Support NeoGAF

[LordOcidax]

Remedy really needs to fucking patch that game for the ps5 pro so we can play with RT at 60 fps ...the console should be able to at least do it with only RT reflections!

That is one game that on PC really does look amazing with RTGI

I just don't know how people can say RT isn't a massive, important improvement after we've seen so many games on PC implementing it well. This thread had shown me that even on an enthusiast gaming forums, people are either not savvy about graphics or really just don't care much about graphics.

All I can say is careful what you wish for. If these publishers could get away without having to spend so much money on graphics while still raking in the same profits, we can say goodbye to better graphics. We've already seen a lessening of graphical standards this gen from the likes of Sony, who is more than happy to prioritize 60 fps on Cross Gen games instead of Ray Tacing.

I personally hope they keep chasing visual leaps until we hit that holy grail of full Ray Tracing/path tracing in games using dense geometry at 60 fps on console. Even if that means we don't get advanced physics I'm ok with that. Games like Control strike a good enough balance i don't need physics beyond that for now. That's not to say I don't want great physics and destruction for certain games ...Battlefield for instance.

Devs needs a capable hardware to achieve that, in the case of consoles even the PS5 Pro is not capable of give good results without big sacrifices when it comes to RT, i bet that ND it’s going to use a lot of baked lightning for Intergalactic and its going to look amazing, some people are just forgetting how good games looks with old techniques. I was playing the Order 1886 and that game still looks amazing. It’s not a matter of chase the holy grail of full ray tracing from the devs standpoint, that’s on the hardware side.

 

[analog_future]

Current consoles just aren’t powerful enough for it, and never have been.

It is 100% worth it on a good gaming PC and will be 100% worth it on next-gen consoles.

 

[Xdrive05]

Hard disagree.

RT can give a level of immersion that's simply not possible with raster lighting. This mostly has to do with how dynamic lighting plays off of materials and how the accuracy of GI and shadowing plays out over time.

It's like the concept of emergent gameplay but for being immersed within game environments. Emergent immersion. Sure. I'll call it that.

It's why old and lo-fi games can become completely transformed just by adding good RT to them. A few cases in point:

• Minecraft bedrock RTX maps
• Half Life RTX mod
• Mario 64 RTX (sm64rt)
• Doom RT (prboom)

And when modern games use good RT, it takes the immersion to a whole new level as well, such as:

• CP2077 with highest RT
• Metro Exodus: EE
• Indiana Jones Full RT on.

It's not even something you can see in screenshots, because "you have to be there" in the game yourself, over time, to experience it.

Good RT brings the world together as one cohesive simulation with the lighting being done in real time, rather than a bunch of pre-baked fakery that can't quite get the details good enough to sell the illusion.

 

[Donald mac Ronald]

A con created by Nvidia to sell you more expensive cards marked up.

 

[clarky]

A con created by Nvidia to sell you more expensive cards marked up.

Console gamer enters the thread.

 

[Donald mac Ronald]

Console gamer enters the thread.

Bellend enters the thread.

 

[CrustyBritches]

RT reflections should be standard these days.

 

[Scrawnton]

When developers are too stale to sell their games on freshness and gameplay mechanics alone, they fall back on graphical features. When these graphical features hit a plateau and players start to see through them, games stop being as impressive overall. I think we have hit the point where a lot of games (the AAA industry) can't sell on big graphics alone because we are all mostly over that crap. We see the games for what they truly are now.

 

[DoubleClutch]

Hard disagree.

RT can give a level of immersion that's simply not possible with raster lighting. This mostly has to do with how dynamic lighting plays off of materials and how the accuracy of GI and shadowing plays out over time.

It's like the concept of emergent gameplay but for being immersed within game environments. Emergent immersion. Sure. I'll call it that.

It's why old and lo-fi games can become completely transformed just by adding good RT to them. A few cases in point:

• Minecraft bedrock RTX maps
• Half Life RTX mod
• Mario 64 RTX (sm64rt)
• Doom RT (prboom)

And when modern games use good RT, it takes the immersion to a whole new level as well, such as:

• CP2077 with highest RT
• Metro Exodus: EE
• Indiana Jones Full RT on.

It's not even something you can see in screenshots, because "you have to be there" in the game yourself, over time, to experience it.

Good RT brings the world together as one cohesive simulation with the lighting being done in real time, rather than a bunch of pre-baked fakery that can't quite get the details good enough to sell the illusion.

Yeah but there are full resolution 4K videos which show the contrary. Let’s not forget the biggest pusher of RT (Nvidia) uses screenshots to show the difference.

Anyway, here’s Nvidia’s official video showcasing the difference in game at 4K.

It’s undeniably better. All I’m saying is it’s not this gigantic difference. The difference is much, much less than a generational console jump, yet the cost is many magnitudes more.

For the savings from not opting for a 4090 to run this stuff, you can buy almost every console out there presently and still have an amazing gaming PC.

 

[Edgelord79]

Putt for dough, drive for show. I’ll let you figure out where rtx falls here.

 

[justiceiro]

It's almost like people making graphics cards had nothing to do with people making physics engines...

 

[clarky]

Bellend enters the thread.

Kudos.

Only me, you and a few select others respect the nature of the bellend.

 

[amigastar]

Raytracing is a good thing even if you don't turn it on.
The Requirements without Raytracing are much more lower since the devs calculated Raytracing into the max graphics fidelity and the required specs.

 

[Balducci30]

The consoles were too early to take advantage of it that well. I’d wait until next gen

 

[Diddy X]

One of the biggest nonsenses coming out of this is that now they can't make mirrors anymore without RT, even though we've had mirrors since 1996.

 

[DoubleClutch]

It's almost like people making graphics cards had nothing to do with people making physics engines...

Production budgets aren’t unlimited. If you’re spending more money in one area you’re spending less of it in another.

 

[TexMex]

The tech is absolutely worth the hype. It’s the implementation that isn’t consistently great right now.

 

[Xdrive05]

Yeah but there are full resolution 4K videos which show the contrary. Let’s not forget the biggest pusher of RT (Nvidia) uses screenshots to show the difference.

Anyway, here’s Nvidia’s official video showcasing the difference in game at 4K.

It’s undeniably better. All I’m saying is it’s not this gigantic difference. The difference is much, much less than a generational console jump, yet the cost is many magnitudes more.

For the savings from not opting for a 4090 to run this stuff, you can buy almost every console out there presently and still have an amazing gaming PC.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the benefits that RT brings. It's completely transformative IMO. Try Portal RTX with and without ray tracing. Even keep the same model and texture upgrades, but lose the RT lighting and the world immediately feels dead in comparison.

And you definitely don't need a 4090 to enjoy RT! I run all of it at 1440p on a 4060ti and it runs great. But I'm okay using DLSS and frame gen to get good RT performance, and I already prefer using a controller in some games (like Indiana Jones and Cyberpunk). Because of that I can crank the RT and have a blast at 60-80fps. Some other gamers may need more GPU to play with RT than I do, if they don't like controllers for example and need 100fps+ to have a good session.

I do strongly agree with you about the importance of good monitor tech and smooth motion. How quickly a game refreshes your screen directly impacts how well a game plays and there's no way around that. And RT won't help most games play better, aside from theoretical edge cases where RT could impart a gameplay advantage (like giving away an opponent's position because you can see their shadow or something).

 

[Bernardougf]

Agreed...RT for this gen was a mistake

 

[joeygreco1985]

RT is definitely a jump in realism but there are times when rasterized lighting when done right can look just as good without the performance penalty. I'm playing through Horizon Forbidden West on PC right now and the lighting in that game knocks my socks off, with NO RT.

 

[bender]

Console gamer enters the thread.

Bellend enters the thread.

 

[gatti-man]

A con created by Nvidia to sell you more expensive cards marked up.

Dude if you can’t afford the cards it’s fine. But you sound insane to those of us that enjoy RT in our games.

RT is a total game changer if you can afford the rig to power it. And the game actually implements it correctly.

No pre baked lighting isn’t reasonably close. It’s literally impossible for pre baked lighting to look like RT in motion.

For example Space Marine 2 with RT would look absolutely spectacular. Same with gears of war or any game with small dynamic light sources. Total missed opportunity for SM2. Hopefully SM3 gets it.

 

[amigastar]

Agreed...RT for this gen was a mistake

Raytracing will be matured incoming gen i'm sure.

 

[gatti-man]

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the benefits that RT brings. It's completely transformative IMO. Try Portal RTX with and without ray tracing. Even keep the same model and texture upgrades, but lose the RT lighting and the world immediately feels dead in comparison.

And you definitely don't need a 4090 to enjoy RT! I run all of it at 1440p on a 4060ti and it runs great. But I'm okay using DLSS and frame gen to get good RT performance, and I already prefer using a controller in some games (like Indiana Jones and Cyberpunk). Because of that I can crank the RT and have a blast at 60-80fps. Some other gamers may need more GPU to play with RT than I do, if they don't like controllers for example and need 100fps+ to have a good session.

I do strongly agree with you about the importance of good monitor tech and smooth motion. How quickly a game refreshes your screen directly impacts how well a game plays and there's no way around that. And RT won't help most games play better, aside from theoretical edge cases where RT could impart a gameplay advantage (like giving away an opponent's position because you can see their shadow or something).

The problem with threads like these is people naturally poopoo things they don’t want to pay for. It’s objectively a game changer. Night and day in any game that implements it correctly.

 

[DoubleClutch]

The problem with threads like these is people naturally poopoo things they don’t want to pay for. It’s objectively a game changer. Night and day in any game that implements it correctly.

Just because I can afford something doesn’t mean it’s worth spending money on.

 

[gatti-man]

Just because I can afford something doesn’t mean it’s worth spending money on.

Literally what I just said in my quote. People poopoo things they don’t want to pay for. You aren’t going to experience RT if you don’t pay for it. Can’t wait for the ps6 to hear how great RT is from all the gamers that say it isn’t a real feature now lol.

 

[DoubleClutch]

Literally what I just said in my quote. People poopoo things they don’t want to pay for. You aren’t going to experience RT if you don’t pay for it. Can’t wait for the ps6 to hear how great RT is from all the gamers that say it isn’t a real feature now lol.

The other side of that coin is there are shills that inflate the value of something to justify their purchase. Is that what you’re doing? If not, why not?

I have experienced enough RT with a 3070 to not be very impressed with it, certainly not to the point of going out and getting a replacement card for it. I think it’s good and the future for sure, but in so many games it borders on a gimmick.

Ray Tracing is so impressive! No wait, now we have Path Tracing! No wait, now we have Ray Reconstruction Path Tracing DLSS 3.5 Frame Generation Low Latency Ultra Mode!

I remember when frame doubling was considered a gimmick. Now it’s a feature. The truth is a lot of this is trend chasing. Physyx back in the day…

 

[Stuart360]

After recently upgrading to a 3070 and done some testing on various games, the main problems with RT is obviously how much of a performance hog it is (although it was actually less of a hog than i was expecting), and the fact that most of the time its hard to tell if its on or off. Honestly how many people could look at a game and be like 'damn thats great RT' if you didnt altready know a game uses RT.

Well maybe you could tell with reflections, but even then you turn off RT reflections and Screen space reflections can look almost the same, apart from them dissapearing at the edges of the screen of course.

I feel the main benefit to us with RT (and a benefit to the devs) is that in theory it makes it a lot easier for devs, and should mean shorter dev times.

Its also somehting we cant avoid going forward with Indiana Jones requiring a RT card, and the port of FF7 Rebirth also requiring a RT card to run. Its going to be somehting more and more common going forward, especially as only about 15% of Steam users dont have some kind of RT card now, and that itself will get smaller as time goes by.

 

[DoubleClutch]

After recently upgrading to a 3070 and done some testing on various games, the main problems with RT is obviously how much of a performance hog it is (although it was actually less of a hog than i was expecting), and the fact that most of the time its hard to tell if its on or off. Honestly how many people could look at a game and be like 'damn thats great RT' if you didnt altready know a game uses RT.

Well maybe you could tell with reflections, but even then you turn off RT reflections and Screen space reflections can look almost the same, apart from them dissapearing at the edges of the screen of course.

I feel the main benefit to us with RT (and a benefit to the devs) is that in theory it makes it a lot easier for devs, and should mean shorter dev times.

Its also somehting we cant avoid going forward with Indiana Jones requiring a RT card, and the port of FF7 Rebirth also requiring a RT card to run. Its going to be somehting more and more common going forward, especially as only about 15% of Steam users dont have some kind of RT card now, and that itself will get smaller as time goes by.

Completely agree with all this.

 

[Pegasus Actual]

RT is fine but I'd almost always would rather have more frames given the choice.

 

[Strider7]

Ray tracing is yet another in a long line of bullshit gimmicky distractions in the same vein as motion controls, 3d glasses/tv, and VR headsets (while cool are ultimately irrelevant). We don’t need ray tracing and we certainly don’t need to be going into resolutions past 4k.

It’s a waste of time, money and resources.

 

[gpn]

I'm going to disagree with the caveat of RT being used well. I've been playing Indiana Jones on a Series X, so lower settings than PC, and the RTGI lighting looks so nice and the game's still running at 60 fps. I'll be curious to see how Indy looks on PS5 and if they leverage RT even more on PS5 Pro, that may finally convince me to upgrade.

 

[Miggytronz]

I really wish everyone can get and play on a 4090. There are times where I'm literally blown away and other times where the performance hit is so bad id rather not use it. Indiana Jones and Cyberpunk are examples of a must play with everything turned on and enjoy. Some other games are a solid, NO.

 

[DryvBy]

I grew up on PC in the 90s and still game on PC. I like the video quality to increase yoy. Ray tracing is it. I'm not one that pretends 60fps is minimum. Its nice, but in a single player game I want the thing to look amazing. Heck, I played Dungeon Siege 1 back in the day at 15fps and just dealt with it lol

 

[Gaiff]

I

A con created by Nvidia to sell you more expensive cards marked up.

Ray tracing is yet another in a long line of bullshit gimmicky distractions in the same vein as motion controls, 3d glasses/tv, and VR headsets (while cool are ultimately irrelevant). We don’t need ray tracing and we certainly don’t need to be going into resolutions past 4k.

It’s a waste of time, money and resources.

Then you guys will keep crying because graphics aren’t advancing. There’s only so much that can be done with rasterized graphics.

 

[Boss Mog]

I disagree. Ray-tracing is the future. The ultimate goal being full raytraced rendering.

 

[Zathalus]

Ray tracing is yet another in a long line of bullshit gimmicky distractions in the same vein as motion controls, 3d glasses/tv, and VR headsets (while cool are ultimately irrelevant). We don’t need ray tracing and we certainly don’t need to be going into resolutions past 4k.

It’s a waste of time, money and resources.

Except ray tracing isn’t going anywhere. The key difference is that ray tracing is the future of rendering technology. When PS6 is the base console spec you can expect most games to have it enabled with no option to turn it off.

 

[DoubleClutch]

Except ray tracing isn’t going anywhere. The key difference is that ray tracing is the future of rendering technology. When PS6 is the base console spec you can expect most games to have it enabled with no option to turn it off.

Yes, but right now it is sold and boxed as a special advanced feature worth lots and lots of money.

 

[Zathalus]

Yes, but right now it is sold and boxed as a special advanced feature worth lots and lots of money.

Because in some games it is. Certainly that list is rather small now with only about 20-30 games where it makes a nice difference, but it is growing.

 

[Effigenius]

I love tracing. It's awesome

Just learn how to draw, man.

 

[V1LÆM]

It makes a huge difference in Cyberpunk. I can run it with full path tracing and it’s beautiful. I still get 80-100fps.

Hogwarts Legacy has good ray tracing I think.

Most games you can hardly tell the difference. The most obvious difference is usually in reflections in glass/water. Resident Evil 2-3 remakes I only noticed reflections. Elden Ring looks pretty much identical with it on and off.

Ray tracing is still very demanding but if done right then it is worth it. As GPUs get more powerful hopefully more games make more use of it.

 

[ChoosableOne]

I agree as a 3060ti owner. Ask me again 3 years later as a 7090 owner.

Spoiler

I like it but can't turn the damn thing on

 

[HoodWinked]

 

[Donald mac Ronald]

Candy man?

 

[FireFly]

Ray tracing is yet another in a long line of bullshit gimmicky distractions in the same vein as motion controls, 3d glasses/tv, and VR headsets (while cool are ultimately irrelevant). We don’t need ray tracing and we certainly don’t need to be going into resolutions past 4k.

It’s a waste of time, money and resources.

Yes, if you don't want game graphics to advance, there is no need for RT.

 

[ikbalCO]

global illumination is great tho.but I can live without reflections and shadows etc.

 

[Strider7]

I



Then you guys will keep crying because graphics aren’t advancing. There’s only so much that can be done with rasterized graphics.

I won’t be crying. I think graphics are just fine where they are at now. I’d rather have consistent performance.

 

[xrnzaaas]

If there's a toggle or a graphics mode without raytracing, I'll always choose it. The difference just isn't enough to justify the increase in requirements and likely fps/resolution loss.

 

[sachos]

I wish more effort was put into developing vibrant worlds that you can interact with. Less focus on upscaling and Ray Tracing and more focus on physics and how gameplay changes with the environment.

See, i think to get that level of interactivity at the graphical level that devs/most people expect (AAA level) you need something like RTGI/Path Tracing so your lighting doesnt get all messed up when things start moving in your open world. Most games are not interactive enough because they use baked lighting techniques that would completly break if they were dynamic.

 

[LordOcidax]

If there's a toggle or a graphics mode without raytracing, I'll always choose it. The difference just isn't enough to justify the increase in requirements and likely fps/resolution loss.

The baked lightning in new games that have RT in the majority of cases is trash, and for obvious reasons.