PC Gaming
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
I'll care about ray tracing if it ever gets efficient enough to run at 60+ fps on an entry-level apu.
does anyone actually care about ray tracing?
I love it, but it's getting treated as a shortcut to lighting when performance would be saved for most by a conventional lighting system. Ue5 is lousy with games that have half their frame rates taken up by a suboptimal implementation.
Honestly it feels like a technology that was designed with a future rig in mind, similar to how it was in the 2000s, but rendering technology doesn't move that fast nowadays. I much prefer a strategy like NVIDIA did with physx back in the day, where it's entirely possible to run with existing technology. Feels safer, more achievable.
I do but I'm also painfully aware that most implementations of it don't really add anything. Though my interest in it is more from a rendering perspective.
It's amazingly beautiful when done right. (See cyberpunk 2077, portal rtx, half-life 2 rtx, alan wake 2, control, metro exodus, SEUS PTGI, etc.)
Yea, didn't care about ray tracing until I played Control, and that game is gorgeous with it, made me appreciate it when it's well Implemented into a game
I mean, it's not necessary, but neither are HD resolutions or high framerates.
It has seemed every beautiful in some things.
It's not necessary, but like, lots of things aren't. The tech in itself isn't horrible, it's just horrible usecases which make it bad. Even if most usecases are horrible. Some aren't.
Edit for instance we have much the same power computers with my brother, aside from me having an outdated GPU. Last year when we played HP Legacy for a bit, I would say that his was far prettier when utilising Ray tracing, and the whole game is a sort of feast of aesthetics, so. Although his rig wasn't potent enough to have great framerates, so playing was still better for him as well without Ray tracing. But the scenery without much action still had good framerares so we saw rhe difference. Idk perhaps it will never be good but
Am I the only one who doesn't need real-time raytraced lighting? Show off the skills of your artists with some fancy pre-baked stuff instead.
im trying to get smoother clip art looking anime cock textures into rimworld
The hero we ~~need~~ ~~deserve~~ asked for and subscribe to on patreon
Or dare I say make a good game instead of just a shiny one
To be fair this time it's obsidian. That is kind of their whole deal.
That and horrible game breaking bugs. If the plot is absolute fire, and also it crashes every five seconds, this is on-brand.
I don't need it, but not being able to do what it says with very recent hardware and shit resolutions is very telling of other major issues in the game.
Another day, another unreal engine game with massive performance issues.
Imagine if modern GPU's were actually designed with gaming in mind...
Imagine if modern games were designed with gaming in mind.
UE used to be, before they started chasing the military sector super hard.
It's great but I threw in the towel after a few hours if play. I've never played a game that so readily gave me car sickness.
Adding a pip to the center of the screen helps reduce motion sickness. I hadn’t experienced it until I installed a Skyrim mod that removed the reticle for most things. Suddenly I found myself getting mildly motion sick unless I was constantly un-hiding the reticle.
Worth noting that some monitors have an option to manually add a pip. It’s meant for shooters when you’re meant to zoom in instead of hip firing, but it also works to reduce motion sickness.
Huh, maybe I'll give it a try, thanks for the tip
my monitor will overlay one for me in it controls, its a massive blessing sometimes
Because I don't like that game.
I kept dying from the same mistakes over and over and couldn't figure out what the hell I'm supposed to do or where to go. Supposely the ship log will update when you've made progress, but mine never did.
Got bored of playing what is basically a Game Over simulator after a day of frustration and never touched it again. I guess I'm just too stupid/ADHD for a game like this.
Its not your fault. Its an amazing game but its hard to find spoiler free help/hints when you need it. if you're thinking of trying again consider asking the discord/chatgpt/me for spoiler free hints and what you are supposed to do or deduce.
Lmao game over simulator.
To anyone who hasn’t seen it: The raytracing mode is actually broken and manages to look worse AND less realistic/accurate AMD run like complete ass. It’s not something turning on, and genuinely wild that they shipped something so broken instead of hide it from the options
because nvidia has somehow convinced the gaming world that hardware has become powerful enough for realtime path tracing. It has not. Not by a long shot. And not anytime soon.
It is…if you render the lighting at like 64x64 pixels and then “deep learning super scale” it to 4k and then AI generate 3 ~~fake~~super-sampled frames for every real frame.
There's actually a very easy fix for all poorly-performing AAA games: don't be a fucking clown and buy shit games from shit publishers. They're only pulling this shit today because they have been getting away with it for years, and they've been getting away with it for years because they have stupid idiot fucking customers who have been enabling them. If you bought this game and are upset that it runs like a snail with nerve damage, you have nobody to blame but yourself.
90% of players don't even know which graphic option does what. source: pulled it out of my ass
As someone playing this on a 3080 with no major issues, just turn off ray tracing. The game really isn't that bad once you turn it off.
Does raytracing even make the game look noticeably cooler, anyway?
No, it’s actually broken entirely and makes the game look worse. That’s why so many people are confused about why they shipped it. Like why not hide the option until it is ready to patch in?
I have a 3080, too, and I have a feeling it's going to be a perfectly good card for a long, long time.
Heyo yee, I got my 1080 when Destiny 2 came out with a free game deal and kept the card for soooooo long (although fuck you, piece of shit Destiny 2 garbage game that made all of the worst or most predatory decisions ever and I hate you)
AAAAANYWAY the 1080 for so much longer than my previous cards have. Now I’m on a 3070ti and have no urge to upgrade.
It's quite crazy how much performance you gain from using pre-calculated lighting instead of raytracing. I know it looks worse, but there's gotta be a way to find a happy middle ground, maybe a "raytracing lite" lol.
I find raytracing adds very little to the look of the vast majority of games unless they are slow enough to focus on shadows or fine details.
Maybe I'm not playing the games that benefit significantly from raytracing.
Dynamic lighting already exists. Look at Phasmophobia, it's probably one of the heaviest Unity games because it uses it everywhere. Basically every light in that game is able to cast shadows, and it's got a lot of lights. Doesn't have any of the RT noise or lag too.
edit: it doesn't come cheap though, they had to do some downgrades to port it to consoles. Interior candles for example, they're no longer interactive.
Yes, but it can be inefficient performance-wise, which is why precalculated lighting is often a mandatory performance setting in most games. The ideal goal is to use the dedicated RT hardware in a way that achieves similar graphical results but with minimal performance loss (to transfer the CPU-bound option to something that can comfortably run on most average consumer GPUs).
Traditional Dynamic Lighting is definitely a good option to have for the user, though.
I haven't played the Outer Worlds, but isn't a whole lot of it about making fun of companies doing this kind of stupid shit?
Based on a quick look at some videos showing off the max settings, it doesn't even look like it's doing much with all that demand. It looks like a completely normal big budget game
It's very milquetoast critique in a safe corporate sort of way. Ironic.
It's a dumbed-down critic of corporatism. «Creative freedom» of Microsoft-owned developers is a joke.
Unreal Engine did some amazing things at a technical level but doesn’t really seem to be ready for consumers. I somewhat don’t even blame the developers for assuming that UE5 would be the right choice considering all the marketing Epic did to make it sound like a magical wand for free performance.
It's called breaking boundaries, just on the other end! Let's see if we can reach 30 fps by 2026
So what, looks completely fine without the option.