Careful now, you might be accused of not understanding art and not having taste.And you know why? Because it's ACCURATE!!
I'm tired of people claiming I'm overly critical because I want to see games look like this. I came from a world where this kind of scene is the norm. Anything less and it looked wrong right away. Taking this engine, you can apply it to ANY art form and it will look incredible. Period.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
DF: Nvidia Marbles RTX Hands-On: A Vision For The Future Of Ray Tracing?
- Thread starter Mister Wolf
- Start date
The Fartist
Gold Member
Lamborghini too, JDM for life!
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Similar to other Nvidia demos showing off game engines (and now RT), this kind of thing might be standard 10 years from now. And even that is a big if.
I don't think I've ever seen an Nvidia demo that:
- Wasn't run on bleeding edge PCs which the common person doesn't even have. Probably not even the most hardcore PC gamer has an equivalent rig
- Was a good demo of a real game, which includes gameplay, AI, HUD, online against 32 other people etc....
- Was more than a couple minutes of graphics and nothing else
I don't think I've ever seen an Nvidia demo that:
- Wasn't run on bleeding edge PCs which the common person doesn't even have. Probably not even the most hardcore PC gamer has an equivalent rig
- Was a good demo of a real game, which includes gameplay, AI, HUD, online against 32 other people etc....
- Was more than a couple minutes of graphics and nothing else
Pedro Motta
Member
No one downplayed anything, it's a marvelous technical showcase. I just don't think it's a game, that's all.
EDIT: Ok, I'll give in to the mini-game tag.
Last edited:
ZehDon
Gold Member
Just played through the demo on my RTX 3090, and it's incredibly impressive. The material and lighting quality is really next-level stuff. I was incredibly impressed by Quake II RTX, whose lighting was simply some of the best I've ever seen, but this is just so much more natural feeling. Highlights how artificial game lighting comes across - especially when mixing pre-baked environmental GI and real-time lighting. Seeing rendering at this quality and at smooth frame rates is really something special. Also, very interesting to read that nVidia is employing their own REYES technique here. Unreal made the big headlines, but it seems like others have already/are going down that same road. Having that many unique objects rendering at that quality level has a level of believability to it all that's hard to express, but is easily felt. Cannot wait to see what comes of this tech in the years ahead.
Rea
Member
Metro is still not full path tracing like this demo, it is still hybrid of Rasterization and Raytracing for GI lighting. This marble game is totally different rendering method, there is no Rasterization in this demo.
VFXVeteran
Banned
You don't need full path tracing to simulate the kind of lighting in path tracing. All you need is to ray-trace the light loop with area lights and importance sample the BRDF shaders to get a color. You can use it for diffuse (which covers most materials), specular (shiny objects) and SSS (sand, skin, etc..). The full path tracer is an elegant way of casting primary rays through the pixels in pixel space instead of iterating through rasterized pixels in triangles. Another aspect of path tracing is using multiple importance sampling to converge the equation much faster. I don't know the tricks that 4A is using to create their hybrid renderer but it's lighting is definitely using the typical light loop I would code up in a path tracer when evaluating the shaders on triangles.
Last edited:
Balducci30
Member
How do the flames in deep down STILL look better? Will we ever get a game with flames like that?
Sevenfold
Member
Introduce the MTX4XXX series. Mining cards... YOU CAN GAME ON!!!
llien
Member
The most curious bit of the claims about this rendering is it being 100% RT with "no trickery".
When even in geometrically primitive Quake RT it's trickery upon trickery upon trickery.
You see colored glass object leave shadows akin to plain old boring opaque spheres.
Accurate, right?
It is perhaps more accurate than some imaginary crap out there, but shadows of an opaque spherical object was never a problem to begin with.
When even in geometrically primitive Quake RT it's trickery upon trickery upon trickery.
You see colored glass object leave shadows akin to plain old boring opaque spheres.
Accurate, right?
It is perhaps more accurate than some imaginary crap out there, but shadows of an opaque spherical object was never a problem to begin with.
llien
Member
Which is, wait for it, 7870.
01011001
Banned
this is more game than shit like Dear Esther or Everybody's gone to the Rapture. and people have for some reason no issue calling them video games, when they barely, if at all, qualify
Last edited:
Or.. we have come a long way from 8 bit graphics .. (real-time)
Last edited:
Shmunter
Member
There is no OR. It’s an AND. 2 things can be true at the same time and yet be unrelated.
Last edited:
killatopak
Member
Sometimes accuracy doesn’t actually look good though.
Like even in real life. Having a light source directly 12 o’clock over your head makes everything look ugly.
VFXVeteran
Banned
Dude, I'm not talking about direct shadows. I'm talking about indirect shadows and the GI system. I'm talking about area lights.Accurate, right?
It is perhaps more accurate than some imaginary crap out there, but shadows of an opaque spherical object was never a problem to begin with.
VFXVeteran
Banned
Name a game other than a particular look whereby using pre-baked solutions looks better than having accurate lighting with GI bounce?
killatopak
Member
Huh? What does pre-bake have anything to do with what I’ve said?
Accuracy does look ugly and it is a fact that the real world shows. You’d know this if you’re a photographer. If a pre-bake game used specific accurate lighting, it would look ugly in certain time of days too.
I’m simply stating it does not look great 100% of the time just like in the real world. There’s nothing controversial whatsoever with what I’ve said.
edit: This is a real life picture.
Last edited:
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
So?
yeah it's crazy. But it's 1080p30
On pc, Death Stranding is 4k120 with less than 3080... but it is to be expected since pc is like 3k+ nowadays.
But most assets are the same. I was perfectly fine playing it on ps4 slim on release. In fact, I was in awe.
OverHeat
« generous god »
Cherry picking FTL.Huh? What does pre-bake have anything to do with what I’ve said?
Accuracy does look ugly and it is a fact that the real world shows. You’d know this if you’re a photographer. If a pre-bake game used specific accurate lighting, it would look ugly in certain time of days too.
I’m simply stating it does not look great 100% of the time just like in the real world. There’s nothing controversial whatsoever with what I’ve said.
edit: This is a real life picture.
killatopak
Member
Sorry, but you’re wrong. It’s called the Lahaina effect and it’s present everyday.
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
That only takes place in certain areas of I'm not mistaken though. Not only that, but would these pictures look better with pure rasterization trying to emulate realistic lighting? I don't get why you are using cherry picked pictures, with something that happens only 2x a year. Fucking cherry picking at it's best! And better, REALISTIC examples? A simple Google search negates your whole post.
Mister Wolf
Member
Last edited:
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
Only happens 2x a year, and only in very specific places. It's almost as if you have to dig really deep, and to possibly find cherry picked results to come up with this kinda shit.
Mister Wolf
Member
Haven't seen a cherry pick this bad since the DF Cyberpunk RTX thread.
killatopak
Member
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
Where are you getting your info from? The BlueBoardForums? I don't get why some people want to make PC, NVIDIA, or raytracing look bad? It's literally not possible. "All things come to light, eventually" no pun intended.
killatopak
Member
google image searching lahaina effect.
I’m not perpetuating that it looks bad. In fact, it looks great.
All I’m saying is that realistic lighting will not always look 100% great which is what happens in the real world. That’s why we use artificial lighting to make things look better isn’t it?
Raytraced lighting will always look better than pre-baked providing that we are tweaking it specifically to look good. Like say with the aforementioned Lahaina Noon. Will games ever use that kind of lighting despite it being realistic? Of course not. That’s why I’m saying accuracy will not always look good cause we’re definitely making sure we’re skipping that time of the year at that time of the day to use.
I’m sure there are other less than stellar looking natural lighting in different scenarios but in games, we can add artificial light like bulbs and lamp posts and such so that it would look better. The devs still have to take that into account is all I’m saying.
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
Why would devs use that effect in games period though? It's a weird stance to have to argue against raytracing. Theres probably no instance where this would take place in a game with raytracing nor rasterization pre baked lighting. I just don't see it taking place, unless you are playing a game located in a very specific place on Earth, during a specific time of day, only happening 2x in a single 365/366 day span. What a weird fucking take, and to even double down afterwards....
Shmunter
Member
Yeah, seen plenty of games with even the old fashioned real-time GI where games can range from stunning to downright ugly when the time of day is basically noon. Shadows retreat, depth becomes limited.Huh? What does pre-bake have anything to do with what I’ve said?
Accuracy does look ugly and it is a fact that the real world shows. You’d know this if you’re a photographer. If a pre-bake game used specific accurate lighting, it would look ugly in certain time of days too.
I’m simply stating it does not look great 100% of the time just like in the real world. There’s nothing controversial whatsoever with what I’ve said.
edit: This is a real life picture.
Certain games deliberately avoid it by transitioning between certain preset conditions to ensure beautiful imagery. Think Horizon Zero Dawn is an example.
No idea what some of these other guys are defending, it’s like they have very limited exposure to games.
Notwithstanding with RT, there is no reason certain conditions cannot be avoided either by curating the simulation also.
killatopak
Member
It’s just one example I gave. It’s not specific to that effect alone.
Raytraced lighting makes things a lot simpler for devs to make great looking scenes and locations with the accurate lighting it provides but accuracy by itself has inherent problems that is a lot easier to fix than using pre-baked lighting. It makes things easier but it doesn’t make lighting worry-free.
Like an amateur taking a picture with a high end camera. Yes, it’s accurate but does it look the best it can be? A professional photographer can take accuracy and looking good into account and produce a picture that not only is accurate but also beautiful to look at.
Last edited:
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
That's only one reason why prebaked lighting may possibly look better than raytraced lighting. Let's take for instance a horror game. Pre-baked lighting may give you more lighting compared to what would really be there with raytraced lighting. This might be better for those who don't care for immersion, but horrible for those that love it.
There's no scenario out there which can portray rasterization lighting, in a better light, than raytraced lighting. None. Not even in the photo you provided, as it would not be realistic. Now, on the other hand, if you are going for faked lighting, rasterization might be your best bet.
Last edited:
killatopak
Member
I’m not comparing one over the other though. You just can’t use the same assets in the scene for a pre-baked game.
Like for a horror game example you gave. A pre baked lighting I guess would need less light sources to light up the scene while a having it ray traced may make the same location look super dark and unplayable. This is why I said accuracy would be a detriment to it. Now if we add a few more light sources like candles and a window for moonlight and such, we can still provide an excellent look to a game while being accurate still.
In my previous post, I said you can’t just slap ray tracing to it because of this. You still have to account how it actually looks and plays. I think the more games use ray tracing as a default and completely leave behind pre-baked lighting, the less we can see this problem manifest.
Last edited:
Wtf, this demo is literally full of duplicated assets. What are you talking about?
VFXVeteran
Banned
I should have stated over 5000 objects but several hundred being unique. My bad.
llien
Member
That's an interesting angle, but I was much more impressed by this demo, which actually ran on a card much slower than 3090
perhaps I'm missing something.
It is not even remotely fair a comparison imo.
VFXVeteran
Banned
Yea, you are missing that UE5 demo has inaccurate lighting/shading as well. This is not a topic for subjective debate. This is objective fact.
OverHeat
« generous god »
Unknown Soldier
Member
LOL here comes our resident AMD shill to shit up what was a nice thread.
llien
Member
U
Unknown Soldier
I'm so sorry you had to suffer. I hope you've recovered from the pain caused 6900xt beating 3090 at newest games, instead of barely competing with 2080Ti, as you, in all your infinite wizdom, expected it.
I'm so sorry you had to suffer. I hope you've recovered from the pain caused 6900xt beating 3090 at newest games, instead of barely competing with 2080Ti, as you, in all your infinite wizdom, expected it.
llien
Member
That's exactly what I was asking about.
OverHeat
« generous god »
Imagine the framerate drop.
VFXVeteran
Banned
The flames should be casting shadows on other objects. It won't cast a shadow on itself. That's like saying an emissive light should cast a shadow on itself.
Dr.D00p
Gold Member
I find it funny they that a 2080 is the recommended GPU for this when it runs like absolute dogshit on mine.
4-6fps @ 1440p rendering res..
..even dropping that down to 720p! will result in sub 10fps at times, and RAM usage is absurd, 20-23GB. I think It's the first time I've actually seen my 32GB Ram made use of.
I assume the incredibly low FPS on the 2080 is down to swap files being used like crazy, on a lowly 8GB of VRAM.
4-6fps @ 1440p rendering res..
..even dropping that down to 720p! will result in sub 10fps at times, and RAM usage is absurd, 20-23GB. I think It's the first time I've actually seen my 32GB Ram made use of.
I assume the incredibly low FPS on the 2080 is down to swap files being used like crazy, on a lowly 8GB of VRAM.
I think you know what I meant. Still It's not even doing that. Not impressed. My RTX3090 is going back for a refund.
Last edited:
Low Moral Fibre
Member
Feel free to tell me I'm wrong but isn't a potential huge advantage of real-time RT that the engines of the future will make it much quicker and easier to get good looking lighting v pre baking? Surely huge for all devs but especially indie devs.
I know a talented artist can fake lighting etc these days so that RT doesn't look much better but that surely takes a massive amount of time and skill compared to what could potentially be a few clicks in a future engine. We just need the hardware to catch up which won't be this gen.
I know a talented artist can fake lighting etc these days so that RT doesn't look much better but that surely takes a massive amount of time and skill compared to what could potentially be a few clicks in a future engine. We just need the hardware to catch up which won't be this gen.