raytracing rule

Unirronically I agree with this. I still have yet to see a use case of ray tracing that makes it worth the 50% hit in fps.

Getting the vibe that OP is being serious while using a template supposed to be ironic.

Seems odd to be angry about game graphics progressing. Imagine how it was during the 90s.

This, but unironically. Games don't even need such realistic graphics, anyway - I'd much rather play a stylized or even 2d game where the devs focused on mechanics and fun, rather than pretty lights.

Don't worry bro just turn on fake frames and upscaling. Now we get shitty graphics AND raytracing at the same time!

The weird hybrid solutions that game devs are coming up with to beat out the old tech without doing full RTX is awesome. And for that reason I like RTX, because its pushing development of ideas that work better for today's hardware and today's applications.

This feels like one of those "VR in the 90s was shit so we should never develop VR" kind of things.

After playing Portal RTX and Quake 2 RTX, my opinion is that what we really need are games that fully embrace RTX as their rendering. Lower poly count, use materials more, lean in onto the cool lighting.

Games like Cyberpunk 2077 use RTX, but it's just painted over so it is very expensive for what it brings to the table. Sure it's more accurate and having reflections is neat, but it costs more than some shadow maps and doesn't beat good artistic design.

Raytracing produces realistic visual effects without requiring tricks like ambient occlusion, screen-space reflections, shadow resolution and so on, since those emerge as a result of raytracing anyway and are much more realistic. I'm currently rendering a Donut in Blender where the effects are clearly visible in comparison.

However, due to the high amount of optimization in visually impressive realtime rendering engines like game engines, I agree with you that I don't see many benefits comparing ray tracing in games with contemporary alternative techniques.

Nevertheless I think that's the future. In the long run, there's nothing better, i.e. more accurate, than simulating the behavior of light when it comes to visual realism.

I'm surprised they didn't go with the fact that ray tracing shoots rays out of the camera rather than having light radiate from light sources.

"That's a scientifically outdated view of how light works! Light enters your eyes, not the other way around! What is this? Emission theory? Are we back in the 1600s? They've played us for absolute fools."

Counterpoint: I like pretty lights and don't mind having to play at a suboptimal framerate if it means more detail that I'm going to notice and enjoy.

Also, I keep seeing people confusing photorealism with a lack of style, when that's just not true. Pixar movies for example are photorealistic but stylized. You can have fancy lights and cool styles.

Eh, pathtracing is pretty cool, and when used correctly, it can lead to real amazing results, while the artist does not have to care about performance as much. Baked lighting is very nice for static scenes, but it also consumes a lot of storage.

To be fair, lighting is the most important part of generating photorealistic graphics. Having realistic and real-time lighting makes it look so much more realistic

Counterargument: my 3090 is my space heater

Ray Tracing is awesome

Counter, or maybe side, argument; the problem is that nobody has actually done it well. There is a very real difference to be made using real time pathtracing, but everyone is distracted by pretty lights.

Just a side note: simulating light in a 3D environment is the stuff you could use to write a fucking phd, no joke. And another if you can figure a way to make the algorithm faster

Am I the only one who thinks that Ray Tracing doesn't even look good?

I like the way insomniac does it with their games on PS5 : priority on hitting 60fps and then raytracing.

Honestly I like ray tracing but I like 60fps more. I don’t care about resolution tho, 1080p is good enough for me. 1440p if I really want to push it.

4K was invented by TV makers to sell 8k TVs

ray tracing is absolutely insane in cyberpunk, it blows my mind every time I turn it on but yes, because we are in a transition period with gpus and its less noticeable in other games, therefore significantly lowering fps, I turn it off elsewhere.

or you know, just be completely uniformed what ray tracing does and complain about not seeing it because your looking for the wrong thing. love it.

Ray Marching is awesome though https://piped.video/watch?v=9U0XVdvQwAI

Didn't quake bounce light 4 times?

Real time RT really is meh, but I like what they're doing in CS2. Prebaked Global Illumination looks freaking fantastic.

Unironically yes.

I just want to know about the ONE real world use for bouncing light. Probably referring to research so groundbreaking that it shifted our entire understanding of the nature of light if not the universe in general.

Just small stuff like that 🤷

I just want my eye candy sometimes :(

I'm a bit behind the times game wise, can anyone explain how I turn on RTX in Doom?

The first one of these was really funny but none of the derivates that came after ever reached that level.

can somebody please ELI5 ray tracing for me. Yes I have googled and am only more confused

Can all of you leave the rays alone and stop trying to trace them? It's hard enough to be a living pancake swimming along the ocean floor.

And don't go bothering Ray either. He's a nice guy and doesn't deserve your BS.

Apparently the new hotness is Ray Marching, basically Ray tracing with circles

I turned off raytracing in 2077 and immediately had a playable experience. So what if the reflections aren't good? They fixed this on switch with SSAO, and that's a cheap way to fix it