What will you do when your favorite new releases force ray tracing that can't be disabled?

[Faiyez]

Some of you are skipping Indiana Jones because of this. But what happens with games that people will actually want to play?

Will you play Witcher 4 or GTA 6 if they force ray tracing?

[Faiyez]

GTA6 will be 100% forced ray trace and priced at 100 USD.

You'd better start saving money to upgrade your GPUs and buy the games for them.

[Ontrix_Kitsune]

Originally posted by robotdex:

doom the dark ages... :( I simply won't buy it and won't Play it. although I can coz I have a RTX 3070, but! I hate ray tracing... it makes my game run like a*** bottom line.. I'll go back to play my old games but it's really sad. if GTA 6 is forced ray tracing... a lot of people will be pissed

At some point in the future all games will require raytracing. We're going to have to either upgrade to a newer faster video cards to be able to play them or not play games at all.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Just like when we had to drop our 3DFX cards and move on because Apps/Games stopped using Glide API and everything and everyone moved on. The same applies with Ray Tracing. Soon enough RT/PT will be standard in Games.

There are already reports that games such as GTA6 will be too hefty for even the very latest of game consoles, which I saw coming anyways, like what happened with GTA5 on 360/PS3. GTA6 will launch on the PS5/XBX but it won't run as well as it should until the next gen consoles come out.

I don't see a problem with DOOM Dark Ages or Indiana Jones. I already played Indiana Jones and I don't think the requirements are too steep to run it well.

Still not everyone plays the very latest games. There are plenty of lower demanding F2P games and various Indie games that will run just fine on something like a GTX 960 2GB for example.

But also keep in mind, by the time RT/PT is more standardized, the older non RT capable GPUs would have lost support and become legacy hardware.

[D. Flame]

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

Just like when we had to drop our 3DFX cards and move on because Apps/Games stopped using Glide API and everything and everyone moved on. The same applies with Ray Tracing. Soon enough RT/PT will be standard in Games.

1 out of every 10 devs got laid off in 2024. This trend will also continue, and gamers further lean into AA and indie games and further reject AAA offerings.

RT is a huge performance hit, is buggy AF, and the benefits are barely noticeable. Forcing it will only hurt their own bottom line.

[Midnight Aurais]

i wil play them yes it sucks if people cannot play due to something missing on the videocard but even if you hate raytracing if i do 4k maxed i get 56 fps in indiana jones no upscaling if i then lower global illumination which i barely notice a lick of difference i get 72 fps

videocard is a 6950 xt by the way

now if i try to play cyberpunk 2077 with raytracing maxed yippy less then 30 fps and around 48-50 at if i use upscaling at 4k

so you can see if its caked in it performs crappy if the whole cake is raytraced meh not that bad heck how am i even going to compare it to normal rasterization there ain't one

that said concerning yeah but since i play mostly indie titles i can often escape upscaling raytracing all the shebang all together so meh for me atleast

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Originally posted by D. Flame:

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

Just like when we had to drop our 3DFX cards and move on because Apps/Games stopped using Glide API and everything and everyone moved on. The same applies with Ray Tracing. Soon enough RT/PT will be standard in Games.

1 out of every 10 devs got laid off in 2024. This trend will also continue, and gamers further lean into AA and indie games and further reject AAA offerings.

RT is a huge performance hit, is buggy AF, and the benefits are barely noticeable. Forcing it will only hurt their own bottom line.

Then you obvious don't remember when games had just started to use things like DirectX; it too was buggy in many games for many years.

[D. Flame]

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

Originally posted by D. Flame:

1 out of every 10 devs got laid off in 2024. This trend will also continue, and gamers further lean into AA and indie games and further reject AAA offerings.

RT is a huge performance hit, is buggy AF, and the benefits are barely noticeable. Forcing it will only hurt their own bottom line.

Then you obvious don't remember when games had just started to use things like DirectX; it too was buggy in many games for many years.

Lots of things were buggy, but they were also improving over time, and the returns on investment were massive. Just look at the jump from PS1 era 3d Graphics to PS2 era 3D graphics. Like compare the character models from Final Fantasy 7 to Final Fantasy 10.

The problem with crap like Ray Tracing is that it is not improving. The performance hit is as large now as it every was, and the difference between RT on and off is barely noticeable, especially during active gameplay. The return is not worth the cost.

[SHREDDER]

Indiana jones since mentioned, as i see here https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=indiana+jones+6700xt on mine 6700xt it runs MAXED 1440P 60 fps WITHOUT the need of FSR! That is aamzing.I will paly it when it is on discount as i dont agree with games that cost 70 or 80. But if you have a card that released before 2018(which means it is now8 years old or 9)..... Then it is time TO FINALY CHANGE IT.!!
JUST DO IT!! DONT BE AFRAID!!!!!!!

Meanwhike wiht mine 6700xt i run evrything maxed 1440p 60 fps so i dont worry.

[nullable]

Originally posted by D. Flame:

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

Then you obvious don't remember when games had just started to use things like DirectX; it too was buggy in many games for many years.

Lots of things were buggy, but they were also improving over time, and the returns on investment were massive. Just look at the jump from PS1 era 3d Graphics to PS2 era 3D graphics. Like compare the character models from Final Fantasy 7 to Final Fantasy 10.

The problem with crap like Ray Tracing is that it is not improving. The performance hit is as large now as it every was, and the difference between RT on and off is barely noticeable, especially during active gameplay. The return is not worth the cost.

Define improving? Because that doesn't mean using progressively fewer resources. If anything as the technology improves it requires more and more power.

Ray Tracing is always going to be demanding. You're going to need decent or specialized hardware to do it well. Hardware will get more powerful though and eventually it won't be something to worry over.

I think people got a little spoiled by the status quo of the last 10-15 years where hardware got a lot more powerful and there wasn't some feature that was a huge leap with a potential to change how games are developed. Like it would never happen again, and hardware would just keep getting more powerful and that status quo would never change. So the expectations of perpetually higher resolutions and FPS became the only thing that matters, and anything else that seems to impede that specific progress must be bad and wrong.

So maybe some people have short memories, or maybe some people are just too young to remember anything different. And the argument that we're not already in the future where RT is trivial and "perfect" is pretty shortsighted.

[Ontrix_Kitsune]

Originally posted by D. Flame:

Originally posted by Bad 💀 Motha:

Then you obvious don't remember when games had just started to use things like DirectX; it too was buggy in many games for many years.

Lots of things were buggy, but they were also improving over time, and the returns on investment were massive. Just look at the jump from PS1 era 3d Graphics to PS2 era 3D graphics. Like compare the character models from Final Fantasy 7 to Final Fantasy 10.

The problem with crap like Ray Tracing is that it is not improving. The performance hit is as large now as it every was, and the difference between RT on and off is barely noticeable, especially during active gameplay. The return is not worth the cost.

It seems you do not remember your history, or you're too young to of lived through that time to experience it, one of the two. When DirectX was first Released the first DirectX games were difficult to run, slow, and performed poorly compared to GLIDE games that ran on 3DFX hardware. It wasn't until later with better hardware and software improvements that DirectX became easier to run, smooth, and superior to GLIDE. Exactly like RayTracing is happening today. The same thing also happened again when the first DirectX-9 games released and the early video cards that supported DirectX-9 struggled to run the new DX9 games slowly at poor performance. Then again With DirectX10 and no one could run the first DX10 games on early DX10 hardware. Today DirectX-9 and DX-10 games are so easy to run that they don't even put a load on modern video cards. The same will happen with Raytracing over time.

[D. Flame]

Originally posted by Ontrix_Kitsune:

Originally posted by D. Flame:

Lots of things were buggy, but they were also improving over time, and the returns on investment were massive. Just look at the jump from PS1 era 3d Graphics to PS2 era 3D graphics. Like compare the character models from Final Fantasy 7 to Final Fantasy 10.

The problem with crap like Ray Tracing is that it is not improving. The performance hit is as large now as it every was, and the difference between RT on and off is barely noticeable, especially during active gameplay. The return is not worth the cost.

It seems you do not remember your history, or you're too young to of lived through that time to experience it, one of the two. When DirectX was first Released the first DirectX games were difficult to run, slow, and performed poorly compared to GLIDE games that ran on 3DFX hardware. It wasn't until later with better hardware and software improvements that DirectX became easier to run, smooth, and superior to GLIDE. Exactly like RayTracing is happening today. The same thing also happened again when the first DirectX-9 games released and the early video cards that supported DirectX-9 struggled to run the new DX9 games slowly at poor performance. Then again With DirectX10 and no one could run the first DX10 games on early DX10 hardware. Today DirectX-9 and DX-10 games are so easy to run that they don't even put a load on modern video cards. The same will happen with Raytracing over time.

No, you are just missing the point.

Like people thought that the 3d Graphics on the PS1 looked like crap compared to the 2D games of the day, but everyone saw that there was massive potential in 3D graphics, so we dealt with it. Now we see the returns on modern 3D games.

The issue is that ray tracing is a massive performance hit, but the returns are minimal and barely noticeable. The costs are just as high as the problems in your example, but they don't have nearly the potential benefits as the 2D to 3D change as in my example.

[Monk]

Originally posted by SHREDDER:

Indiana jones since mentioned, as i see here https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=indiana+jones+6700xt on mine 6700xt it runs MAXED 1440P 60 fps WITHOUT the need of FSR! That is aamzing.I will paly it when it is on discount as i dont agree with games that cost 70 or 80. But if you have a card that released before 2018(which means it is now8 years old or 9)..... Then it is time TO FINALY CHANGE IT.!!
JUST DO IT!! DONT BE AFRAID!!!!!!!

Meanwhike wiht mine 6700xt i run evrything maxed 1440p 60 fps so i dont worry.

Did you watch those videos? None of them maintained 60fps and all had notably faster memory and cpu than yours.

It's OK, we've all seen your stutter game play showing you are more like 30fps though.

As long as you are happy, but, stop lying to people.

[Monk]

Originally posted by D. Flame:

Originally posted by Ontrix_Kitsune:

It seems you do not remember your history, or you're too young to of lived through that time to experience it, one of the two. When DirectX was first Released the first DirectX games were difficult to run, slow, and performed poorly compared to GLIDE games that ran on 3DFX hardware. It wasn't until later with better hardware and software improvements that DirectX became easier to run, smooth, and superior to GLIDE. Exactly like RayTracing is happening today. The same thing also happened again when the first DirectX-9 games released and the early video cards that supported DirectX-9 struggled to run the new DX9 games slowly at poor performance. Then again With DirectX10 and no one could run the first DX10 games on early DX10 hardware. Today DirectX-9 and DX-10 games are so easy to run that they don't even put a load on modern video cards. The same will happen with Raytracing over time.

No, you are just missing the point.

Like people thought that the 3d Graphics on the PS1 looked like crap compared to the 2D games of the day, but everyone saw that there was massive potential in 3D graphics, so we dealt with it. Now we see the returns on modern 3D games.

The issue is that ray tracing is a massive performance hit, but the returns are minimal and barely noticeable. The costs are just as high as the problems in your example, but they don't have nearly the potential benefits as the 2D to 3D change as in my example.

By the time play station arrived 3d looked notably better than 2d in most cases.

Ray tracing adds to immersion and will only continue to improve as the number if rays and bounces continue to I crease bringing us ever closer to photorealism with more believable light and shadow without developers having to spend ages faking the various light sources to set a scene.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Before 3DFX GLIDE ever came into the picture I remember running most games in DOS using Diamond Stealth GPU and SoundBlaster 16 and later AWE32. Then came Win95 and DIABLO game which used DirectX. During most of this time I had Intel Pentium 90Mhz and SCSI HDD and CDROM.

Was not until Tomb Raider and Need for Speed 2 did 3DFX Glide come around. When TR came out I had Intel Pentium 200 MMX. When NFS2 came out I was on to Pentium II platform

[D. Flame]

Originally posted by Monk:

Originally posted by D. Flame:

No, you are just missing the point.

Like people thought that the 3d Graphics on the PS1 looked like crap compared to the 2D games of the day, but everyone saw that there was massive potential in 3D graphics, so we dealt with it. Now we see the returns on modern 3D games.

The issue is that ray tracing is a massive performance hit, but the returns are minimal and barely noticeable. The costs are just as high as the problems in your example, but they don't have nearly the potential benefits as the 2D to 3D change as in my example.

By the time play station arrived 3d looked notably better than 2d in most cases.

FF7 (PS1):
https://youtu.be/SeO3N4oymnE?si=j3JmuFXQ4kRqtm_C&t=236

DarkStalkers (PS1)
https://youtu.be/t1h_vanafL0?si=1y-o8YRVGzT2CTL_