RTX ON

m8 BFV is the most egregious example of how pointless RTX is in its current state. It's a fucking competitive shooter. Nobody would notice the difference between the two unless you told them to stop in the middle of the battle and stare at a window.

The only thing that would give it away is the framerate.

>OP posts two images with no discernible difference
>[group of people] ON SUICIDE WATCH !!!!
just another day for the dumbest cunts on the planet.
great job.

Attached: 1562660236470.jpg (723x901, 103K)

>RTX: OFF
>144fps, looks fine
>RTX: ON
>20fps, may notice a difference if really pay attention

>that level of reflection on a grimy glass window
have the devs that do this shit ever actually been outside before?

Isn't that reflection too exaggerated. IRL reflections are never this clean on a random train car.

Cope

If you cant see their nose hairs you gotta kill yourself is what those autists think

>RTX ON
>20 FPS
>Shadows non-existent

video games are now surpassing reality, there's no need to hold it back

soon reality will be obsolete

Attached: mgn-brasil-mgnbrasil-rtx-off-5-rtx-on-nvidia-geforce-38092087.png (500x778, 138K)

Attached: 8abda448a3032e818ea38d9bd950f1dd.jpg (640x738, 57K)

>meme buzzword for the day keeps my insanity at bay

AMDBROS HOW WE WILL EVER RECOVER
youtu.be/UCfuZSEFzIg

There are already "ray traced" mods for minecraft that dont require RTX.

WOW SO SHINY
youtube.com/watch?v=-9pvAEi4qwI

>RTX ON: no shadows
>RTX OFF: shadows
bravo nvidia

Great looking water

it's like a whole new game

SILKY SMOOTH 22FPS FOR NO DIFFERENCE

imagine falling for the RTX meme

literally audiophile tier

>There are already "ray traced" mods for minecraft that dont require RTX.

They run like shit because they aren't utilizing the RTX chip - so the official implementation should run better, hopefully.

rtx off: water looks like water
rtx on: water looks like liquid metal

>turn the water into mirrors
>call it an upgrade

okay boss

What the fuck were they trying to prove with this? That RTX on is a waste of resources?

jesus christ imagine being this much of a bootlicking cuck

>RTX Chip
Wow someone was successfully shilled lol

>Is that what RTX is, lower brightness?

In some cases, actually yes. I have a 2080ti and Shadow of the tomb raider can actually be harder to play with RTX, because the shadows cause areas you need to see to be far too occluded.

The bottom line is it's a more realistic rendition of lighting behaviour, not necessarily a better looking experience, although I fully grant you it's sold as such. Like any other graphics feature, ie ambient occlusion, you may like it or not, and you don't then just turn it off. for the record I did just turn it off on Shadow.

RTX lighting is clearly more accurate.

How long do you think it'll take for Ray-tracing to be available to an average consumer? I'm not talking about the current shitty RTX implementation.

4 years.

>all these paid shills in the comments
#RTXOn

Of course, but the main criticism towards it is for what purpose? The difference in scenery is minuscule yet the performance you suffer is ridiculous for such small gain. That's not even taking into account the large chunk of money you're spending which doesn't seem like worth it at all.

I like RTX a lot, but NVIDIA has been doing a shit job at showcasing its potential. Fast paced competitive shooters are one of the last things you want to use to show off RTX with.

>huur duur rtx is a scam but muh fps
There's no reason not to have rtx. It's makes it easier for the developers and it looks better.
Is it still early? Absolutely. Give it a few generatiins and will become standard will no major performance hit.
The exact same thing could've been said about any technological advance in graphics over the years.

>it makes it easier

how does making something take even more work make it easier?

ray tracing isn't a meme but rtx absolutely is

>consumers buying $1200+ gpus makes it easier for the developers
NO SHIT? Optimize your shit

>muh everything I don't like is a meme
Fuck off, progress needs to start somewhere.

But it ends up looking bad anyway. This game looks like shit and no amount of ray traced reflections will fix that.

yeah it's shit because it's the first iteration, that's why it's a fucking meme

How is it more work if all the lightning is calculated automatically instead of having to use different techniques to fake it?

>SHADOWS THAT BLACK DON'T EXIST IN REAL LIFE
What do you think happens when you close off a space entirely from light? You are aware that, that is a shadow right?

AYYMDPOORFAGS HAVE NO REAL TIME RAYTRACING TECHNOLOGY AND CONTINUES TO SEETHE AS AYYMD HAS PROVEN TO HAVE NO VISION

Attached: WOW SHINY.gif (372x200, 731K)

Attached: Hitman 3.png (2560x1440, 2.2M)

I appreciate what nvidia are trying to do but it feels like one step forwards two steps back. The 2000 series is the most expensive series yet with the smallest increase in raw performance. But hey at least it has RTX!

I buy nvidia btw.

Next, jewvidia will start paying off developers to stop using other forms of shading besides RTX, in an attempt to make it so you either have to pay out the ass for their snake oil garbage or be stuck with games that have N64-tier shading

Attached: drake point.jpg (612x380, 25K)

It can get more optimized as time passes. Everything was a "meme" until consoles were powerful enough to run it; then they shut up about it.

Shadows? Meme
Ambient Occlusion? Meme
Reflections? Meme
Parallax Mapping? Meme
Anti-aliasing? Meme
PBR textures? Meme
RTX? Meme

From the perspective of a 3D modeler, you shits are annoying as fuck.

>Rotating barrel
muh dick

Attached: Capture25.png (579x618, 466K)

>in normal minecraft a gold block is just yellow, but with RTX WE CAN HAVE SPECULAR HIGHLIGHTS
As if they couldn't have just made a better graphics minecraft without rtx. Either way I prefer original MC look I don't play MC for the graphics

>Next, jewvidia will start paying off developers to stop using other forms of shading besides RTX, in an attempt to make it so you either have to pay out the ass for their snake oil garbage or be stuck with games that have N64-tier shading
Lol no, not before AT LEAST the PS6/Xbox3 generation.

looks great, stay mad AMD poorfags

I mean, anti-aliasing has turned into a meme, used to be all about that MSAA now everything just has FXAA or TAA blurfests

>shadows that black don't exist in real life

Attached: 1562253983538.png (454x520, 7K)

I’ll stick with AMD

Man, NVidia released the MFAA technology when MSAA was already dying out...

>SHADOWS THAT BLACK DON'T EXIST IN REAL LIFE

Attached: 1519183812550.gif (190x200, 2.56M)

to be fair though, there's less reason to bother with AA these days when you can just use a 1440p or 4K monitor with higher pixel density instead. AA matters more the lower-res the screen is.

>itt AMD cope
i don't even have an RTX card and even i can tell that looks great, reflections and illumination have been rubbish since 2010's started

maybe they should stop peddling their shit like it's ready to become standard when it's years off

depends on engine, older games tend to need more AA for some reason mostly UE3 games
modern ones 1440 saves you from most of AA

Have you? Even “grimy” windows remain reflective, especially at that angle. You must live in a blasted out shithole if windows get so dirty that you can’t see a reflection in them.

>showcasing new tech means it's standard
what a simpleton you are

>falling for ambient occlusion v1.5

Attached: 1450360084676.jpg (632x1952, 538K)

>nextgen consoles already falling for the meme

That space isn't etirely closed off from light, and the atmosphere causes diffusion to happen. So he's half right about that, in moderate to bright conditions. Think about how shadows on the moon are described, where there is no atmosphere and light doesn't diffuse, you get pitch black shadows like in the doom engine contrasting with well lit areas.

>Shadows that black do not exist in real life
Then why my wallet just dissapeared?

audiophiles.txt

This is the shame shit that PhysX did when it first came out and it was super expensive gimmick stuff

Grimy windows are usually way more diffuse than that.

meanwhile in 2007
youtube.com/watch?v=WyHovAxVz8k

Did you look between your fat folds? it always happens to me.

Yes, that's a very basic lighting engine; what's your point?

I actually do not understand this post.
Are people blind? RTX is objectively better than non-RTX, the thing is that it is shit in it's current implementation and not worth buying.
Are we under delusion that eventually everything won't move towards real time raytracing? In 5 years time real time raytracing will be implemented as a standard in most games.

Yes they are. Glass is very reflective. Go outside and Look at your phone with the screen off, it may as well be a mirror.

I find it hilarious that so many retards don’t know that smooth surfaces reflect light. Have none of you ever looked at the windows on your own cars?

Attached: 4D816371-E685-4B48-98B8-35BC4B5C018E.jpg (1348x734, 250K)

his point is probably that it looks good and games are enjoyable with that level, but they keep pushing harder graphics and shallower gameplay in order to milk people of $3000 for their pc

Do you understand how raytracing works? There is a reason why materials in modern day vidya still look shittier than fucking pixar stuff from 10 years ago.
It is LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE to replicate accurate light refraction, reflections, shadow, even transparency without raytracing.

OFF: Soul
ON: Soulless

instead of integrating some nvidia jew feature devs should hire competent ukranian programmers.

Man that sure ups the gameplay, gosh gee golly, cant wait til every game forces me to buy a 1000 graphics card so that the fucking shadows are smoother, gosh, what an era

Seriously, wheres the video game crash, im so fucking ready anymore

How come F.E.A.R. was doing shit like this like 10 years ago?

umm user, shadows that black dont exist in real life.

It wasn't.

How is it snake oil you dumb retard, everyone should switch to raytracing.
Current render engines are a literal bane on game development, do you understand that you can't even make double transparent surfaces without bullshit because of how rendering works currently?
This isn't Jewvidya, fuck RTX cards, real time raytracing will still be the future eventually because it is literally better than everything right now objectively and you have to be a literal retard to deny it.
>Half-assed bullshit that you have to pull to replicate life VS. Simulation of actual life
Have you ever wondered why all of the pre-rendered CG uses raytracing EXCLUSIVELY?

It wasn't

>arguing with tech illiterate Yea Forumsirgins

Retard.

Attached: 1114534845.jpg (800x450, 57K)

>5 nvidia firebucks has been added to your account

Threads like this make me literally seethe, same as anons trying to talk about polycount of assets in videogames.
Yea Forums is comprised of literal fucking brainlet retards.

>5 retard neetbucks have been added to your account

>shadows that black don't exist in real life
God damn how is it like being a total retard

Suck that activision cock some more, atta boy! Ill bet youre buying Borderlands 3 on day one too arentcha, what a good boy, Randy and Bobby are proud of you both

>activating rtx turns off shadows
so this... is the power... of cutting edge... technology...

Fuck Nvidia, I use fucking r9 290x to this day and when I upgrade soon I will do it with AMD again probably.
Read what I said here
Real time raytracing will eventually be the future, it is objectively better in every way, how is this even a discussion. I work in a studio that scans terrain through photogrammetry and then we port it to various engines. Current real time rendering methods are obsolete you dumb fuck.
AMD will also move to real time raytracing eventually and so will everyone else, this isn't some physX stuff, it's actually important and usable for every developer.

>everything is either super shiny or niggest black now

I bet you idiots also like "HD mods" for San Andreas

Can you imagine paying a premium just so your AAA non-game with no real art direction looks even worse?

>every playing Borderlands
No thanks, tried the first one many years ago and I got bored, and that robot was terribly annoying. What the fuck does that have to do with anything here?

If you have absolutely no experience with game development or creating 3D renders, then fuck off.

How shitty activision cucks implement it is irrelevant, raytracing is the accurate and physical simulation of light.
Have you ever seen any CG animated movie or an animation? In fact any pre-rendered thing ever? They ALL use raytracing, exclusively.
There is a certain cap of graphical fidelity and light effects that is literally impossible without ray tracing.

>studios can't make good looking shit so just scan the real world with zero effort
So this is.. the power of.. aaa gaming

The one with shinny puddles at a broad sunny day for me please.

And by the way,
>paying to beta test
Hahahahahahahaha.

>the comments on that fucking video
I HATE THIS STUPID FUCKING ":" MEME FUCKING NUKE THE PLANET RIGHT NOW

RTX is just a meme

Attached: 1565752544198.png (1280x1440, 1.34M)

I don't understand how you feel. I have a RTX 2080 and I don't even play games. It just came with my PC lol.

Has there ever been a CGI that you have ever seen that has art direction? Anything pixar or some CG from an animu game or maybe old Warcraft cinematics? Whatever the fuck you like.
ALL OF THEM USE RAYTRACING. What Nvidia does with it's retarded jew cards is irrelevant, raytracing is OBJECTIVELY superior to traditional real time rendering methods, this is not even a debate.
It is a debate only if you believe that real time stuff looks better than non-real time CG of any kind.

It's not for AAA gaming, it's for tourism
Also there is a level of detail that is impossible to model without photogrammetry

buying rtx cards currently is retarded, it's like buying foldable phones
but all the anons who think that raytracing itself is a meme are brainlet wojaks personified

off is actually better

>It is a debate only if you believe that real time stuff looks better than non-real time CG of any kind.
Yeah, well, that's the fucking point. Real-time ray tracing will never be worthwhile in our lifetimes.

This is actually a more substantial change than expected. I never planned to play this game but I sort of want to see how they are using extra free cores to add shit like foliage and replace ultradark black shadows with realistic ones.

>Real-time ray tracing will never be worthwhile in our lifetimes
Yep, I sure enjoy having to spend minutes rendering an image each time I want to test the lighting in my scene. Boy... if only there were a way to do it in real-time.

What happened to PhysX? It looked nice in the batman games.

>Real-time ray tracing will never be worthwhile in our lifetimes.
Nigga how slowly do you think that tech develops? Are you 80 and about to die in a few years?
Do you honestly believe that in 10 years real time raytracing will not be viable? What about in 20? 30? Are you seriously telling me that you think that at least by the end of your life you will not see viable real time raytracing?
Now that you understand how retarded your statement sounds, real time raytracing will be viable by 2025, all developers in various media fields including videogames are working towards that.

It's now open source and used in game engines like unity and UE4. It's baked in to games as opposed to being an optional extra.

People are literally too lazy to use it, and CPUs gotten strong enough that it is possible to replicate most effects with them to some degree even without physX.
Game developers are universally lazy assholes that like to use pre-made shit and hate coding new mechanics, this goes for all developers east and west, talking from a personal experience, the difference is that the fanbase of east has different expectations and they don't have extremely gigantic libraries of pre-made gay shit to use.

First 3 seconds is off, next 3 seconds is on. I'd sooner have the higher fps and brighter environment personally. Judge for yourself though.

Attached: It just works, at least if what you wanted was to be able to see fuck all.webm (1920x1080, 2.44M)

To the untrained eye, there is no difference.

alright then
if rtx is so superior then tell me what blocks these are

Attached: mcrtx.png (1260x736, 289K)

Yeah this is fucking pointless. To the people saying "ooh RTX makes it easy for developers to make their games look good", this is what you get. A lazy implementation that barely looks different.

Metro Exodus legitimately looks great though, because they put effort in.

I was referring to COD, not the next decade's version of cloud computing.

Not in the foreseeable future there won't be. Unless, of course, you don't mind getting shit results, which makes it moot.

>Nigga how slowly do you think that tech develops? Are you 80 and about to die in a few years?
Very slowly. Are you a legit baby boomer and easily impressionable?
>Do you honestly believe that in 10 years real time raytracing will not be viable? What about in 20? 30? Are you seriously telling me that you think that at least by the end of your life you will not see viable real time raytracing?
Nothing worth the performance toll or even fast enough for real-time video game rendering, no, and you're incredibly naive to believe otherwise.

>Very slowly
t. 12 years old and grew up with an iphone

buyer's remorse at full effect

A 12 year old not holding on to rose-tinted glasses of decades old breakthroughs would have a better grasp on technology than you.

tfw old enough to have seen the great leap in tech that happened within only two decades then this zoomer faggot shows up

You don't really get it, if it wasn't nvidia it would have been someone else.
Ray tracing has been the ideal from the start because it takes the guessing game out of accurate lighting from the devs point of view.
Screech all you like. Its the most accurate way to do lighting and its performance impact will only go down as the GPU bandwidth improves.

Attached: 1473574340288.jpg (640x480, 33K)

Thanks for illustrating my point within 30 seconds.

uuuuuuuuuuh, guys.. I don't see any difference

Attached: 1471556801270.png (996x720, 869K)

OFF: Soulless
ON: Soulless
It looks like soulless garbage no matter what you do

>Nothing worth the performance toll or even fast enough for real-time video game rendering, no, and you're incredibly naive to believe otherwise.
I like how you, being an arrogant nigger that you are believe that you know better than everyone.
We literally have a department working on real time raytracing, pic related is scanned terrain of of caucasian mountainous region we are making for microsoft rn.

Attached: 20190819_143357_HDR.jpg (1400x700, 638K)

imagine being one of the poor fucks having to do voice over for this how can you take minecraft and speak about it in any kind of serious tone?

>dude we'll never get this tech within our lifetimes lol
>>how do you know?
>I just do lol

Based danganretard

Based

But I'll just tell you straight up, you don't know shit, you don't work anywhere near any industry related to CG probably and you probably need some help finding your way out of your own ass.
Real time raytracing will take time to be fully implemented properly, up to 10 years max, but you will absolutely see it become the norm in your lifetime you dumb fuck.

more like within the next 5 to 6 years if not much sooner

Unironically this

so far, it isnt worth it, but in a few years when there is no meaningful penalty for using it then it will be. There is no point in completely dismissing the tech, dont use it for now.

Attached: 1286288383465.jpg (200x200, 20K)

In all honesty, I DO see the difference, but it's extremely subtle and not worth a 33% loss of framerate. The other shitty part is that you can attain basically the same exact visuals with very minimal performance loss.
Basically what's happening here, is they have a non-shadow casting point light with a projected texture for a "shadow" beneath the fire when using normal mode. With RTX, they turn on shadow casting for the point light and use ray tracing to process the shadow maps so that shadows that are close to the caster, like the rocks on the floor, are nice and sharp while the shadows cast further away like the pillar covering the dead body on the wall, are softer as they should be.

What they COULD have done here is simply used 2 spotlights with 180 degree angles, have them cast regular soft shadows, and achieved 90% of the visuals while cutting the framerate loss down from 33% to about 5%. Rasterization tricks like this are still a far better option for today's hardware. But eventually yes, real-time ray tracing WILL be vastly superior in every measurable way. It's just that we've been stuck with rasterization for so long that developers have gotten really good at coming up with hacks and tricks to cope with the limitations and get close to real visuals, sometimes even better than real because of artistic direction and emphasis.

I am entertaining an extremely pessimistic estimate. In doors we already have real time raytracing that can simulate refraction, reflections, shadows etc. all at the same time but requires an extremely powerful set of hardware and runs around 16 fps.
Next gen consoles and console like subscription systems will natively support some level of real time raytracing, and after that it will only escalate faster and faster.
The worst part is that retards just parrot shit they read online, this isn't about devs being lazy, you can make almost any artstyle better with it and it has some form of use in every kind of CG.

>pajeet getting paid to drum up snake oil for MS
Can't make this up.

>real time raytracing will be viable by 2025, all developers in various media fields including videogames are working towards that.
no they aren't
the only thing we need for real-time raytracing is more powerful hardware, and video game developers have nothing to do with that

looks good :)

All I can interpret from this thread is that people don't want to upgrade to RTX cards because their favorite youtuber told them not to. Well fuck all you poorfags I'm gonna be playing the campaign with RTX on and enjoy every second of it.

engines are being optimized for it you dumb fuck

Shut up NEET

>engines are being optimized for it
what an absolutely retarded thing to say
you can't optimize for something that doesn't exist yet

Hes right though. Resolution, voxel, volumetric particles are more important than your garbage tech killing the Gpu just for trash gimmick like real shadows that no one would notice anyway.
You are bad at your job

Newsflash: We can have all of those, but we have to start somewhere.

or because the 1000 series card they have now is still going strong

RTX doesn't improve anything yet, it's just a way for developers to be lazy. You can have better reflections without it, but RTX is way easier to just slap in your game with no thought.
It has potential, but it will be a while before it's reached.
I'll always, always bring up DOOM gun reflections vs. BF5's. DOOM's look way better and still reflect almost everything around you in a way that makes sense for how grimy and worn the weapon is, despite not using ray tracing. I should just make a fucking webm already.

I can't afford it so it looks worse

2...2060 bros... can I turn it on?

>posted in two threads
Either shill or buyer's remorse

You sound mad

Newsflash : Engineering is about optimization and making choices. You are like those dudes in the 60's who thought that cars would use nuclear energy because ships, power plant, etc. were using it.
You know why games run at 30 fps on console? Because people don't mind playing at 30fps and shiny graphics impress them.
Ray tracing is about killing 25% minimum of your performance just for differences that no one will notice anyway.
Imagine paying a $2000 gpu to play at 1080p.

Prove me wrong

I don't own the tech I don't think is impressive, I couldn't be happier and I'll wait to upgrade.

whatever helps you cope :)

Pajeet is right. Cope harder.

>i bought it so its good

What am I supposed to prove wrong? You didn't post an argument, just an ironic fallacy.
>I can't afford it so it looks worse
Do I prove you can't afford it? What are you asking me to do here?

Reminder that RTX games remove graphical features on purpose.

IE: In Metro Exodus the muzzle flash of the gun only lights up the environment with RTX ON.

Meanwhile both console exclusive games like Uncharted 4 and multiplat games like The Division 2 have it WITHOUT RTX.

Attached: file.png (700x700, 599K)

guys i need help
a 2080 or 5700x for 1440p gaymen?

this poster is low iq

>dude just tax consumer grade hardware to oblivion so we don't have to work lmao
The absolute state of western video "game" development.

lol cope

>Optimization? Why? Just buy better hardware haha

Well neither one is doing ray tracing at 1440p so go for whatever is cheaper.

>dude just cry about consumer electronics on a pedophile support group because my bitch mom won't buy one for me!

The system of the modern alt right lmao

save and buy a 2080ti or wait for the inevitable 2080ti super to come out.

>what are you poor? lol

Attached: consume product.jpg (680x335, 43K)

Hit a nerve? Lol

It better not

Attached: games.jpg (2704x2028, 597K)

People in the 3D modeling industry benefit from expensive hardware, so this argument doesn't really apply here well.

>look in groggy toilet water to see groggy reflection
>turn RTX on
>look in groggy toilet water to see the ceiling in full detail, your entire reflection, and every illumination in the room to brighten the image in the toilet water so you can barely even see the poopy stains anymore
Even if the FPS difference was 0, why would you want to break your immersion with this shit? It's just fanciness for the sake of fancy graphics. It's like those retards who turn cobblestone in minecraft into fucking 4k platinum blocks with shine and wet textures when you just want fucking cobblestone.

>just buy it you bigot

Attached: 14024968-7075597-image-a-15_1558984125972.jpg (634x655, 65K)

>poorfag cope

Your argument is far worse, literally not even relevant to the context of the conversation.

?
That's not how PBR materials work.

>starts a thread coping because he can't afford it

Showed me.

>dude you're just a sheep lol
But I need that hardware power. I'll benefit greatly from this leap in tech.
>still a sheep lol consume consume

Power doesn't come cheap.

Ya and you're just a commie

>wait for the inevitable 2080ti super to come out
This is exactly what's keeping me from buying one.

Attached: 0991195b.jpg (1080x754, 84K)

tell that to NVIDIA

have a 2080ti, it literally does just that in some games.

raytracing feels like it could be cool, but nobody knows what the fuck to do with it yet.

>looks the same
>lose 60 fps just for that

this games looks fun

And that quote is about indulging in trifling pop culture, not expensive hardware, hurr.

lol no it doesn't

Water itself will always reflect light. A turd in the toilet won't reflect any.

Come on, man. I have an RTX 2080, but only because it cost the same as a 1080Ti, the one I wanted to buy, so I got basically the same card with this meme tacked on.
It's the most pointless feature ever in its current form. I literally never use it, it's that much of a joke.
Anyone trying to convince this RTX bullshit is worth anything is literally a sad and pathetic corporate bootlicker.
Do everyone a favor and off yourself.

It's not even real ray tracing.

If you buy raytracing cards now you are retarded.
The raytracing implementations currently available look laughably dull and sterile. Lets give the devs some time to get comfortable with the next gen consoles.

>the entire thread is OP
Take your meds, sweetie. No, not the hormones.

Attached: la creatura.jpg (640x338, 90K)

Your mom isn't real Ray tracing

We're hitting that point where realistic graphics doesn't mean better graphics.

>No! I'm not poor! Y-you're just a tranny!
Cope harder lmao

but it does you nvidia shill

Attached: file.png (756x748, 1.17M)

that was the highlight of the trailer

I didn't say anything about trannies, but if the shoe fits...

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 14K)

>literal shill
kys

It all depends on the exposure levels. Blacks that black can absolutely exist.

That looks soulless

Well, you're not wrong. But I never claimed otherwise.

Are you a goldfish? lol.

Its a testement to how good the artists are that fake lighting where the comparisons of having RTX off show little difference.
You're all forgetting about all the mid to low level devs that can't afford to pay those level of artists getting everything just right.
However, they can slap on RTX and call it a day.
Tick tock rasterfags. Tick tock.

Which side is which?
Sorry I don't have time to read the thread as I have a real job I have to go to.

not him, but why do you have so many pictures of this shit

>falling for yet another nvidia's jewish trick
yikes

Attached: 1516133901731.jpg (2048x866, 128K)

Yep, no such thing as soft shadows. Remember HFTS? Neither does Nvidia. Buy a 2080ti today fellow gamers

Attached: hfts.jpg (1200x675, 190K)

What if it's time to upgrade graphics cards and you don't care about RTX? Should you really avoid them just because of this? In the end 2080 Ti is still the strongerst card you can get, RTX or no, so why would you skip it?

Wow it looks like an oversaturated pic of google maps if it were a Battlefield Heroes map. Totally worth the money, amiright?

>Ray tracing isn't an Nvidia technology
>Rtx is simply the platform they've released this year that has cards that facilitate it a bit better
>But you're a shill for wanting Ray tracing (again, not Nvidia) in your games
What.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=o07aWS7JpeQ&feature=youtu.be

Look at all the paid #rtxon shills for this trailer.
Disgusting.

>Ray tracing
>Nvidia
Shiggy.

>NVIDIA SHILLS ON SUICIDE WATCH
You know, both AMD and Nvidia people recognize raytracing as a meme. This is not a subject that Nvidia fanboys are boasting about. People who actually play the games really don't give a fuck. Even the people with 2080tis only use raytracing once just to look at it (or for screenshots) then leave it off when they actually play due to the performance drain and barely noticeable difference.

Parents won't let him transition until he's out of the house

the point of real rtx is that there is a dedicated chip that does the computations, instead offloading it to the main graphic pipeline

No, I don't identify as animals or made up genders.

I don't, you just type antifa on any image search and you get flooded with these things.

What did they change aside from shadows?

Okay, Goebbels.

my point is we didn't need RTX to get shadows like that before

holy shit you're dumb

You have the memory of one, maybe that's why you're poor ;)

Why are you Yea Forumsirgins so damn retarded?
>Actually simulating light sources accurately is a meme!
Nigger the fuck. Is it because it's Nvidia pushing a platform that is based upon it that you retards are being contrarian little faggots?

such is life

t. retard
Ray tracing is the future, thing is that the amount of processing power you need for everything to be raytraced won't really be possible until 2021 possibly.

It's because RTX is overpriced shite

You posted a picture with less reflective glass than in the screenshot. The pane in the screenshot looks like a perfectly maintained mirror.

Is there an argument in this post?

>hairworks
>On a fucking bald guy
What world have i awoken to?

So, Physix all over again?

my point is that we did unless you want to play at 30fps

soft shadows and reflections are still a meme tho, it's just eye-candy so more kinds will buy the game

>You know, both AMD and Nvidia people recognize raytracing as a meme.
nope
> and barely noticeable difference.
*in games with a dedicated art team that painstakingly and manually created raster effects to match real lighting conditions

that's the joke you autistic wonderkid

Lava, stone and iron ore, why?

Why is the barrel crooked?

Attached: Untitled.jpg (1920x1080, 233K)

A perfectly reflective glass from 1940 in the middle of a warzone.

False. Ray tracing shouldn't even be remotely possible with modern GPU bandwidth, but nvidia found a way with a cut down amount of rays and a powerful denoiser.
Its not our problem you're an ignorant loser.

>Dynamic and moving shadows now need ray tracing
???

Attached: 1565180661303.jpg (800x732, 94K)

Aim assist.

Sometimes a man's barrel curves, it's very normal.

to shoot bullets up

>nvidia found a way

To dupe stupid consumers, yes

Nope. Anything else you'd like to be wrong about?

And how are google maps made? Oh right, with fucking photogrammetry.
Converting gigantic landscapes into 3d is hard to do by hand, you want to try to model literal kilometers of assets by hand?

Mine's perfectly straight though. You might want to get that checked bro.

to compensate for bullet drop

Attached: 200907250911416b6.jpg (1280x720, 443K)

>daft enough to use subhuman terminology as if it's something normal

>actually believes assisted suicide is the only medical usage of hormones
Embarrassing desu

to help shoot around corners

...

If you don't see that the future is ray tracing for accurate lighting, you're the stupid consumer.

Rent free

You're not using your eyeballs. ray tracing is great, Nvidia's implementation of it is overpriced garbage.

depending on the make and model of the firearm, it is part of the locking system. Sigs, and I believe Glocks, are examples of this.

The future isn't today...

Poo in loo

>more automation: good!

kys

Yea, in 50 years. But then, people will have 16k screen, so your garbage tech will always be irrelevant. Video games =/= movies.

Still ain't buying that soulless shit. Just copy-pasta boring geometry. How about mapping like a real level designer and not just waiting for the computer to auto generate it off of google maps eh? Y'know how actual game devs did back before photogrammetry became a thing for game level design.

But i digress, that form of development requires brain power and creativity. Have fun with your flat ass map.

But dude, think of all the work we won't be doing.

Top kek, this is so true. So much for "real life lighting".

Yeah dude, the best maps known to gamers definitely had it generated off of google maps. Right? The future is now!

I am not a game developer you dumb nigger, we are specifically making large scale scans with drones.
Maybe it can be used for flight simulators or something but this is not intended for games, this is literally how stuff like googlemaps is made.

And again, you can not model a country sized assets in feasible amount of time, or are you suggesting we manually model all of earth?

I have an i7 4790k and a 1660ti. What would be the best 1080p 144hz monitor I could grab for under $180? I play a wide range: FPS, RTS, RPGs, TPS, and so on and so forth. I want a monitor that I dont have to worry too much about ghosting when I play Destiny, but not have shitty washed out colors playing everything else.

So you dumbasses could have just got it off of google maps instead of wasting time and money taking pictures with drones...

> floats behind you

Attached: nothing personèl kid.png (1920x1080, 1.9M)

>turning off RTX in Metro Exodus removes almost all shadowing making indoors look like mat_fullbright 1
>"REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE FUCKING DEVS FORCING ME TO BUY AN RTX CARD"
>COD doesn't nerf non-RTX visual quality
>"h-haha NVIDIA shills BTFO!"
Make up your minds retards

Attached: Metro Exodus 5 RT off vs on.jpg (2560x2880, 1.51M)

Looks like a lighting demo of the early 2000's.

The fact, that there is barely anything noticable that ray tracing adds means that it's not actually as significant of a technical breakthrough as people (espeically at nvidia, I guess) would like us to believe.
All it means is that the workaround and fake lights are working just fine. All ray tracing will do is allow developers to be more lazy about it, hell we could possibly end up with worse lighting overalldue to lazyness but now it will require double or triple the resources to achieve the same thing. It will slowly cause the old art of making "fake" lighting disappear, and we won't even have that.

Attached: 1559290235369.jpg (800x1200, 140K)

Wew that sure is pretty. I bet it will run like dog shit though for 90% of people. Last CoD i got was advanced warfare cause i was tricked by threads on Yea Forums that it was good. Ran like total shit

UNLIMITED DETAIL

>exactly like baked lighting, but 4x as inefficient
Whoa... so that's....... the power................ of.......... Nvidia™..............................................................

>0 shadows cast on the characters

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

at that price point you'll have to choose between black smearing (VA) or shitty colors (TN)

>Yea Forums thinks doom 3 shadows everywhere are good
not surprised to be h

Also not baked in :p

>overpriced garbage
you're not paying for RTX, you're paying for a high end card that has RTX support, and what they're doing with RTX is the best hardware can run at this time

>Too young to even know what the shader graphics were like in the early 2000s.

>Dynamic light
>Baked lighting
I knew that AMDrones were tech illiterates since they can't even play games due to inferior hardware and software but wew

But there is no conflict there, don't sabotage the game just to sell rtx and make rtx worth the cost and performance cost.
Where's the issue?

> russsian can't code darkness
> gets paid by nvdiia to use their darkness

Attached: chiki briki.png (617x381, 275K)

>Implying those chimps care
They don't have money to buy anything but an AMD APU so they sperg out about Nvidia.

>allow developers to be more lazy
Devs can't replicate raytraced lighting without pre-baking, and pre-baking requires static environments

When a large part of the marketing is about the card having RTX, yes you're paying for RTX. That high end card supporting RTX doesn't magically come to be.

But Last Light has better shadows and lighting than the top screen, that's the issue, they forwent the things they already did in the older games because of rtx.

Our lord and saviour, John Mose Browning invented the tilting barrel lock for the 1911 pistol. Most major pistols use it (Glock, H&K USP, Sig, others) because it is easy to design and very reliable, and because the barrel moving doesn't affect accuracy too much at the distances pistols get used (inside 25m).

And it's still overpriced garbage ;)

It's like they feed by sucking on brand marketeer's dicks.

Attached: 1552847965007.gif (413x243, 51K)

UE4 uses physx

I don't get your point to be honest.

No, google maps does not have all of the earth detailed and it uses less detailed meshes.
If someone wants specific region of earth digitized he will hire us to create a 3d mesh of said largescale terrain. This sort of stuff is used mostly in compositing for film and all sorts of tourism industry stuff as well as the newest Microsoft flight simulator, though flight sim uses heavily refined and beautified scans.
Do you want a lecture on various uses of Photogrammetry?

No, you're paying for the card. It's your fault if you get swindled by bullshit artists

I don't think a lecture would be able to explain how long it'll take to photogram the vast void that is your rectum.

Do you understand how retarded you sound? All of CGI uses ray tracing, all of it, your 3d animu intro for FF 14 or whatever does so too.
Full implementation of ray tracing is revolutionary and looks objectively better than anything current rendering engines can produce. It is also not lazy and does not limit you because you can do a lot more with it than without it.
You are basically saying
>Durr because of lazy niggers we should not have objectively better tools than the ones we used before.
Everyone including stylized art directions benefit from this.

But RTX restricted games will force people to buy new cards.

You're paying for both, no shit. If you get swindled by Nvidia, it's indeed your fault.

>SHADOWS THAT BLACK DON'T EXIST IN REAL LIFE

Attached: 1541465167481.jpg (500x375, 32K)

>use raytracing to let the light rays from the candle in the scene and the curtained window do the work
vs
>meticulously place light sources throughout the room while artificially killing the global illumination that is happening outside in order to achieve a similar look
You have to be tech-illiterate to think that baking the lighting in a game like this would be somehow more efficient.

How do stylized artstyles benefit from realistic lighting?

I bought one for 4k...

You're pretty dumb

If you don't understand why static environments for the sake of graphics is bad then you're a retard

Well, if it's such a revolutionary thing, and it's such a great tool, the material so far that has shown off its power and uses sure have done a piss poor job at making us see it then.
All I can see right now, is that we get the same thing, with some negligible improvements here and there, but at enourmous cost of resources. The justification I got from this so far was that this technology in return would enable more devs to produce comparable lighting to today's AAA efforts who can hire good lighting artists.
Is this wrong?

>Building a new graphics rendering process that 80% of current tech doesn't support.

I wonder where we're going to get these new graphics cards for this single specific rendering technique from...

It's not realistic lighting, all pre-rendered stuff uses raytracing as I said.
Any reflection, not just in mirrors but the surfaces affecting the color of your character is also done with raytracing. Transparent stuff is also raytracing since transparent stuff basically doesn't work with current "fake" lighting. For example if you would want a character that has a fishbowl with a glowing fish inside of it for a head this would basically be impossible to do without looking extremely ugly.
Look at any cg
>youtube.com/watch?v=-UaGUdNJdRQ
>youtube.com/watch?v=ORFWdXl_zJ4
See the soft transitions between light? How environments actually affect the color tone of the characters? The way semi-translucency works?
All of this is impossible without raytracing.

I'm not a dev or 3D graphics artist so I don't even know what "static environments" mean in your context, sorry.
Again, as a consumer all I see is basically the same thing but cost more resources, but from dev perspective it's good because....??? I assume it makes things easier for them because why else would they stroke their dicks so much over something so negligible.

>make an open world game like Metro Exodus, where time of day is changing, meaning the sun’s position is constantly moving (and the light it casts with it)
>also allow for objects to be moved via physics interactions
In a game like that, you can’t just bake lighting, because too many things are moving or are capable of being moved at any point, which would break the baked lighting. RTX enables a scene to be appropriately lit without worrying about the lighting breaking from something moving.

>objects on table still floating shadowless

There is no justification right now, if you want ray tracing to show off itself look at any CGI in past ten years regardless of how stylized or real it is, it's all ray tracing exclusively.
The issue is that tech is poorly utilized currently and not implemented properly enough. Yes it also allowed realistic games to be more lazy since they can literally simulate realistic light, but those devs were lazy anyways.
The point is that RTX is shit, but this tech in general is the future because it's just a better way to render light.

What most consumers don't hear is that raytracing is not for them. Sure, it's a little prettier. But the real point of raytracing is for developers and compatibility. Traditional lighting systems are insanely complex and time consuming to create (for developers) and also highly prone to bugs, as any long-time PC gamer can attest to. Lights, shadows, shading, all that. It's all volatile and GPU drivers struggle to maintain compatibility with all the games we play.

This is where raytracing comes in. It takes 1/10th the development time of traditional lighting systems, and will eliminate most of those driver compatibility issues relating to lighting. This is why raytracing is the future. It's an improvement to the core architecture of our games that benefits everyone, and has very little to do with the actual graphic improvements. This is just the introductory phase.

I know :(

Why are you dumbfucks so obsessed with RTX? I am not talking about that, nor am I trying to get you to buy it. I am trying to get you to understand that raytracing (not RTX) is the future of video game lighting and that it is absolutely retarded to try to deny it.

>Posts a sóyboy
>When AMD is literally made for sóyboys

Attached: 68187.jpg (1920x1080, 94K)

But Metro Exodus is perfectly playable without RTX, and there is barely any difference noticable, and even then only if you compare side by side.
Sounds nice, but reality shows something else than what you say...

I can't tell the difference. Rather than working on lighting effects and shit like that, these companies should work on handling more polys, more and better physics, and larger, more complex games.

Attached: 1423345472351.webm (720x406, 2.93M)

It also has everything to do with graphics.
I don't understand how you can say that? Look, open any engine you work in, take a semi transparent material and place it behind another semi-transparent mat and see what fucking happens.
Fucking global illumination and reflections look better in toystory compared to most vidya today because of it.

>buying an RTX card

why?

>SHADOWS THAT BLACK DON'T EXIST IN REAL LIFE

Attached: 1517760292316.png (306x611, 216K)

Its an upgrade sure, its technologically impressive that its finally working, and its going to be the standard moving forward now that the technology has become well known in the gaming community.

That all has absolutely no sway on my desire to drop $1000 on a fucking graphics card.

4Ks

But you don't have to buy a $1000 graphics card? I got my 2080 for ~$500. Granted, it wasn't for RTX but because I wanted to upgrade anyway, but still.

Yeah, this kind of happen the more tangent to the glass you look, retard.

Eventually devs will figure out how to use it. But they don’t now, so the in game benefits are not there and it has a massive performance hit.

If you want a high end card you pretty much have no choice but in its current state it’s absolutely not worth using.

Am I the only one here who fucking hates Trump and Nazi?

It’s noticeable. But if you don’t pay attention to details with lighting, I can see someone not noticing.

Attached: 760C424B-E5C7-48D6-8F72-F0C61819A005.jpg (765x765, 136K)

So RTX just turns off shadows? How the fuck do you retards investing $500 and up for your 2000 series cards justify this shit?

Exactly my point. You only notice this shit when comparing side by side.
Therefore, bold comments like this "In a game like that, you can’t just bake lighting, because too many things are moving or are capable of being moved at any point, which would break the baked lighting." have been thrown out of the window when you admit that.

No, it doesn't. Dirty darkened glass doesn't become a perfect mirror with that sort of luminosity, no matter the angle.

Attached: RTX On.jpg (700x700, 83K)

He was talking about this.

Attached: F1137E80-6A2A-4DFF-B060-1BE055607F70.jpg (1358x1358, 181K)

I don't think anybody actually bought 2000 series cards to replace their 1080Ti-s, maybe to 2080Ti, but you can bet your ass it was not because of RTX but the raw power upgrade (that isn't too much admitedly, but the occasional rich fuck can go for it).

Are you retarded?

Currently, RTX seems to be used strictly for better quality occlusive shadowing and water effects. That seems to be it from what we've seen with BF1, MW, Minecraft, and a few other RTX games.

bottom looks better, turn up the gamma a bit

>SHADOWS THAT BLACK DON'T EXIST IN REAL LIFE. The entire point of RTX is to accurately render how light works and get rid of that style of shadowing that feels like an overhang of Doom 3.
you don't get the point (neither the other guy), raytracing on 3D applications have an option to render an adjustable number of maximum reflections per lightray, the shadows on RTX OFF aren't real but the RTX ON's shadows aren't real either, the light from the back has to much reflections on a single lightray that reaches the other side almost as if there is no obstacle, higher amount of reflections per lightray also cripples your GPU in a similar way when rendering frames on Blender

Attached: 1539475447901.png (737x639, 447K)

Are you? Also not an argument.

Either you never left your basement or you're an AutisticManchilD

Give me one good reason to buy a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti.

Attached: 1524794320822.png (700x1200, 400K)

>In a game like that, you can’t just bake lighting
This statement remains true. The lighting in the non-raytraced pic is raw (light from the sun has no bounce, direct light from candle has no bounce, GI radiocity is occurring inside of the building when it shouldn’t), not baked. The other comparison posted earlier also has the same issues. Just because you don’t notice the difference doesn’t mean there isn’t a difference. It’s as foolish as someone saying that 4k is a meme because they don’t see a difference from 1080p.

RT cores are slow as fuck and make the whole graphics card wait for them to process their useless shit

People keep saying i live in a basement, i fucking wish. Seems so cozy but theres no basements here, dig too deep and theres water.

I'm not a dev either, this is basic information, static environments with baked lighting means objects are nailed to the ground which means no physics or destruction or animations and no changing lighting, no changing time of day etc.

It doesn't take a genius to understand why real-time lighting is preferable

Did the devs turn soap into a sandnigger?

Do you want the most powerful consumer graphics card at the moment on the market?

>show comparison with “rtx on/off” in the pic
>“durr, rtx off look better hurr”
Every time.

rtx? More like rtsux

Looking better doesn't mean shit when it's not optically accurate.

I never argued in the first place that there is no difference. I argued that it's so negligible it doesn't matter. Which is true.
And you definitely don't need RTX for that game as evidenced by the comparisons he posted himself that doesn't show anything that your average player would notice at all unless shown on a comparison picture.
So that guy is full of shit.

Everyone comments on op image instead of the video, in video they literally just turn off shadows on for "RTX: OFF" and turn them on for RTX: ON to show rtx is better. Want to have any shadows at all in your game goyim? Make sure to buy new gpu

Just like your mom ;)

God was too cheap to buy RTX card for the universe

Attached: RTXOFF.jpg (315x400, 22K)

Well, who cares if it looks better? The other one that uses meme technology you can buy for $1000, that's what should matter amirite?
Pssht...stupid goyim and their reason and logic, oy vey the life of a merchant is hard.

Hilarious, they put out a comparison video where it looks the same with and without. Yeah, that's gonna make me spend $1000 on an RTX card lmao

And they even paid some pajeets to shill this crap, see:

>bottom looks better
Are you fucking stupid?

>your average player would notice at all
The raytrace features in games right now are for enthusiasts, not average players (hence the price for entry). Enthusiasts notice this stuff. As ray tracing matures, it will be even more noticeable, as all of the features are put to use at once instead of it being piecemeal like it is now.

>direct light with no other crossing light sources causes sharp shadows
Who knew? Damn, you’re retarded.

I like how someone explaining why ray tracing is where lighting in video games is moving is a shill for Nvidia, despite not mentioning it. You fucks are obsessed. Here, chew on this pic and tell me which is better.

Attached: 08351957-6A1A-4BFD-9A2A-0B1ADE3E2028.jpg (1165x1165, 155K)

But they are trying to market this to average players right now. And they are not having it, they are laughing at them and you too.

why'd you take these pics in 240p

It's a gimmick at the moment like Physx was but all modern lighting engines will use this in 5 years and it will just be a standard fucking thing.

Top, doesnt have an obnoxious green box

He's samefagging and most likely posted like 100 times ITT, larping as totally different people. Just let him have his meltdown.

>In a game like that, you can’t just bake lighting, because too many things are moving or are capable of being moved at any point, which would break the baked lighting. RTX enables a scene to be appropriately lit without worrying about the lighting breaking from something moving.
>not even metioning it
>not a shill for nvidia
>when the first sentence could literally be a fucking nvida marketing bullshit complete with RTX™
>you got BTFO, no actually you self BTFO-d yourself with your own comparison
You are a joke. Get out of here.

O B S E S S E D
Ray tracing is the future. No amount of willful ignorance will change this.

>>In a game like that, you can’t just bake lighting, because too many things are moving or are capable of being moved at any point, which would break the baked lighting.

>this is "nvidia marketing bullshit"
not him but are you actually retarded?

Yes, buy my cards goy lol. I’m a secret nvidia shill and no someone that typed RTX instead of raytrace by mistake, given how many times it has been mentioned in this thread.

It is the future, but do we honestly need it? Considering what we have is really good already and according to these official comparison videos no significant improvement can be expected from this, but at the cost of disproportionately increased cost of resources.
This sounds like a bad deal from the average consumer's perspective.

You didn't even bother to read the entire text, did you? Stop wasting my time, and get some reading comprehension before you reply to my comments again.

Full implementation of raytracing is very noticable, partial and shitty implementation by jew Nvidia is a joke currently
Read the thread nigger, the reason why pre-rendered CG renders have better lighting and effects is almost exclusively because of raytracing

I agreed with you though and meant the guy you replied to

>still not a single counter argument for why ray tracing is not better than rasterization

Mistake...riight. Okay retard. Fuck off.

Actually, the effect of RTX on visuals is pretty much irrelevant and a marketing strategy.

The real benefit of raytracing is getting rid of the retarded, hacked together polygonal rendering pipeline, which will save game artists and programmers a shitton of time not having to worry about some dumb technical shit like how polygons are sorted on the gpu, or how to construct game levels in such a way that the fake lighting doesn't look wrong.

They can just do their immediate job of coming up with levels and characters instead of wrestling with technicalities.

It's impossible to explain to these retards that you literally can't have double translucent materials with rasterization. Yea Forums is full of literal brainlets.

But if this is the best they can do currently, then it will be another 10 or more years before we get to the level of those cg movies you are talking about.
What happens until now? Are we really supposed to endure these terrible "improvements" at the cost of everything running like 1/10th of the framerate it would take if it wasn't for this meme technology?
I don't think I want this.

This. RTX is only a partial implementation of raytracing, which is why you have games that have only lighting or only shadows that are raytraced. Nvidia wanted to be first, but to be first without extreme costs, they had to only partially implement it.

ummm

Attached: Capture.jpg (1290x830, 90K)

>partial and shitty implementation by jew Nvidia is a joke currently
it's the only thing that current hardware can run dumbass, video games aren't going to get full implementation of real-time raytracing over night

seriously though.. what's the difference? It might be my poor eyesight (and about everyone's here too) but I don't see a fucking difference.

Attached: 324234565.gif (320x240, 50K)

Paranoid and noargumentpilled

Then it depends on the games you play. Why is it time to upgrade? Is it so pressing that you can't wait 1 year?

Protip: I lied and the top is actually rtx.

Attached: 5E0C0B44-603E-429F-A5F5-BA6DA902A5B1.png (1334x750, 2.15M)

Also, I think RTX is pretty much also irrelevant.
AMD will probably roll out their own implementation, then Khronos group will come up with a standardized specification that everyone will adopt, and that will be that.

>they have to circle the difference for you to fucking see them and even then it's not even noticeable and when it is it's not even a matter of better or worse, it's just different

Attached: dishwashy.jpg (768x576, 64K)

My argument is very simple, and it has been stated many times. It looks just as good, but costs a fraction of the resources required to run. If the end result I'm looking is the same, except when I hunt for pixels and looking at a guided side by side comparison to notice, I honestly couldn't give less fucks how what I see before myself is rendered.

I dont even know what RTX is, i didnt like the box

>what's this user talking about
>watch the video
Fucking hell.

It will not be 10 years, more like 5.
Just chill, no one will force you to buy shitty nvidia hardware at gunpoint.
But there are cool things that people don't realize that can be done with raytracing, for example imagine a real physical light puzzle where you have to use mirrors to activate something etc.
Light becomes actually a real thing in engine.

Wow, amazing, totally worth the 40-60% increase in GPU prices and only being playable on an $800+ GPU.
Sign me up.

>My argument is very simple, and it has been stated many times. It looks just as good, but costs a fraction of the resources required to run. If the end result I'm looking is the same, except when I hunt for pixels and looking at a guided side by side comparison to notice, I honestly couldn't give less fucks how what I see before myself is rendered
This can be said for someone who thinks 720p is just as good as 4K or that no GI is just as good as GI. Not a very strong argument. If this is just your opinion, then okay, I guess.

what kind of nvidia tranny are you? lmao

60p is just as good as 4K.

You aren't seriosly trying to imply and base your argument on the difference between 720p and 1080p and 4K to be as unnoticable as the RTX bullshit you see in these comparisons? Because you are even more retarded than I originally gave you credit for.

>competent ukranian programmers
guess how I can tell you've never looked into stalkers code

your face IRL

Attached: 1556038899159.jpg (680x940, 63K)

Fuck you Robert is based

>SHADOWS THAT BLACK DON'T EXIST IN REAL LIFE

I hope this becomes the next "humans can't see above 30fps".

talented ukrainian programmers get hired by western companies, they don't stay in the shithole to make stalkers and cossacks
that's our main industry - exporting itcucks, manual labour and prostitutes
t. ukrainian

That's actually the backstory of basically every slavic sounding shithole country in eastern europe. The actually talented people go to the west because the pay is like, what 10 times better? and I'm not even exaggarating too much. They would be stupid staying.

>SHADOWS THAT BLACK DON'T EXIST IN REAL LIFE.
so this is the power of Yea Forums...

Attached: IMG_20190805_132338_785.jpg (550x547, 46K)

The point I’m making is that just because your plebian understanding of tech can’t spot the differences doesn’t mean the differences don’t exist.

>buying a card with nvidia tax when you could just get a 5800 xt

remember: raytracing is a meme and next gen consoles use AMD hardware anyway so expect perfectly optimized games for AMD cards and processors

What will you do when AMD cards start running raytracing?

radeon and ryzen are for poorfags while nvidia and intel are for functioning members of the society

Attached: consider.jpg (600x600, 32K)

>and intel are for functioning members of the society
I guess the functioning members of the society love their opened backdoor

And I never doubted that the differences existed, I'm saying that the differences are meaningless, especially considering the amount of resources required to bring said differences about. And I'm not convinced it will change in the forseeable future. And that this will be good for the consumer in the transition period, when we will be forced to use insane resources for miniscule improvements, all the while the old technology will undoubtably be phased out too.

How is this even an argument in the age of Facebook and Google, when your backdoor is wide open 24/7 anyway thanks to these nice people, and you basically open it up willingly thanks to comrade peer pressure?

are they implying that real time character shadows require RTX?

Could they have picked a darker picture. What’s the difference?

So how many years until the price drops enough to care about it?

It's a slider that you can drag across the screen on their website

Now unless you're poor

i cant wait to finally die for israel and murder innocent brown people for israel, in raytraced lightning!!!

desu if muzzleflashes finally casts real shadows that would be neat, killzone 2 is still the only game that got this right

Ray Tracing may have been developed over a long period of time but the rush to have it implemented in console games is only recent. The first games to utilise new rendering tech are always a bit underwhelming because it's a feature that has been layered on top of every thing last instead of used to build the game's visuals around. It'll be a while longer yet until Ray Tracing is used to better and more worthwhile effect.

Ray tracing isn't nvidia-exclusive, AMD is just late to the game.

>so expect perfectly optimized games for AMD cards and processors
Considering how many games use UE4 (an engine that was designed in part by Nvidia, and runs significantly better on Nvidia), good luck with that.

doom 3 was anything but underwhelming, graphically speaking

No, they are demonstrating ray traced shadows, which more correctly cast, diffuse, and sharpen shadows according to the brightness, number, and closeness of the light sources present in a scene.

but Source engine blew it the fuck outta the water

AMD cards could do raytracing ever since 2005

>SHADOWS THAT BLACK DON'T EXIST IN REAL LIFE

Attached: 1565116613455m.jpg (757x1024, 106K)

Shadow is the absence of light. Not the presence of shadow rays. Which is kinda how they are done in normal computer graphics.

>what is the absence of light?????

source engine didn't do dynamic lightning until left 4 dead, 4 years later

It's not just them, though. It's either the talented, shit-together kinds of people, or our equivalent of white trash. I can't blame e.g. Brits for hating Poles, when I was living over there I didn't want anything to do with them either, and I'm Polish.

and it still made Id Tech look like first gen crap

Sprite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>trAshnime

this looks like shit

not really, doom 3 had much better lightning than hl2, everyone agreed on that. but most of half life 2 took place during daytime in lit environments so it wasn't as big of a deal as it would have been otherwise.

No game has taken full advantage of ray tracing yet. Because it will require them to design the game with ray tracing in mind from the ground up. Not just slapping a 1 or 2 of the RTX features into any old game.

The first game that's actually lit by the sun and moon will look nothing like current games. Not like these gimmicks you see. The only game that even comes close right now, is minecraft with RTX. Because they actually use the sun as a light source, with global illumination.

>not really

lol cope

Metro Exodus does this.

And it absolutely looks like current games RTX on or off doesn't matter. That game makes it a really bad example, if you want to argue how much a of a revolutionary technical breakthrough it really is.

It doesn’t actually. It merely raytraces some light sources with some traditional rasterization mixed in. It doesn’t cast shadows, reflect on every surface where applicable, and it doesn’t raytrace sound.

>people falling for gamewerks 2.0
you deserve to be jewed

>Paying a premium for what amounts to slightly better looking shadows in the handful of games that even support ray tracing
Don't get me wrong ray tracing could certainly make games look better but the current half assed implementation with first generation cards is a total waste of money.

Attached: 1496023009117.jpg (260x314, 32K)

>press F to brake padlock

if you think 2004 hl2 lightning looks better than doom 3 lightning you might have had a lobotomy

ray tracing in video games will only leave meme status 5 years from now if not 10

gotta show your respects to the padlock bro

cope

You're like one of those metalfags who won't shut the fuck up about how his wall of noise is good music because it's in 1/16 time signature or some dumb bullshit. Nobody cares autist now put on some Bon Iver or something so I can get laid.

my friend bought an RTX 2080 for some 900€ or something. Not sure about the model/make. First time he'll ever own a high end graphics card.. My friend plays on full hd, his monitor is only 1080p with 60 Hz. I mean he can always upgrade his monitor and stuff but 2bh I think it's kinda overkill for full HD gayming. but still looking to hear all about "OMG BRO, I GOT ALL THOSE FRAMES" Thanks for reading my blog

go back to plebbit you fucking low iq nigger

lol seething

Attached: tenor (3).gif (400x300, 370K)

>come into a thread discussing graphics tech
>get mad that people care about graphics tech
Is this the fabled summerfaggot?

have sex

with you?

Attached: 0ce47ea1448c5cb32bc85e02665e6ad6e3949ab2bba86ee96d740c8a70329cb3.png (740x724, 37K)

What does a programmer have to do with realistic reflections and lighting? Are you fucking retarded? You think they could write a few lines of code and everything would look realistic?

Fucking moron

I'm in the same boat, I'm waiting for the new LG 1440p 144hz freesync monitors to release or read some decent reviews since I don't want to wait a 4-5 years old monitor now.
Until then, it's glorious 1080p 60hz on my RTX 2080

>what the fuck?

Attached: frt.png (795x385, 26K)

god.. that's genius

(you)

>wants 2005 shadows
>it looks better

Attached: 12229707.jpg (445x503, 31K)

ray tracing is a meme for lazy developers who want to just use basic toolkits to shit out games without prebaking anything and offloading the processing costs onto the consumer/player.

You can achieve lighting that Ray Tracing achieves through simple art design.

At least you're filterable

>just bake lighting into your open worlds and games with dynamic environments, bro
Yea Forums is disappointingly tech illiterate.

>what is fresnel

A tripfag being a massive retard, surprising no one

I can see that Raytracing is different (if someone points it out lol) but I wouldn't call it better. I am sure it's accurate, but it doesn't seem to improve the graphics.

based carmack

Because there are no open world games released in the past 10 years that look fantastic, you absolutely require this meme to make them...oh.

Hairworks was literally a anti competition feature.

It bloats models with tessellation fucking up intel/amd GPUs.

Ray tracing exists since the 70s retard.

wait a moment, why isn't the puddle of water reflecting the fire perfectly if raytracing is on? looks like it's off my dude

There are, but raytracing would make them look much better, and the tripfag suggested you can make them look as good as raytracing would by baking the lighting, which is true but would force environments to be static, making this sentiment absolutely retarded.

What a fucktard. There's a huge difference between interior and exterior lighting. Outside, light bounces which lightens shadows and spread the color of objects. You'll never see pitch black shadows outside.

It's amazing how gamer neets know nothing about graphics.

Pretty nice. Is that a mod?

Tomb Raider only traces shadows, not reflections

>vidya still look shittier than fucking pixar stuff from 10 years ago
pixar was using a half raster pipeline until like 2015.

But they already are making open world games that look as good. Don't see anyone complaining about static environments.

The puddle is actually blood, but I don't think RTX reflections are implemented in Shadow, mainly just shadow and lighting effects.

well that's fucking gay

Except that you can't use baked lighting with dynamic lights (flickering lights, lights that you can toggle on and of) and it can't be used in open worlds either.

Why yes, I did purchase a 5700XT instead of a 2060 or 2070 Super. How could you tell?

Attached: 1560314510348.jpg (1024x710, 61K)

Attached: activision pls go.png (873x840, 41K)

Are you fucking dumb? Modern open worlds are made with real-time lighting, which means dynamic environments, and it looks nowhere near as good as raytraced lighting.

>youtube.com/watch?v=-UaGUdNJdRQ
>All of this is impossible without raytracing.
KEK. incredibles was done on a 100% raster renderer.

Oh really now? And where is the proof and comparison video side by side? None? Fuck off retard.

Even worse, it's a bit puzzling since shadows are the only thing rasterization does well enough.

Don't waste your time with fat neets. They don't know shit about graphics, that's embarassing. They're just making up excuses because they can't afford the new tech. Reminds me of 2011-2012 when gamers said that ambient occlusion didn't exist, just because their cards sucked too much to render it.

>gamers said that ambient occlusion didn't exist
To be fair, it still doesn't exist to me, because it's among the first effects I turn off in the settings when I start a new game along with chromatic aberration, depth of field, and the other cancerious shit that I can't even remember now. Oh yeah, motion blur.

You're that tripfag aren't you? Sad

No argument, no proof, only ad hominem now.
Sad

autism

retardation

If you weren’t retarded, you wouldn’t lump SSAO in with chromatic aberration and motion blur. And raytracing’s full implementation will eliminate the need for SSAO.

In their defense, Screen Space AO is pretty stupid.

>And raytracing’s full implementation will eliminate the need for SSAO.
In 2030 maybe, so really, who gives a shit?

>wants proof that raytracing looks better than conventional real-time lighting
can't tell if baiting or actually retarded

>RTX ON -80 FPS
neat can't wait to buy a 500 dollaroo card for this great effect

You are talking about shit that will not exist for another 10 years or more.
We are talking about NOW. About nvidia's RTX bullshit. It's meaningless. And no, just because in it's final form when it won't be a meme 10 years from now it will be worthwile, doesn't excuse this shit. Nobody cares.

>nvideo shilled ((((proprietary hardware only)))) solution for marginal improvements
>couple of games implement it for total gimmicks (simulated liquid blood)
>general GPU accelerated implementations follow later
>proprietary hardware acceleration support dies quietly and is never mentioned again while general compute solutions are still going strong
basically, yeah