The big benefit of raytracing now, imo (which most games aren’t doing), is that it frees games up to introduce dynamic destruction again. We used to have all kinds of destructible walls and bits and bobs around, with flat lighting, but baked lighting has really limited what devs can do, because if you break something you need a solution to handle all the ways the lighting changes, and for the majority of games they just make everything stiff and unbreakable.
Raytracing is that solution. Plug and play, the lighting just works when you blow stuff up. DOOM: TDA is the best example of this currently (although still not a direct part of gameplay), with a bunch of destructible stuff everywhere, and that actually blows up with a physics sim rather than a canned animation. All the little boards have perfect ambient occlusion and shadows, because raytracing just does that.
It’s really fun, if minor, and one of the things I actually look forward to more games doing with raytracing. IMO that’s why raytracing has whelmed most people, because we’re used to near-flawless baked lighting, and haven’t really noticed the compromises that baked lighting has pushed on us.
If ray tracing can give me back the fun of tunneling through the ground with explosives that the first Red Faction games let me do, I will 100% change my mind on the technology. I have missed 100% destructible environments.
Several new or in-development games have it. I’m playing Enshrouded right now and it’s really impressive how good both the destruction and the building is, easily the best I’ve ever seen. And they just showed off the upcoming update with full water physics: https://youtu.be/vBAnTKGioq4
The lighting is also superb, IMO, though I’m not sure if it’s actual ray tracing or not.
That absolutely is something that Ray Tracing could simplify/enable, yes!
It’s not that ray tracing is a gimmick, it’s more that modern cards still aren’t powerful enough to fully trace every ray, so some cheating is still done with baked lighting I believe. Plus a lot of devs might not have gotten accustomed to using it properly yet.
Oh yeah. For example the game “Teardown” uses a software ray tracing for lighting. Most Minecraft shaders also do ray tracing I think…
Of course these are voxel based examples which are a lot easier on the processor. You need hardware ray tracing for high poly destructible structures and I have absolutely nothing against the technology.
I just don’t like how the technology is abused by studios to push out unoptimized games running at ~50 fps on 3090s
It is. Instead of hardware rt, it just uses a software implementation of ray tracing to run on all GPUs, as it does not need to do that much ray tracing. As a side note: Teardown has its own engine.
It also boils down the fact RTX GPUs were not that popular when the game was released
Oh, does it? I was literally thinking to myself that Teardown was an interesting example of destruction, and wondering how they did their lighting. RT makes perfect sense, that must be one of the earliest examples of actually doing something you really couldn’t without RT (at least not while lighting it well).
But yes, agreed that recent performance trends are frustrating, smearing DLSS and frame gen to cover for terrible performance. Feels like we’re in a painful tween period with a lot of awkward stuff going on, and also deadlines/crunch/corporate meddling etc causing games to come out half-baked. Hopefully this stuff does reach maturity soon and we can have some of this cool new stuff without so many other compromises.
But compiling levels takes so long with baked lighting :( /s
I know it actually does take some time and does slow down level building. But until every supported graphics card can handle fully race traced environment lighting you’ll be stuck with that process anyway.
If you want it to read as “a hundred,” you simply write out in letters “a hundred” (without the quotes).
If you want to say “one hundred,” you can write 100 or “one hundred” (without the quotes). Typically shorter numbers in the single or double digits should be written out with letters and then switch to numerical representation at three digits and above to be considered “correct” by some academics. Always write with numerics-only when working in scientific or data-oriented settings.
Finally, if you want to write “a one hundred,” simply write “a 100” (without the quotes).
ray-tracing? Sure let’s give it a try.
Ok I don’t see a difference and my fps dropped by a 100.
Ray is tracing as fast as he can. 1 frame per minute and his hand is cramping.
“Normally cartoons aren’t live. It’s hell on the animators.”
He’s already raytracing, he can’t raytrace any further!
High performance lighting? We had a tool for that.
It was called texture baking.
The big benefit of raytracing now, imo (which most games aren’t doing), is that it frees games up to introduce dynamic destruction again. We used to have all kinds of destructible walls and bits and bobs around, with flat lighting, but baked lighting has really limited what devs can do, because if you break something you need a solution to handle all the ways the lighting changes, and for the majority of games they just make everything stiff and unbreakable.
Raytracing is that solution. Plug and play, the lighting just works when you blow stuff up. DOOM: TDA is the best example of this currently (although still not a direct part of gameplay), with a bunch of destructible stuff everywhere, and that actually blows up with a physics sim rather than a canned animation. All the little boards have perfect ambient occlusion and shadows, because raytracing just does that.
It’s really fun, if minor, and one of the things I actually look forward to more games doing with raytracing. IMO that’s why raytracing has whelmed most people, because we’re used to near-flawless baked lighting, and haven’t really noticed the compromises that baked lighting has pushed on us.
If ray tracing can give me back the fun of tunneling through the ground with explosives that the first Red Faction games let me do, I will 100% change my mind on the technology. I have missed 100% destructible environments.
Several new or in-development games have it. I’m playing Enshrouded right now and it’s really impressive how good both the destruction and the building is, easily the best I’ve ever seen. And they just showed off the upcoming update with full water physics:
https://youtu.be/vBAnTKGioq4
The lighting is also superb, IMO, though I’m not sure if it’s actual ray tracing or not.
Is there a story or what’s the gameplay like? Can I play by myself or must I work with others?
Think Zelda. You can play with others but it’s fine solo.
That absolutely is something that Ray Tracing could simplify/enable, yes!
It’s not that ray tracing is a gimmick, it’s more that modern cards still aren’t powerful enough to fully trace every ray, so some cheating is still done with baked lighting I believe. Plus a lot of devs might not have gotten accustomed to using it properly yet.
Oh yeah. For example the game “Teardown” uses a software ray tracing for lighting. Most Minecraft shaders also do ray tracing I think…
Of course these are voxel based examples which are a lot easier on the processor. You need hardware ray tracing for high poly destructible structures and I have absolutely nothing against the technology.
I just don’t like how the technology is abused by studios to push out unoptimized games running at ~50 fps on 3090s
Isn’t Teardown fully raytraced? As in, all rendering being raytracing? I don’t have a source, but remember it being talked about.
It is. Instead of hardware rt, it just uses a software implementation of ray tracing to run on all GPUs, as it does not need to do that much ray tracing. As a side note: Teardown has its own engine.
It also boils down the fact RTX GPUs were not that popular when the game was released
Oh, does it? I was literally thinking to myself that Teardown was an interesting example of destruction, and wondering how they did their lighting. RT makes perfect sense, that must be one of the earliest examples of actually doing something you really couldn’t without RT (at least not while lighting it well).
But yes, agreed that recent performance trends are frustrating, smearing DLSS and frame gen to cover for terrible performance. Feels like we’re in a painful tween period with a lot of awkward stuff going on, and also deadlines/crunch/corporate meddling etc causing games to come out half-baked. Hopefully this stuff does reach maturity soon and we can have some of this cool new stuff without so many other compromises.
But compiling levels takes so long with baked lighting :( /s
I know it actually does take some time and does slow down level building. But until every supported graphics card can handle fully race traced environment lighting you’ll be stuck with that process anyway.
deleted by creator
My Celeron was overclocked and all, but sometimes that stuff just took too long and I tested the changes in fullbright!
Also, you turn it off and the performance is somehow still shit until you restart the game.
“By a one hundred”
Sorry I am not a native English speaker. I forgot you guys pronounce it weird.
If you want it to read as “a hundred,” you simply write out in letters “a hundred” (without the quotes).
If you want to say “one hundred,” you can write 100 or “one hundred” (without the quotes). Typically shorter numbers in the single or double digits should be written out with letters and then switch to numerical representation at three digits and above to be considered “correct” by some academics. Always write with numerics-only when working in scientific or data-oriented settings.
Finally, if you want to write “a one hundred,” simply write “a 100” (without the quotes).
Thanks I will try to remember it. We just say “hundred” for 100 and I know “a hundred” is a thing so a 100 makes sense to me.