Well HW RT is a method to sample environments enabling lots of different algorithms. It can be used as an afterthought gimmick and that is the usual way at the moment. Designing lighting around just HW RT isn't feasible as long as there aren't enough users with proper HW. And in the end it might not even look drastically different for the player. But no-one is asking players really. No-one asked if players wanted compute shaders either.
Can I be honest here, I tried out Ray Tracing and it's not a big deal as some people make it out to be.
- Thread starter Derktron
- Start date
This is how I feel playing Control.
The reflection is neat, but what gets a "Woah!" out of me is light reacting to things and the feel that it makes sense.
It is difficult to explain, but a room is not only well-lit, the light is coming from somewhere and when you mess with that somewhere, it changes how it should change.
It is weird.
I'm with you OP. RT is neat and all, don't get me wrong, but until it becomes mandatory (like when hardware 3D acceleration was required for some for games to even boot in the early 00's) i'll stick with my rasterisation only card, thnx.
I've seen quite a few people on various sites downplaying raytracing over the past few days. I don't know why someone would do this? As someone who's been gaming for 30+ years, I think raytracing is phenomenal. I think it's one of the biggest leaps in graphics in a long time. We're barely scratching the surface with raytracing in games. Sometime in the near future, all games will feature raytracing, and thank the gaming Gods for that.
Sounds like someone hasnt tried Control with all the RT settings yet. I was skeptic of the tech until I played it.
I don't think the issue is whether it's "better" it's whether it's "worth it" give the heavy price you pay in performance. For me the answer is "No" because I only really see a small improvement and most of the improvements I don't eve notice (Like puddles, screen space reflections look pretty realistic to me).
Tbh I agree. HDR is more important to me then anything else which is probably weird lol.
I said as much before (quoted myself). It's just not realized in a beneficial way on the players side at this point. So it's not really a sellable angle yet. I used to have to wait an hour or more on some scenes to render with RT back in Autodesk. Then the department got a server farm and that became a few minutes. But It's amazing how far we've come.
Sounds like next gen consoles all over! Not quite there for 1080p and/or 60fps, then not quite there for 4k, then not quite there for ray tracing. They always shoot for the next big target, but always end up with a "nearly" implementation of it.
Most videos I see with the RTX On / Off comparison have a static scenario or one where light isn't really changing and I feel like people are not getting what makes the technology cool.
For example, any RT screenshot is just a pretty picture, maybe with cool reflections.
And then you have a person walking in broad daylight with RTX Off and in broad daylight with RTX On and you are squinting to see the difference.
Or someone turns it on "Yeah ok cool" turns it off "oh I don't see a difference" and keeps playing.
What blew my mind is how natural the light changes feel. Screenshot can't capture *change*.
And change depends on what you do, which is why I also think that playing a game versus watching a video is a big difference.
www.youtube.com
Like, look at how much of this video is a static camera looking at something.
Even with Nvidia's own video examples I'm like "ahhh show motion!" lol
Like, real motion, real change, go between two rooms that have different environments, go outside and then inside, knock a lamp down.
I mean, it's where I am.
I was skeptical, I played Control, now I am preaching. And I watched a lot of videos and did nothing for me, then I played the game and it clicked that this is how games should always feel.
For example, any RT screenshot is just a pretty picture, maybe with cool reflections.
And then you have a person walking in broad daylight with RTX Off and in broad daylight with RTX On and you are squinting to see the difference.
Or someone turns it on "Yeah ok cool" turns it off "oh I don't see a difference" and keeps playing.
What blew my mind is how natural the light changes feel. Screenshot can't capture *change*.
And change depends on what you do, which is why I also think that playing a game versus watching a video is a big difference.
Control PC: Ray Tracing's Killer App? Plus: Full Xbox One X vs PC Comparison!
Alex returns with a deep dive into Remedy's amazing Control. Is this the most fully featured ray tracing game yet available? Does Nvidia's RTX line finally h...
www.youtube.com
Like, look at how much of this video is a static camera looking at something.
Even with Nvidia's own video examples I'm like "ahhh show motion!" lol
Like, real motion, real change, go between two rooms that have different environments, go outside and then inside, knock a lamp down.
I mean, it's where I am.
I was skeptical, I played Control, now I am preaching. And I watched a lot of videos and did nothing for me, then I played the game and it clicked that this is how games should always feel.
Yeah this video doesn't convince me that it's worth the performance hit. Sure, the reflections in the puddles or car windows look nice... but you're hardly going to be noticing that while playing, compared to a butter smooth framerate.
The issue here is that approximation got so close to the real deal that it gets more and more difficult to say what's more accurate. The difference between no shadows or no ambient occlusion to them being enabled is pretty obvious. But if you enable the diffuse lighting in Control is just so subtle and often just "change" the looks it becomes difficult to say "it looks better" or "it looks more real"; you had to analyse the whole scene, the lighting and the light sources and do some mathematics to say what's more accurate, it's simply not as obvious.
Reflections on the other hand are a bit more obvious and some scenes with ray traced global illumination in combination with ray traced shadows however can look quite amazing. But it's not a game changer for any given scenario in a game and there will be scenes were it's more apparent and good looking than in others.
Also, more accurate rendering doesn't automatically means "better looking" in every scenario. Real life can look quite dull at times, too.
Reflections on the other hand are a bit more obvious and some scenes with ray traced global illumination in combination with ray traced shadows however can look quite amazing. But it's not a game changer for any given scenario in a game and there will be scenes were it's more apparent and good looking than in others.
Also, more accurate rendering doesn't automatically means "better looking" in every scenario. Real life can look quite dull at times, too.
There probably won't ever be game changers like 3D and HD ever again. Just small improvements that will eventually make a big difference over time.
Ray tracing is one of those things like PBR and ambient occlusion where a bunch of people will think it looks "weird" and not worth the effort with early implementations at the start of the generation, but by the end of it any game missing RT will look completely "wrong" and flat.
Once it becomes standard and normal, it's one of those things that makes the space feel more real without beating you over the head about existing.
It's ok to not care. Eventually it's just going to be part of the standard.
It's ok to not care. Eventually it's just going to be part of the standard.
Raytracing can look so much better, than what games currently offer, but you have to start somewhere.
Just look for the Unreal Engine Tech Demo with the stormtroopers in the elevator.
It's the rendering technique that's used for special effects in movies after all and games will achieve this quality eventually with more powerful hardware.
I haven't researched how RT exactly works in current game engines.
But it looks like most materials are rendered as usual with some RT effects slapped on the most reflective surfaces and RT is used for more exact shadow calculation.
So it seems it's not used for all materials and that's why it looks a little underwhelming for now (apart of highly reflective surfaces).
Just look for the Unreal Engine Tech Demo with the stormtroopers in the elevator.
It's the rendering technique that's used for special effects in movies after all and games will achieve this quality eventually with more powerful hardware.
I haven't researched how RT exactly works in current game engines.
But it looks like most materials are rendered as usual with some RT effects slapped on the most reflective surfaces and RT is used for more exact shadow calculation.
So it seems it's not used for all materials and that's why it looks a little underwhelming for now (apart of highly reflective surfaces).
I partially agree with OP, especially in regards to consoles where raytracing is so far very limited. The nice reflections and shadow improvements we get with raytracing are imo not worth the massive hit on performance. If you would just leave out raytracing you would be able to push the performance or visual fidelity in other ways that might have more of an impact to how the game runs and looks. At least on consoles raytracing seems like a marketing buzzword.
Sure, but you can't play that and say "Yeah, ray tracing is not a big deal".
Reflections in Watch Dogs is more than puddles and car windows, it effectively applies to everything from walls to stones and bricks and even includes clothing accessories like hats and umbrellas. Physically speaking reflection is a part of lighting, so when objects in the world having convincing reflections they appear to "fit" in the environment naturally rather than look like they were created once in a 3D modelling software and then the same object is placed across the entire world with no variation to them which is what makes it look like it doesn't belong in that place.
It's not something you'll notice instantly when you are "looking for it" because puddles and windows are the only in your face effect, but there are more reflective objects in the world that aren't puddles and windows. And like any good effect it's one of those subtle effects that you subconsciously notice it when it's not there as things don't seem quite right without it once you've played the game with it.
I tried out like 10 or so games on pc with Ray Tracing. Most left me unimpressed or simply with the thought of, "yeah this looks different but does it look better? "
The only game that impressed was Control and that game brought my 2060 to its knees .
I doubt many if any ps5 games or Xbox games will have a full suite of RT options like control does either.
I'll take it , but if it is RT at 30 vs No RT at 60. Framerate will always win for me
The only game that impressed was Control and that game brought my 2060 to its knees .
I doubt many if any ps5 games or Xbox games will have a full suite of RT options like control does either.
I'll take it , but if it is RT at 30 vs No RT at 60. Framerate will always win for me
Are you crazy OP? Ray Tracing is the new gospel and you need to get on with the program! How dare you. Retract your statement and start singing the praise. Right now.
/s of course but you never know because theres so many people around who may be seriously thinking this.
I know what you're saying, but I still think that outside of those clear-cut reflections, the effect is still too subtle for it to be worth the perf hit.
It has had good and bad implementations.
The game I'm most familiar with is Control and that had an amazing implementation. I honestly felt a little sorry for gamers who didn't get to experience it with RT effects.
The more familiar developers get with the technology, the more likely we are to see impressive implementations. It won't be long and gamers will simply come to expect RT and any game that doesn't utilise it will somehow seem wrong or lifeless.
The game I'm most familiar with is Control and that had an amazing implementation. I honestly felt a little sorry for gamers who didn't get to experience it with RT effects.
The more familiar developers get with the technology, the more likely we are to see impressive implementations. It won't be long and gamers will simply come to expect RT and any game that doesn't utilise it will somehow seem wrong or lifeless.
Ray tracing significantly reduces dev time thats one major reason there is a push for it or mixed solutions, on top of more natural lighting etc there is way less to develop or do when it comes to lighting that's why there is a push the less devs need to work on that the more time can be spent elsewhere developing. It's good to adopt and understand now it will make games lighting systems way easier to make.
People need to realise that Ray Tracing is still in its infancy when it comes to gaming but is absolutely going to become the standard in the future. Right now not every implementation is going to be good and the performance hit is always high but you have to start somewhere. If anything I'm impressed by the GI we got in Metro Exodus, the fully path traced Quake 2 and the reflections in WD3. Saying it's overrated doesn't make sense because it simply can't be when everything done now is building towards a very desirable end goal.
It's a 17% performance hit with DLSS, we make that kind of performance sacrifices all the time even in non RT games for things like fancier volumetric lighting, particles, more accurate shadows or clouds. Infact there's a bigger performance hit going 1440P to 4K native without RT, than there is going 1440P to 4K DLSS with RT. And the difference between native 4K and 4K DLSS is miniscule in comparison to what this offers I feel.
When I saw the game in video I thought the same, that it's just shiny puddles and cars. But actually playing it for about 22 hours now I just simply can't go back to non RT reflection in a game like this where RT reflections are done like this. It effectively changes the look of the materials, and is in a way equivalent to playing the game with a less accurate PBR vs proper PBR if such an option existed, not immediately apparent in a video but very easily visible while actually playing where you are the one controlling the camera.
Yeah Quake 2 with Raytracing is amazing and I'm not even kidding.
We need much more power for far less cost and heat before it's used in the way it's been dreamed of.
Every machine having Ray tracing will help so the consoles having it is great but they're weak sauce in comparison to where we need to be. Ray tracing is the future and it's just starting now.
Every machine having Ray tracing will help so the consoles having it is great but they're weak sauce in comparison to where we need to be. Ray tracing is the future and it's just starting now.
While I do believe that RT is the next big thing and necessary for the future of graphics, I have switched between rt on and off in Control more times than I care to admit and it is just not that impressive. Yes it does look better and more consistent and it's lovely to see the problems of rasta lighting addressed but it's just nothing that pops into your face screaming. I mean compare Control with RT to Demon's Souls. DS looks instantly next gen, now doubt about it. So as long as we have other areas to boost that will make a bigger difference for the specific game, rt shouldn't be the focus. I'd rather have next gen geometric complexity with standard lighting that slightly better geometry with flawless AO, shadows and reflections.
Minecraft looks insane but it's minecraft, we are half a decade or more away from a AAA games with that lighting quality.
Minecraft looks insane but it's minecraft, we are half a decade or more away from a AAA games with that lighting quality.
There's way more to ray tracing than just reflections. Seems like people just haven't bothered to look into what it actually is or does and how it's used in certain games before dismissing it as a gimmick or being "overrated".
Next gen isn't anywhere near powerful enough to utilize Ray Tracing properly. It'll be a next-next gen mainstay.