like it switches over to the real time renderer and has to chug for a sec before it's smooth. It's not shader related IMO.. In Alan Wake 2 it happens all the damn time when finishing a chapter or whatever. It's so god damn annoying. And Remedy is flying high off good reviews and no dedicated forums for people to bitch on so it's not likely that they're going to do anything to fix it either.

What is it with PC and issues with video playback and switching to real-time?

It's not something I've noticed in AW2.
 
It's not something I've noticed in AW2.
And I feel like between John and Alex from DF, they would have mentioned something too if it happened to them, but they didn't.. so I dunno.

I've seen a couple other people mention the same issue though so I don't believe it's just me. I don't get it.
 
So I have a question granted I haven't read every post in this thread but they all seem to be about how this game looks, but how does it play, is it any good ?

ps: there was some talk in this thread about games stores, well it's worse than you think.
I bought StarWars Squadrons on Epic because it was on sale, so I launch the Epic store to run the game, the game then launches Origin because it's an E.A game, then it launches Steam because the game uses SteamVR
So 1 game 3 different games stores....
 
Last edited:
NVIDIA now offers a new version 546.08 GeForce Hotfix Windows drivers as an update for the recently released version 546.01 drivers. Along with a couple of other fixes, the new release is to clear up a problem that caused Alan Wake 2 performance to degrade over time:
 
So I have a question granted I haven't read every post in this thread but they all seem to be about how this game looks, but how does it play, is it any good ?
I like it. Typically i do not play horror games but after 15 hours it was the right decision to try AW2. Gameplay is very simple like the GotG game from Eidos Montreal. It's all about the story, the characters, the atmosphere.
 
Can someone explain to me why, and this isn't just an issue with Alan Wake 2... but some games seem to have issues with video playback cutting back to real time. There's always some big god damn stutter.. Like it switches over to the real time renderer and has to chug for a sec before it's smooth. It's not shader related IMO.. In Alan Wake 2 it happens all the damn time when finishing a chapter or whatever. It's so god damn annoying. And Remedy is flying high off good reviews and no dedicated forums for people to bitch on so it's not likely that they're going to do anything to fix it either.

What is it with PC and issues with video playback and switching to real-time?
Could it be the gpu downclocking during the the video playback then when the game cuts back in stuttering while the gpu gets it's ass back into gear? Not really the same issue but when playing starfield I noticed when I would hit escape and go to the menu to pause it when I came back the gpu/cpu had dropped into a low power state (only sitting on around 30 watts each) after hitting esc to get going again the game would stutter a bit as everything boosted back to high power mode.
 
1440p FSR Quality in Alan Wake 2 is worse than DLSS Ultra Performance!



I've only just had a chance to watch this on a large screen and while there are clear trade offs with both FSR Q and DLSS UP in the street video to the extent that I couldn't pick a clear winner, in the trees shot DLSS UP is clearly the winner by a significant margin. Not just in the trees which is really obvious but also in the chain link fence behind. It's pretty bonkers that that can be the case. Perhaps these are hand picked scenes and FSR can look better in other scenario's (I don't have the game to test myself) but based on this alone I'd say DLSS Performance is very likely to look at least as good, and probably better than FSR Balanced. DLSS Ultra Performance might even be a fairer comparison there which would have a massive impact on the level of GPU you need for an equivalent experience across NV, AMD and Consoles.
 
Compusemble put up a video showcasing how the game stresses storage bandwidth.


Around the town you're looking at some big fluctuations from frame to frame.. with an average 250-300MB/s. Peaks of up to 2GB/s as well.

And the crazy thing is the loading speed isn't particularly impressive and is perhaps the one thing that lets the rest of the technical side down.
 
Compusemble put up a video showcasing how the game stresses storage bandwidth.


Around the town you're looking at some big fluctuations from frame to frame.. with an average 250-300MB/s. Peaks of up to 2GB/s as well.

Video is weird. Those peaks are not that interesting. If you load 1 GB/s for 20ms you're loading 20 MB of data. The average is a lot more interesting. Don't know if 250-300 MB/s is on the high or low side for next gen games.
 
Video is weird. Those peaks are not that interesting. If you load 1 GB/s for 20ms you're loading 20 MB of data. The average is a lot more interesting. Don't know if 250-300 MB/s is on the high or low side for next gen games.
What's not interesting about loading 20MB of data in 20ms? 1GB/s is still 1GB/s no matter how you break it down.
 
And the crazy thing is the loading speed isn't particularly impressive and is perhaps the one thing that lets the rest of the technical side down.

It's something I'd like to see explored a little more in this game. I've seen the comparisons which show a well equipped PC as being a bit slower than the consoles, but I think they may have been at maximum details which potentially means more texture data and certainly the requirement to build a BHV which the consoles wouldn't have to deal with.

Load times at PS5 matched settings would be interesting.
 
What's not interesting about loading 20MB of data in 20ms? 1GB/s is still 1GB/s no matter how you break it down.

The average is probably telling in terms of what kind of drive you'd need to run the game. The instantaneous numbers might not be relevant. Say you need to load 20 MB off the disk. The disk will just load the file as fast as possible, but it could be the case that the data is not used immediately and a much slower drive would handle the game fine.
 
Don't know if 250-300 MB/s is on the high or low side for next gen games.
I think that's around what the ue5 demos were averaging, it makes me also realise I don't think anyone in any of the tech focuses reviews checked disk use for some of the recently released games (aveum/lotf/ark/robocop)
 
Back
Top