With the way consoles have moved into the PC space. This argument doesn't work as well anymore. We can scale games down to oblivion if we need to.
Well that would depends on how photorealistic we're talking about
, we're not getting nearly enough number of rays in games like Metro or Tomb Raider which subsequently look either too dark or worse than the rasterizer sometimes. On another hand the asset quality could still be vastly improved, a big focus on photogramatry by getting much higher fidelity scanned assets into game engine even with traditional lighting is a huge win. The end result is decisively better overall.I'll just have to wait and see what a ground up RT designed game would look like and at what cost. I do hope for the best tho, the last thing I want is for such a feature to be implemented but severely limiting advancement in asset, FX, simulation etc.
One is a game and the other is a graphics demo though.
It's a rhetorical test of your definition. You say any game using current-gen assets is current gen. Hypothetically, if next gen is this gen assets but at truly photorealistic/cinema CGI level rendering, impossible on current hardware, by your definition they'd still be current-gen games. Ergo, do you stick with that definition or look for another one thus requiring you to re-evaluate your position on what constitutes a next-gen game?Well that would depends on how photorealistic we're talking about
If we don't care whether next-gen is a next-gen or not, it doesn't matter. If we want to talk about the difference between next-gen content and current-gen content, we need to know what makes something next-gen. If the qualities of 'next-gen' are present in some current titles on some current hardware, that'll be a next-gen game rather than a current-gen one, and the comparisons to future console workloads may not be expected to be any different.Put it simply, the Raytracing quality for games is not remotely close to what Pixar is doing with their RT and it's unrealistic to expect next gen consoles to reach that quality. The entry level RT we'll come to expect for next gen consoles alone does not warrant a next gen claim due to not enough wow factor compared to Pixar level. I guess what constitute to a true next gen game should be how drastically better the end result looks compared to current gen games, it's the sum of its parts.
Hey you never mentioned a hybrid solution till now you shifty bastard
. Joking. But yeah that might be what we need to balance things out, RT brute forcing might be just too much to handle even with proper optimization I reckon. I'm welcoming any surprised tho, maybe some talented devs could pull off something out of the blue, we'll just have to wait and see.
Just because current rendering on RTX isn't particular next-gen, doens't mean the potential isn't there and won't be realised. I think we all agree that if next-gen lighting could be 'next gen', we'd be happy with that as a new next generation, regardless of whether we hope or doubt or expect that'll pan out. In some cases, like yours, you are so doubtful of the lighting improvement ever happening that you want everything to focus on what we already have in terms of asset quality and content and don't want that to hit a roadblock while the rest of the rendering only gets a marginal improvement.
