Crytek discusses future of Neon Noir real-time raytracing tech

[HEXUS]

Devs say it will be further tuned for modern APIs and for dedicated raytracing hardware.

Read more.

[philehidiot]

I love how they're being realistic about what ray tracing does - it's a useful tool and a step towards photorealism. Whereas Nvidia's marketing was just so overhyped you'd think that Jesus was surfing back down to Earth on a traced ray and that the second coming could only happen with "RTX on". And that if you didn't buy an RTX card you might as well just start your journey to hell now as life just isn't worth living without "RTX on".

If Nvidia had been this realistic and sensible and treated us like adults, rather than trying to make their uber-nerd CEO into some kind of leather clad pseudo-rock star and blowing up any passing birds with the sheer quantity of laser beams, I might have taken their tech seriously. As it was, they set a standard that was so high that nothing other than total perfection at high FPS and resolution was going to meet it.

I get they were trying to sell cards, but you don't sell anything by setting consumer expectations so high that your product can't meet said expectations. You're just setting yourself up to fail. Set those expectations more modestly (or at least not stupidly) and let the reviewers and early adopters go "WOW, THIS IS AWESOME!" for you. This is what Cryteck have done - they've been realistic about what it is and then made a demo which is stunning, runs well on hardware people can afford and isn't seen as being some ego fuelled brag-fest.

[Dashers]

Would have been a tough sell from Nvidia's part: we've added a lot of dedicated expensive hardware to our new boards that only act as a bit of visual polish.

Those of us who see it as just that, aren't paying through the nose for an RTX. Do I want to see ray tracing in games and this visual polish? Absolutely, but I'm not willing to pay extra for it - and I'd rather current visuals are high fps in 4K first.

[Iota]

I love how they're being realistic about what ray tracing does - it's a useful tool and a step towards photorealism. Whereas Nvidia's marketing was just so overhyped you'd think that Jesus was surfing back down to Earth on a traced ray and that the second coming could only happen with "RTX on". And that if you didn't buy an RTX card you might as well just start your journey to hell now as life just isn't worth living without "RTX on".

If Nvidia had been this realistic and sensible and treated us like adults, rather than trying to make their uber-nerd CEO into some kind of leather clad pseudo-rock star and blowing up any passing birds with the sheer quantity of laser beams, I might have taken their tech seriously. As it was, they set a standard that was so high that nothing other than total perfection at high FPS and resolution was going to meet it.

I get they were trying to sell cards, but you don't sell anything by setting consumer expectations so high that your product can't meet said expectations. You're just setting yourself up to fail. Set those expectations more modestly (or at least not stupidly) and let the reviewers and early adopters go "WOW, THIS IS AWESOME!" for you. This is what Cryteck have done - they've been realistic about what it is and then made a demo which is stunning, runs well on hardware people can afford and isn't seen as being some ego fuelled brag-fest.

I guess it depends entirely on the consumer who is purchasing. I went with the RTX 2080 for the fps / resolution / power draw / noise options, couldn't give a jot about ray tracing hardware and still haven't played any of the few games with that available (even though I have BFV installed on my PC). My expectations have been met.

[Ttaskmaster]

While RTX and the like does make all this stuff look so pretty, I fully expect everyone to go all Ray-Tracing mad and 'photorealism' crazy, just like they did with surround sound and keep doing with 3D movies.
It's a background effect that exists only to enhance the experience... yet all the demos so far, understandably wanting to highlight and showcase the RTX, have made everything absolutely pristine and shiny and reflective to a point waaaaaaaaaaaaay beyond realistic.

In the RTX future, nothing is dirty and presumably entire nations are employed to polish everything.

But then, Chris Roberts will save us when Star Citizen finally comes out and gifts us with all that realistic Physics Based Rendering he promised...

I can't believe we're five months into 2019 and I haven't yet had a single dig at him!
Now if I can just get in a mention of lariats, and turn this into a thread about Brexit, the trinity will be complete and Cthulu shall be summoned to our plane!!

[philehidiot]

I guess it depends entirely on the consumer who is purchasing. I went with the RTX 2080 for the fps / resolution / power draw / noise options, couldn't give a jot about ray tracing hardware and still haven't played any of the few games with that available (even though I have BFV installed on my PC). My expectations have been met.

Fair. I bought a Vega64 because it was winter and I wanted to not have to turn on the heating.

My expectations have been met.


Note: No subtle / passive aggressive piss-take intended there, just a flippant remark.

[philehidiot]

While RTX and the like does make all this stuff look so pretty, I fully expect everyone to go all Ray-Tracing mad and 'photorealism' crazy, just like they did with surround sound and keep doing with 3D movies.
It's a background effect that exists only to enhance the experience... yet all the demos so far, understandably wanting to highlight and showcase the RTX, have made everything absolutely pristine and shiny and reflective to a point waaaaaaaaaaaaay beyond realistic.

In the RTX future, nothing is dirty and presumably entire nations are employed to polish everything.

But then, Chris Roberts will save us when Star Citizen finally comes out and gifts us with all that realistic Physics Based Rendering he promised...

I can't believe we're five months into 2019 and I haven't yet had a single dig at him!
Now if I can just get in a mention of lariats, and turn this into a thread about Brexit, the trinity will be complete and Cthulu shall be summoned to our plane!!

Brexit? Didn't you see on the BBC? It's all sorted, mate. No problem. Junker just announced that the EU is going to disband as a body and the member states are all going to join the United Kingdom under the reign of Her Majesty The Queen. No more trade problems, they just have to do as HRH commands.

And they'd better, or they'll get a bloody nose from some very well presented Red Coats.

That aside, I think the demos going too far is forgivable for me as it's a showcase. More importantly, if they can run software RT at 4K30 with a Vega 56 with everything clearly set to overkill and complex rays flying around all over the place, then it proves the point that this should be easily achievable in games.

Oh and the RTX future is Dubai. Where near-slaves are basically brought to polish and shine everything and then sent to live in accommodation akin to Metro 2033 living standards. Dubai is very much RTX on. And I THINK it's one of the places I can never visit without being arrested at the airport.... there are a few. Had to abandon a recent trip to Russia due to that.

My 'feeling' around RTX is that it'll be like anti aliasing in that you'll be able to have it low, medium and high giving various frame rate hits when used with software based RT and then there will be an ULTRA! setting where devs will be able to exploit hardware based RT cores that allow a quality that just isn't doable on software without making the game unplayable. It may also be that Nvidia uses its market clout to ensure that this happens, whether the ultra setting is actually that bad for FPS or not.

[Iota]

My 'feeling' around RTX is that it'll be like anti aliasing in that you'll be able to have it low, medium and high giving various frame rate hits when used with software based RT and then there will be an ULTRA! setting where devs will be able to exploit hardware based RT cores that allow a quality that just isn't doable on software without making the game unplayable. It may also be that Nvidia uses its market clout to ensure that this happens, whether the ultra setting is actually that bad for FPS or not.

I think it'll depend on a couple of things, the software engine being used and the developer using it. It's fine having fancy "showcase" scenarios that simply focus on RT, however it'll always be completely different when everything else going on in games comes up. As was mentioned when RTX was announced, many people quite simply think the first gen hardware side of things simply isn't going to be "good enough". Perhaps when the software and developers catch up in the coming years we'll see something better, including on cards without dedicated ray tracing hardware, when it becomes mainstream.

So your point about it being akin to anti aliasing in games right now is probably spot on the money.

[HollyDOL]

I find that remark about soft shadows quite interesting.

First not having shadows cast as a result of ray tracing kind of reduces the whole thing to maybe even less than half of the problem.

Second using term soft shadows with ray tracing is weird. If you had light model done with RT, you have no need for simulation done by soft shadows... you have cast ray, reflect, refract, partially consumed and shadow/light is the result.

Or what do I miss here?

[mtyson]

Crytek has just updated the CryEngine roadmap.

"we will also be looking to integrate the new hardware-agnostic ray tracing technology into the engine, with the aim to make it available in CRYENGINE 5.7"

Release scheduled for Spring 2020.

[Ttaskmaster]

Brexit? Didn't you see on the BBC?

No, sorry, I got caught up in the traffic around the whole Danny Baker racism woke triggered fake news thing.

And they'd better, or they'll get a bloody nose from some very well presented Red Coats.

Red coats?
Why aren't we making use of the Green Jackets that have served us so much better since the days of my regimental ancestors in the late 1700s?

That aside, I think the demos going too far is forgivable for me as it's a showcase.

It'd look even better if everything was as subtle as real life, though. Even in Fantasy worlds, no-one walks around with armour made of mirrors, for example!

"we will also be looking to integrate the new hardware-agnostic ray tracing technology into the engine

But... what if my gaming rig is a believer?
Are they seriously going to discriminate against my computer because of its faith??!!

[persimmon]

Good enuf RT in soft vs hard sharp RT in hardware (for an extra $250 ) hmmmm?

[philehidiot]

Yes, Red Coats. We're British and we stand upright and visible to be shot at, thank you very much, Sir. We shall march at the enemy and take our fire like men. Not like cowards dressed as grass and covered in mud like some cowering worm. </FieldMarshallHague_LadyHague_AndTheirTortoiseAlan>

And mirrored armour might be the way forward when the US gets its lasers up and running.


P.S. Yes, I know that by WW1 they'd at least got rid of the red but the remainder is about right. Don't forget your stick, Lieutenant. Interestingly, in the history of the original green jackets during field trials they did actually find that solid grey was better for camo than green but the Occifers in charge felt green just looked nicer. So they went with green. We went full circle when the US spent $5billion on new camo that was based on grey. It was found to be rubbish (many issues but the lack of solid black elements meant it lacked depth, so people stood out as the environment had shadow and depth and they looked flat). They now have a lot of grey camo no one wants to use and they can't sell it on to other countries like they would normally have done because... it doesn't work. I'm glad we've moved on from DPM. Never felt that worked well.

[blueball]

I'm glad we've moved on from DPM. Never felt that worked well.

DPM is fantastic!




...if you are trying to hide in a DPM factory

[Ttaskmaster]

Yes, Red Coats. We're British and we stand upright and visible to be shot at, thank you very much, Sir. We shall march at the enemy and take our fire like men. Not like cowards dressed as grass and covered in mud like some cowering worm.

"An' ye'll bluddy well die like bluddy screamin' Frenchmen, ye bluddy buffle-brained boogeh!"
</Richard Sharpe>

Interestingly, in the history of the original green jackets during field trials they did actually find that solid grey was better for camo than green but the Occifers in charge felt green just looked nicer. So they went with green.

Not quite.
It was a mixture of brown and green, with only some in grey and other colours, and then only in certain terrains.
"Green is without comparison the best colour for light troops with dark accouterments; and if put on in the spring, by autumn it nearly fades with the leaves, preserving its characteristic of being scarcely discernible at a distance"
JG Simcoe, 1748.

A variant of Hunter Green was later adopted for official Rifle regiments in reference to the Jager (hunter) regiments and the skirmishing nature now fulfilled by the Rifles (and because it worked).

I'm glad we've moved on from DPM. Never felt that worked well.

Works fine if you follow the principles of camouflage. As useless as anything else if you don't.
Outside of that, MTP does kinda match with the most common current environment, but we'll likely be going back to DPM if we end up anywhere with lots of dark greens, again.