What do gamers actually think about Ray-Tracing?

[Phixsator]

Pixel-peepers of the forum unite!!!!

You called sir?

 

[Pottsey]

Possibly but your including remakes/remasters but the point still stands which is its only the higher end cards which benefit from it which Tim alludes to - where he says its not usable so you don't bother with it. Did you watch it at all?

Here is the full RT titles from nvidia:

No I didn't watch the video. I just spotted your 20 games comment and thought that's odd I have more then 20 RT games. Not sure why Tim is saying don't bother as I have had a lot of fun replaying old games with RT. Its fair enough to say only higher end cards benefit but that's just a time factor. Every year a wider range of RT games get playable on a wider range of GPU's. I do agree some games are hit and miss with RT but overall its been more then worth it for me. Some of the RT mods and RT remasters have brought old games back to life.

 

[Calin Banc]

That's kind of my point - things can be done very well and you can have good hybrid of raster and RT, with proper performance and visuals, without going full PT route. But that's not what Nvidia pushes for.

Yup, stuff like Metro EE can be a good start.

No, it's 4 dynamic lights casting shadows per object, overlapping. Nearly unlimited of such per scene. When you have too many shadows per object there's often no shadows left - object is so well lit from all sides you will get flat scene or one shadow is much stronger than the other and we humans really notice well only very contrasting things. Hence, not an issue at all in reality, as I've seen even devs confirming on UE 4 forums. And, that's the old now Unreal Engine 4, from 2017. Lumen adds much more than this, it's more about global illumination than number of dynamic lights and shadows - the latter is just by the way.

It doesn't matter that the shadows are less obvious, that's how it works in reality to give it believable look. Still doesn't change the fact that you can go over that limit and you'll need a system that dynamically cuts which light can cast shadows or not based on their intersection. Moreover, how many games have that properly implemented and how many engines outside of that? Starfield is bad at it and was launch recently, for instance. And still... how much the performance tanks with let's say 6? Is it 50% slower, more, less? Perhaps is not an issue at all. Don't know how it goes for all engines and platforms.
Either way, shouldn't be a problem in the future with UE's new features.

I have to repeat myself, in the end a consumer have 0 interest how they make these games - consumers only care if it's fun and for how much. Everything else is just what tiny amount of enthusiasts discuss.

In other words, it's all very irrelevant to the end user.

Consumers don't care for much in general which turns around and bites them. For instance, if you tell someone that you'll want certain elements to be developed further than the very basic in game X, fanboys will argue against it and love staying/playing in the same simplified version, copy pasted game after game, missing out on something better.

To few people who care sure. To the large market - not one bit, as per multiple polls. Consumers don't care one thing. There's a reason switch and mobile games are still ruling gaming market by far, PC is not doing that great work xx60s cards (so no PT) being the vast majority. You can't really argue against numbers and stay objective. For the market at large, PT is completely irrelevant.

Funny how people ask for a patch for PS5 Pro

https://twitter.com/x/status/1859151714747552122

Thing is, switch and phones have their own crowds - phone for instance has the convenience on its side, just like with photos, but isn't better. If graphics would not matter, then games on Xbox and PS would be at least 60fps if not 120 fps, low end visuals, with no real need to upgrade the... GPU (basically). However, this is the 2nd gen that a "mid life" upgrade takes place.

Basically gamers care, but like everything, they care if is delivered at a lower price (which keeps going up anyway, even for consoles).

That tells a lot about the actual quality of these games with regards to fun, when the gamer finds more fun with graphics than with actual game, I believe
It happens a lot, I've noticed, as most modern games just really suck as games and are good just as tech demos. And again, can't argue with numbers here - most of them bomb financially for a reason.

No, I love the visuals. The game is not a 10 for me without visuals to back it up. That always improves the product. Gameplay alone isn't enough. Video, audio, story, ALL come together for a the perfect experience.

They don't. You confuse graphics tech with creativity. I would say it's the opposite in reality.

When you have to tiptoe around the limits, then you're affected by those limits.

I don't even know what to tell you here, it sounds so wrong... There's plenty of examples of prize winning photos taken on some of the worst cameras and hardware out there. Because hardware is just a tool and it has nothing to do with creativity nor quality of art. I worked for years with commercial art galleries in London, you wouldn't believe what people pay really good money for (most of that I wouldn't even call art).

If I'm paying for retro/hypster style, sure, but if I not... sorry, deliver what I want, I don't care about your "art". And by you I mean the photographer from the example.

 

[Bill Turnip]

Funny how people ask for a patch for PS5 Pro

Slightly disproved as demand is not enough to make the dev actually do it.

 

[Calin Banc]

Slightly disproved as demand is not enough to make the dev actually do it.

Without Sony's involvement to sweeten the deal, I doubt it will come since there will be too few units sold, plus... the game itself is "old news". They're moving to UE5.