Support NeoGAF

[Lethal01]

But why not have day time, all the time, but realistic lighting? I never heard of anyone who wants generic baked-in lighting, over realistic raytracing.

Why would you want "not realistic" lighting?

Just about every lighting trick you see in games is an attempt to simulate realism. Going back to Pixar movies, do you not think they employ the most sophisticated lighting code (absolutely using ray tracing) that exists, even though their movies are highly cartoony?

"Why would you not want realistic lighting?"
This is some of the dumbest shit I've read in ages and we're on gaf. I was hesitant to go full throttle before because I thought you guys just meant "having the option to use raytracing is always better" Which is true. Sometimes RT is the only way to reach your vision. But no, realism isn't always better.

Raytracing is important because it opens up so many more choices in ways to intentionally make your scenes more unrealistic when you want to even if the lighting is still inspired by the natural world.

 

[Tqaulity]

According to the masses here on these boards (especially the Sony folk) anyone can declare "next-gen" and it be OK. There was even a thread about it that many people ignored.

Let's Establish What Constitutes "Next Gen" for PS5/Xbox Series Generation

60 fps is the most overrated shit in gaming history. Yeah motion clarity and input responsiveness are so overrated; can't wait for all those beautiful, but slow motion and laggy as fuck fighting games.

www.neogaf.com

Yep that was my thread . Not surprised it's not 100 pages long. Too much truth and facts to argue about.

You'll think every game on PS is next gen that's new and is an exclusive. The fact is, that's just your opinion.

That's BS. Don't just through judgements and and try to categorize me like many of the fanboys on this forum as if you know me. I've never promoted games like Spider Man MM, Demon Souls, Godfall, or Destruction All Stars as anything resembling next gen (although SpiderMan and Demon Souls are clearly some of the best looking gamesout there). I"ve consistently promoted the idea that true "next gen" is more than just better graphics and have applauded Sony in particular for really promoting things like the input, audio, and user experience for this gen. In fact, in that thread you referenced, part of my point was that just because a game is exclusive to a "next gen" system is completely irrelevant in it being considered next gen. Xbox is also doing great things with BC and is primarily adopting a PC model for their consoles. That's fine although it doesn't really excite me personally.

I work with the latest and greatest PC games everyday on the latest PC HW. I've been working directly on PC gaming HW and SW for well over 10 years now. I'm definitely not coming from a place of ignorance or bias to a specific platform. But I won't back down from the idea that true "next gen" is really about more than higher number of pixels or more visual effects. It's about advancing the state of the art in interactivity, immersion, and (of course) fun gaming experiences. The current obsession that many folks have with just the number of 'P's in the framebuffer, frame rate, or checkbox type of visual features on a spec sheet is just sickening and tiresome to me. I get that it completely misses the point of what gaming is really about and I refuse to engage in the hyperbolic fanboyism that is rampant around the NET.

That said, yes I have my opinions as well and Metro Exodus update is more akin to a "remaster" of the game utilizing "next gen" graphical features sure....but it's silly to try to classify that as a next gen experience overall when it's the same game designed for HW released over 8 years ago.

 

[sandbood]

Good to see what a proper RT tech implementation looks like instead of after thought by the developers.

 

[rodrigolfp]

"Why would you not want realistic lighting?"
This is some of the dumbest shit I've read in ages and we're on gaf. I was hesitant to go full throttle before because I thought you guys just meant the option to use raytracing is always better, But no realism isn't always better.

Raytracing is important because it opens up so many more choices in ways to intentionally make your scenes more unrealistic when you want to even if the lighting is still inspired by the natural world.

But how can you tell that these games would not look better with realistic RT lighting?

 

[DenchDeckard]

This looks absolutely insane. Finally something to push my 3080.

mindblowing RT.

 

[Dr Bass]

"Why would you not want realistic lighting?"
This is some of the dumbest shit I've read in ages and we're on gaf. I was hesitant to go full throttle before because I thought you guys just meant the option to use raytracing is always better, But no realism isn't always better.

Raytracing is important because it opens up so many more choices in ways to intentionally make your scenes more unrealistic when you want to even if the lighting is still inspired by the natural world.

I don't think you even understand your own argument. Do you really think Wind Waker wouldn't look better with ray traced lighting?

I am not a graphics professional but I have programmed offline ray traced renderers for fun and I am a software professional. You can say my post is some of the "dumbest shit" you've seen, but you don't even understand the field. A cartoony look doesn't mean your lighting isn't behaving "realistically".

We keep bringing up Pixar on this board. Have you seen the latest Pixar trailer? Do you think it looks realistic? Do you think it's not using way more advanced ray tracing than anything you posted here?

Before you go around calling people dumb, don't presume to know who you are talking to when you have zero knowledge and experience in the area. You are conflating ray tracing with realistic end results and it's just not the case.

In the meantime, please go do some reading on 3D rendering and lighting.

 

[Lethal01]

But how can you tell that these games would not look better with realistic RT lighting?

Because the appeal is the lack of realism in many areas. It would be one thing if you just said RT. Because you can use RT to create unrealistic lighting.
Because Spider-Verse is a movie rendered on super computers that could be 100% realistic but they choose to purposefully making the lighting objectively inaccurate all the time.

But suggesting that all these games would be better if you made them more realistic is just crazy. Strive devs actually want to make it more unrealistic but it would take too much dev time to get make it match the anime movies aesthetic as closely as they want to.

Now I'm not saying that a realistic effect or accurate reflections are always worse whenever a game is stylized or anything like that. To be clear I'm addressing comments that take this to the extreme and go "when would you ever want unrealistic lighting" or "why would you want baked lighting instead of real dynamic lighting" or

Artistically placing lights in a scene has what benefits exactly? I'd love for you to give me an example with screenshots.

 

[Lethal01]

I don't think you even understand your own argument. Do you really think Wind Waker wouldn't look better with ray traced lighting?

I am not a graphics professional but I have programmed offline ray traced renderers for fun and I am a software professional. You can say my post is some of the "dumbest shit" you've seen, but you don't even understand the field. A cartoony look doesn't mean your lighting isn't behaving "realistically".

We keep bringing up Pixar on this board. Have you seen the latest Pixar trailer? Do you think it looks realistic? Do you think it's not using way more advanced ray tracing than anything you posted here?

Before you go around calling people dumb, don't presume to know who you are talking to when you have zero knowledge and experience in the area. You are conflating ray tracing with realistic end results and it's just not the case.

In the meantime, please go do some reading on 3D rendering and lighting.

Don't presume to know my qualifications. I never claimed that you had no experience in the field. I never said a cartoony look by itself means your light isn't behaving realistically.

I don't care if you're John Carmack, The statement that you will "never want unrealistic lighting" is foolish, I can absolutely guarantee you that spider-verse has tons of scenes where they want scientifically inaccurate lighting that throws conversation of energy far, far out the window.

 

[JackMcGunns]

I'm confused here. Wasn't Spiderman a AAA game with ray tracing? Prior to the release of Metro with Ray Tracing added?

Ah! Sry my bad they are purely talking about PC here.

Not just that, when he says RT-ONLY, it means it could only run on hardware with RT and it's always ON, typically you can toggle these things, but this is the first case where its MANDATORY.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

When's the patch out for PC? I bought the complete edition a month ago on sale (Steam) in anticipation of this.

I am lucky enough to have a legit PC that's just about ready for anything.

 

[Dr Bass]

Don't presume to know my qualifications. I never claimed that you had no experience in the field. I never said a cartoony look by itself means your light isn't behaving realistically.

I don't care where you work, The statement that you will "never want unrealistic lighting" is foolish, I can absolutely guarantee you that spider-verse has tons of scenes where they want scientifically inaccurate lighting that throws conversation of energy far, far out the window.

I don't think you're even understanding the conversation but ok. So you think ray traced rendering is a lesser technology in some cases? Ok. Got it.

What does "inaccurate lighting" that "throws conversation of energy" look like to you? That just doesn't even make sense. Lighting that doesn't light things? And how does rasterization with its own lighting techniques allow for "inaccurate lighting" that is not simply "not as accurate as it should be." You're talking like the very existence of ray tracing means "realism" instead of the ability for light to behave realistically. Again, you took what I said, completely not understanding what it means because you don't understand what it is (which is why I can also presume your "qualifications") that we are talking about, then posted a shot of Wind Waker as an example of when you wouldn't want to use RT. Can you tell me there on the Wind Waker shot where the lighting is not trying to behave realistically? ONCE AGAIN ... you are conflating the realistic behavior of light with realism. They are not the same thing. Also, you can ... you know ... program your renderer to behave the way you want. So you can still achieve various visual styles if you want. It's too deep to even get into if you don't know the topic which you clearly don't because you picked toon shading as an example of when you don't want realistic lighting. You're talking about the LOOK. Ray tracing doesn't mean you can't have cartoony visuals.

Instead of name calling, laughing, and making statements that make absolutely no sense, why don't you back up some of your statements with actual substance?

Let me ask you this:

In what situation, do you want light to not act like light? Please provide some concrete examples, and not meaningless phrases like "conversation of energy". Again, when do you want light to not act like light?

 

[YCoCg]

Well shit, I dunno about you guys but imagining a game like Grand Theft Auto IV or Red Dead Redemption 2 with ray traced global illumination would be a damn dream.

 

[bbeach123]

Movie use "fake lighting" all the time . Realistic lighting could look pretty bland sometime .

 

[01011001]

those have to be the worst RT Reflections I've ever seen tho... there's so much detail removed that it even manages to look way worse than any planar reflections I know, which also should be less expensive to use in this case, at least in water surfaces... like wtf?

 

[DonJuanSchlong]

Lethal01 I'm sorry man, but you can't call my post "the dumbest shit ever", yet everyone literally disagrees with you. You don't seem to really understand raytracing, and why prebaked lighting will always get beaten by raytracing. That will always be the case in ex; real life, cartoon graphics, cell shaded, realistic art style, movies, audio, etc.

Synthetic/fake lighting is like fucking a girl with a condom

Raytracing it's like fucking a girl without a condom, and no worries about std's or getting pregnant.

It gets no better than the real deal.

 

[Lethal01]

I don't think you're even understanding the conversation but ok. So you think ray traced rendering is a lesser technology in some cases? Ok. Got it.

What does "inaccurate lighting" that "throws conversation of energy" look like to you? That just doesn't even make sense. Lighting that doesn't light things?

Yes, Light that doesn't light certain things even when it should, Light that brightens things more than it should while it doesn't brighten others as much as it should. Maybe you don't want your light to bounce, maybe it wants only a directly lit environment with light bleed and no shadows. If this doesn't make sense to you then I think just doing some reading won't be enough, try working in recreating the stylized aesthetics

And how does rasterization with its own lighting techniques allow for "inaccurate lighting" that is not simply "not as accurate as it should be." You're talking like the very existence of ray tracing means "realism" instead of the ability for light to behave realistically. Again, you took what I said, completely not understanding what it means because you don't understand what it is

I didn't say raytracing can't be used to purposefully create inaccurate results. I posted spider-verse that does exactly this.

posted a shot of Wind Waker as an example of when you wouldn't want to use RT. Can you tell me there on the Wind Waker shot where the lighting is not trying to behave realistically? ONCE AGAIN ... you are conflating the realistic behavior of light with realism.

Nah, you can have totally realistic lights and be stylized, or you can have light that's only realistic in particular ways and manually set them to be "wrong" in the ways you want them to be. don't know how you got the idea I'm saying otherwise.

They are not the same thing. Also, you can ... you know ... program your renderer to behave the way you want. So you can still achieve various visual styles if you want. It's too deep to even get into if you don't know the topic which you clearly don't because you picked toon shading as an example of when you don't want realistic lighting. You're talking about the LOOK. Ray tracing doesn't mean you can't have cartoony visuals.


In what situation, do you want light to not act like light? Please provide some concrete examples, and not meaningless phrases like "conversation of energy". Again, when do you want light to not act like light?

Okay, I had one typo, you got me. Conservation of energy. I don't see exactly how you would think it's meaningless. It's not exactly complicated. Just means, I may want an object that gives off more light than it receives. Like when I need something that's impossibly shiny to make it really pop. I may want a light that falls off incorrectly. like if I want a torch that never gets too bright even when it's right next to a character's face yet manages to light several square kilometers brightly.

Once again, I'm not saying RT can't achieve these effects, from the start I made sure to specifically talk about the claim "you would never want unrealistic lighting". which you totally would. All those things are examples of unrealistic lighting.

 

[Dr Bass]

Movie use "fake lighting" all the time . Realistic lighting could look pretty bland sometime .

So those "fake lights" aren't ... behaving like lights?

My response to reading much of the craziness in this thread:

 

[Lethal01]

Lethal01 I'm sorry man, but you can't call my post "the dumbest shit ever", yet everyone literally disagrees with you.

"You can't say realistic lighting is always better yet literally everyone disagrees with you."
Trying to give the impression that everyone is on your side when several people right on the last page are disagreeing with you just makes it seem like you don't actually have confidence in your argument.

You don't seem to really understand raytracing, and why prebaked lighting will always get beaten by raytracing. That will always be the case in ex; real life, cartoon graphics, cell shaded, realistic art style, movies, audio, etc.

Except it isn't, sometimes I literally want the ground to be a single color plane with non of the dynamic light sources affecting it. and RT would not help me at all, sometimes the look of static baked light is EXACTLY what I need. Now, we can agree that the option to use RT is always better. but that's not what was said, You said "realistic lighting" is always better which is not true.

Sometimes you want "lights" that literally don't cast light.

 

[CitizenZ]

I thought that airplane game from MS was the first? Or wait wasnt it that minecart game?

 

[VFXVeteran]

Bro, you said anything. Toon shading is included in everything. That was just the easiest example; because you admit that qualifies what I'm saying.

Any game where some exaggerated lighting adds atmosphere would be ruined by a completely rt solution. Take the lit walls of twilight in twilight princess. Literally I could sit here all day and bring up unrealistic examples that would be amiss with a overly darkened or bright scene change.

You may be an artist but you seem to have a casual interest in the hobby itself. Or certainly not as a purist who can appreciate all aspects of the art.

I'm not an artist bro. I'm a graphics programmer. I've worked with artists for years and years. I have had to make specific shaders for multiple looks and sets in any scenario.

You are applying realistic light bounce to be stuck with doing just that. Just because you have RT lighting capability doesn't mean you have to use it like real life. Every single one of the CG movies out don't use realworld lighting. We create several render passes to art direct scenes.

Why are you guys trying to mitigate RT lighting's importance? I don't understand the defense force here. Nearly every game that has come out except for non-photorealistic rendering would benefit from RT lighting. Every single PS5 game that has been shown (including R&C) would look way better with RT lighting. You guys are way too biased for Sony it's pathetic. There isn't a single Xbox gamer on these boards downplaying RT lighting. Why can't you give props to a gaming studio and forget about the hardware for once?

 

[DonJuanSchlong]

"You can't say realistic lighting is always better yet literally everyone disagrees with you."
Trying to give the impression that everyone is on your side when several people right on the last page are disagreeing with you just makes it seem like you don't actually have confidence in your argument.



Except it isn't, sometimes I literally want the ground to be a single color plane with non of the dynamic light sources affecting it. and RT would not help me at all, sometimes the look of static baked light is EXACTLY what I need. Now, we can agree that the option to use RT is always better. but that's not what was said, You said "realistic lighting" is always better which is not true.

Sometimes you want "lights" that literally don't cast light.

So you prefer artificial lighting. You could have just said that is what you like. Not that it's actually better than raytracing, cause if it was, we wouldn't be using raytracing at all. Raytracing would be the old outdated technology, but since we're evolved from old tech, were now implementing RT into movies, games, audio, etc. You can stick to your preferences, while the rest of us keep up with next gen tech.


Can you tell me why form of lighting that doesn't cast light, in real life? Wasn't sure that was actually a thing?

 

[VFXVeteran]

I agree. But the key point is that if you wait, you really do get the extra bounces. So there is seemingly no "cutoff", except the point at which further bounces don't make a visual difference.

Compare that to a game like Quake 2 RTX, where if you configure the game for 2 bounces, that's all you will ever see. (Since the lighting information isn't reused from past frames)

You can force it to explode though. I don't know how many samples they are using for importance sampling the area lights but if you make the lights move, that will force a rebuild on the cache. Believe me, if I had their engine, I could bring the hardware it to it's knees.

Also their materials are on the weak side for sure. The PBR is very very light. I'm not sure if it's because they chose this or don't have good materials implemented yet. Also their light bounce is only for diffuse scattering. There is no reflection scattering or refraction scattering for the lamps and such. Basically we still have a long way to go..

 

[HAL-01]

"Why would you not want realistic lighting?"
This is some of the dumbest shit I've read in ages and we're on gaf. I was hesitant to go full throttle before because I thought you guys just meant "having the option to use raytracing is always better" Which is true. Sometimes RT is the only way to reach your vision. But no, realism isn't always better.

Raytracing is important because it opens up so many more choices in ways to intentionally make your scenes more unrealistic when you want to even if the lighting is still inspired by the natural world.

Half of your examples are Spider-Man into the spider verse... which is a ray traced cg movie. It is literally an example of how good a cartoony Spider-Man game could look like if it had rt

The other one is from wind waker HD, a remaster that has more accurate lighting than the original and thus looks cleaner.

Most "cartoon" games would benefit from rt. They all still have lighting passes, they just use cel shading over them. Simply having a more accurate lighting pass would take them from looking kinda flat to looking the way an actual artist would draw them

Only time you wouldn't want rt would be if you deliberately want minimal lighting for artistic reasons

 

[Lethal01]

I'm not an artist bro. I'm a graphics programmer. I've worked with artists for years and years. I have had to make specific shaders for multiple looks and sets in any scenario.

GASP, No way son, why did you never mention this before? We are all now very impressed.

Nearly every game that has come out except for non-photorealistic rendering would benefit from RT lighting. Every single PS5 game that has been shown (including R&C) would look way better with RT lighting.

So how about we stop saying realistic lighting is always better? Then we won't have to waste time pointing out that it's obviously not.

You guys are way too biased for Sony it's pathetic.

Okay, time to go home. You're literally console warring for nothing.

So you prefer artificial lighting. You could have just said that is what you like. Not that it's actually better than raytracing,

??? Using raytracing does not mean you aren't using inaccurate(assuming that's what you mean by "artificial") light. Saying "raytracing is better than Innacurate lighting" just doesn't make much sense.

Can you tell me why form of lighting that doesn't cast light, in real life? Wasn't sure that was actually a thing?

I'm assuming you mean "what form of lighting doesn't cast light, in real life" not to attack you for a typo just make sure it's clear what I'm responding to.
Anyway, none, all lights in real life cast light on other objects, But games don't need to be held back by reality. Breaking the rules makes for fantastic effects.
real life doesn't have outlines by they can look super cool in game.

You could use it for a neat effect where you are in a cave full of glowing crystals to create an extreme contrast and abstract feel.

 

[Lethal01]

Half of your examples are Spider-Man into the spider verse... which is a ray traced cg movie. It is literally an example of how good a cartoony Spider-Man game could look like if it had rt

The other one is from wind waker HD, a remaster that has more accurate lighting than the original and thus looks cleaner.

Most "cartoon" games would benefit from rt. They all still have lighting passes, they just use cel shading over them. Simply having a more accurate lighting pass would take them from looking kinda flat to looking the way an actual artist would draw them

Only time you wouldn't want rt would be if you deliberately want minimal lighting for artistic reasons

I'll just assume you skimmed through what I said, the point I was making is that being "realistic" doesn't mean better. That post was not at all saying that Raytracing can't be great for stylized games, I specifically posted spiderverse to showcase it can. I do regret using Windwaker HD as an example though, since while it does look better overall there are areas where it looks worse due to it's attempt to be realistic.

Sometimes the way the character is lit looks super awkward compared to the more simple cellshading in the original.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Nope it isn't.
It's RDNA 2 BASED ie CUSTOM.
PS5 has a faster I/O than any consumer gaming PC.

A PC with a PS5 dev kit is what made SM MM not your typical $4000 build.
Dev kits also make games for consumer gaming PC's as well.

Are you seriously hating on Metro and DF video simply because it's not showing the PS5 hardware in the spotlight? For real?

 

[StateofMajora]

I'm not an artist bro. I'm a graphics programmer. I've worked with artists for years and years. I have had to make specific shaders for multiple looks and sets in any scenario.

You are applying realistic light bounce to be stuck with doing just that. Just because you have RT lighting capability doesn't mean you have to use it like real life. Every single one of the CG movies out don't use realworld lighting. We create several render passes to art direct scenes.

Why are you guys trying to mitigate RT lighting's importance? I don't understand the defense force here. Nearly every game that has come out except for non-photorealistic rendering would benefit from RT lighting. Every single PS5 game that has been shown (including R&C) would look way better with RT lighting. You guys are way too biased for Sony it's pathetic. There isn't a single Xbox gamer on these boards downplaying RT lighting. Why can't you give props to a gaming studio and forget about the hardware for once?

Ok I am in no way a Sony fanboy, ffs I give them more shit than anyone atm. Even though I will a tell you Xbox is pretty much useless as a platform with PC around.

I could live without getting a ps5 for a couple years. I never even downplayed this new edition of exodus ; it clearly looks better than the original.

I am not downplaying anything ; RT just wouldn't automatically make anything that's ever been done better with it. It in fact would fuck up a lot of art. You said literally anything would be better with RT and that's a load of bollocks.

As to you saying RT doesn't have to be used realistically; yeah, that's what me and DeepEnigma have said in this thread already. It can definitely enhance any new project going forward, where it's made with RT in mind.

I'm simply saying that devs need to be careful because simply making everything realistically bounce will be a temptation because RT is a new toy. New techniques are often overused.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Are you seriously hating on Metro and DF video simply because it's not showing the PS5 hardware in the spotlight? For real?

Wait what!
Nobody said this wth lolz?


Since I am falsely accused I will entertain the accusations...

Just because Metro Exodus is a last gen game with a touch of paint...I am very much looking forward to playing it with these enhancements.

As far as DF... I take them with a good "basic reference" grain of salt.

 

[HAL-01]

I'll just assume you skimmed through what I said, the point I was making is that being "realistic" doesn't mean better. That post was not at all saying that Raytracing can't be great for stylized games, I specifically posted spiderverse to showcase it can.

And my point is that having "realistic" lighting simulation is not the same thing as pursuing photorealism, which is what you seem to be arguing against. No one has said every game must go for a realistic style, the people you quoted said basically the same thing I did

 

[VFXVeteran]

Ok I am in no way a Sony fanboy, ffs I give them more shit than anyone atm. Even though I will a tell you Xbox is pretty much useless as a platform with PC around.

I could live without getting a ps5 for a couple years. I never even downplayed this new edition of exodus ; it clearly looks better than the original.

I am not downplaying anything ; RT just wouldn't automatically make anything that's ever been done better with it. It in fact would fuck up a lot of art. You said literally anything would be better with RT and that's a load of bollocks.

As to you saying RT doesn't have to be used realistically; yeah, that's what me and DeepEnigma have said in this thread already. It can definitely enhance any new project going forward, where it's made with RT in mind.

I'm simply saying that devs need to be careful because simply making everything realistically bounce will be a temptation because RT is a new toy. New techniques are often overused.

OK. Trust me on this man. I've worked on a lot of CG films and I've worked with a LOT of professional directors on all kinds of various techniques. I'm telling you with 100% conviction and 20yrs of graphics experience - NO ONE will ever go back to rasterized lights for ANY CG type movie . You can name your art direction and I can make it look better than standard fake lighting. 100% of the time. Once these graphics engines adopt RT lighting - you can forget ever seeing standard lights the way games have been using them.

 

[Lethal01]

And my point is that having "realistic" lighting simulation is not the same thing as pursuing photorealism, which is what you seem to be arguing against. No one has said every game must go for a realistic style, the people you quoted said basically the same thing I did

No, I'm saying that having you realistic lighting simulation isn't always what you want, wind waker is a good example, the lighting in the new version does sometimes look awkward compared to the less accurate original.

To be clear I'm not talking about whether it should use ray tracing since you are totally capable of having unrealistic light simulation with ray tracing.
Some games will aim for photorealism, some will aim for a stylized aesthetic using realistic light simulation and some will have unrealistic light simulation to get their stylized aesthetic, many will use a mix of both. If we all agree on that then okay, good talk.

 

[DeepEnigma]

OK. Trust me on this man. I've worked on a lot of CG films and I've worked with a LOT of professional directors on all kinds of various techniques. I'm telling you with 100% conviction and 20yrs of graphics experience - NO ONE will ever go back to rasterized lights for ANY CG type movie . You can name your art direction and I can make it look better than standard fake lighting. 100% of the time. Once these graphics engines adopt RT lighting - you can forget ever seeing standard lights the way games have been using them.

I think quite a bunch will take advantage of UE5's GI method and the like for most of this gen. Hardware in gaming just isn't quite there yet like the movies with their offline rendering power budgets.

 

[VFXVeteran]

EVERY SINGLE one of these CG shorts have some form of 3D rendering to them. Maya, 3DSMax, Vray, all use path traced renderers as standard now. You can literally pick ANY scenario and using the path tracer will render it and workflow will be MUCH faster and look way better.

 

[DeepEnigma]

EVERY SINGLE one of these films have some form of 3D rendering to them. Maya, 3DSMax, Vray, all use path traced renderers as standard now.

Looks like an indie game lineup

 

[Lethal01]

EVERY SINGLE one of these CG shorts have some form of 3D rendering to them. Maya, 3DSMax, Vray, all use path traced renderers as standard now. You can literally pick ANY scenario and using the path tracer will render it and workflow will be MUCH faster and look way better.

Can't wait for season 2.

To get back on topic, I can't stress enough how happy I was when I saw news of a ray-tracing only AAA game coming out. I was already excited to see one of the earliest adopters show off their second iteration but this takes it to another level.

Breaking a renderer built for RT so that you get physically innacurate lighting is a million times easier than matching the results of RT using only screen space results.

 

[Mister Wolf]

EVERY SINGLE one of these CG shorts have some form of 3D rendering to them. Maya, 3DSMax, Vray, all use path traced renderers as standard now. You can literally pick ANY scenario and using the path tracer will render it and workflow will be MUCH faster and look way better.

Blur Studios are amazing. I really like the CGI cutscenes the did for Halo 2 Remake and Halo Wars 2.

 

[01011001]

EVERY SINGLE one of these CG shorts have some form of 3D rendering to them. Maya, 3DSMax, Vray, all use path traced renderers as standard now. You can literally pick ANY scenario and using the path tracer will render it and workflow will be MUCH faster and look way better.

wtf is the video with Hitler in a threesome? xD

 

[Mister Wolf]

wtf is the video with Hitler in a threesome? xD

One of the episodes of Love, Death + Robots animated anthology on Netflix. Next season coming out on the 14th. Reminds me of the old MTV Liquid TV era with stuff like The Maxx, Aeon Flux, The Head, etc.

 

[99Luffy]

I think it looks worse.
Its kind of funny cause when they first showed RT alot of people were like 'Why is it so dark I dont like that!' and everyone was all like 'Youre wrong the darkness is more realistic.'
And now they have this ultrabright version and its all like 'Umm..'

 

[VFXVeteran]

Yep that was my thread . Not surprised it's not 100 pages long. Too much truth and facts to argue about.


That's BS. Don't just through judgements and and try to categorize me like many of the fanboys on this forum as if you know me. I've never promoted games like Spider Man MM, Demon Souls, Godfall, or Destruction All Stars as anything resembling next gen (although SpiderMan and Demon Souls are clearly some of the best looking gamesout there). I"ve consistently promoted the idea that true "next gen" is more than just better graphics and have applauded Sony in particular for really promoting things like the input, audio, and user experience for this gen. In fact, in that thread you referenced, part of my point was that just because a game is exclusive to a "next gen" system is completely irrelevant in it being considered next gen. Xbox is also doing great things with BC and is primarily adopting a PC model for their consoles. That's fine although it doesn't really excite me personally.

Hey bro. I'm talking to so many people on these boards sometimes anyone that tries to downplay anything that's not Sony gets those responses. I apologize my man.

I work with the latest and greatest PC games everyday on the latest PC HW. I've been working directly on PC gaming HW and SW for well over 10 years now. I'm definitely not coming from a place of ignorance or bias to a specific platform. But I won't back down from the idea that true "next gen" is really about more than higher number of pixels or more visual effects. It's about advancing the state of the art in interactivity, immersion, and (of course) fun gaming experiences. The current obsession that many folks have with just the number of 'P's in the framebuffer, frame rate, or checkbox type of visual features on a spec sheet is just sickening and tiresome to me. I get that it completely misses the point of what gaming is really about and I refuse to engage in the hyperbolic fanboyism that is rampant around the NET.

I completely agree. This thread though is not about pixel counting and FPS. You are right though, there is a LOT of fanboyism going on and it dilutes the waters greatly.

That said, yes I have my opinions as well and Metro Exodus update is more akin to a "remaster" of the game utilizing "next gen" graphical features sure....but it's silly to try to classify that as a next gen experience overall when it's the same game designed for HW released over 8 years ago.

And here is where we disagree. There isn't a single graphics engine that's going to be rewritten from scratch. Metro Exodus and the previous Metro games have ALWAYS been first out the gate with new tech. 4A is a PC studio first and foremost. You can't put a timestamp on a graphics engine based on what kind of hardware is out for the masses and immediately declare it 'last-gen'. Going by your own thread the PC has never been considered a 'next-gen' machine. It's completely agnostic and will always be the first hardware to try new tech. Always. Lighting is absolutely the main driver of any 3D rendering software. I consider the enhancement 'next-gen' because it fully addresses the elephant in the room for this cycle of consoles - Ray Tracing in it's fullest form. To me, this justifies the label more than any other game so far.

 

[StateofMajora]

OK. Trust me on this man. I've worked on a lot of CG films and I've worked with a LOT of professional directors on all kinds of various techniques. I'm telling you with 100% conviction and 20yrs of graphics experience - NO ONE will ever go back to rasterized lights for ANY CG type movie . You can name your art direction and I can make it look better than standard fake lighting. 100% of the time. Once these graphics engines adopt RT lighting - you can forget ever seeing standard lights the way games have been using them.

Not the classics; I would believe that when I see it.

If you're talking about the future; as long as RT can be made to look unreal such as a light source that is always on the character (see wind weaker vs. wind water HD) or exaggerated brightness when compared to the light source, then yeah I can see your point. Artist control is key.

 

[Rea]

This doesn't look anything better than "Lumen" in unreal 5. When games are built with UE5, next gen gonna be freaking awesome.

 

[Lethal01]

This doesn't look anything better than "Lumen" in unreal 5. When games are built with UE5, next gen gonna be freaking awesome.

Sure, they both are built from the ground up around raytaced GI.
The difference is that this comes out in under a month.

 

[Lethal01]

I think it looks worse.
Its kind of funny cause when they first showed RT alot of people were like 'Why is it so dark I dont like that!' and everyone was all like 'Youre wrong the darkness is more realistic.'
And now they have this ultrabright version and its all like 'Umm..'

You gotta remember that the lighting is redone in this version. The original release may be way more realistic compared to the faked lighting but the new one may be adjusted so that it's accurate while also matching the original look they were going for.

The lighting coming in through a window for example maybe 8x more intense than it originally was.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Wow, excellent video from DF as usual. What an upgrade, I hope more games on PC start doing this, full RT GI, remove the pre-baked shit.

Now to find a 3080..

 

[rofif]

Ilien will say DLSS is shit

He is wrong as always.
Dlss reconstructs way more, don't shimmer and don't pixel crawl. It's godly

 

[muteZX]

Lighting GI /bounce/ propagation is clearly slower than expected, delayed by many frames and scenes in general are too bright /once again incorrect bouncing/. Speed up and refine.

 

[Mister Wolf]

He is wrong as always.
Dlss reconstructs way more, don't shimmer and don't pixel crawl. It's godly

Also doesn't have the ghosting associated with TAA and all the derivative upscaling techniques that use it in their implementation.

 

[Chris_Rivera]

I wasn't particularly impressed with Exodus, originally. Glad they made a proper PC version before doing the next gen update, which will run like ass.

 

[Cattlyst]

Got excited thinking the console update had finally dropped. Oh well.