Is ray tracing a big deal to you?

The PS5 isn’t a great showcase for raytracing. Neither new console handles it well. The RTX 2000 series and beyond all do it better. I wouldn’t be surprised if the consoles kinda abandon it in the near future. Ray tracing and 120fps on the consoles will be an afterthought in a couple years. Hell, native 4K is less of a bullet point than it was when the Xbox One X launched in 2017. These are things the consoles won’t do well. Not at their price point.

Don't give one shit about ray tracing.

Nice to have and with a 3080 I look forward to using it moving forward.

As long as it doesn't chug the fps below 60 then having more accurate reflections and shadows will only enhance the experience.

Seeing as the best selling console is the Switch and some of the most popular games currently offer very simplistic graphics, it really is a niche of a niche.

I honestly don't care. And I would trade ray tracing for higher performance, or higher resolution.

Quite debatable, since my RTX 3080 will be delivered next month, lol.

Anyways, i'm pretty sure console fanboys will tell us how irrelevant it is, because neither of those cheap plastic boxes can bring good results.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Nope. Whenever it's not very taxing on hardware anymore and therefor in my games, I guess I'll go "huh, that's pretty cool" then. No rush. Not worth it right now.

Don’t care when it tanks fps by 60%.

Pretty much this, Raytracing on the PS5 is only done for certain things. On Spider-Man MM it's only done on windows and selected floors. On cod it's done on wet patches on the ground, some static objects and scopes. (there are probably more things in game it's just what I noticed) It's not the full thing in the slightest. I tried it once with my 1060 on control even though I only got 1fpm lol It was such a huge difference in over all quality. Must be fantastic at stable 60fps.

When fully implemented, it's great. But devs have gotten really goid at emulating it so I would not say a must have by any means. Indeed, graphics in general are great, but not my top priority.

But for the skeptical - Control has many moments where RT on max shows how much of a sense of presence more realistic lighting can imbue.

Not really. It's nice to have, but I feel that we're still years away from it being incorporated into gaming graphics seamlessly. For now it just seems more like a novelty item.

On PC, "It's a nice to have" when you have the proper specs to use it's full potential but on next-gen consoles, not so much.

It's great to have. As someone who couldn't care less for native 4k, the ideal scenario for my 9th gen games would be 1440p60 with some form of ray tracing.

It is what makes games next gen. Look at CP2077 with and without RT. The difference is night and day.

Seconded. ;)

It's not really needed at this point, as it sacrifices other factors such as frame rate and resolution.

Some argue that ray tracing can change gameplay, such as reflecting off-screen enemy shadows. That's not wrong, but developers can program a similar effect without using ray tracing.

Oh good lord I swear every time a new graphics technology advancement is made we get the same threads.

"MY POS shiny box or dated PC can't do proper ray tracing with stable framerates therefor ray tracing is a gimmick/waste of time."

Stop it, give it a break and enjoy the games. People like you and the little "BUT I still play Pong" hipster c*nt muffins need to understand that regardless of what comes next there is always something new to push graphics.

You guys are under the impression that if it wasn't for ray tracing ALL games would be 4K/120FPS.

Dirt 5 drops to 900p in 120FPS mode and looks worse than Forza Horizon 4 on both consoles in a mode that doesn't use Ray Tracing.

If it wasn't ray tracing developers would still find something to push graphics further to use up all the power they can and hit a steady 30FPS its really that simple... You don't buy a new console every 5-6 years to play the same looking games at higher frames and resolution! You want newer graphics that weren't possible before.

Graphics will keep going forward unlike your IQ's which have clearly peaked when the X360 launched.

The new consoles won't implement it will and will take away a ton of framerates, it's basically useless on them. Even on Nvidia cards, it's only worth it if the game supports DLSS 2.0, which about half of new games do. AMD can't do raytracing well at all, what the console GPU's use. My issue with raytracing is I barely see any improvement, with the exception of reflections and even then it's not worth the FPS hit. I have a 2070 Super GPU and on games that have DLSS 2.0 I would say it's worth it, not on games that don't.

FPS is better than shiny mirrors everywhere.

@npiet1: "(there are probably more things in game it's just what I noticed) "

The majority wouldn't notice.

It’s pretty noticeable in COD shadows when you toggle it on/off. I know it’s recommended to play with it off on weakboxSX since it’s bricks the console lol

have not tried it yet so I do not know but I imagine in a linear story game it will look nice, but I am not sure about any game where there is alot of active motion as I think it will tank the framerate (first person shooters, spiderman, gears, etc)

Certainly nice to have but not terribly important to me if it affects the game performance too much.

I don't really care about RT. I'd rather see a boost in poly count. UE5...where forth art tho?

Ray tracing is just hype. The samples are too low and the performance hit is too high. DLSS is the only tech that makes it viable and still you need frame by frame comparison to appreciate it.

I care about it a lot in the high end PC space, care a lot less when it comes to consoles.

Bu buh but, next gen. 😥

It made Control look like a whole new game. Adds tons of depth to Watch Dogs: Legion as well. Ray tracing would suck without DLSS, however, because it does kill framerate pretty badly. Quake RTX was pretty awesome, too.

Looking forward to it in Cyberpunk 2077.

Nope. Not compared to something like VR.

Spider-man: MM is next gen beyond what PC can do. If PC could run it, you would be able to buy it on pc.

Everyone will give a shit when it becomes the literal standard, which is not wishful thinking but rather a completely inevitable evolution of computer graphics.

Heard the same excuse about lighting and specifically realtime dynamic lighting for almost a decade.

I think ray-tracing will be in almost every game in the near-ish future, but right now I can't justify the cost + performance hit. Not many games even support it, and the ones that do are often boring AAA games I'm not interested in anyway. I was tempted to get a 3000 series card, but now that they hype has died down I can see it's sensible to wait and see what the next series of RTX cards are like. My 1080TI is more than adequate right now, I'm pretty happy gaming at 1440p at 60+ FPS in the majority of games...

It's nice to have but to me having more realistic faces is more important so sick of plastic looking faces.

definitely a nice to have but not a deal breaker.

as i said in another thread: Ray tracing is kinda odd because, at the end of the day, when its being used properly you shouldn't realise its being used at all. everything should just look correct and awesome.

it will be interesting to see how its implemented in games in a few years. the PS5 and XSX are...well...not great at it. the RX 6000 series is also not great. the RTX 3000 series are better but the performance hit is still hefty.

at the end of the day its just another tool in the tool box and i think thats how devs will treat it going forward for this gen. They may use it to clear up weaknesses in current tech (Screen space reflections could certainly use the assist) and generally just take a lighter approach to its use. it could also be used in combination with the tech crytek demonstrated with the RT cores being used more subtly to clear up weaknesses in that tech.

if they could even do that though that would be great. SSR annoys me.

i think long term the goal is to replace rasterisation with RT completely but thats a long long way off.

But you need raytracing to get there. How light scatters through the skin is complex compute.

Yes and no. It's something I definitely want going forward, but in a practical manner. I didn't even bother using it properly with my 2080, because lol.

I finally have a rig that can handle RTX really well and maintain a steady framerate. It is really cool looking... but totally pointless. I would not miss it one bit if it was gone.

DLSS is a much bigger deal to me... ai sampling really improves performance.

More than likely it will be that option people turn off for performance.

Which we are already at, really.

Dont care one bit

My GPU doesn't support RT so in turn I don't care about it. :P

In all honesty though, it's a nice to have. It does look cool but it's far from a game-changer.

meh, its kind of cool some times but not a big deal. The radeon 6800xt does it at the level of the 2080ti, but its raw performance is above the 3080. I'd take the 6800xt with the extra 6gb of vram over the 3080 and better raw performance but with decent ray tracing performance.

Good point.

I don't really care, but checked "It's nice to have." It's pretty, and pretty things are nice, but not a necessity.

...Literally no chance.

Almost every 3D game in 10-15 years will be built for raytracing, with it being something that you cannot fully turn off, except for certain aspects like raytraced reflections.

I find its general appeal here is directly proportional to how well one's console of choice does it.

Personally, couldn't care less. There is not one time in my life where I've sat down to play a game and thought "Boy, this game would be good, if it only had ray tracing!!!"

Yes for the long haul. It'll greatly decrease the work done on traditional rasterization technique by making shading, GI, reflections become real-time, hence, faster development time instead of traditional light baking.

But right now, it's shit on console, and just okay on PC.

lol no.

It's that bit of parsley garnish chefs sprinkle on your plate so they can charge you 20 dollars instead of 15 for a plate of pasta.

Looks nice, but it's not worth it.

We will see what the future holds, though; I am always optimistic about new tech, even though it tends to be turned into a fad or gimmick at the start.

Going AMD this time screwed over both Microsoft and Sony in this factor. AMD is a generation behind Nvidia in hardware accelerated ray tracing and the consoles ray tracing capabilities are worse than the RTX 2060 Super which is second to bare minimum needed to do ray tracing on PC with first generation Turing. It also doesn't help that they don't have any solution like DLSS to significantly reduce the performance hit without sacrificing image quality so they're even worse than a RTX 2060 when you factor that in.

The PC is going to have a serious lead in ray tracing by time we're half way through the gen. Seriously they'll have to hope that games don't heavily use RT and support DLSS or else even future budget Nvidia cards like the 3050Ti will be able to swim laps around them despite not being as powerful in rasterization. I wouldn't be surprised if Sony and Microsoft make mid gen refreshes with significantly improved ray tracing performance being a priority. Image first party Sony developers won't use it outside of very limited ways like they currently are doing and will instead focus more of that power on trying to make the best baked lighting and shadows they can.

This.

and on top of that. that ray tracing is the crappest version to.

if you really want to know what perfect ray tracing is. look at the white suits in avengers movie. that all cgi!. they had to use multi render farms to do that.