4 ms·
Sure, it's awfully simplifies everything, but at a huge cost. > lighting, reflections, diffraction, motion blur Just about every one of those becomes easy, bu
by Arelius 14y ago
Sure, it's awfully simplifies everything, but at a huge cost.
> lighting, reflections, diffraction, motion blur
Just about every one of those becomes easy, but incurs a huge performance penalty.
Also, thinking about it, I'm not sure that motion blur actually becomes significantly easier.
Lighting isn't a huge win, direct lighting is improved slightly, but GI is still impractically slow.
Reflection and diffraction are a pretty good win, but are also things that are solvable with a "ray-trace sometimes" approach, which is a much more likely solution for the near to mid-term.
And generally speaking visibility is done with some sort of ray checking anyways, sure it simplifies things that now we don't have two different solutions, but the complexity is a huge optimization.
So sure, it'd simplify things a ton, but I don't imagine it to be the primary rendering technology in real-time game for a long time.
- norswap 14y ago> Also, thinking about it, I'm not sure that motion blur actually becomes significantly easier. For motion blur, you take frames at different points in time and distribute the tracing ray over time. So it's actually pretty easy. Don't know if it's practical or efficient tough.
- Arelius 14y agosimilar sort of thing can be done in a rasterised system, just distribute the rasterised triangles over time, tada.