Is Ray-Tracing the biggest scam in gaming?

Nowa

Member
This technology has like what, 7 years in mainstream gaming? And it is still dogshit. I have a decent Nvidia GPU, and why in god's name would I ever turn it on when I can run games much more smoothly without it?

The new Doom only works with RT, you could run Eternal on max settings with 200 frames, now you run it on medium 60 frames with the same gpu. What a joke.

What do you think about it? I wish it would just die already.
 
Jack Nicholson Yes GIF

It's always been rubbish and games are coincidentally taking longer to make since it has been around.
 
In its current state definitely. It needs crutches at every step and is so limited that you can barely call it raytracing. It's selling $5k videocards to gullible though so its here to stay
 
Last edited:
Yes and no. I think raytracing's benefits are for the developers but a good dev can make a game which looks close enough to the more accurate raytraced game with much better performance and optimisation. Raytracing gets you much better accuracy and quicker development changes but the benefit is mostly minor in terms of visual returns vs a competent (nonraytraced) dev team.
 
Last edited:
This technology has like what, 7 years in mainstream gaming? And it is still dogshit. I have a decent Nvidia GPU, and why in god's name would I ever turn it on when I can run games much more smoothly without it?

The new Doom only works with RT, you could run Eternal on max settings with 200 frames, now you run it on medium 60 frames with the same gpu. What a joke.
bye-felicia.gif


Give it a gen.

You're living through it's growing pains, that's why you're annoyed. Every generation had one.
 
No, ray-tracing is a significant step forward and the future of gaming. Fake frames are the biggest scam, particularly multiframe gen.
Ironically raytracing perpetuates this scam because of the low framerates of pathtraced games needing things like framegen to be acceptably playable.
 
Implementing Ray-Tracing in a bare-minimum fashion on weak ass console hardware way too early has diluted the tech and thats why people think its scam. Looks great on a powerful PC but all people ever talk about now is how horrible it looks on console. Give it a few generations.
 
Until consoles can run path tracing, the technology will live mostly on PC through devs who actually give a damn to support it. When consoles can run path tracing, then it becomes the norm and tools and development workflows can be safely designed around it for AAA.
 
This technology has like what, 7 years in mainstream gaming? And it is still dogshit. I have a decent Nvidia GPU, and why in god's name would I ever turn it on when I can run games much more smoothly without it?

The new Doom only works with RT, you could run Eternal on max settings with 200 frames, now you run it on medium 60 frames with the same gpu. What a joke.

What do you think about it? I wish it would just die already.
Hardware lumen solves this.
 
Benefits of ray tracing:

- Easier to iterate levels and lighting for developers
- Higher graphical fidelity, especially in dynamic time of day or changing lighting conditions
- Baked lighting can take up a lot of disk space.

Negatives of ray tracing:

- It is harder to run.

Hardly a scam, just a leap forward in rendering technology. Also, your Doom example is flawed, the game has other graphical and scale upgrades as well.
 
Last edited:
I think a mix of RT in dev and blended in-gameplay measure is best, like what Fortnite is doing these days. You get like 90% of the look with way better performance.
 
The visual uplift is really not there unless you are anal about lighting and reflection. For example, going from PS3 to PS4 we had the advent of physically based rendering and various hair and skin rendering options that meant that people did not like dolls and materials looked like their real world counterparts. Just look at AC III vs AC Unity, there is a clear generational leap. Now, we have DF zooming to tell, hey the interior will not be that dark as it is indirectly lit, which is great but not worth killing your framerate for, especially if you do not notice it. If the devs do a good job with baked lighting, a blind survey in the general population will not show that people prefer the RT enabled version. The RT enabled versions look different but not better. RT might save on dev time and costs though.
 
I have to say, for many years I thought that raytracing was best thing ever, but when I actually got into playing some raytraced games, I am not blown away.

Or, I am blown away for the first five seconds when I take a look at some reflections in a puddle, for example, but when I get into the actual gameplay, I just forget all about it. I don't really care at that point. Those reflections might as well be inaccurate screen space reflections that are actually performant.

It's the overall presentation and image quality I care about more. I mean, I get what raytracing does. That's why I got lured into checking out raytraced games in the first place. But it is also something you just forget about when you are actually in the flow of the gameplay.

I wouldn't say it's a scam, there are benefits for both the developers and the gamers. But I do think it is somewhat overrated. It is not the only thing that makes up computer graphics.
 
... The new Doom only works with RT, you could run Eternal on max settings with 200 frames, now you run it on medium 60 frames with the same gpu. What a joke...
Doom Eternal had offline baked lighting that then incorporated ray traced reflections. It also used to smaller environments, smaller enemy counts, and less geometric complexity across the board. What you're seeing with Doom The Dark Ages is the performance difference between offline lighting, held together with smoke and mirrors created by the best in the business, versus fully real-time lighting based on full-blown photonic simulation. The key benefit isn't to you - the gamer - getting a more total lighting solution, it's actually to the developer, because they don't need to use offline techniques which require nightly builds, delaying QA on scenes by literally days. This allows them to move quickly because in their editing tools, what they see is what you get. This is quite a lot faster, which in turn means cuts costs. That's important because big AAA games are climbing north of USD$300 million on a regular basis.
... What do you think about it? I wish it would just die already.
Ray tracing isn't going to die because your old hardware can't handle Doom The Dark Ages any more than polygons are going to die because your 386 couldn't handle Quake. This is the future.

Real talk - developers used tricks and fakery for so long to give the illusion of better real-time rendering that they utterly eclipsed what the hardware was actually capable of. This created a gulf - the difference between what can done in real time, and what can only be done when you spend millions on elaborate tricks to fake it. This bubble was always going to burst. Instead of intelligent trade offs, like what we saw in games like Doom 3, the industry employed entire armies of people to create masses of bespoke assets to give the illusion they'd pulled off the impossible. What they couldn't achieve with talent they faked with money. Everything from one dimensional background billboards to hardcoded per-camera angle pixel shaders for cut-scenes. And now we're seeing that come to a head. No one can afford to keep doing this. Not at this level of complexity, this level of fidelity. Outside of Rockstar, there's literally no one left who can actually sell enough games to justify these expenses. Developers are falling back to real-time because it's literally the only way they can stay in business. Fortunately, graphics hardware is still actually super powerful - as long as you know how to use it. Doom The Dark Ages is the real deal - it's 60 FPS fully real-time on consoles with great animations, texture work, models, scale, scene complexity, and ray traced lighting. id don't fuck around. Anyone else still delivering pre-baked non-sense is spending dramatically more - and if they're not delivering native 4K 60FPS across the board with all that extra headroom, why even bother? So their screenshots can look 6.7% better? Pfft.
 
When it's great I can't play with it turned off. Reflections, lighting, shadows, it can make no raytracing look incredibly flat and boring. I don't want it to go away.

In general I always turn it on if it's there, then upgrade the system or use framegen if I don't get the performance I want. Definitely understand the frustration if you can get fully locked out of a game! Didn't realize that was still a thing. I remember some talk around Indiana Jones. Is id Tech the only engine with a RT requirement?
 
That's what they've been doing for years.

But everytime design changes it all has to be undone and started again.

Having it all happen in real time instead removes all that.
Depends on game engine, right? Why don't they use real time ray tracing during development and calculate baked lighting only after everything is stable?
 
No, it has been poorly implemented alongside rasterized lighting as a side visual effects, a gimmick, but it's one of the features that will help game devs develop faster and bring proper graphical leap without taking 8 years on everything.

Doom TDA and Indiana Jones ditched rasterized lighting and went full RT, allowing devs properly optimized it imo, almost anything else so far use it as a gimmick.

BTW I'm seeing amazing reflections in Mario Party Jamboree Switch 2 mode and I'm not sure if that's RT or planar reflections...
 
Rt is the reason why upscalling exist in the first place.
Upscalling makes outdated/underpowered hardware viable for current games. My old 4 year old 3060 gaming lappy is still chugging along at 1080p upscalled. Not to mentioned the benefits of fsr on my steamdeck. So yeah, rt is a net positive.
 
The new Doom only works with RT, you could run Eternal on max settings with 200 frames, now you run it on medium 60 frames with the same gpu. What a joke.
And eternal looks like a cartoon in comparison because it's a last gen Sherlock, did you just discover it?, if that's how RT will look and the perform then give me an games RT asap.
 
Doom Eternal had 4 years of development and Doom The Dark Ages had 5 and it's a game built from ground up with RT in mind that also massively flopped. The lie that the development will be faster than baked stuff is annoying. It has benefits but cost and time of development are not it.

Decima Engine remains the king engine and it doesnt need any raytracing capabilities to look as good as any raytraced capable engine.
 
Depends on game engine, right? Why don't they use real time ray tracing during development and calculate baked lighting only after everything is stable?
A lot of workflows depend on seeing what it's like while developing it so it's not really possible to have nothing baked until the very end of development. Even then a product manager might come in and say I don't like X or Y and you need to make changes.
 
A lot of workflows depend on seeing what it's like while developing it so it's not really possible to have nothing baked until the very end of development. Even then a product manager might come in and say I don't like X or Y and you need to make changes.
Check out my second post, I think they can develop the game in ray tracing mode first and only calculate baked lighting when everything is done. Same as using dev mode to test an application in real time but compiling when build for production environment.

I don't say that real time ray traced is not needed, but abandon baked lighting feels harsh.
 
Rushed out before it was ready and adoption is glacially slow because of rising hardware costs. It also relies heavily on AI post processing to not look bad so is it really that great?
 
Doom Eternal had 4 years of development and Doom The Dark Ages had 5 and it's a game built from ground up with RT in mind that also massively flopped...
Doom Eternal re-used significant engine work and assets from Doom 2016. Doom 2016 took approximately eight years, including a reboot. The Dark Ages has a brand new version of the engine, and every single thing was built entirely brand new. Without Ray Traced lighting, id estimates an extra year or two of development time would've been needed due to the efforts of baking their assets. So, it shaved approximately 25-30% of the development off, dropping the budget accordingly.
... The lie that the development will be faster than baked stuff is annoying. It has benefits but cost and time of development are not it...
If you're going to post garbage on the internet, might I suggest not posting gaming related garbage on one of the most hardcore gaming forums on the web? You're less likely to be called out on your bullshit.
... Decima Engine remains the king engine and it doesnt need any raytracing capabilities to look as good as any raytraced capable engine.
... wait, are you trolling, and I'm too old and grumpy to pick up on the nuance?
 
Last edited:
AI will help design better chips so I believe that there will be a significant leap in performace in the coming decade. Eventually we will get games entirely rendered via ray-tracing, that's kind of the Holy Grail.
 
No, it has been poorly implemented alongside rasterized lighting as a side visual effects, a gimmick, but it's one of the features that will help game devs develop faster and bring proper graphical leap without taking 8 years on everything.

Doom TDA and Indiana Jones ditched rasterized lighting and went full RT, allowing devs properly optimized it imo, almost anything else so far use it as a gimmick.

BTW I'm seeing amazing reflections in Mario Party Jamboree Switch 2 mode and I'm not sure if that's RT or planar reflections...
Jamboree doesn't have RT. In fact I don't think a single Nintendo game uses RT at all. The reflections are planar and present on the Switch 1 too.
 
It's right now too hard on hw, especially on consoles, and probably will be for another gen with how little progress hw makes in the current fauxK fauxframes era. But kinda like soft shadows since Doom3, it's tech here to stay. Shadows looked terrible before and ran terrible for a while after, but got much better a couple years after. Also similar to AA in its different solutions, that were costly at first, than a few lighter techniques (with new problems) were developed and today it is mostly solved. RT is a lot harder, i can't remember any single addition in visual stuff being so taxing, but it will get there, eventually.
 
Isn't the purpose of RT to provide realistic lighting and reflections?

That can never be scam. I'd argue that baked lighting is the actual scam, just like all those color-enhancers and whatnot on your tv that you should be turning off straight-away.
 
No. It implemented right, game looks amazing with it. It just needs better optimization so its less expensive on games

But if you care about graphics, raytracing is an amazing feature you cant play without
 
Top Bottom