Article:
Alan Wake Remastered: can the 360 classic cut it on PS5 and Xbox Series consoles?
Pick up a flashlight, grab a thermos and get your typewriters ready because it's time to return to Bright Falls - with …
www.eurogamer.net
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Digital Foundry: Alan Wake Remaster: PS5 vs Xbox Series X/S Compared to Xbox 360 Original!
- Thread starter chandoog
- Start date
Article:
www.eurogamer.net
There's something about this game, despite its kind of ho hum albeit solid gameplay loop, that just stuck with me. The art, writing, and atmosphere maybe. I'm not sure I like what they've done with his face - he kind of looks like an animatronic at a Disney ride. I think it's the eyes and skin.
Guess it's a choice between tearing on XSX or marginally worse framerate on PS5. He doesn't mention if VRR does anything for the tearing, which it sometimes does.
Guess it's a choice between tearing on XSX or marginally worse framerate on PS5. He doesn't mention if VRR does anything for the tearing, which it sometimes does.
Last edited:
The original ran at 544p/30fps and looks significantly worse.This is a decent remaster, nothing more.
All the more bizarre because, according to the article, the XSS is running at 1080p....
Yeah, it's ridiculous. A game with this level of visuals should be 4K/60 at minimum on next gen consoles, if not 4K/120.
Remedy games always run like shit though, so I can't say this is a shocker.
User Warned: Hostility
It's… Like, very much reworked up to modern standards though? Sure they've used some base assets to assist with the translation to current gen but it's not like they've just slapped the old games onto the new consoles.
Use your brain.
The XSS is running at 1080p. The XSX and PS5 should be running at at least 3x that res and not less than twice the res of the XSS. It makes no sense.
All you have to do is look at the game to see that these modern consoles should run at a higher resolution in comparison to what we're seeing on screen. That's all it really takes.
It's almost as if I can hear the "lazy dev" rhetoric underneath your words. Very subtly. Hmm.
Would be interested to see PC benchmarks of the original vs remaster at the same resolution. Just to try and see how much more taxing this remaster is and to try and understand why it's only 1440p on PS5/XSX and 1080p on XSS.
lol what!? I'm not even the poster you're quoting but there was clearly zero implication of "lazy devs" there.
Especially since I ran the original game at 1440p on an overclocked R7950*, fully maxed out at 60hz.
*Basically the PS4 gpu.
One of my favorite 360 games but i find it subpar on new gen without American Nightmare, no HDR and 1440p for next gen machines. At least price is really good, so ir compensates other things. Much better than Shenmue 1 & 2 remasters, that where done by the same company, right?
No.
In fact a quick google sees a 1660 super performing above 60fps at 1440p using an i5 cpu.
This video is really disappointing in that they didn't touch on the PC version. Also didn't really detail the changes the lighting system in any sort of deep dive.
Hopefully they do a 2nd video where they detail the changes in a more profound way.
Hopefully they do a 2nd video where they detail the changes in a more profound way.
The game is running on its original engine and is still from an era where multi-threading was in its infancy. Throwing that code onto a modern low power APU isn't going to just let it fly at 100+ fps because it wasn't designed to take advantage of all those processing threads. It's important to have some perspective when discussing this kind of content.
Here's a review of how this game performed on PCs of its era that can explain some of the idiosyncrasies you'll see in the remaster today: https://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/alan-wake-pc-performance-analysis/
Here's a review of how this game performed on PCs of its era that can explain some of the idiosyncrasies you'll see in the remaster today: https://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/alan-wake-pc-performance-analysis/
I'm just saying that a remaster of a 2 generation old game that clearly has had some work gone into it running at 1440p shouldn't be grounds to be "gobsmacked". It looks pretty reasonable to me to be completely honest.
Im loving my time with it right now, I remember playing it like 6 years ago but the resolution was so fucking low. I just wonder why the cutscenes run so bad on ps5, makes for a laugh sometimes.
I guess the performance issues aren't too surprising when it's running on the original engine, but this part got me...
I'm playing it for the first time and enjoying it. Glad it was only $30, considering how much further other remakes/remasters have gone, but this is passable for me.
I greatly prefer the new one. Not sure why everyone's down on it. He looks dopey AF in the original.I guess the performance issues aren't too surprising when it's running on the original engine, but this part got me...
I'm enjoying it well enough, but I think $30 is too high of an asking price for what we got with this one.
The Mass Effect trilogy for example was $60 and they went way beyond what's been done here.
I guess the performance issues aren't too surprising when it's running on the original engine, but this part got me...
Remaster looks good most of the time but seeing screens like this... wow. What were they thinking?
This is a meme waiting to happenI guess the performance issues aren't too surprising when it's running on the original engine, but this part got me...
I would've felt I got a good value if I paid $20 for this.
I understand why they have a $30 MSRP though and can't blame them. I'm sure a price drop will come soon enough.
the old one is super derpy lookingI guess the performance issues aren't too surprising when it's running on the original engine, but this part got me...
This is a pattern for Remedy at this point. Control should've ran at 60fps with ray tracing, now this should run at 4K60 at the bare minimum... Yeah, I'm not a fan of these decisions.
The game is still stuck in the old engine. Its still very much stuck using old rendering techniques. There's no PBR materials. No RT. There really isn't anything " modern standards" about this remaster. It's a Res/frame rate bump with some better models. And even that is debatable. Higher poly, sure. But Alan looks derpy as fuck now.
I'm guessing that is average frame rate. I would be curious on the minimums.
Quantum Break had all kinds of visual/performance issues as well on both Xbox and PC.
I'd blame the Northlight engine but Alan Wake didn't use that engine.
Control is either 1440p60fps or 1440p30fps. I can't see Control not pushing for 4K60fps or 1440p60fps RT when a much more impressive games like Miles Morales or Metro Exodus do it.
I know comparisons like those are not really comparable, but you can't help ask yourself how is it possible.
You should be barred from any and all technical discussions for allowing drivel to just fall from your brain and onto your keyboard without a second thought.
Interesting.
For me, I'd say 100% play this is you've never played Alan Wake before. It's amazing. Seems like a perfectly competent remaster. It'll be fine.
It doesn't feel like something I need to rush out and buy as someone who's played the game through a couple of times before, though.
For me, I'd say 100% play this is you've never played Alan Wake before. It's amazing. Seems like a perfectly competent remaster. It'll be fine.
It doesn't feel like something I need to rush out and buy as someone who's played the game through a couple of times before, though.
Gonna double dip as soon as I have a PS5.
Sure the idea of a consistent face is cool but the actor's face looks goofy instead of realistic. Should have updates the facial animation if they wanted to update the face.
I really wish they left the face like it was.I guess the performance issues aren't too surprising when it's running on the original engine, but this part got me...
Sure the idea of a consistent face is cool but the actor's face looks goofy instead of realistic. Should have updates the facial animation if they wanted to update the face.
Do all of the reflective environments in Exodus and Miles deform or break down like the walls and floors in Control?