Has he created a better ray-tracing solution for his traditional meshes in Godot?
He is actually planning a full path tracing solution for his engine relying on meshlets, so he completely ditched virtual geometry and any nanite like solution.
"The first thing to understand is that Godot is not Epic. The project does not have 150 veteran graphics engineers who can maintain an insanely huge renderer. [...] First of all, it should be ray/path-tracing only (with base raster pass). This saves incredible amounts of work, as shadows, GI, reflections, etc. would all be ray traced. Hybrids like Unreal or Unity HDRP are far too much complexity, and hardware is getting there anyway"
"As for Nanite. The problem with it is that it is also just too complex; it works as a hierarchical meshless LOD, plus it's not that friendly with raytracing, which is our main goal. Instead, a much simpler approach can be using more traditional auto-LODs with meshlets, all GPU-driven. This works great with raytracing (just stream LOD levels together). Has a bit more overdraw? Sure, but remember, we don't have shadow maps, so we don't care. Downsides? Probably slower for insanely complex, huge geometry if it spans hundreds of meters. Just divide it up (which most, if not all, games, do anyway), but for anything else, you still get great performance and detail. Also likely will use meshlet LRU less efficiently, but to be honest, unless you are an AAA studio, you don't care about these things; you have something close that solves a similar problem, and on the Godot side, something way simpler to do and maintain"
Godot engine creator Juan Linietsky discussed his preference for a full path tracing approach instead of a Lumen-like hybrid approach.
wccftech.com
