General Next Generation Rumors and Discussions [Post GDC 2020]

Or this


yLLGetK.png


Exactly. This is when you don't waste power on native 4k and RT.
 
Yet it looks like a PS3 game next to this Rebirth demo even if we render the demo at 1080p/30fps vs 4k/60fps for Control.
Stop with comparing directed movies with actual games. This is folly for any argument. People watch a movie, people play games. You don't need dynamic anything for a rendered movie.

In short, Raytracing, native 4k, 60fps are not what makes a game look next gen
Something as simple as Minecraft RTX would suggest otherwise.

it's a combination of other things like 10s or 100s millions of polygons for environment detail, fluid sim, gpu particles, extensive use of Photogrammetry, high fidelity character models, motion matching animation, high res textures of great variety
All of these are extremely expensive on budget and in combination with compute. So you're not really selling me here that you don't just love production quality, you are by in large describing high quality production. If it costs a lot to make the assets, and it takes a long time to bake and render, and requires massive studios with insane attention to detail and be in production for several years; you are referring to the love of production.

and you put all that in a voxel cone tracing global illumination renderer with SSR, cubemaps etc and you'll have a game looking million times better than a 4k/60fps raytraced basic bitch
You have serious issues with this statement.
 
Stop with comparing directed movies with actual games. This is folly for any argument. People watch a movie, people play games. You don't need dynamic anything for a rendered movie.


Something as simple as Minecraft RTX would suggest otherwise.


All of these are extremely expensive on budget and in combination with compute. So you're not really selling me here that you don't just love production quality, you are by in large describing high quality production. If it costs a lot to make the assets, and it takes a long time to bake and render, and requires massive studios with insane attention to detail and be in production for several years; you are referring to the love of production.


You have serious issues with this statement.

I would say it so , if Raytraycing Effects does not look much better on the Screen than classic Rasterrizer Effects , so why spend so much GPU Resources for it if the Result is so medicore or doesent impress the audience?

And the Minecraft Demo was a Joke technically , this can be also done on the Ps3 Cell Chip.
 
Last edited:
I would say it so , if Raytraycing Effects does not look much better on the Screen than classic Rasterrizer Effects , so why spend so much GPU Resources for it if the Result is so medicore or doesent impress the audience?
There is significant fear mongering that the addition of RT effects would reduce overall presentation. Developers would know exactly how much of everything they need to improve the overall look of their game. They wouldn't trade off worse graphics performance for equivalent or worse graphics just because they want to market it as a RT product. The usage of RT will be in areas where it's going to provide better performance than doing through traditional T&L methods. OR, it will be used in areas as a hit in performance to make up a lack of production budget.
And the Minecraft Demo was a Joke technically , this can be also done on the Ps3 Cell Chip.
Is this a parody post?
 
Last edited:
There is significant fear mongering that the addition of RT effects would reduce overall presentation. Developers would know exactly how much of everything they need to improve the overall look of their game. They wouldn't trade off worse graphics performance for equivalent or worse graphics just because they want to market it as a RT product. The usage of RT will be in areas where it's going to provide better performance than doing through traditional T&L methods.

Is this a parody post?


I cannot see anything impressive Result in this Demo sorry to say that. The "RESULT" is important and not the Algorithm behind. If i can create the same Result with pre baked / Fakering Effects so where is the Point to use Raytraycing?? The Tech Demos they have shown us does not have any CGI Quality.
 
If i can create the same Result with pre baked / Fakering Effects so where is the Point to use Raytraycing?? The Tech Demos they have shown us does not have any CGI Quality.
You can't and Cell in PS3 couldn't raytrace Minecraft. If you don't understand what this demo is doing, and why it's taking multiple teraflop GPUs to achieve the unprecedented lighting results, you don't belong at B3D.
 

I cannot see anything impressive Result in this Demo sorry to say that. The "RESULT" is important and not the Algorithm behind. If i can create the same Result with pre baked / Fakering Effects so where is the Point to use Raytraycing?? The Tech Demos they have shown us does not have any CGI Quality.
Try representing the product a little deeper than a sizzle reel.
 
So by that "logic" everything NextGen brings is worthless since everything has been done previously by some game somewhere before. Why does Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo even bother with hardware iterations and improvements?
 
You can't and Cell in PS3 couldn't raytrace Minecraft. If you don't understand what this demo is doing, and why it's taking multiple teraflop GPUs to achieve the unprecedented lighting results, you don't belong at B3D.

Sorry I exaggerated I just wanted to express that the demos didn't impress me visually. When I see what was possible in the last generation and before that I honestly expected more of it.


 
Stop with comparing directed movies with actual games. This is folly for any argument. People watch a movie, people play games. You don't need dynamic anything for a rendered movie.


Something as simple as Minecraft RTX would suggest otherwise.


All of these are extremely expensive on budget and in combination with compute. So you're not really selling me here that you don't just love production quality, you are by in large describing high quality production. If it costs a lot to make the assets, and it takes a long time to bake and render, and requires massive studios with insane attention to detail and be in production for several years; you are referring to the love of production.


You have serious issues with this statement.

From a technical point of view Minecraft RTX is interesting but the game with or without RTX is hideous imo.

And this is not only because I like photorealistic game for example Call of Sea is gorgeous or the two Ori games are gorgeous.
 
Sorry I exaggerated I just wanted to express that the demos didn't impress me visually. When I see what was possible in the last generation and before that I honestly expected more of it.
It's the difference between rendering a photorealistic game and rendering a quad with a photo on it. The latter looks photorealistic but it breaks in gameplay. Between the two you have the spectrum of interactivity. Uncharted 4 had some incredibly well lit scenes that were interactively broken - a single, homogenised solid of 'scenery'. You can't shoot walls in the Uncharted 4 home environments because the lighting would fail. Heck, there were times in that game where the lighting conflicted very disruptively.

Visually, games aren't going to blow minds the way they used to because the visual delta is less, but like good audio, when the tech has finally reached it's best, we won't notice it and will instead just have realistic worlds that don't keep challenging our immersion with shonky shadows, immovable objects, odd lighting, and all the other limits we have.
 
Stop with comparing directed movies with actual games. This is folly for any argument. People watch a movie, people play games. You don't need dynamic anything for a rendered movie.


Something as simple as Minecraft RTX would suggest otherwise.


All of these are extremely expensive on budget and in combination with compute. So you're not really selling me here that you don't just love production quality, you are by in large describing high quality production. If it costs a lot to make the assets, and it takes a long time to bake and render, and requires massive studios with insane attention to detail and be in production for several years; you are referring to the love of production.


You have serious issues with this statement.
That demo wasn't a movie, the dev actually played around in it to show that everything was interactive. Minecraft with or without RT is still in the end, blocks of low res squares. It runs only 1080p on XSX and I bet that will not sit well with majority of gamers if that's the kind of sacrifice needed to get RT.
And not everything has to be high production value either. Hellblade was done by a small team on a small budget using traditional rasterizer yet still looks as good as most high production games.
Look, I'm not saying RT doesn't have its merit. If devs could implement it without sacrificing too much other things then by all means, go for it. We'll just have to wait and see how the first party games do it. But I'm not holding my breath if Minecraft is anything to go by.
 
I said similar in the Minecraft discussion, but less extreme because this is a path tracer and not a hybrid renderer which is what games will be leveraging to get the best results from RTRT; it's not indicative.
 
From a technical point of view Minecraft RTX is interesting but the game with or without RTX is hideous imo.

And this is not only because I like photorealistic game for example Call of Sea is gorgeous or the two Ori games are gorgeous.

Yeah, it's lipstick on a pig.

Still, I think it's a pretty good showcase of RT - the visual differences are quite apparent. Much like you can tell the difference between a pig with and without lipstick.
 
From a technical point of view Minecraft RTX is interesting but the game with or without RTX is hideous imo.

Many find that the most impressive game this generation, watch the DF video and it's comments below. Ray tracing has been around for ages but it never has been possible before 2018 to actually implement it in games without having a slideshow going on. Quake 2 RTX also has done a very impressive job.

Hellblade was done by a small team on a small budget using traditional rasterizer yet still looks as good as most high production games.

If you mean Hellblade 2 as in the trailer, it looks beyond anything else, and it might have ray tracing in there, even if subtle, it adds to the total picture of the game. (that is, if games are going to look like that, doubt it, but i hope so atleast :p) Like DF thinks, it's a game changer, probably more then anything else so far, if it can be implemented well.
 
Yeah, it's lipstick on a pig.

Still, I think it's a pretty good showcase of RT - the visual differences are quite apparent. Much like you can tell the difference between a pig with and without lipstick.
That's fine, but it doesn't need to be like that. I think people have vastly mismatched understanding of what is possible with rasterization and what is possible with ray tracing.
During these transition periods things are bound to be less optimized having to support both render paths. I don't believe this to be the case by the end of this generation.
 
Hellblade was done by a small team on a small budget using traditional rasterizer yet still looks as good as most high production games.
Who said that?

Their second project (Mara) is clearly using DXR.

I wouldn't be surprised if Hellblade 2 is as well. UE4 supports ray tracing.
 
if all pc games are gpu limited at 4K, then adding ray tracing on top of that will increase the load,
You have monster GPU like the 2080ti, with a massive die and cost. then you have the next gen consoles- how bloody efficient and balanced will they need to be to get close to the performance of a card like that.
it’s going to be very interesting to see how they do it.
 
Back
Top