13 ms·
Of course, but at least now you have the ability to render it. "Black Ops 2" made $1B in 15 days, so some studios already have this budget, so they should be ab
by crote 7y ago
Of course, but at least now you have the ability to render it. "Black Ops 2" made $1B in 15 days, so some studios already have this budget, so they should be able to make use of it.
As for smaller players? Personally, I'd be interesting in procedural generation, or just modelling NURBS surfaces. And have you seen the demos of raytraced Minecraft / Doom? The highly advanced lighting already makes it look way more detailled, even with a low poly count. Even low budget games will be able to make good-looking games.
- fxtentacle 7y agoThe Doom+Raytracing pictures look great, but I believe they are fake https://www.dsogaming.com/news/doom-rtx-released-mod-bringing-real-time-ray-tracing-to-the-classic-doom-game-via-the-vulkan-api/ https://www.dsogaming.com/news/doom-rtx-released-mod-bringin... For Minecraft, the water is a bit nicer, but it still looks very unconvincing to me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXoLY9lF-NI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXoLY9lF-NI
- simias 7y agoUnless I'm missing something it's not a very fair comparison, you have low-res unshaded textures on one side and high-res bump-mapped textures on the other. That alone accounts for 99% of the difference between both versions. Meanwhile current "AAA" games that have RTX support don't look radically different with RTX on or off. Better and more accurate reflections of course but also a big hit on performance that's, IMO, not worth it. Of course that may just be because the devs don't bother to use the tech to its full potential when only a tiny fraction of the playerbase will be able to use that mode anyway.