RTX = no effort

[鳳凰院 凶真]

I've never played DOOM 2016 before. Only Eternal and The Dark Ages.
After beating Dark Ages i decided to give a chance DOOM 2016 and holly s h i t, it's graphics look amazing even if it's almost 10 years old game. Without any RTX it has really impressive graphics for today. No soapyness, no blurr and ray tracing artifacts. VFX looking very good. It felt like there was a lot of engine graphics engineering efforts to make it look so good.

The Dark Ages level design looks sick and awesome, no doubt. And of course it has more detailed models, the atmosphere is also great, but... the engine itself and overall graphics looks just decent? And it's on all-ultra settings without upscaling and frame generation. Most VFX looks like it's rendered in low resolution, game doesn't look better then DOOM 2016.

It feels like "RTX On" is a magic pill for game developers. Good example is Spider Man 2 game. On PS4 it has awesome graphics, reflecitons, shiny windows, beautiful lighting at night. And all of that is without RTX. On PC when ray tracing disabled it looks like nerfed piece of crap. When RTX is on - it looks like original, but slightly worse.
Some times ray tracing makes game look even worse causing weird artifacts.

Isn't ray tracing now is a way to deliver things we are used to but with higher GPU resource consuming? Reflections, beautiful light and shadows, shiny things, etc could be achieved without ray tracing and game coud look even more beautiful with OG rasterization rendering, but just because NVIDIA wants to sell more GPUs they pay developers to prevent players from having "RTX Off" option.
I actually hate that fact that I bought 5070 Ti to play Dark Ages on ultra settings in QHD with acceptable FPS. I am sure my old 3060 ti could handle this game in 150fps on ultras without any ray tracing.

[Quick☢420™]

Oh look it's another one of those threads about how lazy the devs are with zero knowledge about the time constraints that the team was under and the choices which had to be made. The development time would have been considerably longer had they decided to add a non-rtx version to the game, and a choice had to be made. They made the right decision by keeping it Ray Trace compatible only, the rendering techniques need to be pushed forward, not stagnating with older ways. RT will mature and become even better than it is already thanks to devs from games such as CP2077, Indy and now Doom:TDA. I'm looking forward to more and more full on Ray Traced games in the future. If you look for videos explaining why they went RT only you will know the whole story, and not just parrot the same old talking points from every other poster....

[Dr.Kalashnikov]

Download Blender. Switch renderer to Cycles.
Show us how low effort raytracing is.

[鳳凰院 凶真]

Originally posted by Dr.Kalashnikov:

Download Blender. Switch renderer to Cycles.
Show us how low effort raytracing is.

bruh...
comparing game engine where performance > render capabilities to 3d editor rendering whith dense ray tracing without any ray reconstruction. Ray traced render in blender is precise and heavy, while in games it's approximated. Good luck with using dense raytracing in 100% screen resolution.

I don't need RT. I like graphics with unique style where I can see efforts of artists and engineers, not blurry upscaled slop with shimmering and low FPS on high-end GPU.

[Quick☢420™]

Originally posted by Dr.Kalashnikov:

Download Blender. Switch renderer to Cycles.
Show us how low effort raytracing is.

The parrots just don't get it. By using RT they cut a YEAR from the dev cycle....a YEAR! They hear another NPC say something so that is what they base 'their' opinion on, it's scary. What people should do is actually learn about something before making their mind up, but some people think we are sitting here just waiting to hear what they think. Oh and to the OP, I didn't have to buy an RT card capable of playing this game.....I already owned one, and actually bought it for a NON RT GAME, so there goes that theory out the window.

[鳳凰院 凶真]

Originally posted by Quick☢420™:

By using RT they cut a YEAR from the dev cycle

Fast and undercooked food tastes almost the same as properly cooked, I got you

[miofio]

Originally posted by Quick☢420™:

Oh look it's another one of those threads about how lazy the devs are with zero knowledge about the time constraints that the team was under and the choices which had to be made. The development time would have been considerably longer had they decided to add a non-rtx version to the game, and a choice had to be made. They made the right decision by keeping it Ray Trace compatible only, the rendering techniques need to be pushed forward, not stagnating with older ways. RT will mature and become even better than it is already thanks to devs from games such as CP2077, Indy and now Doom:TDA. I'm looking forward to more and more full on Ray Traced games in the future. If you look for videos explaining why they went RT only you will know the whole story, and not just parrot the same old talking points from every other poster....

Nobody forced them to have time-constraint, it's just to save money. They probably could sell a lot more copies if they added non-RTX option, so was the right choice worth it?

[opus132]

Originally posted by Dr.Kalashnikov:

Download Blender. Switch renderer to Cycles.
Show us how low effort raytracing is.

The entire justification to force this crap on us is that it's easier and less time consuming than just doing baked in lighting. If RTX takes effort than that argument goes out the window.

[UNBREAKABLE]

Originally posted by opus132:

Originally posted by Dr.Kalashnikov:

Download Blender. Switch renderer to Cycles.
Show us how low effort raytracing is.

The entire justification to force this crap on us is that it's easier and less time consuming than just doing baked in lighting. If RTX takes effort than that argument goes out the window.

No matter how you look at it - using ray tracing is still less effort and also wastes less time. Baked lighting makes development a slog and we know this because we have access to idstudio.

Have you ever tried making an Eternal map with idstudio before? A simple room with baked lighting could take hours to compile. And if you want to change one small thing you have to do it all over again. Very inefficient and you have no idea how the map will look until it's done compiling. That's how maps for 2016 and Eternal were made and the devs just put up with it because that's what hardware at the time allowed.

Raytracing does all that crap in real time. You instantly know what the map looks like and don't need to spend hours waiting for baked lighting. It is faster, looks better and allows the devs to make more maps. The fact TDA has twice the maps of eternal despite them being bigger and more detailed makes that apparent.

[V I D A L]

Well, yes. RTX saves a lot of development time, sherlock. That's the long term point while being much more accurate than what you think it looks right in other games.

[ButtGravy]

Originally posted by 鳳凰院 凶真:

I've never played DOOM 2016 before. Only Eternal and The Dark Ages.
After beating Dark Ages i decided to give a chance DOOM 2016 and holly s h i t, it's graphics look amazing even if it's almost 10 years old game. Without any RTX it has really impressive graphics for today. No soapyness, no blurr and ray tracing artifacts. VFX looking very good. It felt like there was a lot of engine graphics engineering efforts to make it look so good.

The Dark Ages level design looks sick and awesome, no doubt. And of course it has more detailed models, the atmosphere is also great, but... the engine itself and overall graphics looks just decent? And it's on all-ultra settings without upscaling and frame generation. Most VFX looks like it's rendered in low resolution, game doesn't look better then DOOM 2016.

It feels like "RTX On" is a magic pill for game developers. Good example is Spider Man 2 game. On PS4 it has awesome graphics, reflecitons, shiny windows, beautiful lighting at night. And all of that is without RTX. On PC when ray tracing disabled it looks like nerfed piece of crap. When RTX is on - it looks like original, but slightly worse.
Some times ray tracing makes game look even worse causing weird artifacts.

Isn't ray tracing now is a way to deliver things we are used to but with higher GPU resource consuming? Reflections, beautiful light and shadows, shiny things, etc could be achieved without ray tracing and game coud look even more beautiful with OG rasterization rendering, but just because NVIDIA wants to sell more GPUs they pay developers to prevent players from having "RTX Off" option.
I actually hate that fact that I bought 5070 Ti to play Dark Ages on ultra settings in QHD with acceptable FPS. I am sure my old 3060 ti could handle this game in 150fps on ultras without any ray tracing.

Realistic shadowes and light cannot really be achieved without ray tracing.

[ButtGravy]

Originally posted by opus132:

Originally posted by Dr.Kalashnikov:

Download Blender. Switch renderer to Cycles.
Show us how low effort raytracing is.

The entire justification to force this crap on us is that it's easier and less time consuming than just doing baked in lighting. If RTX takes effort than that argument goes out the window.

Except Ray tracing does lighting, shadows, reflection better than any game without it.

[Quick☢420™]

I love how this thread has evolved into people now admitting RT looks better at everything it does. We all just need to have access to the proper hardware to enjoy it. Once it becomes mainstream it will mature much faster and the devs will get more proficient at using it, giving us much better games in less time. WIn-WIn.......

[opus132]

Originally posted by ButtGravy:

Originally posted by opus132:

The entire justification to force this crap on us is that it's easier and less time consuming than just doing baked in lighting. If RTX takes effort than that argument goes out the window.

Except Ray tracing does lighting, shadows, reflection better than any game without it.

It does them better but you can barely tell the different... and you lose 60% of your frames in the process.

[Dryspace]

Originally posted by UNBREAKABLE:

Raytracing does all that crap in real time. You instantly know what the map looks like and don't need to spend hours waiting for baked lighting.

You can't be that silly... You can use real-time ray tracing to design maps --- that has nothing to do with whether or not the game itself uses real-time ray tracing.

You can use these advanced tools you are talking about to speed up development, but that has nothing to do with whether or not the actual game has baked lighting or real-time ray tracing.

You are confusing the subjects of game engines and game development.