Seriously, how will Xbox Series X exclusives make full use of Ray-tracing if all of it's games will release on PC too?

Ray tracing has been around in PCs since 2018 man.

It's already been through many iterations from the first shitty implementations like BFV to the stuff in Control. We are about to get 2nd generation cards that will do it much faster than the old GPUs and the consoles, thus speeding up adoption even more.


Tenka Musou said:
Multiplatform games? for sure.

Exclusives though? That is the point of this thread, it seems like Xbox Series X exclusives won't fully realize it's GPU potential when it comes to RT, unless they make two distinct versions of their games.

Which would be like being stuck in a cross-gen limbo, only it lasts the entire generation
Click to expand...

Every game is multiplatform. There will not be any Series X exclusives. Why can't console warriors come to grips with this?
 
OP this isn't a question and you aren't genuinely "curious" because all of the people explaining why it's a non issue you're just simply shutting down and giving your 2 cents.

No one is going to change your mind as to why you believe it will be an issue, you've already made that decision.

So the first sentence/statement in your post is a lie.
 
Last edited:
Optimistic Gamer said:
Btw the same question can be asked for SSDs. :3
Click to expand...
I'm actually curious about this. Let's say a game on PS5 uses full use of the speed of the SSD to the point where it's actually loading assets into view as you move the camera around. They'd have to completely re-write it to work on a standard HDD, wouldn't they?
 
Last edited:
Tenka Musou said:
Fucking hell...

I'm out.
Click to expand...
You're operating under the assumption that a game can be designed with RT in mind as if it's an inhibiting factor for a standard lighting model, it's not. It's merely another set of rendering instructions for physical interactivity with lighting within a scene.

There's not going to be some "RT only" game design ethos, it's just not a thing.
 
DoctaThompson said:
Did you know even games that support raytracing, have the option to turn it off? Maybe starting there, would make you realize this thread was a stupid idea?
Click to expand...
waylo said:
You do realize PC already has games that have ray tracing as an option? And that PC's without RTX cards can still play them? It's literally a toggle. I don't understand how this is an issue or a concern.
Click to expand...
DynamiteCop! said:
There's not going to be some "RT only" game design ethos, it's just not a thing.
Click to expand...

Using Ray Tracing, developers don't have to lose time with traditional Illumination techiniques, that require a lot of work to look right. To save costs, there'll probably be a tendency to abadon old light simulation in favor of RT. In that case, there's a chance that games in the future simply won't have the option to "turn it off", or will look pretty basic/ugly without it.

With that said, OP is overestimating just how soon that future will be. It'll more likely still take some years to get to that point, and by them most GPUs will probably already be able to run Ray traced games just fine.
 
Last edited:
Grinchy said:
I'm actually curious about this. Let's say a game on PS5 uses full use of the speed of the SSD to the point where it's actually loading assets into view as you move the camera around. They'd have to completely re-write it to work on a standard HDD, wouldn't they?
Click to expand...

You say this like this isn't the entire history of video games until very recently. I personally don't think you'll be seeing games like that, maybe one or two from Sony themselves, but even Sony is dipping their toe in multiplatform...

But yes if they do that they will have to rewrite and redesign the game to accommodate, watch a YT video about Doom ports or Quake 2 on PS1, etc.
 
Last edited:
I doubt there will be any games that absolutely require ray tracing. No big budget flagship titles, anyway. And if there were, you can just raise the minimum specs. Those games are years off, and by the time they release any PC gamers interested in playing them will have upgraded to capable cards already. The ones who haven't are gonna be too busy playing CSGO or Valorant or Dota or whatever to give a shit about console games.
 
Last edited:
Tenka Musou said:
Read the thread, clown.


The landscape of the PC market and especially in relation to multi-platform games is ridiculously different then than it is today which makes your example moot.
Click to expand...
Only clown 🤡 that I, as well as others see, is you. Others have explained it as well. Just learn to read and comprehend. Everything you said could easily be googled.
 
I think this is the kind of graphics we can expect with full RT.
Shame the game never took off, it was amazing.
Hopefully we see more like it next-gen.
FI-1620x800.jpg
 
Grinchy said:
I'm actually curious about this. Let's say a game on PS5 uses full use of the speed of the SSD to the point where it's actually loading assets into view as you move the camera around. They'd have to completely re-write it to work on a standard HDD, wouldn't they?
Click to expand...

Big amount of RAM in PCs can be used as cache, systems with 16 Gb are already standard for PCs. You can go for 32 and never bother again for assets availability. Or simply make require SSD, even in the case of SATA SSD you will be fine with 16 Gb of RAM. Even DDR4 2400 is still 4x faster than PS5 SSD. DDR5 starts next year with about 10 times faster transfer rate. At the time we get to this technology, we won't have HDDs anymore. Don't expect to see this kind of technolgy very soon. Developers first have to build completely new engines or rewrite them. Will take 2-3 years. Than this kind of new technology first must show it's advantage over existing ones. There are already some good working culling systems like Umbra.

I still don't get Cerny's Point of "swap" immeadiatly gigabytes of data. Which kind of data? Most of memory intensive data are high quality textures and sound assets. Why should you swap several gb of textures and from where? Games could user user texture decals, but I really doubt they want to sell games with 250 gb space requirement with this small SSDs. Sure it's theoretically possible but I don't see that many practical implementations in next years. At least fast travel will be fast next generation. Fast NVMe are primarily in next gen for cost savings. Jump from 1 Tb NVMe instead of 1 Tb SATA Speed SSD should be cheaper than jump from 16 to 24+ GDDR6.
 
DrAspirino said:
The real-time ray-tracing technique is as revolutionary as 3D was in the 90s. It will take some time for developers and gamers to get used to it.
Click to expand...
Eeerr... no. To start with, ray tracing isn't even a new techinique and it has been around in animation movies for more than a decade.
Secondly, RT is only good for two things:
1. Save development time
2. Look cool

On the other hand, the passage from 2D to 3D completely changed how we played games and even created entire genres. If you're looking for a modern equivalent to that, i'd say VR is much closer to it.
 
Smug_Horned_AI said:
Eeerr... no. To start with, ray tracing isn't even a new techinique and it has been around in animation movies for more than a decade.
Secondly, RT is only good for two things:
1. Save development time
2. Look cool

On the other hand, the passage from 2D to 3D completely changed how we played games and even created entire genres. If you're looking for a modern equivalent to that, i'd say VR is much closer to it.
Click to expand...
3D games have been around since 1984.
 
This is really a non issue though, any game that has RTX right now isn't exclusive to Nvidia and works just fine on any other GPU or system without any raytracing. Developers will account for that going forward. Will that hold the Series X back? Doubtful. It's not like the Series X will be doing anything special anyway, will likely just use the same hybrid approach as RTX seen as isn't powerful enough for full raytracing.
 
Same applies to XSX/PS5's SSD situation (as almost nobody is going to have PC parts fast enough to contend for a while).

And PC games release with features omitted from console all the time. Ever played a game with Nvidia special features like grass, fire, or hair?


Most games using raytracing are going to use them for enhancing existing effects, so this will not be an issue for a while.

As for exclusives, that's the whole point of consoles and exclusives....highly-specialized hardware running a highly specialized game.
 
Smug_Horned_AI said:
Eeerr... no. To start with, ray tracing isn't even a new techinique and it has been around in animation movies for more than a decade.
Secondly, RT is only good for two things:
1. Save development time
2. Look cool

On the other hand, the passage from 2D to 3D completely changed how we played games and even created entire genres. If you're looking for a modern equivalent to that, i'd say VR is much closer to it.
Click to expand...
I used to think the same about raytracing, until I got the top of the line RTX card to replace my 1080 TI. Control is really what made me realize how beneficial accurate lighting is. Playing any other game that didn't feature raytracing, felt like it was lacking something major. It's like one of those things, that once you see and experience it, you can't un-see it.
 
DoctaThompson said:
I used to think the same about raytracing, until I got the top of the line RTX card to replace my 1080 TI. Control is really what made me realize how beneficial accurate lighting is. Playing any other game that didn't feature raytracing, felt like it was lacking something major. It's like one of those things, that once you see and experience it, you can't un-see it.
Click to expand...
I get that it looks cool, but does it change the game? As far as i know, Control or Minecraft play exactly the same with RTX on or off.
 
Smug_Horned_AI said:
I get that it looks cool, but does it change the game? As far as i know, Control or Minecraft play exactly the same with RTX on or off.
Click to expand...
And Minecraft and control could be played in 320p, and it wouldn't change the game. I get that raytracing won't magically change any game. But why not let the games have a superior and realistic lighting, to make the game have a more visual appeal? Especially now that consoles are getting a hardware update, games will be much better than before.
 
Smug_Horned_AI said:
And thats the point, the passage from 2D to 3D did magically change games, unlike ray tracing.
Thats what my original post was about, you cant put both of them on the same level.
Click to expand...
We're not going into 4d games all of a sudden though. I get that 2d to 3d was a huge step. But what can we do next? We won't see realistic worlds, with realistic physics anyone soon. And when I say realistic, I mean with environments that you can't tell the difference between in game and real life, on a large scale. Physics in every single object in the world, etc. Raytracing at least will make things more realistic and immersive. Of course I would love all of this, and then some, but we just don't have the hardware for it, not anytime soon.
 
OP makes terrible thread with disingenuous question, when question gets answered his only response is "fuck it I'm out" and throws his toys from the cot.

NEOGAF
 
The software can detect the hardware that is running it and implement the feature if the hardware supports it...much like on PC for higher end effects.
 
DoctaThompson said:
We're not going into 4d games all of a sudden though. I get that 2d to 3d was a huge step. But what can we do next? We won't see realistic worlds, with realistic physics anyone soon. And when I say realistic, I mean with environments that you can't tell the difference between in game and real life, on a large scale. Physics in every single object in the world, etc. Raytracing at least will make things more realistic and immersive. Of course I would love all of this, and then some, but we just don't have the hardware for it, not anytime soon.
Click to expand...
First of all, none of what you said relates to what i was talking about first. In fact, it just reaffirms what it.

Second, you're wrong about many things. There are already tech showcases where its hard to tell the difference between real and fake (just look at this, or this), as well as games with pretty advanced physics systems (sure not a 1:1 representation of real world physics, but good enough to trick us. Try looking at BeamNG car crash physics).

Third, if we're talking about immersion, i'd say rather than realistic looking graphics, VR is a much bigger step onto that direction. Try using it at least once, it doesn't even have to be a proper game, and you'll understand what i mean.
 
Last edited:
Will a $500 console be able to utilize all available tech features available on high end PCs?

No. Nor do I believe that is ever the expectation for consoles by console gamers.
 
Smug_Horned_AI said:
First of all, none of what you said relates to what i was talking about first. In fact, it just reaffirms what it.

Second, you're wrong about many things. There are already tech showcases where its hard to tell the difference between real and fake (just look at this, or this), as well as games with pretty advanced physics systems (sure not a 1:1 representation of real world physics, but good enough to trick us. Try looking at BeamNG car crash physics).

Third, if we're talking about immersion, i'd say rather than realistic looking graphics, VR is a much bigger step onto that direction. Try using it at least once, it doesn't even have to be a proper game, and you'll understand what i mean.
Click to expand...
Hey man, I'm not arguing with you, or against you. I'm just saying I don't believe we will get to a level of realism, high resolution, high framerate, with full path tracing, anytime soon. I have the best consumer gpu right now, and I can tell you, we just aren't there yet. Those game do look great, but we're just not there yet to have ALL games looking that good.

Don't get me wrong, I only hope for the best, but I'm also realistic about the whole ordeal. Which is why I feel raytracing is just as important, if not more important than simply, upping the resolution, and making games bigger.
 
Tenka Musou said:
Multiplatform games? for sure.

Exclusives though? That is the point of this thread, it seems like Xbox Series X exclusives won't fully realize it's GPU potential when it comes to RT, unless they make two distinct versions of their games.

Which would be like being stuck in a cross-gen limbo, only it lasts the entire generation
Click to expand...

Sounds like you asking if the strain of developing different versions of the games for different platforms will act as a resource drain on the main team, and be more money than it's worth?

Well, thing is this shouldn't be a concern since they can simply outsource the non-XSX versions to a 3rd-party contract studio. In fact MS did this with a few of their XBO 1st-party exclusives on the 360, like Forza Horizon 2 (SE did the same thing for 360's version of Rise of the Tomb Raider).
 
Unbelievable how many clowns come to repeat "bbbut there are button for it in games!" Without even reading what OP said.

That button just magically appears?

OPs point simplified:

Games now: build for non-RT, add RT above those effects

Next gen game: build game for RT, what happens if game have to run on non-RT hardware?

(Assuming that RT is used for lightning and other stuff that MUST be done again for non-RT version using non-RT techniques and it doesnt magically work)


Which is possible:

A) Add features(RT) above features(non-RT lightning etc)

B) Remove features(RT) without having base level features(non-RT lightning etc) under it (as it were made to use RT from ground up)

Hint: by removing something that doesnt have base version under it -> nothing left.


This is what he asked, so stop the idiotic "muh holy xbox, must defend!" Nonsense and think it from neutral standpoint.

IF raytracing handles major parts of the game WHAT happens on systems that dont have raytracing IF there isnt another version with code for this?

A) there must be 2 versions of the game

B) there is The Button made by magical clown without any extra work

Jesus how hardheaded xbots can be, just speculate OPs scenario IN THEORY, dont cry and defend your box with emotional responses
 
Last edited:
DynamiteCop! said:
You're operating under the assumption that a game can be designed with RT in mind as if it's an inhibiting factor for a standard lighting model, it's not. It's merely another set of rendering instructions for physical interactivity with lighting within a scene.

There's not going to be some "RT only" game design ethos, it's just not a thing.
Click to expand...

This. It's like asking what would happen if consoles had an anti-aliasing exclusive game....that's just never going to be a thing.
 
DoctaThompson said:
Those game do look great, but we're just not there yet to have ALL games looking that good.
Click to expand...
Thing is, we'll never be "there". Its not even about hardware limitations, developers just aren't going to spend time developing advanced physics or retouching visuals if its not necessary for the product they want to make.
ALL games will never be what you're imagining, simply because they don't have to. There'd be at best one or two like that.... decades from now that is, maybe a century even.
 
Last edited:
Smug_Horned_AI said:
Thing is, we'll never be "there". Its not even about hardware limitations, developers just aren't going to spend time developing advanced physics or retouching visuals if its not necessary for the product they want to make.
ALL games will never be what you're imagining, simply because they don't have to. There'd be at best one or two like that.... decades from now that is, maybe a century even.
Click to expand...
Not so much as what I'm imagining, but what I would hope for, before the end of my life time. I just feel raytracing is more beneficial from a visual and technical standpoint, than upping the rez like what has been done year after year in gaming history. Sure, there are features like bloom, ssao, etc. But none of those look as amazing as raytracing. I respect your opinion and all, I just think we're at a point that we will be arguing over each other's opinions.
 
DoctaThompson said:
Not so much as what I'm imagining, but what I would hope for, before the end of my life time. I just feel raytracing is more beneficial from a visual and technical standpoint, than upping the rez like what has been done year after year in gaming history. Sure, there are features like bloom, ssao, etc. But none of those look as amazing as raytracing. I respect your opinion and all, I just think we're at a point that we will be arguing over each other's opinions.
Click to expand...
There's no problem with arguing over opinions, its not like they're sacred things.
Also, if you haven't already, you really should try VR. In terms of immersion, i find it much more appealing than any advanced graphical techinque.
 
Smug_Horned_AI said:
I get that it looks cool, but does it change the game?
Click to expand...
And that's where the revolutionary part comes from. For example, you could be playing competitive CoD and an enemy could see your accurate reflection on some puddle of frozen water and know where to shoot. For RPG games, it could mean that you could discover secrets on stone wall embossed patterns depending on the angle you hold the torch. For motorsports games, it could mean that depending on the day and the car, the sun could literally blind you for a second.

Anyway...the list goes on and on.
 
Smug_Horned_AI said:
There's no problem with arguing over opinions, its not like they're sacred things.
Also, if you haven't already, you really should try VR. In terms of immersion, i find it much more appealing than any advanced graphical techinque.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree with VR. I've put in hundreds of hours in VR, and you're absolutely right on this. And that's not even an opinion.
 
DrAspirino said:
And that's where the revolutionary part comes from. For example, you could be playing competitive CoD and an enemy could see your accurate reflection on some puddle of frozen water and know where to shoot. For RPG games, it could mean that you could discover secrets on stone wall embossed patterns depending on the angle you hold the torch. For motorsports games, it could mean that depending on the day and the car, the sun could literally blind you for a second.

Anyway...the list goes on and on.
Click to expand...
I get where you're coming from, but my experience with that kind of thing is that those details usually end up not mattering as much as we'd think.
I though something similar when dynamic shadows started appearing in games, stuff like "ah, i'll be able to detect enemies through their shadows!", but i don't really remember a single moment where that actually happened, in any game at all.
 
Last edited:
It will take extra work, but I'm guessing equal to or less than porting CPU intensive games to X1.
It's totally a guess on my part.
Either way, PC will have two versions(ray traced and not ray traced) of everything for a long time anyway.
 
obviously...thats one of console role...be a minimum baseline for entire videogame scene (except mobile, ofcourse)
 
I think they'll just throw more money at the game and develop 2 versions. One with and one without RT.
 
I don't see this as an issue. How is ray tracing vs tradition lighting going to change how a game is developed? Wouldn't the more advanced graphical options be able to be turned off during testing anyway? If you can run a game for test without a feature then it is modular enough that you can turn it off on sub RTX ( Big Navi) GPUs.

I really don't understand why people think that games get gimped if they are designed with sliders for settings. How can you optimize without being able to move the sliders? Console games just have the devs move those sliders for you and then fix them when they optimize.
 
Same way that Horizon 4 looks much better on PC despite being developed for console first? Different devices, different settings.
Tenka Musou said:
Not a console wars thread, just genuinely curious.

If it's mandatory that Xbox games release on PC, does that mean Xbox exclusive developers have to design their games around a non-Raytracing capable PC as the baseline? Which means all we'd get are tacked on RT features like Control and Metro, and no games designed from the ground-up based on Ray-tracing.

So for example, PS5 exclusive devs do not need to bother making a version of their games with baked lighting/fake reflections, but Xbox exclusive devs must make two versions with different lighting modules.

This is only taking into account the graphical side of things, what about A.I applications of ray tracing like that one developer recently mentioned? Are they gonna make two different A.I behaviors?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rhythm Doctor - Official Release Date Trailer (Dec 6, 2025 - Steam, Xbox Series X|S, Xbox on PC)
2
91
Shifty1897 replied
  • Locked
Its confirmed that Xbox Rog Ally will not use cartridges.
Clickbait 
15
187
Sephiran replied
PC Gamers, what are your thoughts on Ray Tracing? Do you usually leave it on or off?
2
90
959
amigastar replied
Switch 2 games with ray tracing?
2 3 4
157
3K
daclynk replied
No, seriously, how would you salvage XBox?
Opinion Drama Platform  2 3 4 5
221
483
CashPrizes replied
Top Bottom