>raytracing is placebo…

Home Forums Science & tech >raytracing is placebo…

Viewing 43 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #153999
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >raytracing is placeb…

    • #154000
      Anonymous
      Guest

      regular rasterization has advanced to such a point that it looks pretty close to ray tracing

      for the average person to tell the difference we are gonna have to wait a good few years so ray tracing can actually look noticeably better in games

      • #154011
        Anonymous
        Guest

        the main promise of ray tracing was to make the production pipelines simpler (no more baking and placing probes) and remove dirty hacks (because "it just works"), but the performance is so bad that it doesn’t really deliver on any of that, it’s just a new set of production hassles and dirty hacks. it does enable some pretty cool effects (like stable and good-looking reflections), but that’s about it.

        • #154014
          Anonymous
          Guest

          well displaying graphics relies on dirty hacks to work but ray tracing just requires fewer but right now it is expensive, i dont think ray tracing will be common place anytime soon but in a good few years computers becoming more powerfull and more processing being done in the cloud it will replace regular rasterization

        • #154017
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Raytracing isn’t for consumers, it’s for developers. Prebaked lighting and other tricks already use raytracing during development to achieve similar effects and it takes a lot of time and takes up a lot of effort from developers but the results look really good unless you autistically try to find inconsistencies and shit. For ray tracing, you basically just have to give objects some traits like how reflective they are and whether or not they produce light themselves everything else gets handled by the consumer’s hardware. I predict ray tracing will stay a gimmick for at least another console generation, because developers mostly focus on consoles when they develop games, and the ray tracing capability they have is somewhere around the level of a 2060super, i.e. unusable.

        • #154109
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >>the main promise of ray tracing was to make the production pipelines simpler (no more baking and placing probes) and remove dirty hacks (because "it just works"),
          Yeah instead you just have to hire people who are professionals at lighting sets, as they have to do when making movies with real cameras. Light behaving like real light doesn’t actually eliminate the need for skilled labor.

        • #154218
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >the main promise of ray tracing was to make the production pipelines simpler (no more baking and placing probes)

          >>the main promise of ray tracing was to make the production pipelines simpler (no more baking and placing probes) and remove dirty hacks (because "it just works"),
          Yeah instead you just have to hire people who are professionals at lighting sets, as they have to do when making movies with real cameras. Light behaving like real light doesn’t actually eliminate the need for skilled labor.

          >Yeah instead you just have to hire people who are professionals at lighting sets, as they have to do when making movies with real cameras. Light behaving like real light doesn’t actually eliminate the need for skilled labor.
          Both of you are correct. Even if it doesn’t eliminate a significant number of man hours, ray tracing still eliminates baking and light probes and the limitations they set. You know why so many games nowadays have zero interactivity in their environments? It’s because of these precomputed indirect lighting techniques.

      • #154024
        Anonymous
        Guest

        It doesn’t. Raytraced lighting is night and day different in a dynamic scene. With a static screenshot it’s a bit different since you can have "pre baked" raytraced light.

        • #154028
          Anonymous
          Guest

          shadow maps have been perfected over the last 20 years, the only thing RT can really beat them in is large area lights (which cause a fuckton of noise so you have to blur all the details away)

          • #154031
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Shadow maps always look fake when you have multiple light sources and surfaces interacting. It only looks realistic when you have a preset scene.

            • #154034
              Anonymous
              Guest

              do you mean baking or something? and the number of lights has got nothing to do with shadow map quality (though it does tank performance)

              >shadow maps have been perfected over the last 20 years
              wrong, shadow volumes are better
              they use rays by the way

              woke af, but they were never that widely adopted.
              >use rays
              nah, they very much rasterize the resulting mesh.

              • #154036
                Anonymous
                Guest

                The mesh is projected using rays.

                • #154037
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >rays
                  sure, but not "ray tracing". you extract the silhouette and extrude it far away (there was some homogeneous space trick to do this nicely, but I can’t remember how it works). I guess you can call moving a vertex away from a point using "a ray", as that’s what the point moves along. but shadow volumes require no intersections or anything.

                  • #154041
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    You sound like you have no idea what you’re talking about

                    • #154044
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      I’ve actually implemented the algorithm, seems like you haven’t

              • #154040
                Anonymous
                Guest

                I mean to get shadow map quality comparable to raytracing, you’re going to suffer raytracing level performance, or possibly worse.

          • #154033
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >shadow maps have been perfected over the last 20 years
            wrong, shadow volumes are better
            they use rays by the way

            • #154099
              Anonymous
              Guest

              the main problem with shadow volumes is that they 1) require a second render pass using carmack’s reverse and 2) have extremely sharp shadows. they work really well for scenes with harsh lighting, but aren’t always the most appropriate choice for shadows

              • #154104
                Anonymous
                Guest

                there is the wedge version that produces soft shadows, but that’s more complicated and slower to set up (and probably run) the second pass

        • #154154
          neural9000
          Guest

          Agree. It actually looks dumb and too fancy on screenshots and even gameplay videos, but as you play it yourself, RTX gives you another level of immersive experience
          t. RTX 3090 owner

      • #154072
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Exactly, aside from certain reflecitons with object behind you/out of screen space all the other visuals are almost perfectly "faked" by devs at this point with a fraction of the performance that actual raytracing would require.
        There have been a few games recently where even people from DigitalFoundry thought it was raytracing, but just turned out to be really well done rasterization and overall light, shadow, occlusion placement etc.
        Raytracing can definitely look incredible for certain kinds of games, but they are usually on the more stylized or more linear side.

        • #154073
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >thought it was raytracing, but just turned out to be
          kek, got a link for that?

          • #154080
            Anonymous
            Guest

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggXzxN0-bh8
            At 5:42 they talk about it a bit, i can’t remember the other one, but it was also from a recent tech video.
            Granted Forza looks great overall and creating basicly realtime cubemaps is a great way to pretty much fake raytracing to some extend.

            • #154081
              Anonymous
              Guest

              right, cool. cubemaps are a nice fit for car games indeed, as most of the time you’ll get pretty much the same result as a ray tracer would (well, there’s some error for things that are close by)

      • #154100
        Anonymous
        Guest

        That Metro Exodus remaster looked pretty great tbh, raytracing GI is where the real shit is

    • #154001
      Anonymous
      Guest

      o

    • #154002
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >yeah sis, here’s a blocky polygon world with some slightly more realistic lighting bro
      ok no one cares. show me when nvidia releases the 5090ti which can generate true photorealistic scenes at 320fps 8K and AMD releases the zen 7 architecture which can simulate real life perfectly so I can go off and do dangerous shit in video games while it feels like irl

      • #154004
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >dude, 8K
        90% of people dont even have 4k

        shit’s scrotebrained.

        • #154005
          Anonymous
          Guest

          I need a desktop monitor with the same pixel density as a flagship android smartphone. Even phones have 4K displays nowadays. I want my monitor to genuinely look like portal, a window to another dimension.

          • #154006
            Anonymous
            Guest

            you can’t tell apart 1080 from 4k without staring very closely the screen.

            • #154007
              Anonymous
              Guest

              that’s not true, you might not be able to see the individual pixels, but curved/diagonal lines are way sharper, and you don’t need antialiasing with extreme pixel densities.
              t. has a 1080p monitor right now

              • #154008
                Anonymous
                Guest

                t. placebo scrotebrain

                • #154010
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  Dude the only reason I have a 96PPI monitor is because Windows 7 looks way better on it than if you try to scale the DPI. Plus I only have a RTX 2060 so any higher resolution would tank my framerate.

            • #154009
              Anonymous
              Guest

              id say 4k is the limit on an average screen for a competitive player but 1440p is the max for an average person

              • #154214
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >t. 640kb ram visionary

            • #154066
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Only applies to 22" and under monitors assuming 16:9 aspect ratio. Anything bigger will benefit from 1440p. 4k ideally is for large TVs.

            • #154084
              Anonymous
              Guest

              try playing a game with no anti-aliasing
              if you can see a difference then the density is lower than you can discern

            • #154193
              Anonymous
              Guest

              True. You can’t see above 30fps either, so idk what these scrotebrains are arguing about.

            • #154194
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Eh, my eyesight is shit and i can definitely tell.

              I’m using a macbook air at the moment and the screen res is 2560 x 1600, I can’t tell the different between this and my 4K monitor but I can tell the difference between it and a 1080p one.

          • #154113
            Anonymous
            Guest

            No matter how fancy your screen gets, you aren’t going to be able to escape your crappy life through it.

          • #154142
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Im not asking for much, just want at least 200ppi, 96 is so freaking ugly ;_;

            • #154148
              Anonymous
              Guest

              96ppi is soul

        • #154021
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >new tech bad therefore we should not explore it
          it’s about time to realize how scrotebrained this statement is…
          new techs are ALWAYS trash for a few iterations, there is no exception and if something "new" looks great since day one then it’s not new and you just didn’t know about it and marketing tricked you.
          it’s also how engineers try their hand at something before it become a critical mainstream feature.
          by engineers I’m not talking only about devs but everyone invovled in the pipeline, manufacturers need years and many iterations to streamline the various processes, devs needs years to update softwares, companies need years to plan their new product lines, these products also need to pass various certifications and many more tedious but mandatory stuff.
          you also miss opportunities to discover new by-product technologies, everything you use in your life these days come from cold war race to space, "wasting" money into r&d is more important than relasing wtf normans want.

        • #154083
          Anonymous
          Guest

          90%? Im in the 10%? I thought I was a holdout. 4k is fuckin neato.

          • #154086
            Anonymous
            Guest

            According to September 2021 Steam hardware charts you are actually in the 2.23%

        • #154110
          Anonymous
          Guest

          The push for 8k comes from vr goggles where 8k per eye was indistinguishable from reality

          • #154116
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Is resolution the number one thing stopping VR from being indistinguishable from reality?

            • #154118
              Anonymous
              Guest

              scrotebrains developing for VR not knowing how human perception works is the only reason why VR is not industinguishable from reality

        • #154225
          Anonymous
          Guest

          The human eye can only hear 1366×768 anyway.

      • #154139
        Anonymous
        Guest

        > 5090Ti is released
        > Scalpers bought the entire stock
        > Rest of it went to the mines mining a fork of eth after it became PoS and went to the moon
        > The amd/Nvidia war introduces random bugs when an Nvidia gpu is not paired with an intel cpu or an amd gpu is not paired with an amd cpu
        > Arm became a realistic option for desktops and laptops, and a true replacement to x86
        > Wanna enjoy your new rig? You can pay the gold price and buy Microsoft vr, or pay the data price and buy Facebook vr. There is no viable third option.
        > Mandatory tpm woke af drm means piracy is only possible on Linux and even then you need vms. Amd gpus now have a true edge due to better virtualization and process model support

    • #154003
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Why don’t homosexuals finish their sentences?

      • #154078
        Anonymous
        Guest

        golfcourses

      • #154095
        Anonymous
        Guest

        parole

      • #154207
        Anonymous
        Guest

        It’s not gay if they identify as female. Passing has nothing to do with it.

        • #154209
          Anonymous
          Guest

          I just identified another homosexual

    • #154012
      Anonymous
      Guest

      RayTracing is like nVidia PhysX, it’s cool but will never become a thing and will die off eventually.

      • #154013
        Anonymous
        Guest

        this current iteration might die out, but it will become a thing sooner or later. it’s just fundamentally nicer to work with, it’s not a coincidence that literally all offline rendering is ray traced nowadays.

      • #154015
        Anonymous
        Guest

        physx is still the default physics engine in unreal engine 4 and the OOP default for Unity.

        • #154016
          Anonymous
          Guest

          I think anon was referring to the physical chip. A library having the same name (and even running the same operations) is not quite the same, as you can run it on any hardware.

          • #154018
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Nvidia never had a physical chip. They killed that off as soon as they bought Ageia and rewrite the code in CUDA for GPGPU

      • #154101
        Anonymous
        Guest

        You mean RTX? No shit. Just like physx it’ll end up being hardware agnostic.

    • #154019
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I remember seeing people talk about raytracing as a technique of the future in a textbook, 15(?) years ago. It seems to have advanced dramatically since then, but it still looks like we’ll get ITER up and running before we get proper smooth raytracing for all new games. I find it strange people today seem to think it’s new, or even worse, that a modern company "invented" it.

      • #154022
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Its probably because most people didnt know what raytracing was and that its biggest use back when 20 series launched was in animated films

        Im pretty sure it was just ignorance

      • #154029
        Anonymous
        Guest

        It’s not new, it’s very old and simple, that is one of it’s advantages.

        What is new is being able to do it in real time at an acceptable frame rate on consumer hardware.

        • #154106
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >real time
          >acceptable framerate
          5-10 photons per px at 5-7 bounces per photon, per frame, is roughly the RTX capability at this time.

          If your 30 inch 4k monitor were emitting 7 photons per pix 30 times a second it would be extremely dim.
          A 60w incandescent bulb emits roughly 4×10^18 visible spectrum photons per second,
          If an RTX game were doing RT to fully drive the graphics output, no hacks, no tricks, no raster lighting,
          1.7×10^9 photon per second for the 4k fully RT scene being driven at 30fps.
          That’s 1/1,000,000,000th less light than a 60w lightbulb.

          RT is another hack on top of raster, dude.
          Real raytracing has calculation limits of 10s thousands photons per pixel of a source object and calculates several tens of bounces or up to when the photon would actually disappear,
          And takes as much as 10 hours for a single computer to make just one complete frame, without denoising/AI hacks.

          RTX isn’t going to be any good for a long, long. Long. Long long time and to even suggest it’s comparable to photorealism is an insult.

      • #154074
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Well, most people just don’t give a shit and don’t care enough about tech in games or other things they like to even do a few seconds of resaerch.
        They only start to know about once it gets tons of marketing push like raytracing did with the whole RTX series.
        The main difference though is that now we can get basic raytracing in realtime at 30, 60 or even more fps on consoles or consumer GPUs compared to 1 frame every few minutes or hours in a preset scene.

        • #154077
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >1 frame every few minutes
          it’s not like the hardware ray tracing was that big of a jump though, the best CUDA tracers were pushing over two gigarays per second in simpler scenes.

      • #154236
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >15(?) years ago
        We talked about raytracing in mid 90s anon. It was the hottest buzzword for a while because by then you could do it on your 486 box. Of course it would take a whole day or more to render a 640×480 frame with a couple colorful balls, but it was possible. Plus it was shortly after The Abyss, Terminator 2 and a couple other movies that made it seem like the way forward (culminating, crashing and burning with The Spirits Within, at least in the movie world). It’s funny how zoomers act like it’s a new thing somehow.

        • #154237
          Anonymous
          Guest

          I thought the Abyss and T2 didn’t use ray tracing. Instead they just use some cube map with special surface mapping to make things look shiny. Real ray tracing wasn’t practical in the early days.

          The Spirits Within was critically acclaimed for looking great. It was just a turd of a movie in every other way. ray tracing is used in movies more than ever now. Pixar even use real-time ray tracing so artists can preview lighting without needing to run a full render.

    • #154020
      Anonymous
      Guest

      …o

    • #154023
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >>raytracing is placeb…
      It isn’t, but it might as well be since it’s only available on the most scrotebrainedly overpriced cards and it also isn’t exactly realistic in most games. Every surface is shiny and polished to perfection or everything is covered in puddles and perfect reflections of everything are everywhere.

      • #154026
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Priced out lol

        • #154027
          Anonymous
          Guest

          ?

    • #154025
      Anonymous
      Guest

      raytracing is and was good
      "rtx" is a fad, so is subsampling an image "but with ai"

      • #154102
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >so is subsampling an image "but with ai"
        Not unless devs stop using deferred rendering or people stick with 1080p

        • #154105
          Anonymous
          Guest

          most people don’t use deferred any more though, it’s forward+ all the way (so basically depth prepass for light culling and removal of redundant pixel shader work)

          • #154107
            Anonymous
            Guest

            So care to point any examples? Because all I see is more and more games using vaseline temporal AA shit since MSAA is useless.

            • #154112
              Anonymous
              Guest

              the new doom games. but yeah, it baffles me too why most aren’t enabling MSAA again, it’s a great solution and everyone has the hardware.

              • #154114
                Anonymous
                Guest

                Im pretty sure they are just exceptions nowadays, the developers tried lots of interesting stuff specially with Doom 2016.

                • #154119
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  they’re not the only ones, but yeah, you might be right — it’s not the norm yet, even if newer engines are going towards it.

    • #154030
      Anonymous
      Guest

      […]

      wrong (but nice try, lode is very cool guy)

      • #154035
        Anonymous
        Guest

        they aren’t the same thing, sure. But if you add a reflection to a raycast (or *gasp* a refraction) and viola you have a raytrace.

        • #154039
          Anonymous
          Guest

          oh, it’s this argument. I always found this scrotebrained, and all of the academic publications that introduce the methods just use "ray tracing" and "ray casting" interchangeably. the whitted algorithm (that first handled reflections/refractions/shadows and what LULZ knows as ""ray tracing"") is a specific rendering algorithm, and should be referred to as such.

          • #154042
            Anonymous
            Guest

            The difference between ray casting and ray tracing is that ray casting is a special case of ray tracing where you do 0 bounces. It’s not a scrotebrained argument, it’s a semantic subtlety.

            • #154046
              Anonymous
              Guest

              "Ray casting" as used in wolf3d didn’t have anything much to do with lighting, it was done on a 2d plane as a way to discover distance and thus how many pixels to draw the wall.

              • #154048
                Anonymous
                Guest

                I agree with that, but open up your mind and see that you could use the same technique to render an entire scene.

                • #154050
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  But it’s not really a good way to do that. Even carmack said he should have used a regular rasterization technique for wolf3d but he used raycasting because that’s what he read in a book.

                  • #154052
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    That was before RTX bro

                    • #154053
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      RTX is just used for lighting, not for the actual geometric stuff.

                      • #154054
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        RTX only traces the rays you give it, you can use it to find the geometry from the camera if you want to. games don’t do this because it’s faster to rasterize.

                      • #154057
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Rasterization has always been just a hack, a convoluted complex series of mathematical tricks that get you a pretty decent result in linear time.

                      • #154061
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        it’s just a performance optimization, ray tracing a scene with a regular grid will give you exactly the same image. but with rasterization you can loop over your geometry and accelerate on the rays (pixels) instead, which is pretty smart since their grid structure is implicit and doesn’t change. but yeah, it’s very limited in comparison.

                      • #154068
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        With ray tracing, you can have a near-infinite amount of geometry, especially if it’s non-animated, or the same object copied 1000000000 times. That’s because computational complexity goes up logarithmically. With rasterisation, it increases linearly for every polygon, and you need culling and LOD to keep polygon count under control, and each mesh that needs to be drawn adds CPU overhead. With ray tracing, you can also have non-polygonal models like spheres or cylinders, but I think current RTX hardware only accelerates ray-triange and ray-box intersection.

                      • #154070
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >especially if it’s non-animated, or the same object copied 1000000000 times
                        exactly my point; if it’s animated and non-repeating, building the acceleration structure is still necessarily going to be linear in the number of triangles, and it’s a bottleneck even in the current implementations.

                      • #154121
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Fuck Meme Tracing.

                        >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC5KtatMcUw
                        Why can’t people develop features like what unreal is doing? which is has actual benefits to several aspects of games and cinematography.

                      • #154124
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >20gb for a 5 minute demo
                        "benefits" indeed

                      • #154125
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >m-muh drive space
                        cope chud, its not meant to be consumed, most meshes in that scene aren’t even decimated properly
                        >330 million triangle statue
                        the point is to show off performance, nobody puts that into actual games, except maybe Bethesda

                      • #154126
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        it’s explicitly a part of their pitch that you can just take a "movie quality asset" and put it in your game. so yeah, many are going to do just that. sure, they’ll add better compression schemes, but that won’t remove the issue, just alleviate it a bit.

                      • #154127
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        maybe LULZtards will, every single actual graphics engineer knows what an actual good quality model ready for use looks like

                      • #154129
                        Anonymous
                        Guest
                      • #154131
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Most people in computer graphics agree that representing 3d objects as triangles is not even close to ideal. The bottom line is that nobody wants to work with triangles. They are lossy hard to analyze and hard to manipulate.

                        Ray tracing we can actually display infinitely complex implicit objects that you’d never be able to do with triangles.

                        I have a have a hard time believing triangles will be here to stay in the future of computer graphics

                      • #154132
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Unless you want realtime performance, you cannot, dilate.

                      • #154133
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Look at shadertoy you imbicile.

                      • #154134
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >shadertoy
                        oh, that thing where my laptop cannot handle trivial scene of seawave simulation despite rasterized version working just fine?

                      • #154138
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Have you actually run any of them OUTSIDE of the browsers pozzed sanboxed Environment? They run 10x faster in my experience.

                      • #154140
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Its all running in a GPU chud, not downloading your pozzedware

                      • #154141
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        no they don’t, pure GPU compute doesn’t really change between webgl and desktop. they start up faster and you might reduce some driver overhead, but that’s about it.

                      • #154143
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        They don’t run faster at all. Gas yourself.

                      • #154155
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        He can’t dilate?

                      • #154135
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        indeed, pros model everything in quads. I don’t think SDFs will become the main way to do things, but I do agree that procedural detail is the way to go; for example a Nanite-esque renderer where the small level detail is generated on the fly sounds very feasible.

                      • #154136
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        triangles (and simplices in general) are great mathematically. if you seriously believe in your opinion, i’d suggest learning about how FEM works using things like the galerkin method with things like whitney bases

                      • #154137
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        graphics ain’t FEM tho

                      • #154146
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        i’ll add discrete differential geometry to the pile to, which does diff geo on simplictic surfaces. these tools are used often in simulation and generating computer graphics data

                      • #154181
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        right, it’s surely useful for geometry processing, if not rendering itself.

                      • #154153
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Fuck Meme Tracing.
                        >Why can’t people develop features like what unreal is doing?
                        >[shows off unreal5 raytracing demo]
                        what did he mean by this?

                      • #154059
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Yes, that’s pretty much what I said.

            • #154049
              Anonymous
              Guest

              this would be all good and well, if "ray tracing" was a specific algorithm, but it’s not. people use ray casting, ray tracing, and ray traversal completely interchangeably. trying to convey some meaning by using one or the other is a lost cause; you should just be more specific on what you mean.

    • #154032
      Anonymous
      Guest

      […]

      It’s not new, it’s very old and simple, that is one of it’s advantages.

      What is new is being able to do it in real time at an acceptable frame rate on consumer hardware.

      >it’s old
      that’s exactly what anon was saying, it was always "a technology of the future" because nobody could do it fast enough, not because people didn’t know about it. RT also started dominating offline rendering only sometime around 2010.

    • #154038
      Anonymous
      Guest

      That looks like shit, maybe try using something with more polygons than your IQ

    • #154043
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >those jaggies
      sis pls

    • #154045
      Anonymous
      Guest

      https://i.4cdn.org/g/1633303541468.webm

      Now that the dust has settled and raytracing will eventually win, when can we expect a paradigm shift in the creation of 3d objects? All this juggling around with different density meshes, baking textures, and all that trickery isn’t ideal. Kinda weird that lighting is as real as in the real world when you pour in enough numbers, but the geometry is just a bad approximation.

      • #154051
        Anonymous
        Guest

        this is a different endeavor altogether; see epic’s Nanite renderer for a pretty decent attempt at solving the geometry problem. it’s also in direct conflict with real-time ray tracing, as building the acceleration structure for all that geometry fast enough will become a real problem.

      • #154235
        Anonymous
        Guest

        raytracing’s cost is tiny compared to a more realistic, physicalized model

    • #154047
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Is that one of those ReShade "raytracing" clickbait mods

    • #154055
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >ITT Nvidia shillthread

    • #154056
      Anonymous
      Guest

      if it wasnt placebo why can you still see rtx in pictures without rtx gpu

      • #154058
        Anonymous
        Guest

        plz elaborate. one thing is that some of the last non-RTX gpus got a driver update that lets them do ray tracing in software with the same API as the hardware implementation, but the performance is absolutely horrible. so you can render the same things, but at 2fps or something.

        • #154060
          shut up
          Guest

          shut up

    • #154062
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Jesus freaking Christ none of this shit matters guys

      I dont give a FUCK about how accurately the scrotes can simulate light. Gimme a game that’s actually worth freaking playing Jesus

      • #154064
        Anonymous
        Guest

        I agree, but I also just like graphics for their own sake. It’s a fun thing to program and the results are pretty and nice to play with.

      • #154103
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Once raytracing become the norm then maybe devs will stop putting so much effort in graphics and go back at the gameplay. Nah, who I’m kidding.

      • #154111
        Anonymous
        Guest

        This

    • #154063
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Why instead of undersampling DSLL, don’t they invest in training an AI to convert regular rendered input > raytraced output?

      • #154067
        Anonymous
        Guest

        it’s relatively easy to interpolate between pixels, but it’s pretty difficult to extrapolate what a reflection should be like if the reflected thing isn’t visible in the camera (and often they aren’t, that’s why screen space reflections fail)

        • #154069
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Ok, but all that ambient occlusion and radiosity could probably get a damn good approximation. Just make an engine that renders it in a simple style with reflections (in glass/water only, where it’s most noticeable) and have the AI handle the rest.

          • #154071
            Anonymous
            Guest

            sure, stuff like that exists right now, for example: https://theorangeduck.com/media/uploads/other_stuff/nnao.pdf — it’s just not that easy to come up with shit that isn’t there in the image.

            • #154076
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Thanks, didn’t know. I feel like this should get more marketing than DSLL shit.

              • #154079
                Anonymous
                Guest

                I kind of agree, but these are more engine level things as they actually change how the stuff looks, they’d need unity or unreal to start pushing them I guess. oh, you might also enjoy this one: https://nvlabs.github.io/GANcraft/

                • #154082
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >oh, you might also enjoy this one
                  I DO enjoy this one! Imagine some old school Flight Simulator running thru this?

                  • #154085
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    Yup, it’d be cool for all kinds of simple rendering styles if you could make it generic enough

                    • #154089
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      Yeah, but I wasn’t even thinking in generics. If some company made a game with the hardware demands of old timey flight sims and run it thru a specialized AI like that guy did for minecraft but for their game. Think picrel level of hardware requirement + whatever the AI needs.

    • #154065
      Anonymous
      Guest

      If you tried that level of tray tracing with actual textures and complex geometry you would get like 5fps on a 3090 at 4k

    • #154075
      Anonymous
      Guest

      […]

      You misspelled 70s

    • #154087
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Yes or No
      Does true ray tracing fully eliminate polygon clipping?

      • #154088
        Anonymous
        Guest

        What do you mean by clipping? But probably not, it doesn’t remove any of the precision limitations of rasterization

    • #154090
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Why did you post a picture of SDFGI, which is not raytracing?

    • #154091
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Do i need a raytracing card to see what op is seeing?

      • #154092
        Anonymous
        Guest

        It’s a test screenshot for Godot Engine’s future SDF-woke af global illumination, which is not raytracing. Hence the low-poly models and lack of anti-aliasing.
        https://twitter.com/reduzio/status/1444736520787832833

        • #154096
          Anonymous
          Guest

          > Hence the low-poly models and lack of anti-aliasing.
          I don’t think either of these is actually a limitation of sdfgi? Tho not sure, juan still hasn’t explained how it works

    • #154093
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I’m not seeing anything there that can’t be accomplished without raytracing.

    • #154097
      Anonymous
      Guest

      technology cannot create good design or taste

    • #154098
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >raytracing is important for VINEO GRAMES
      >best selling game of all time is about breaking/stacking cubes covered in low res textures

      raytracing is a marketing gimmick and contributes literally nothing to how fun a game is or isnt.

      stop beating off to accurate reflections

      • #154115
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Raytracing unironically worked best in said cube stacking game though.
        The dynamic nature of the world meant ray tracing was the only way to get shadows, reflections going.

        • #154120
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >what is shadow mapping
          >what are screen space reflections

          • #154122
            Anonymous
            Guest

            we never had shadows before raytracing sis, its just not happening

    • #154108
      Anonymous
      Guest

      is that meant to look good?

    • #154117
      Anonymous
      Guest

      rasterization can produce a better looking realtime scene at a fraction of a cost

    • #154123
      Anonymous
      Guest

      It looks pretty good tbh
      https://youtu.be/NbpZCSf4_Yk?t=1010

      • #154229
        Anonymous
        Guest

        muh dick

    • #154128
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Ray tracing is pleb
      FTFY

    • #154130
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Whoever took that image thinks anti aliasing is placebo

    • #154144
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Technically games like Half-Life 2 and Mirror’s Edge were using ray tracing years ago. That’s much of why they looked so good for their time, and why modding RTX in those games doesn’t show much of an improvement.
      The difference is that they did the ray-tracing at map compile and then generated a static lightmap. It looks like ray-tracing but it only works when the environment is all or mostly static. If you want to do something like a day/night cycle or a fully dynamic environment such as Minecraft it’s no good.
      Modern RTX/DXR is just able to do it in real time as opposed to taking several minutes for a single frame.

      • #154145
        Anonymous
        Guest

        most games in the past 15 years do light mapping. it’s limited to not only static, but DIFFUSE objects — you can’t have mirror-like reflections (or slightly directional like a glossy floor) since they change with the camera view.

        • #154147
          Anonymous
          Guest

          creating a mirror is trivial scrotebrain

          • #154151
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Show me your baked mirrors o great genius. I mean when you want every surface to be reflective as with proper precomputed GI.

            • #154156
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >every surface
              scrotebrain

              • #154157
                Anonymous
                Guest

                He’s right; fake mirrors are very restricted.

                • #154159
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  Fake mirrors don’t move dipshit

                  • #154161
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >>fake mirrors are very restricted
                    >fake mirrors don’t move
                    exactly…

              • #154158
                Anonymous
                Guest

                Creating a single mirror is easy yes, we had that in the 90s. The point is that for a baked GI, any surface can be a glossy reflector which makes it very difficult to store since the result is view dependent. Do you understand now or do I have to hold your hand a bit more?

                • #154160
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  It is trivial, any scrotebrain who knows how cube mapping works can figure out how to make it dynamic.
                  Is it computationally expensive? Rendering 6 times probably is
                  Is it hard to reposition a camera and render a part of cubemap for the reflection? Maybe if you’re mentally ill.

                  • #154162
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >6 times
                    6 times per object*

                    • #154163
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      if you aren’t scrotebrained its less

                      >>fake mirrors are very restricted
                      >fake mirrors don’t move
                      exactly…

                      >uhh I need a moving mirror because I just do okay?

                      • #154165
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Moving is not the only restriction fake mirrors have. The more you have in the same room, the more resource intensive they are and it doesn’t scale linearly. They also perform worse in larger rooms than small rooms.

                        There is a reason most fake mirrors are in small bathrooms.

                      • #154167
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Where else do you need a mirror? Are you trying to build a chud simulator where you need to reapply your cried and licked off lipstick after every human interaction in a densely packed urban area?

                      • #154168
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        You’ve dropped the pretense of pretending we are wrong.

                      • #154169
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >haha reflections
                        show me a game where it actually makes use of reflection and refraction in its core gameplay and I will admit that you’re right

                      • #154170
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        I never said mirrors are important to gameplay. I said fake mirrors have numerous restrictions. You’ve admitted that I’m right.

                      • #154171
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >fake mirrors aren’t important to gameplay
                        >mirrors aren’t important
                        >anything to do with mirrors is not important
                        >mirror restrictions are not important
                        >b-but I am right because I am okay?

                      • #154172
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        I never said that unrestricted mirrors are important to have. The only game I play is minecraft, and it doesn’t even have fake mirrors unless you build one yourself. You read too much into my comments, and perceived claims which I never actually made. You need to take your meds.

                      • #154173
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        We’re talking about rendering, anon. We just want our shiny images, it doesn’t matter what games need or don’t need

                      • #154174
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Making up things people never said so I can "win"
                        incidentally almost nothing in 3d graphics is "important". Anything that’s important gameplay wise can run on 2002 hardware. Everything else it just shiney shit.

                      • #154175
                        Anonymous
                        Guest
                      • #154176
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        You seem to be very upset about things no on is claiming.

                        meds

                      • #154177
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >>then use ray marching,
                        Why would I do that?
                        > ray tracing IS a meme
                        I just told you I only play minecraft, I don’t use raytracing. I don’t even have an nvidia GPU, I play on linux with an integrated laptop GPU. I don’t give a shit about ray tracing. I haven’t said a single damn thing in support of ray tracing. The only thing I claimed is that fake mirrors are restricted, which is factually correct and you’ve admitted as much. You seem to believe that I’ve claimed "and therefore raytracing is good", but I didn’t. If you believe I said anything like that, you must have hallucinated it and you need to take your meds.

                      • #154179
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        read OP scrotebrained chud

                  • #154166
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >6 times
                    6 times per object*

                    if you aren’t scrotebrained its less
                    […]
                    >uhh I need a moving mirror because I just do okay?

                    Most modern car games do exactly this in order to archive ray-traced looking reflection on the main car. It’s expensive, but for the reflection for the players car it’s worth it.

      • #154149
        Anonymous
        Guest

        One thing I noticed in Portal 2 is that moving objects were reflected in water with very good reflections (presumably not screenspace reflections, since they didn’t have noticeable artefacts or disappear when they weren’t on the screen).
        I haven’t seen an explanation for how they were done. Can’t have been ray-tracing since they were not-static, right?

        • #154150
          Anonymous
          Guest

          portal 2 already has multiple cameras for portals and wheatly tv’s, wouldn’t be suprised if they had another camera for a couple key reflections

          • #154152
            Anonymous
            Guest

            So they just basically just render the scene again from the position of convergence of the red rays here, culling the water and apply some shaders to it?
            Sounds expensive, but I guess you can only render the dynamic objects and use the cube maps for the rest of the scene.

        • #154230
          Anonymous
          Guest

          portal 2 already has multiple cameras for portals and wheatly tv’s, wouldn’t be suprised if they had another camera for a couple key reflections

          So they just basically just render the scene again from the position of convergence of the red rays here, culling the water and apply some shaders to it?
          Sounds expensive, but I guess you can only render the dynamic objects and use the cube maps for the rest of the scene.

          Source games use planar reflections for water

      • #154215
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Static lightmaps have been a thing since quake 1, but like it’s name implies its only a static snapshot of a single moment. If you want time of day changes you have to add multiple static bakes, and lights and shadows are not dynamic, you can of course fake all that shit with "technology" but even the basic raytracing available now is a huge step forward in simplyfing the process.

        This tech is for artist and techies to the average gamer it means nothing. Just like they don’t care if the game has static or dynamic lighting.

    • #154164
      Anonymous
      Guest

      This isn’t even raytracing

    • #154178
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Raytracing is a very devious scheme between devs and hardware manufacturers.
      It’s advantageous to devs since they no longer needed to spend time and therefore money on making the game look good. The cost is offloaded onto the consumer who will in a few years have no choice but to buy a new GPU that does raytracing.
      The answer is to just stop playing video games.

      • #154180
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Raytracing is woke af in movies though. If not for raytracing we’d never have Kino shit like Cars 2.

        • #154192
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >If not for raytracing we’d never have Kino shit like Cars 2.
          Cars 2 is really a cinematic masterpiece for you? Are you 12 or something?

          • #154195
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Are you 12 or something?
            Lol, I’m 35. Bet you feel stupid now huh?

            • #154199
              Anonymous
              Guest

              No, I don’t, since there’s no way of knowing if that’s the case or not and I don’t consider a sequel of some dumb fun movie for kids a cinematic masterpiece. And you do while supposedly being 35.

              • #154200
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >And you do
                That’s because I’m smart and you’re an dumb

                • #154206
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  No. That’s because I’m smart and you’re dumb. Quality discussions to be had with you man, great stuff.

              • #154223
                Anonymous
                Guest

                he’s making a joke. you really do have autism, huh.

                • #154226
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  As if you can be sure at this point with the unironic Apple shilling and all the rest of the crap.

      • #154182
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Raytracing is a very devious scheme between devs and hardware manufacturers.
        >It’s advantageous to devs since they no longer needed to spend time and therefore money on making the game look good.
        I think it’s a not a scheme, I think it’s a scam. Specifically hardware manufacturers scamming both developers and users at the same time, by trying to gaslight both into believing that raytracing is the future. They tell developers that raytracing will save them money, which I believe is false for reasons stated here:

        >>the main promise of ray tracing was to make the production pipelines simpler (no more baking and placing probes) and remove dirty hacks (because "it just works"),
        Yeah instead you just have to hire people who are professionals at lighting sets, as they have to do when making movies with real cameras. Light behaving like real light doesn’t actually eliminate the need for skilled labor.

        Having physically accurate lighting does not solve the problem of needing an artist to design the lighting of a game level or cut-scene. Movies shot with actual cameras picking up physically accurate light still need somebody to design the lighting of a scene. It’s not a trivial job, and when done by an amateur it usually results in a movie that looks like ass. The same applies in raytraced video games; physically accurate lighting doesn’t magically give you aesthetically pleasing lighting. So game studios are not going to save any money with this.

        Secondly, they are scamming gamers by promulgating the myth that higher fidelity graphics correlates with having more fun. It’s the same bullshit as curved TV; a transparent ploy to sell more hardware by hyping some new bullshit.

        read OP scrotebrained chud

        I’m not OP you insufferable scrote. OP’s claims are not my claims. Take your goddamn meds.

        • #154183
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >hurr durr rasterized mirrors suc
          >hurr durr I’m not OP
          they do their job, dilate

          • #154184
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Meds. I didn’t say they suck, I said they are restricted.

            • #154186
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Not restricted enough to matter, dilate

        • #154185
          Anonymous
          Guest

          I think the developer time-save point is somewhat true; the artist can focus on the lighting, instead of having to deal with lighting AND the technical limitations of whatever algorithm he’s using to produce it (as long as there are fewer limitations, which would be the main promise). as a concrete example, in older 3D movies reflections were handled with manually placed fill lights, and now that they path trace most things, they can just skip that step.

          • #154187
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Instead with raytracing, they’ll be fighting the lights trying to find ways to have their cake and eat it too; e.g. making the light behave in unrealistic ways because their desired aesthetic differs from the physically realistic.

            Not restricted enough to matter, dilate

            I never said it matters. Raytracing is a scam and doesn’t matter. Take your schizo meds.

            • #154188
              Anonymous
              Guest

              yeah, that’s true if you want non-physical stuff. and with the current implementations the perf isn’t there so you’ll have to do all kinds of hacks anyway.

            • #154189
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >making the light behave in unrealistic ways because their desired aesthetic differs from the physically realistic.
              you know you don’t have to make every light use raytracing. You don’t have to use raytracing at all.

              Raytracing is used basically for everything in movies. It’s only logical when it becomes computationally feasible it will be used pervasively in games.

              • #154190
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >you know you don’t have to make every light use raytracing.
                Which means game developers need to retain people with non-raytracing skills anyway. It doesn’t save money. Not now, and I doubt ever in the future. If it really saved money, then there would be a groundswell of games developers adopting it to save money. I don’t see that happening.

                • #154191
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  it will, once the performance is good enough. but that might take a while, or just never happen.

                • #154196
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >Which means game developers need to retain people with non-raytracing skills anyway.
                  Imagine for a moment that people with ray tracing skills also have non-raytracing skills.

                  • #154198
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    that’s literally impossible, once you learn ray tracing the rasterization knowledge just spills out of your head

                  • #154204
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    you think that’s free?

                • #154197
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  raytracing doesnt require a different skill set

    • #154201
      Anonymous
      Guest

      congratulations on having a worse discussion about raytracing than LULZ usually does you braindead scrotes

    • #154208
      Anonymous
      Guest
      • #154210
        Anonymous
        Guest

        is that even ray traced

    • #154211
      Anonymous
      Guest

      notice how the games people use to justify memetracing are always things like Minecraft or decades-old games like Quake with extremely rudimentary lighting. Baked lighting has advanced significantly and looks very good but does not have the ridiculous demands of raytracing. But raytracing would make the job easier for the devs because lighting gets semi-automated, so they’re pushing for that. Even if it means the end-user has their framerate slashed in half. Fuck that.

    • #154212
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Why would I want to see retraced lighting with some ugly low poly design with no textures? That image looks objectively worse than a video game from the 90s.

      • #154213
        Anonymous
        Guest

        *raytraced

    • #154216
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Can’t get the video under LULZ’s file size limit without looking like arse, so had to upload it to Streamable.

      https://streamable.com/fm60g1

    • #154217
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Simple ray traced and rasterized scenes are basically equivalent (as long as they don’t involve reflections).
      What you’re thinking about is called "global illumination".
      Path tracing is one of methods to achieve it.

      As always LULZ is all just larping scrotebrains repeating superficial "knowledge" learned from marketing materials and other clueless LULZtards.

      • #154222
        Anonymous
        Guest

        "RTX" games aren’t path traced except for tech demos like Quake II RTX. It’s accurate to call them "ray traced" because the primitive operation that RT hardware accelerates is finding the point where a ray intersects a volume (tracing a ray).

        For example, some games just use RT hardware to accelerate soft shadow mapping by tracing rays from each fragment to each area light. They aren’t path traced, but they are using ray tracing.

    • #154221
      Anonymous
      Guest

      holy YIKES looks just like real HECKIN’ life I have to CONSOOM

    • #154228
      Anonymous
      Guest

      > Uses the power of a small star to do ray-tracing in real time.
      > can’t afford anti-aliasing.

      • #154231
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Anti-aliasing is no longer necessary with supersampling.

        • #154232
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Anti-aliasing typically is just super sampling.

        • #154233
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Anon, super sampling is an anti aliasing method.

        • #154234
          Anonymous
          Guest

          you mean SSAA? lol

Viewing 43 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
startno id