Support NeoGAF

[xion4360]

do you care about ambient occlusion?

ray tracing is just another technique to make games look better...its going to be implemented wherever it makes sense now that its possible. yes it has a cost...but so does every other aspect of the visual presentation. as long as they hit their targets they should go for it.

 

[Allnamestakenlol]

Yes, god yes. Games need better lighting/shadowing. I'm so sick of still seeing games where light doesn't behave naturally and characters are walking around with shadowy outlines, like it's still fucking 2010.

 

[GloveSlap]

For sure. Whether its worth whatever trade offs will have to be considered on a case by case basis.

 

[TheMay30thMan]

I love what RTX has to offer, but if it compromises 60FPS on consoles, then I'd rather Devs didn't bother. This isn't a reality though, since the masses already prefer 4k over constant 60FPS.

 

[Strider Highwind]

I gained an appreciation for it after I completed control on my pc with a 2080 super....then my wife was given a copy of the xbox one version she played on our xbx and I felt like all the reflections, lights and so on were gone. Then i did the same with metro exodus and felt the same way .

Some games don't really use it in ways I like....like cod mw..i really dont notice like that.

Its going to he like any tech..up to how the dev implementation.

 

[dano1]

Besides loading times it’s the next thing I’m looking forward to!!

 

[OnThePathToWisdom]

No. Human artistry > boring computer calculations that accurately portray light bounces.

This obsession with realistic graphics was old in the ps3/360 era already. Art done by skilled artist is always better than sterile computer calculations.

 

[JLB]

Those saying "No" are the same that 30 years ago would say "No" to 3D graphics. Time will fix this, rest assure.

 

[Jaxcellent]

It looks nice, but Id rather have 4k 60 frames a sec..

 

[lukilladog]

do you care about ambient occlusion?

ray tracing is just another technique to make games look better...its going to be implemented wherever it makes sense now that its possible. yes it has a cost...but so does every other aspect of the visual presentation. as long as they hit their targets they should go for it.

Common ambient occlusion is already a good approximation of true ray traced ambient occlusion, but way faster. I think it´s better to save performance for other things.

 

[BattleScar]

Yes absolutely.
Even in games with cartoony art-styles, lighting does a world of good in adding to the character and ambience of the game.
Ray tracing offers up the potential for amazing lighting and shadows in the future, which will help games with modest detail and textures really pop.

 

[AGRacing]

I care about it a lot.

What blows me away though .. Control and Wolfenstein First Blood perform great with it turned on... I wouldn't dream of turning it off.

BUT I also took a look at Fortnite..... My 3080 drops under 60 fps constantly with it turned on. Doesn't matter what resolution. Shouldn't have even been released in that state.

I hope Cyberpunk will deliver.

 

[xion4360]

Common ambient occlusion is already a good approximation of true ray traced ambient occlusion, but way faster. I think it´s better to save performance for other things.

It was just an example of a technique that makes games look better. Ray tracing can make games look better, much better even, at a cost...and its up to developers to weigh that in a way that has the most benefit and least detriment to the performance.

 

[Sushen]

4k 60fps over nice lighting. Especially if frame rate deeps below 30fps, no thanks

 

[Azelover]

Not really. To me the graphics have reached a "good enough" point.

It's nice to look at, but I want things that will significantly affect gameplay.

 

[GustavoLT]

 

[Iamborghini]

No. Human artistry > boring computer calculations that accurately portray light bounces.

This obsession with realistic graphics was old in the ps3/360 era already. Art done by skilled artist is always better than sterile computer calculations.

I agree with you, who wouldn’t?
It’s the main reason why Naughty Dog games looks so good.

BUT, if you care about artistry, you care about Ray Tracing. Because how render engine work today is with lot of pre backed infos, like the nearly perfect Global illumination map in Uncharted 4 (at the end of the game when we walk trough the house). This particular scene is very good looking, but what if you move something in the scene like opening a door or closing the windows? The lighting wouldn’t change at all. Do this limit what artists can do? Absolutely.

We already have GI in most games but not INTERACTIVE. Yes lighting looks “good enough” in recent games but most people fail to notice most scenes are static and it limits what artists can do.

See the PS5 unreal engine tech demo, when the sun positions changes the way light bounces.

 

[Griffon]

Rasterization is waaaaay faster, and with SVOGI and other similar tricks you can get very good GI for a fraction of the GPU power. Unreal 5 is proof of that.

The nvidia 3000 series are huge power hungry bloated cards, wasting a lot of silicon on those RT core.

I'm not too sure there's a future for it. Every time RT gets faster, polygon rasterization gets miles ahead in speed and efficiency.

 

[kikkis]

Rasterization is waaaaay faster, and with SVOGI and other similar tricks you can get very good GI for a fraction of the GPU power. Unreal 5 is proof of that.

The nvidia 3000 series are huge power hungry bloated cards, wasting a lot of silicon on those RT core.

I'm not too sure there's a future for it. Every time RT gets faster, polygon rasterization gets miles ahead in speed and efficiency.

Yeah, some people think that just because some thing has specific hardware it makes fundamentally slower algorithm faster such as ray tracing super fast. If that was the case we would have started with raytracing to begin with in 1990s.

I agree that people clamoring over raytraced GI is stupid since at the end of whole phenomena of GI is "soft" so its not so easy spot imperfections in it. Also isn't incoherent raytracing like on GI even slower than coherent rays like shadows on HW raytracing. So far raytracing has been plugged to games that has to run on 2013 console, so I doubt performance is particularly good when they start applying ray tracing to next gen games with increased scene complexity.

Reflections on flat reflective surfaces are much easier to spot as wrong, but lets face its not the most prevalent occurrence even in real life.

 

[MR ARCADE FOREVER]

Ray tracing is a waste of resources.

 

[blastprocessor]

Got to start somewhere but for me it's like "highest detail mode" right now.

For consoles it's going to be highly compromised (first gen AMD raytracing after all). I'd personally be happy with using performance mode without raytracing. I'm sure the PS5 Pro will help catch up with PC and so the effort now will certainly help for future.

If you look at Nvidia marbles by night it's incredible. I see that as the future it's a new paradigm.

This current hybrid based approached is just a stop gap.

 

[Fbh]

Sure, maybe at some point in the future when the tech has been further improved and the performance cost is lower.

But the ray tracing we'll most probably get in most games next gen (at least on consoles), which basically translates to performance destroying reflections?.

Couldn't care less and I hope every game offers the option to disable it and enhance performance or at least resolution instead.

 

[Greeno]

Depends on the game. In a spy or a competitive game? Hell yeah, it gives those who are attentive a great advantage.

 

[MetalAlien]

We are just seeing the beginning. When modern games are fully path traced you will have a hard time going back to raster graphics.

 

[LuganoX]

Only if it would pave the way to realistic physics. I don't know if it does it or not.