this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
97 points (83.0% liked)
Games
32592 readers
1243 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Ray tracing performance that’s actually good enough for games to fully ditch rasterized lighting and reflections
That is beyond optimistic for consoles. Maybe three or four more generations worth.
It’s possible with high end PC hardware today. Since when have consoles been 20 years behind PC?
That sounds a lot like the jump from HD to 4K. Which is to say a lot less impactful than the previous jumps and tech. And something a lot of people might not even notice.
Are there other benefits to this? Like less work for developers?
A lot less work for developers, smaller game sizes, and map and game design no longer needing to be built around the onerous limitations of raster lighting and reflections.
Ray tracing is a bigger deal than most people realize. It feels like a gimmick because the games that support it today are still ultimately designed around rasterization.
Path-traced lighting in particular is a huge game changer, and means developers will no longer have to choose between rudimentary global dynamic lighting and very static and storage-intensive baked lighting. You can get the benefits of both without the drawbacks of either, assuming the hardware is up to snuff.