That looks very impressive. Try turning down volumetric lighting to medium and MSAA off, maybe you can hit 60 FPS more often for a very small visual impact. Since you have RTX for everything on, you can also disable Global Reflections and SSAO.These are my screenshots from my PC RTX 2080 Max Q 90W! RT makes a BIG Difference. This Is MAX Everything at 1080p With RT ON. I get 40 to 50 FPS and I dont mind at all.
It is just as radical a change though. For example you have less destruction and environment interactivity in games now largely due to the fact that a lot of lighting in games needs to be baked. So you can't just have stuff being moved in a game because the baked lighting would be broken. You can also use RTX for better audio processing and stuff like cloth deformation. Ray tracing can go way beyond just "better lighting". Yes, the lighting will be better but it also affects so many other things.
Not to mention that fact that baked light maps can take up many gigabytes of space.
Normal Minecraft looks like shit dude. We're comparing it to games where they put effort in the faked lighting. That RT can transform butt ugly games is great news for ... a handful of titles.
Utterly ridiculous. I'm not coming into his home and interrupting dinner. He's producing a product, and in this case, defending one which is explicitly receiving funding from the industry he has 'passion' for (again, 'passion' for the industry you're covering is not inherently a good thing - it explains why you do it, but it's not a shield for any criticism). This was put out there for public consumption, it's going to be critiqued.Id say at this point you have said your piece and its probably better just to leave it be, as this is someone passion you maybe inadvertently shitting on.
Lol, 3d compared to 2d is a radical change, better lighting(which quality varies based on the location of the Chracter for raster only) is nowhere near the same level of difference, it is frankly embaressing for you that you even made this comparison.
exactlyIt's embarrassing that you think ray tracing is just "better lighting" and that you're being this defensive about being called out on it.
The whole point of ray tracing is that any game can have lighting that good without artists spending hundreds of man hours faking it. Someone should look at Minecraft with ray tracing and have the lightbulb go off in their head just how much of a game changer it is. It can make Minecraft look like that.
You can't "master lighting with rasterization" due to the nature of rasterization where all lighting is always a fake of some sort. A faked lighting means that it can't be dynamic and/or will break often requiring artists to go into the assets and remake them to fix the technological limitations - if they even can be fixed which they more often than not can't.The thing is, devs have mastered lighting already with rasterization. Games like Red Dead, GTSport, Horizon, etc. Have sublime lighting, so I don't see RT being much of a difference at all. Certainly not worth the cost.
Nothing will "lessen the performance blows" of RT just as nothing has managed to lessen the blows which rasterization h/w brought to CPU rendered games back in the 90s. RT as general problem has no limit on performance which it can spend on tracing rays.Having said that, I understand that it's a marketing word that needs to sell consoles, and that with it being standardized -- optimization will lessen these performance blows.
Every genre will benefit from RT. I fully expect that even 2D/2.5D side scrollers will benefit from RT at some point.I think it depends on the genre. Racing games in particular will benefit from this.
You're telling me that on this day, February seventh, two thousand and twenty, Minecraft RTX is NOT a next gen leap in terms of visuals over base game Minecraft? I just cannot process how someone could think it isn't.
It's embarrassing that you think ray tracing is just "better lighting" and that you're being this defensive about being called out on it.
The thing is, devs have mastered lighting already with rasterization. Games like Red Dead, GTSport, Horizon, etc. Have sublime lighting, so I don't see RT being much of a difference at all. Certainly not worth the cost.
Having said that, I understand that it's a marketing word that needs to sell consoles, and that with it being standardized -- optimization will lessen these performance blows.
I think it depends on the genre. Racing games in particular will benefit from this.
Since someone just brought up destruction:
abload.de is fantastic for future reference (it's in German but shouldn't be too hard to navigate).
Minecraft is pretty unique case, that game can work on 7th gen platforms, heck it could probably work on a OG Xbox.
The leap in minecraft is so big because the game was never made with a realistic artstyle in the first place.
The same with quake 2, that game is like 25yrs old, so it's RT implementation is going to be very dramatic.
I agree it is impressive though.
But I'm talking about the level of overall visual improvement RT brings in games like control and Battlefield 5.
The lighting in Star Citzen before they changed engines or toned it down was absolutely amazing.RT goes beyond just Global Illumination, which yes has been great for years....I was one of the guys who was really banking on CryEngine being the next big thing....I actually bothered learning a whole bunch of it and was very impressed with its lighting solution.
No problem at all, and that should be enough :PThank you a bunch, I'm can speak enough German. Wolfenstein < see
Actually lighting in Star Citizen was only upgraded over time and switch from CryEngine to Lumberyard did not even affect it.The lighting in Star Citzen before they changed engines or toned it down was absolutely amazing.
Even the racing level? That's what I played ages ago - I bought the m50 (little red racing) ship because of it. It looked unreal, but the performance was trash. Then it looked like every other game.Actually lighting in Star Citizen was only upgraded over time and switch from CryEngine to Lumberyard did not even affect it.
Next gen consoles can't come soon enough. RT will readily be accepted as a game changer when most people can afford it.
Out of curiosity, would having a system level feature to disable ray tracing in consoles be an impediment to the development of the technology? Simlpy because the option exists, developers would have to support non ray traced visuals? Just asking because I feel like the average person that's wowed by graphics isn't paying attention to the accuracy of lighting, reflections, shadows, etc. so it would nice for them to have an option to gain performance/resolution. I was skeptical of RTX at first but after playing Metro and Control, I feel the peformance hit is worth the enhancements to the visuals (left it off in Tomb Raider though). I'm looking forward to checking out the implementation in Youngblood.
that's like asking for a system level function to disable the game's lighting. it's pretty nonsense. if a dev doesn't want to use raytracing, they just wont use it. and that's what's gonna happen if they prioritize framerate. the point of consoles is players don't really get those kinds functionsOut of curiosity, would having a system level feature to disable ray tracing in consoles be an impediment to the development of the technology? Simlpy because the option exists, developers would have to support non ray traced visuals? Just asking because I feel like the average person that's wowed by graphics isn't paying attention to the accuracy of lighting, reflections, shadows, etc. so it would nice for them to have an option to gain performance/resolution. I was skeptical of RTX at first but after playing Metro and Control, I feel the peformance hit is worth the enhancements to the visuals (left it off in Tomb Raider though). I'm looking forward to checking out the implementation in Youngblood.
I dont think they touched racing level for at least 2-3 years now ;p Its almost forgotten feature, as most people are racing in Persistent Universe on planets and moons.Even the racing level? That's what I played ages ago - I bought the m50 ship for it. It looked unreal, but the performance was trash. Then it looked like every other game.
I never really tried the station section.
Yeah...it was a very long time ago that I tried it... Nice to know you can race on planets now, might be time to try it out again. I thought you could only go on the station.I dont think they touched racing level for at least 2-3 years now ;p Its almost forgotten feature, as most people are racing in Persistent Universe on planets and moons.
Out of curiosity, would having a system level feature to disable ray tracing in consoles be an impediment to the development of the technology? Simlpy because the option exists, developers would have to support non ray traced visuals? Just asking because I feel like the average person that's wowed by graphics isn't paying attention to the accuracy of lighting, reflections, shadows, etc. so it would nice for them to have an option to gain performance/resolution. I was skeptical of RTX at first but after playing Metro and Control, I feel the peformance hit is worth the enhancements to the visuals (left it off in Tomb Raider though). I'm looking forward to checking out the implementation in Youngblood.
Your assumption is that developers will continue to dedicate hundreds or thousands of man hours to faking lighting if ray tracing is a viable option. If the next gen consoles have the RT performance I imagine that the time spent faking rasterized lighting will plummet. Ray tracing will be such a time and money saver for developers that anyone arguing against it's merits is just pissing into the wind.
The thing is, devs have mastered lighting already with rasterization. Games like Red Dead, GTSport, Horizon, etc. Have sublime lighting, so I don't see RT being much of a difference at all. Certainly not worth the cost.
Having said that, I understand that it's a marketing word that needs to sell consoles, and that with it being standardized -- optimization will lessen these performance blows.
I think it depends on the genre. Racing games in particular will benefit from this.
lolThe thing is, devs have mastered lighting already with rasterization. Games like Red Dead, GTSport, Horizon, etc. Have sublime lighting, so I don't see RT being much of a difference at all. Certainly not worth the cost.
Having said that, I understand that it's a marketing word that needs to sell consoles, and that with it being standardized -- optimization will lessen these performance blows.
I think it depends on the genre. Racing games in particular will benefit from this.
I did not say that RTX was just about the reflections. Just that I find the layer of sheen & shine more distracting than I find the fake lighting solutions of current tech.I'm not sure what "coated in oil" look you're talking about but RTX is not just about reflections at all. It's ALL the lighting and shadows in a scene.
Give me one example of a game with less environmental interactivity because the lighting is done using rasterisation.
What u are saying does not even make sence.
Also not all raster lighting is baked.
Skyrim has some of the most interactivity and that game is nearly a dacade old where the lighting is not even physically based.
I did not say that RTX was just about the reflections. Just that I find the layer of sheen & shine more distracting than I find the fake lighting solutions of current tech.
Youngblood is only reflections I think so the performance hit isn't bad at all, especially given that the game has a lot of headroom on high end cards to begin with. The reflections looks fantastic but in a way they're almost "too good" at times because some of the surfaces look like straight up polished mirrors.
That has nothing to do with RTX, you can have ray traced lighting in scenes with zero reflective or shiny objects and still see a big difference.
Well that video disproves your point because all modern games don't use only baked lighting.
So RT is not needed for more environmental interactivity.
The part between where you started typing and stopped.
Imagine what actual developers would think if they read some of the laughable posts in here about what people here think ray tracing actually is.
All modern games don't use baked lighting? Where are you getting that information from?
Did you even watch the video where he shows how the baked lighting breaks in Ghost Recon Wildlands? It's only 40 seconds into the video.
I've been trying to clean my office/flat and you guys keep giving me reasons to drop everything and write up my list of grievances about current lighting and reflection issues and how ray tracing can't become mainstream soon enough to magically solve everything.Imagine what actual developers would think if they read some of the laughable posts in here about what people here think ray tracing actually is.
Except of course that previous improvements to graphics were so breathtaking and dramatic that the companies behind the tech did not need to pay someone to create a twenty minute video explaining why games look better. It was simply apparent to laymen at first glance.By your logic we should be still playing games in 8 bits. Like seriously, I am glad people who actually push for better real time graphics enhancement don't share your mentality. It's so close-minded.
"Just self shadowing" which doesn't really have a good general solution in a world of rasterization, yeah. Hence why you see the lack of shadows, shadow bleeds and stuff floating in the air above the point of shadow contact in pretty much EVERY. SINGLE. GAME. out there. People are so used to this shit that they don't even notice it anymore.
Similar to a "feature" which would just disable 2/3rds of a GPU. Would that be an impediment or not?Out of curiosity, would having a system level feature to disable ray tracing in consoles be an impediment to the development of the technology?
Is self shadowing an RT thing? Because non RT games have had better looking faces than that.
I've been trying to clean my office/flat and you guys keep giving me reasons to drop everything and write up my list of grievances about current lighting and reflection issues and how ray tracing can't become mainstream soon enough to magically solve everything.
I'm quite serious. Making water reflective and refractive, anything to do with mirrors, and large scale shadow mapping and lightmap usage seems to make a nearly endless list of problems. RT lighting is going to be grand.
I've been trying to clean my office/flat and you guys keep giving me reasons to drop everything and write up my list of grievances about current lighting and reflection issues and how ray tracing can't become mainstream soon enough to magically solve everything.
I'm quite serious. Making water reflective and refractive, anything to do with mirrors, and large scale shadow mapping and lightmap usage seems to make a nearly endless list of problems. RT lighting is going to be grand.
The thing is, devs have mastered lighting already with rasterization. Games like Red Dead, GTSport, Horizon, etc. Have sublime lighting, so I don't see RT being much of a difference at all. Certainly not worth the cost.
Having said that, I understand that it's a marketing word that needs to sell consoles, and that with it being standardized -- optimization will lessen these performance blows.
I think it depends on the genre. Racing games in particular will benefit from this.