-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Control - Nvidia RTX Demo Showcase
- Thread starter Equanimity
- Start date
I'm exceptionally excited for this game, and hearing Alan Wake's voice again was the cherry on top :) Send my well wishes to the team, and I'm looking forward to playing it already!
To be fair, the last section with the lamp (I.e. the most impressive bit) didn't show what it would look like without RTX, so there wasn't a point of comparison.
I'm super excited for Control. Remedy are tech wizards and always seem to put out stunning games no matter the hardware. Can't wait to play this.
Most pc gamers (and I'm one) won't have a RTX-enabled card in the next two years, so don't think the REAL gap is going to be that huge.
The gap is already huge simply by virtue of the fact that I can play every game at 60+ FPS on PC. Having recently purchased a PS4, I can say with no uncertainty that ~30 FPS feels really bad compared to 60.
Not just that, but there are also some things which are exorbitantly expensive or even impossible with shadow maps (like overlapping realistic penumbras).
I wasn't very hyped when I first saw the game. The fact that it was confined to one building, made me feel like it was sort of an indie game with repeat environments.
But the more I see of the game and the gameplay... I dig it. I love destruction and good use of physics, and this game seems to have all of that.
I just wish there are more environments than what we've seen so far.
But the more I see of the game and the gameplay... I dig it. I love destruction and good use of physics, and this game seems to have all of that.
I just wish there are more environments than what we've seen so far.
Not bad improvement, but none of the raytracing implementations so far are nothing more then a better graphic setting.
Have high hopes for this tech in future games though.
Have high hopes for this tech in future games though.
Now I want to play this on PC instead of my X (I wonder if the X will get some form of Ray tracing patched in).
I cant wait for this game but one thing that bothers me is how weird the camera zooms in and out when you aim with the gun. Feels like it skips frames and its too close.
Getting Quantum Break 2 vibes from that.
Not a bad thing, mind, other platforms getting to experience the awesomeness of QB.
Not a bad thing, mind, other platforms getting to experience the awesomeness of QB.
Wow. Some of you really are clueless at what to look for and how dramatic it is.
It's really a rediculous point of view to think people's opinions on how big a visual jump is are less valid then others.
If a visual jump needs explaining on why it looks better, it is not that significant of a visual jump.
But your point is meaningless with no real examples to back up what you say.
You stated it as if it was fact. There was no "IMO" in your words.
The only thing I can say about noticing the difference with RTX (especially with GI enabled) is to actually play a game that has it for a couple of hours and then jump back to any game. You'll notice the difference dramatically. Until people get used to seeing the 'proper' solution in the rendering, they are going to think it's a subtle difference and remain clueless as to why it's wracked up so much of a fuss.
As an aside, there is a thread where people are complaining about RDR2 downgrading their graphics. That exact feature they are complaining about (AO) is the most visually noticeable feature with RTX on vs. off in that particular mode (GI).
This comparison clearly show the "problem" with real time raytracing.
Rasterization has already reached an high level of realism so many of us feel this scene without rtx as plausible. Even if RTX is more accurate, real, in the end there is not much difference between what is accurate and what is plausible for our brain. That's why comparing the two screens, we can't clearly say one is better than the other, but just different.
I'd say a setting which so overtly clashes the mundane with the surreal in a morphing, shape shifting building, with unexplained phenomena leaking in, will get weird enough that this won't be an issue. And even confined to what little we've seen, it's already a pretty striking and well realized style.
This isn't taking into account what RT does in real time, with dynamics that just don't come across in screenshots. Yes modern tricks can approximate a lot, especially technically proficient devs like Remedy, but there's no comparison when things start moving and dynamic objects/characters are interacting with simulated light.
Last edited:
Well in that side by side parallel to the floor comparison, sure. Maybe?
The camera there is looking at the wrong thing IMO to actually show what RT does magnitudes better.
Only thing I am not sold on is the colour grading. I do not like how the lights are generally more orange and the shadows are more blue!
I wish they left the image much less colour graded.
In relation to the "Problem" statement, I have a different take at that observation. Rather than stating it as a problem, i think its an opportunity to celebrate the talented artists out there, achieving these great results.And now with real-time ray-tracing, they will be liberated from from pre-baking lighting scenarios and should be able to focus their energies in realising their vision quicker.
Wow, that's probably the best implementation of dynamic indirect shadows I've seen in a commercial game so far.
If he said what he said then high chances are it was his opinion. No need to act like a snob and dismiss what he says because it doesn't align with your views on whether RTX is good or not. 🙄
I'm making an opinion too. A lot of people don't know what they are looking at. Saying "clueless" shouldn't be equated to acting like a snob. Several posters say things with strong vigor (i.e. "you are joking right?"). Shouldn't be taken personally.
No but still if he has to actually look deep into it to find out what is so fascinating about it, chances are it is not a big jump to him. This happens in all of the HDR threads and there aren't snobs that go around calling them clueless, they'd help them see what they should.
Get over yourself, you're always like this.
So what will you all turn off first to help performance. Rtx reflections or Rtx GI? I doubt anything besides a 2080ti will be able to handle both at 60fps 1080p or higher.
I do help all the time. I try to explain a LOT of things, but sometimes it feels like people just don't listen or ignore or don't want to hear the facts.
RTX reflections. The GI is definitely the most used evaluation in the rendering. It's responsible for what everything looks like in general. Every surface needs a diffuse contribution from the light. NOT every surface exhibits a mirror reflection of light.
It happens yeah I agree, there are the stubborn willed types who don't care to learn or listen.
I felt this could have been one of those situations where you could share your knowledge and I know you are knowledgeable on such things enough to help those who can't see. If you felt he wasn't willing to learn then it's whatver.
RTS is not a game changer here, for me. But damn the gameplay looks awesome and I'm all in for that.
There actually are more and less valid opinions. All opinions are not equal. Some are more informed. Trump's opinions are not as valid as many other peoples', for example.
I won't say that Control RTX specifically is a depiction of a gargantuan graphical leap, though. But the other guy was factually wrong about RTX. Some RTX implementations have obstantiated the biggest graphical leap in over a decade. His opinion wasn't worth salt. Opinions aren't equal.
Last edited:
So RT is for shadows and reflections? What about dynamic GI? Or will they use their own MSGI solution that they used in Quantum Break?
Or maybe use MSGI for consoles and on PC when RT is disabled and when RT is enabled it becomes RT GI ?
Or maybe use MSGI for consoles and on PC when RT is disabled and when RT is enabled it becomes RT GI ?
The indirect diffuse is GI, although not sure if it is selectively applied?
Dynamic GI is kinda complex. I wonder how they will deal with it with different techs. They can't keep dynamic GI exclusive to RTX while they already have an excellent solution they created before aka MSGI. Ray-traced GI is more accurate and probably less screen-space but they need to offer something for people not using RTX and on consoles too, so MSGI for them and RTGI for those who enable RTX.
It's important to note that Remedy already has an incredibly sophosticated and kickass non ray traced dynamic GI solution, this is probably why the difference isn't as "woah" like Metro Exodus.
I was looking forward to a comparison because Remedy quite possibly has THE BEST non ray traced dynamic GI solution out there as far as implementation in a game is considered and as such I was really interested in seeing how RTGI compares to it, unlike say Metro Exodus where the non ray traced solution is average at best and below average at worst.
I was looking forward to a comparison because Remedy quite possibly has THE BEST non ray traced dynamic GI solution out there as far as implementation in a game is considered and as such I was really interested in seeing how RTGI compares to it, unlike say Metro Exodus where the non ray traced solution is average at best and below average at worst.
Yes, but when talking about opinions regarding visuals, if the layman can't tell the difference that is pretty revealing in itself.
I understand the importance of raytracing it means shaders are correctly lit and different lighting conditions will not vary in quality in the graphics.
E. G in UC4 Drake looks a lot better in good lighting when there is a direct light sources shining at his face, but if Drake is in some dimly lit wooden shack his face model will drastically worse.
Physically Correct simulations of light will improve this significantly, but the implementations we have seen so far of this are not that drastic an improvement, even more so when you look at the graphics as a whole.
It's kind of like putting material based shaders in a 360/ps3 game, sure it would be an improvement (an even bigger improvement then the current RTX implementations) but as a whole it would not that huge if a difference and nothing like a generational leap.
RTX is similar to other PC settings, I think I would rather have tesolation, hair works, physx particle effects and other settings over RTX in metro Exodus.
16 years ago they changed the gaming landscape with asshole physics. Now witness asshole physics on working lamps.
One issue I have with the RTX off scene is that the reflections can actually be better than what you see there even without ray tracing. It looks like there's no SSR there and just cubemaps, because otherwise the tree would be reflected appropriately and so would that small tree in the middle . If the SSR was there properly then I suspect the difference would be even less dramatic in this particular scene atleast.