No. Raytracing isn't new technology. However, Real-Time Raytracing, that runs really well at high framerates, and efficiently IS new. That Perfect Dark demo definitely wasn't the same thing as what we have now. Games back then however, did have Raytracing, albeit baked in. I can probably say for certain any pre-rendered background from Final Fantasy VII or Ocarina of Time probably have baked in Raytracing.
most if not all 90s renders didn't use raytracing and instead used standard raster rendering, but with a lot of things that wouldn't be possible in realtime for another decade or so as it was faster and easier to implement than raytracing it only really went mainstream when studios started needing the characteristics of light getting bent in scenes that involve a lot of refraction, such as underwater scenes, which is why Finding Nemo was Pixar's first movie to use raytracing, as 90% of it took place underwater
@@jc_dogen here‘s the thing, it sucks. Raytracing has to be done in the engine and not in a random shader that gets injected into the graphics api, otherwise it looks like ass
@@jc_dogen that‘s pretty rare, and most of the time it‘s only in a specific scene. Raytracing needs to be implemented into the engine so it can interact with objects not visble to the players eye!
@Ruby Williams ur like 6, why should i listen to you the shadows are baked, the fake hdr "reflection" textures use the camera coordinates, the floor is transparent and has a reflection texture, the reflection model on the floor is part of the normally visible level but flipped upside down and given vertex colouring so it looks like it fades
This video is fake but in the 90s ray tracing did exist. They would use formulas and calculations to render images that have been traced. Best examples are dnb/Y2k renders and the program Bryce 3D that could make anything look like you wanted to lick it
Ray tracing is old, what's new is doing is real time, efficiently, and at playable frame rates, I think it would be best with VR, but real time ray tracing can't be implemented in VR yet at you need over 200FPS for that, but, once we get 1 to 1 lighting in VR, shit's going to feel even more real, which is like, the point of VR. Imagine touching a reflection of yourself, in VR, having your gun realistically flash the dim warehouse you're fighting in, etc... the one thing I still need to see is, can you make cartoony ray tracing, can ray tracing look hand drawn, can I have cell shading, done with real time ray tracing, can I shove ray tracing in Wind Waker, improve it's visuals yet retain it's still, keeping it looking and feeling like Wind Waker. That's what I want to know right now, we've seen ray tracing be realistic, can we see it be stylized now. Cause if it can't output more stylized lighting, the rasterized graphics wont go away, even if in the future it only stays for cartoony games.
Real Time Ray Tracing in the 90's? At what framerate? Fully ray traced graphics today are still limited by the hardware they run on and the complexity of the games running them, we're in a transition phaze, I don't think it's going to be a long one, but for now, not every gpu can do it, not every gpu that can do it can do it as fast as the other ones, it's kinda like when 3D accelerated cards became a thing, Quake showed what the future had in Stock in 1996, in 2000, Max Payne still had software mofe cause to run it well, you needed a beefy machine. VR's main problem is that it becomes comfortable once in hits stable 90fps, you have 2 eyes, flickering and inconsistencies can generate massive headaches very quickly, you can't have noise, you need the best denoiser you can, so from the get go, performance will be slowed down by the need of a strong denoiser, players need their GPU to produce a stable 180fps, 90 for each eye, at pretty high resolutions, streamers need the extra 60 from the spectator view for their viewer in 1080p, sometimes even 2K or 4K, a third eye, that's 240fps, stable. Ray Tracing is the future, we're reaching head on into the future, the future is exciting, but the future, isn't the present, the future doesn't have to be in too long from now tho.
@@IndieLambda today's ray tracing is a half baked technology that's only just started to be optimized. The performance dump with it off vs on used to be absolutely bad, and it's still preferred for many to keep it off. What's the future really is improving the physics engines of video games. Really.
I think Ray tracing would be most effective for games that has a lot of reflecting or something. Like Control where there are mirror-like surfaces that adds to its experience.
No, ray tracing in the form of path tracing is useful for any sort of realistic graphics. It's what ultra realistic CGI uses. You just can't rasterize that
Current gen RT is terrible. An RTX 3090 cant do it correctly and its $1500. That's why he is saying that RT doesn't make a difference bc current gen is stupid.
@@humble2246 All the modern games hybrid rasterized-ray traces games and even then, you have to degrade the visuals with DLSS. The only games that can kind of do it are old games like Minecraft and Quake 2...but you still need DLSS. Current gen raytracing is just a tech demo that requires image degradation to work. The hardware is just not cheap enough for the average person to buy. Raytracing is like VR but its a tech demo version that people are overpaying for.
Yeah, raytracing has been around on the demo scene a pretty long time. Problem is, it could never scale well to the quality and detail level needed for a full game. As far as software vs hardware raytracing, software isn't necessarily worse quality, but it's much slower. Any quality problems from a software implementation arise largely from being forced to lower the detail level to meet framerate targets. By the way: From what I've read, DLSS uses the tensor cores rather than the RT cores. The RT cores are pretty specialized - I don't think they can even be used for DLSS. Their sole purpose is the accelerate tasks specific to ray tracing that are the most intensive. Regardless of whether or not people are impressed with it, I personally think raytracing is the long term future of gaming. It offers massive benefits to developers and artists, as they can achieve realistic lighting far more easily, rather than faking it with things like fill lights and complex shaders. It will definitely improve over time, and since it mimics the way light works in real life - any attempt to make graphics more realistic will converge on ray tracing. There's really no getting around it - it's the ultimate way to make realistic graphics. I don't think it's actually important for players to be overly impressed with it for it to become the norm: It'll get there eventually due to the benefits to the developers and artists. As the technology improves, it should also become less of a performance hit and eventually should become not much more than an art style decision. Might be a few years out, but I think it's going to happen.
It's just math on calculating bouncing of light. Of course it has been. It was the original idea of how to light 3D models and games, but was far too demanding to work in real time as can be seen.
Ultimately I agree with your main point but...There’s literally so much wrong in such a short amount of time that it’s hard to debunk everything, but: 1. Yes RT has been around since the first white paper on it in the (70s/80s?) 2. N64 could raytrace the shadows on like 4 balls at 2 seconds per frame at 240p, it actually had some rudimentary hardware RT support because it was developed by SGI, which custom-made the computers used by Industrial Light and Magic (ILM) 3. The engine for perfect dark had support for RT but never used it. What you saw was not RT, although definitely an impressive effect for the time 4. Software RT is effectively useless unless you cheat. 5. Hardware RT is already cheating (Denoising, Upscaling, RT at 1/2 resolution of actual game) 6. Using RT for shadows or Global Illumination is simple and isn’t as taxing as Reflections 7. DLSS is not done on the RT cores whatsoever 8. Raytracing removes the work for a developer to create custom lighting in every scenario, you will likely see games that require raytracing support in order for them to run But yes, I think RT is currently a meme. Control looks nice with RT though
raytracing always needs denoising even professional software based solutions that big budget movie studios use denoises the image because raytracing is noisy
@@TorutheRedFox Yes, but the denoising in professional workloads doesn't affect the final product. Denoising in most RT games is very noticeable to most end users, as you can see the denoising happening in realtime. And I would say, almost 2 years later, that I would no longer buy a non-RT capable card as it's clearly going to become more widespread in the coming years
@@TeranToola the denoising is noticeable as it's temporal noise, as it only does a select few rays at a time, making different pixels update at different times creating a ghosting effect
Ray-tracing actually goes further back then that. The technique was theorized in the 70s and some real time application were created back in the 80s on mainframes... The recent development for nvidia and amd showing interest in the technique is solely due to the fact were at the peek of what rasterization can do in regards to lighting transport. The push to the tracing methods is fueled to push lighting beyond what we could do with rasterization. Plus the tracing methods allows for realistic simulations of lighting transport due to the nature of the algorithm compared to rasterization.
well, with the game cube selling way less than the ps2 and even less than the xbox orig, i mean, nintendo obliously thought, being tech lead doesnt help.
A tablet is absolutely _not_ going to set the graphical standards. I'm hoping next gen, they'll aim for PS4P/XBOX in power, but there's no way they'll do better than PS5/XSX.
Well there are businesses working solely on getting real time ray tracing on mobile devices which likely will be coming in the next 2 years. I just would expect those games to be 30fps.
@@glungusgongus it's already possible you just need games to utilize it. Plus many phone games are only 720p and therefore only need a tenth the rays as 4K.
@@dirtydirtsgt4751 No, not happening, the Switch lacks the ram necessary to calculate that many rays period. It's why the 20 series Nvidia GPUs can't even hold 60fps at 1080p on Quake RTX. That is basically as basic as graphics can be with no tessellation, low poly, almost no particle effects or anything really. Unless it were just a room with a single box and a single light the Switch would not be able to handle it. The other main issue is the Switch has a bandwidth bottleneck which would limit how many rays it can calculate at a time so it just couldn't handle it. It needs more memory bandwidth much like why the 2060 is so bad at ray tracing.
This is not ray tracing, its called planar reflection. Ray tracing is a completely different thing much more complex calculation using real world physics formulas.
You all have no idea what you're talking about. These are ray-traced shadows and effects in extremely low resolution. Why do you have to talk about things you have no idea what you're talking about? And lie in the title? If you want to argue or explain anything you can comment.
@@Darenz-cg9zg It's not what you would think of when people say "Ray-tracing" and honestly it barely fits the actual definition as well. It's clickbait.
Saying Raytracing isn’t impressive because it’s been around for a while is like saying HD Rumble isn’t impressive because Cellphones had haptics years before it.
I didn't say it wasn't impressive, it's just barely noticeable for a lot of people in a ton of games that "have it". In something like Minecraft, it's night and day. Reality is, modern engines have handled a lot of the things ray tracing does already so well, that most don't even know if it's on in say, Battlefield V.
Most people also say they can’t tell the difference between 30 & 60fps. Should we not push for 60 because a sect of people can’t tell the difference? The tech is still in its infancy & now that it’s coming to console it’s finally in a state where developers can leverage using it on machines that are affordable enough to run it. Vs the $500+ GPU’s required when it went “mainstream” on the 20 series.
@@glungusgongus ruclips.net/video/w4UHrM0LzYo/видео.html It's done using BotW on PC using Cemu or Yuzu emulators. Easiest to notice the difference on objects that are self emissive like the light bow he has on his back as well as small objects having shadows like individual blades of grass.
DLSS is basically nothing more special than cold fusion. It would be great if it worked as advertised but it doesn't. As a russian hacker though found out about 6 months ago, he had what he believed was DLSS working on an AMD GPU by modifying how it was processed on the drivers. Later an Epic developer told him it was not really DLSS but just the built in upscaling technology inside Unreal Engine. Basically put that's the majority of what DLSS is. Plus the performance boost is honestly far less impressive than people make it out as at 1800p you get about the same performance and in the majority of games that still looks better. DLSS is just a buzz word Nvidia advertised till people stuck to it and begged them to give them it.
Yeah but it’s Samsung. It’s crazy that they were looking into ray tracing when the poly counts were so ridiculously low. You would think they’d try and improve everything else over “realistic lighting”.
Seriously, look at the lighting in the Link's Awakening remake or Luigi's Mansion 3. They achieved ultra realistic lighting on a weak piece of hardware without having to rely on ray tracing. Also, on PS4 Pro (dunno about base PS4, dont have one) but on the Pro, most AAA games have ultra realistic lighting already. Ray tracing is a different method but darn good methods already exist. It's not better, just different.
Yeah, that is my gripe with, like, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2019 and Black Ops Cold War having Real Time Raytracing. It just, doesn't look any different at all from maxed out setting without Raytracing. The only game as of now that drastically benefits from Minecraft. Which is solely do to the variable, sandbox-y nature of the game. That and the room for much better visuals.
It is actually better, it allows the developers to focus more on art and geometry because the need to make custom lighting and bake it all in disappears. All the load taken of of developers allows them to be more productive in other areas. In the not to distant future raytracing will be the standard
That’s the point. It’s not a huge difference in many of today’s modern games since they already have fantastic lighting and reflection tricks in play as is.
@@NintyPrime Its been used in movie production before n64. The underrated aspect is the geometry relevant glow effect meets geometry based darkness which is superior to hbao+ and actually subtle reflectivity. RUclips is a place people lack the integrity to tune it within the confines of injectable limitations. Often they crank settings that break other scenes, but almost always have no intention of sharing how they rendered the small window into their efforts.
I don't see any ray-tracing in that footage - just environment mapping and a transparent floor with objects mirrored under it. Maybe they were tracing just a few rays here and there for some other purpose? But that's called raycasting today.
You're really oversimplifying things. That "mod" in Breath of the Wild only does global illumination and ambient occlusion and it's being applied with Reshade so it applying on top of the rest of the game. You'll see that GI and AO on-top of loading screens, on-top of BOTW's existing ambient occlusion and lighting, on-top of any atmospheric fog, and on-top of cell-shading that's applied to Link and all of the other characters. If the game were actually modded to include ray-tracing then it would replace the cascading shadow maps, AO, and area lights that the game currently uses. I'm fairly certain that would reduce memory consumption, the shadows would be "infinite" resolution with no seams between cascades. Objects would be self-shadowed, and Link lantern would cast a shadow instead of being a point light beneath him, and light would bounce properly without ruining the cell-shading. Water would also have proper reflections instead of screen-space reflections would would prevent instances where the water is too bright at the shore. Also Rare didn't originate ray-tracing. It was used in non-real-time rendering for decades and the idea was credited to somebody from the 16th century. Yes, the N64 could do it, lots of things could do it, but they couldn't do it in real-time, they couldn't do it at high resolutions, and they couldn't always do it without enough bounces to do anything that stencil shadows or cascading shadow maps could do faster. Ray-tracing and pathtracing aren't just used for graphics either. Rays could also be cast to do spatial audio and FPSs use them for bullet trajectory because it requires casting very few rays. If Perfect Dark had any real-time raytracing, its because they were casting rays for aim. I understand that you make RUclips videos and you aren't really required to know what you're talking about, but for your own sake I think you should have actually read up about this stuff before making this.
If it doesn’t affect gameplay, it’s nothing to write home about as if it does. The hype over ray-tracing has been ridiculous and speaks badly about modern gamers as well as developers.
I went from playing Watchdogs 2 on PS4 to playing it one PS5 and waaaaay better with Ray Tracing. So much more immersive looking at business shop windows and seeing yourself and cars go by in the reflection. I can imagine playing COD or Battlefield and passing by a window and seeing another player trying to creep up on you but you now know, like IRL they are there now. Side note and the reason I clicked on this video is I am playing “Bowsers Fury” on my Switch and I swear it is using Ray Tracing, IDK.
Probably because all games use different aspects of the tech, three main branches being global illumination, reflections and shadows. Not all games use all three or even 2 of them depending on how demanding the game is with geometry and light sources
Using all three kind of gels everything, it's when they use a combination of RT and traditional rasterization techniques to fake the rest it gets a little uncanny
Mm my 2021 LG OLED, with a 3080ti driving ith through a 2.1 HDMI cannot be beaten on colour or contrast. I had a £1000 Samsung panel with HDR before my current setup and the difference is remarkable. This man is uninformed in many areas
@@Katzelle3 of course it won't 😉 I look forward to what comes next though. What you really want to keep your eye on is light field tech, star trek holodeck inbound 👍
Raytracing doesn't have to look better to be better. theres other things important for a rendering system, like behaving predictably for developers and artists using it to create games, behaving consistently for various kinds of 3d information, and achieving a desired look with minimal complications. There's a lot of things that ray tracing just does better that are under the hood and not immediately visible when you boot up a game. that, and nothing beats raytracing for colored lighting.
If we could fake ray tracing better we would need less calculations to generate a dynamic detail image for up-scaling. Things that could be up-scaled include geometry, physics, colour, texture. It could all be up-scaled at the point of denoising which with more fake ray tracing should require less effort. This way you might be able to do the impossible and make a 1.5 to 2 terraflop system equivalent to a ps4 with extra AI cores using Nvidia and ARM that infers so well that you would be close to matching the performance of a ps5 or xbox 4. It's a gamble but the new Nintendo could be a disruptive force.
That it was always too demanding and raising the resolution increases the number of rays you need to fill the image. For the 360-480p image the N64 used you would only need about 2000 rays a frame vs current 1080p displays at about 5,000,000 rays a frame and 4K with 20,000,000 rays a frame. It's why ray tracing has always been out of reach. We are only attempting it now as we have better AI to fill in gaps so we can use a few less rays by cheating.
Title should have been: Nintendo claimed to use ray tracing in the 1990’s. There is no credible evidence that any playable game used ray tracing on the n64 hardware. Its doubtful any of the gameplay footage shown by Rare 1 depicts ray tracing, and 2 on n64 hardware. I vividly recall reading in Nintendo Magazine, or maybe it was Ultra Gamers, that the nintendo disk drive would allow for ray tracing to be used, but even child-me knew that to be false. I don’t know how many of you recall just how prevalent doctored game images taken from a PC were during this time period.
4:50 ya, sure, it's technically considered real ray tracing, it's just the most bottom of the barrel version/experience you can use without losing much FPS or dropping thousands on something that could do it for you without even caring. Tbh, I have reshade on Phasmaphobia and it changes the whole games looks, even with the somewhat modern tech they use for lighting already lmao. But real time ray tracing done on hardware vs a rebranding of the lighting system (i.e reshade) is not a good comparison as one is full fledged and calculated and one is just a glorified global illumination filter. Lol I have a 3060, for anyone curious
What if I told you that ray tracing has been existing since the MS-DOS era? Like, the early DOS days? It's not that "hardware" ray tracing works better or worse. Every real ray tracing is hardware assisted, it's either calculated by your CPU (what you'd call 'software rendering') or your GPU. What nVidia does is to implement an AI algorithm with an already trained model that somewhat predicts how the lighting would work, had it been real ray tracing (which is still kinda expensive for our current hardware if we want to achieve photorealism). Hence why the first versions of the RTX were so bad. Raytracing has been around for a very long time and it's how 3D modeling software renders the scenes. But we're still a few years from achieving real time ray tracing without tricks and magic like RTX does.
It was prior to Nintendo. They didn't make it, it was originally made for 3D modeling. It was intended to be used in games but it was cut as it was far more demanding than they thought and could push 3D gaming back another 5-10 years if resolutions never went up which they did.
I need more context for the Rare example. Ray tracing may have referred to mathematical rays, not light rays. These rays may have referring to bullet trajectories or something. But yes, the idea is not new. Games need to be designed to take advantage of ray tracing, and things like multiple light sources and reflections make ray tracing much more valuable. The BOTW videos here had neither of those. (Maybe some dull lighting in the dungeon? Hard to tell.)
That would be the same thing as that's exactly what ray tracing is. Plus today we have far higher resolution displays which need drastically more rays to fill the image. We need thousands of times more rays to fill the image now so back then it was actually easier especially for some N64 games that were 20fps or 360p.
@@Skylancer727 Yeah, I know. I just noticed the reflections used on the floor at one point, so it is a similar concept after all. My main point is that ambient light is still the primary lighting in that video. Modern ray-tracing is trying to incorporate that wholly instead of situational.
@@danielevans7439 well this does do it for the whole image, it's just that the base lighting can't be removed entirely witb just screen spaced shaders but it can get close. I still say the best game to look at is Halo 3 for why reshade ray tracing can look good. You really need a lot of small points lights and dynamic lights scattered around the map to make it shine as shadows are usually done fairly decently on the game naturally. m.ruclips.net/video/6A-tEa5-4Vg/видео.html Just don't get too out of control and make something disgusting like this. Plus you'll also learn fast reshade doesn't understand your hud. m.ruclips.net/video/_gZruam6tKA/видео.html
@@asanstudio Actually, it's just the same room modeled on the other side of the "mirror", along with a second model of Mario copying the player's movements. It's a clever and convincing workaround though.
Ray Tracing is not physically possible on N64 hardware. The only reason it works now is deep learning. None of what showed up on your N64 was a ray tracing example. The colored spheres would have their bright colors bleed onto each other as the rays of light bounce between objects. That clearly isn't happening here. You cannot have ray tracing in software and expect it to run more than a frame every few hours. That's the nature of having a ray of light physically simulated bouncing between multiple objects then back to the camera let alone multiple physical ray simulations. They didn't even have realistic physics by the N64 era let alone realistic light physics. Ray tracing has always been the penultimate graphics achievement because until now, multi server render farms would take hours just to render a few frames for CG movies because the physical ray based light simulations were literally impossible to do in real time. You literally have zero idea what you're talking about.
I like the campfire scene more with raytracing than without, but really dislike the change in the look to the light sources in the shrine scenes - both interior and exterior (Though I suspect that's just a property of how the light sources for shrines are designed specifically to look good in the BotW light engine). Most scenes, I can sort of see a difference in these side by sides but not enough of one to have an opinion on which I like more - Was expecting to like the water more, since I thought reflective surfaces was where raytracing was meant to really shine. Art style may be king, but fancy rendering tricks can be used to enhance non-realistic art styles as well as the more realistic styles they're usually associated with. Animal Crossing's use of e.g. anisotropic highlights really does help give its cartoony aesthetic that little bit extra versimilitude, and the ability of modern rendering techniques allows for 3d games to have aesthetics that just wouldn't have been viable on the PS1 and PS2 - I can't imagine Little Big Planet, Yoshi's Wooly World, Yoshi's Crafted World, and Kirby's Rainbow Paintbrush's aesthetics working nearly as well prior to the PS3 - The raw power of visuals aren't something that can get me excited about something but I do acknowledge that they can enhance the part of visuals I actually care about and make additional non realistic art sytles viable, some of which we may not even be imagining yet - You need a certain amount of ability to sell detailed realism to sell that this world is made of yarn rather than a realistic one - Without that you're likely to just read a tree as a tree, rather than a knitted tree, or one molded from clay, or made of plastic.
Rareware lied. There is *ZERO* realtime ray-tracing at play in Perfect Dark! The only things on display are pre-baked vertex shadows and fake polygonal reflections done by mirroring objects upside down and putting a transparent floor in between, two very common techniques of the late 90s considering that even per-vertex lighting was still expensive, let alone per-pixel. In fact, not a *single* commercial N64 title had any form of realtime ray-tracing. The demo shown in the video is just that...a demo, a proof of concept...the concept of being able to do *any* form of realtime ray-tracing, regardless of framerate (which as we've seen is very low). Clickbait title.
Real time ray tracing is a mind blowing computing feat to anyone a little knowlageable on rendering technics... All those ray tracing shader are fake you just can't approximate ray tracing with a shadder that's not possible
I actually prefer no ray tracing for botw. I think if the game has it built in I think I’ll look great but if it’s not, it won’t always make it look better.
Real life lighting sucks, that's why ray tracing don't look impressive or necessary, at the end of the day you want improved lighting in your video games to actually be able to see everything going on on the screen.
Nintendo are very clever when they are being successful like they are now,the super Nintendo had many graphics advantages over the mega drive so you never know, dlss2 on switch pro or switch home with 4k upscaling could look as good as real 4k on more powerful hardware so hope they go with that.
When a bunch of misinformed people come together is one of the few situations I truly hate.
So much this 👆
No. Raytracing isn't new technology. However, Real-Time Raytracing, that runs really well at high framerates, and efficiently IS new. That Perfect Dark demo definitely wasn't the same thing as what we have now. Games back then however, did have Raytracing, albeit baked in. I can probably say for certain any pre-rendered background from Final Fantasy VII or Ocarina of Time probably have baked in Raytracing.
most if not all 90s renders didn't use raytracing and instead used standard raster rendering, but with a lot of things that wouldn't be possible in realtime for another decade or so as it was faster and easier to implement than raytracing
it only really went mainstream when studios started needing the characteristics of light getting bent in scenes that involve a lot of refraction, such as underwater scenes, which is why Finding Nemo was Pixar's first movie to use raytracing, as 90% of it took place underwater
How can someone talk for 12 minutes and say nothing at the same time??
N64 actually had a geforce 4090 built in it before it was released to the mainstream today.
you spent maybe 3 minutes talking about the actual subject of the video and then padded it out to get to 12 minutes by complaining, nice work
not to mention the video is total bullshit, Perfect Dark never had ray tracing
Wait...you think some ReShade filter is the same as actual Ray Tracing? lol.
No, he said it wasn't a big deal
reshade has a raytraced gi shader, yes.
@@jc_dogen here‘s the thing, it sucks. Raytracing has to be done in the engine and not in a random shader that gets injected into the graphics api, otherwise it looks like ass
@@notarandom7 sometimes it looks pretty good though. depends on the game
@@jc_dogen that‘s pretty rare, and most of the time it‘s only in a specific scene. Raytracing needs to be implemented into the engine so it can interact with objects not visble to the players eye!
2:10 as you can clearly see, thats just a retextured copy of the map upside down put under a transparent floor
@Ruby Williams ur like 6, why should i listen to you
the shadows are baked,
the fake hdr "reflection" textures use the camera coordinates,
the floor is transparent and has a reflection texture,
the reflection model on the floor is part of the normally visible level but flipped upside down and given vertex colouring so it looks like it fades
This video is fake but in the 90s ray tracing did exist. They would use formulas and calculations to render images that have been traced. Best examples are dnb/Y2k renders and the program Bryce 3D that could make anything look like you wanted to lick it
Its been around since the 90s but my computer still can't handle Minecraft ray tracing
Ray tracing is old, what's new is doing is real time, efficiently, and at playable frame rates, I think it would be best with VR, but real time ray tracing can't be implemented in VR yet at you need over 200FPS for that, but, once we get 1 to 1 lighting in VR, shit's going to feel even more real, which is like, the point of VR. Imagine touching a reflection of yourself, in VR, having your gun realistically flash the dim warehouse you're fighting in, etc... the one thing I still need to see is, can you make cartoony ray tracing, can ray tracing look hand drawn, can I have cell shading, done with real time ray tracing, can I shove ray tracing in Wind Waker, improve it's visuals yet retain it's still, keeping it looking and feeling like Wind Waker. That's what I want to know right now, we've seen ray tracing be realistic, can we see it be stylized now. Cause if it can't output more stylized lighting, the rasterized graphics wont go away, even if in the future it only stays for cartoony games.
Real Time Ray Tracing in the 90's? At what framerate?
Fully ray traced graphics today are still limited by the hardware they run on and the complexity of the games running them, we're in a transition phaze, I don't think it's going to be a long one, but for now, not every gpu can do it, not every gpu that can do it can do it as fast as the other ones, it's kinda like when 3D accelerated cards became a thing, Quake showed what the future had in Stock in 1996, in 2000, Max Payne still had software mofe cause to run it well, you needed a beefy machine.
VR's main problem is that it becomes comfortable once in hits stable 90fps, you have 2 eyes, flickering and inconsistencies can generate massive headaches very quickly, you can't have noise, you need the best denoiser you can, so from the get go, performance will be slowed down by the need of a strong denoiser, players need their GPU to produce a stable 180fps, 90 for each eye, at pretty high resolutions, streamers need the extra 60 from the spectator view for their viewer in 1080p, sometimes even 2K or 4K, a third eye, that's 240fps, stable.
Ray Tracing is the future, we're reaching head on into the future, the future is exciting, but the future, isn't the present, the future doesn't have to be in too long from now tho.
@@IndieLambda today's ray tracing is a half baked technology that's only just started to be optimized. The performance dump with it off vs on used to be absolutely bad, and it's still preferred for many to keep it off. What's the future really is improving the physics engines of video games. Really.
Exactly, raytracing isn't new.
Yeah... Just like the Virtual Boy lol 😂😂😂
So yet another buzzword made popular now to sell "cutting-edge" hardware and consoles? Gotcha
@@pridifygaming1114 Not really because the quality of the raytracing that you see today, is vastly superior to the raytracing you saw 20 years ago.
@@ShredderYosh How when it's been on the pc for years.
@@ShredderYosh this was real time Ray tracing.....
I love how little you know about this. It’s endearing to watch a guy ramble nonsense for 12 minutes
I think Ray tracing would be most effective for games that has a lot of reflecting or something. Like Control where there are mirror-like surfaces that adds to its experience.
@GodZpeed X7
Ikr.
This is Screen Space Reflection for crying out loud.
No, ray tracing in the form of path tracing is useful for any sort of realistic graphics. It's what ultra realistic CGI uses. You just can't rasterize that
Or any cell shaded game
Forget ps5 and Xbox series x, get a N64.
I have to say this, the person making this video is somewhat of a misinformed person. ray tracing DOES make a difference
Current gen RT is terrible. An RTX 3090 cant do it correctly and its $1500. That's why he is saying that RT doesn't make a difference bc current gen is stupid.
@@4m470 "cant do it correctly" explain
@@humble2246 All the modern games hybrid rasterized-ray traces games and even then, you have to degrade the visuals with DLSS. The only games that can kind of do it are old games like Minecraft and Quake 2...but you still need DLSS. Current gen raytracing is just a tech demo that requires image degradation to work. The hardware is just not cheap enough for the average person to buy.
Raytracing is like VR but its a tech demo version that people are overpaying for.
@@4m470 you dont need dlss. Minecraft i get 30 fps easily with ptgi on at 4k.
@@humble2246 30fps is not good performance dude. What GPU are you using?
Ray tracing may not be new, but it definitely makes Minecraft almost look like a new game.
Yeah, raytracing has been around on the demo scene a pretty long time. Problem is, it could never scale well to the quality and detail level needed for a full game. As far as software vs hardware raytracing, software isn't necessarily worse quality, but it's much slower. Any quality problems from a software implementation arise largely from being forced to lower the detail level to meet framerate targets.
By the way: From what I've read, DLSS uses the tensor cores rather than the RT cores. The RT cores are pretty specialized - I don't think they can even be used for DLSS. Their sole purpose is the accelerate tasks specific to ray tracing that are the most intensive.
Regardless of whether or not people are impressed with it, I personally think raytracing is the long term future of gaming. It offers massive benefits to developers and artists, as they can achieve realistic lighting far more easily, rather than faking it with things like fill lights and complex shaders. It will definitely improve over time, and since it mimics the way light works in real life - any attempt to make graphics more realistic will converge on ray tracing. There's really no getting around it - it's the ultimate way to make realistic graphics.
I don't think it's actually important for players to be overly impressed with it for it to become the norm: It'll get there eventually due to the benefits to the developers and artists. As the technology improves, it should also become less of a performance hit and eventually should become not much more than an art style decision. Might be a few years out, but I think it's going to happen.
I honestly had no idea that Ray tracing has been out for this long
well, the math concept of it is quite old indeed.
Yeah... Just like the Virtual Boy lol 😂😂😂
I did.
It's just math on calculating bouncing of light. Of course it has been. It was the original idea of how to light 3D models and games, but was far too demanding to work in real time as can be seen.
The Super Nintendo technically also had it, but none of the actual games had the capacity for it to be used.
I’m sure that the ray tracking for modern consoles is more stylistic than the older consoles.
Well obviously its been improved on, hes just saying, that it has been done before in the past
It’s been around for a while. It’s just a different method of rendering an image that is pretty expensive on hardware to perform.
Ultimately I agree with your main point but...There’s literally so much wrong in such a short amount of time that it’s hard to debunk everything, but:
1. Yes RT has been around since the first white paper on it in the (70s/80s?)
2. N64 could raytrace the shadows on like 4 balls at 2 seconds per frame at 240p, it actually had some rudimentary hardware RT support because it was developed by SGI, which custom-made the computers used by Industrial Light and Magic (ILM)
3. The engine for perfect dark had support for RT but never used it. What you saw was not RT, although definitely an impressive effect for the time
4. Software RT is effectively useless unless you cheat.
5. Hardware RT is already cheating (Denoising, Upscaling, RT at 1/2 resolution of actual game)
6. Using RT for shadows or Global Illumination is simple and isn’t as taxing as Reflections
7. DLSS is not done on the RT cores whatsoever
8. Raytracing removes the work for a developer to create custom lighting in every scenario, you will likely see games that require raytracing support in order for them to run
But yes, I think RT is currently a meme. Control looks nice with RT though
raytracing always needs denoising
even professional software based solutions that big budget movie studios use denoises the image because raytracing is noisy
@@TorutheRedFox Yes, but the denoising in professional workloads doesn't affect the final product. Denoising in most RT games is very noticeable to most end users, as you can see the denoising happening in realtime.
And I would say, almost 2 years later, that I would no longer buy a non-RT capable card as it's clearly going to become more widespread in the coming years
@@TeranToola the denoising is noticeable as it's temporal noise, as it only does a select few rays at a time, making different pixels update at different times creating a ghosting effect
Ray-tracing actually goes further back then that. The technique was theorized in the 70s and some real time application were created back in the 80s on mainframes... The recent development for nvidia and amd showing interest in the technique is solely due to the fact were at the peek of what rasterization can do in regards to lighting transport. The push to the tracing methods is fueled to push lighting beyond what we could do with rasterization. Plus the tracing methods allows for realistic simulations of lighting transport due to the nature of the algorithm compared to rasterization.
just imagine if Nintendo had continued with the powerful route after the GameCube..
It's been a while since big N led the gaming tech. Maybe switch pro will bring it back, but it's unlikely IMO.
well, with the game cube selling way less than the ps2 and even less than the xbox orig, i mean, nintendo obliously thought, being tech lead doesnt help.
A tablet is absolutely _not_ going to set the graphical standards. I'm hoping next gen, they'll aim for PS4P/XBOX in power, but there's no way they'll do better than PS5/XSX.
Well there are businesses working solely on getting real time ray tracing on mobile devices which likely will be coming in the next 2 years. I just would expect those games to be 30fps.
@@Skylancer727 no. Not happening
@@glungusgongus it's already possible you just need games to utilize it. Plus many phone games are only 720p and therefore only need a tenth the rays as 4K.
Does anyone know if the ps1 had ray tracing? Or even the og xbox? Or just n64
og xbox would be able to do raytracing since its obliviously more powerful than the n64, the play 1 is a good question.
@@charlestrudel8308 the switch can also do ray tracing at 4k 60fps for simple 3d models
@@dirtydirtsgt4751 thats the point isnt it, raytracing isnt taxing, but having other stuff with it is taxing.
Any consoles can do ray tracing. It's not hardware specific, the only reason games never used it is the performance trade off was dreadful.
@@dirtydirtsgt4751 No, not happening, the Switch lacks the ram necessary to calculate that many rays period. It's why the 20 series Nvidia GPUs can't even hold 60fps at 1080p on Quake RTX. That is basically as basic as graphics can be with no tessellation, low poly, almost no particle effects or anything really. Unless it were just a room with a single box and a single light the Switch would not be able to handle it. The other main issue is the Switch has a bandwidth bottleneck which would limit how many rays it can calculate at a time so it just couldn't handle it. It needs more memory bandwidth much like why the 2060 is so bad at ray tracing.
This is not ray tracing, its called planar reflection. Ray tracing is a completely different thing much more complex calculation using real world physics formulas.
I woulda liked to see more evidence and proof of concept of the N64 ray tracing. The rest of the video went off on a tangent and was mostly Minecraft.
You all have no idea what you're talking about. These are ray-traced shadows and effects in extremely low resolution. Why do you have to talk about things you have no idea what you're talking about? And lie in the title? If you want to argue or explain anything you can comment.
@@Darenz-cg9zg It's not what you would think of when people say "Ray-tracing" and honestly it barely fits the actual definition as well. It's clickbait.
Lol. This video is non sense. Ray racing exists since the 70´s. But I don’t see the point of the video.
And now someone made ray tracer for SNES
Yea, it was done with inclusion of a SuperRT chip in the cartridge that allows it to do simplistic ray-tracing at 200x160 resolution at 30fps.
Saying Raytracing isn’t impressive because it’s been around for a while is like saying HD Rumble isn’t impressive because Cellphones had haptics years before it.
I didn't say it wasn't impressive, it's just barely noticeable for a lot of people in a ton of games that "have it". In something like Minecraft, it's night and day. Reality is, modern engines have handled a lot of the things ray tracing does already so well, that most don't even know if it's on in say, Battlefield V.
@@NintyPrime People thought that Demon's Souls had ray tracing but the developer confirmed that it doesn't have it. "Ray Tracing" is just a buzz word.
Most people also say they can’t tell the difference between 30 & 60fps.
Should we not push for 60 because a sect of people can’t tell the difference?
The tech is still in its infancy & now that it’s coming to console it’s finally in a state where developers can leverage using it on machines that are affordable enough to run it. Vs the $500+ GPU’s required when it went “mainstream” on the 20 series.
I didn't notice any difference in the RT on BOTW but Minecraft looked like a whole new beast with RT.
Yup. It really shows up huge in such a simplified game. Modern engines ALREADY handle lighting and shadows, even reflections, really well.
@@NintyPrime Yeah... Just like the Virtual Boy lol 😂😂😂
Zelda raytracing isn't a thing.
@@glungusgongus ruclips.net/video/w4UHrM0LzYo/видео.html
It's done using BotW on PC using Cemu or Yuzu emulators. Easiest to notice the difference on objects that are self emissive like the light bow he has on his back as well as small objects having shadows like individual blades of grass.
@@Skylancer727 thats not real raytracing.
Still waiting on Rare's Everwild after the Microsoft announcement
I see you know of Master Sapolsky, now clikc muh mozd
DLSS is basically nothing more special than cold fusion. It would be great if it worked as advertised but it doesn't. As a russian hacker though found out about 6 months ago, he had what he believed was DLSS working on an AMD GPU by modifying how it was processed on the drivers. Later an Epic developer told him it was not really DLSS but just the built in upscaling technology inside Unreal Engine. Basically put that's the majority of what DLSS is. Plus the performance boost is honestly far less impressive than people make it out as at 1800p you get about the same performance and in the majority of games that still looks better. DLSS is just a buzz word Nvidia advertised till people stuck to it and begged them to give them it.
I am pretty sure that Rare used some other kind of ray tracing, not the one we're used to. Or they were capping.
Yeah but it’s Samsung. It’s crazy that they were looking into ray tracing when the poly counts were so ridiculously low. You would think they’d try and improve everything else over “realistic lighting”.
Seriously, look at the lighting in the Link's Awakening remake or Luigi's Mansion 3. They achieved ultra realistic lighting on a weak piece of hardware without having to rely on ray tracing. Also, on PS4 Pro (dunno about base PS4, dont have one) but on the Pro, most AAA games have ultra realistic lighting already. Ray tracing is a different method but darn good methods already exist. It's not better, just different.
Yeah, that is my gripe with, like, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2019 and Black Ops Cold War having Real Time Raytracing. It just, doesn't look any different at all from maxed out setting without Raytracing. The only game as of now that drastically benefits from Minecraft. Which is solely do to the variable, sandbox-y nature of the game. That and the room for much better visuals.
It is actually better, it allows the developers to focus more on art and geometry because the need to make custom lighting and bake it all in disappears. All the load taken of of developers allows them to be more productive in other areas.
In the not to distant future raytracing will be the standard
6:40 you're literally just moving a white line across the screen I see no difference
That’s the point. It’s not a huge difference in many of today’s modern games since they already have fantastic lighting and reflection tricks in play as is.
@@NintyPrime
Lol.
@@NintyPrime
Honestly most people dont know what raytracing is let alone how to use it.
@@NintyPrime
Its been used in movie production before n64. The underrated aspect is the geometry relevant glow effect meets geometry based darkness which is superior to hbao+ and actually subtle reflectivity.
RUclips is a place people lack the integrity to tune it within the confines of injectable limitations. Often they crank settings that break other scenes, but almost always have no intention of sharing how they rendered the small window into their efforts.
@@NintyPrime
Hdr is more important?
Lmao. Slappable.
Also just because your monitor is overpriced doesn’t mean it has proper HDR. What’s the nits?
Is ray tracing the same thing that movies use to make shadows look more realistic
Didn't even know it was a thing until now 🤣
Wow, Rare was way ahead of it's time with the tech
Ray tracing has existed since the 1960's.
I don't see any ray-tracing in that footage - just environment mapping and a transparent floor with objects mirrored under it. Maybe they were tracing just a few rays here and there for some other purpose? But that's called raycasting today.
You're really oversimplifying things. That "mod" in Breath of the Wild only does global illumination and ambient occlusion and it's being applied with Reshade so it applying on top of the rest of the game. You'll see that GI and AO on-top of loading screens, on-top of BOTW's existing ambient occlusion and lighting, on-top of any atmospheric fog, and on-top of cell-shading that's applied to Link and all of the other characters.
If the game were actually modded to include ray-tracing then it would replace the cascading shadow maps, AO, and area lights that the game currently uses. I'm fairly certain that would reduce memory consumption, the shadows would be "infinite" resolution with no seams between cascades. Objects would be self-shadowed, and Link lantern would cast a shadow instead of being a point light beneath him, and light would bounce properly without ruining the cell-shading. Water would also have proper reflections instead of screen-space reflections would would prevent instances where the water is too bright at the shore.
Also Rare didn't originate ray-tracing. It was used in non-real-time rendering for decades and the idea was credited to somebody from the 16th century. Yes, the N64 could do it, lots of things could do it, but they couldn't do it in real-time, they couldn't do it at high resolutions, and they couldn't always do it without enough bounces to do anything that stencil shadows or cascading shadow maps could do faster.
Ray-tracing and pathtracing aren't just used for graphics either. Rays could also be cast to do spatial audio and FPSs use them for bullet trajectory because it requires casting very few rays. If Perfect Dark had any real-time raytracing, its because they were casting rays for aim.
I understand that you make RUclips videos and you aren't really required to know what you're talking about, but for your own sake I think you should have actually read up about this stuff before making this.
3:33 pretty sure dlss is run on tensor cores not rt cores
2:44 my pc running Cyberpunk 2077
what's the difference between raytracing and path tracing?
Always wanted to try what Conkers would have been.
Most uses of raytracing now is just, "wet GTA"
If it doesn’t affect gameplay, it’s nothing to write home about as if it does. The hype over ray-tracing has been ridiculous and speaks badly about modern gamers as well as developers.
I went from playing Watchdogs 2 on PS4 to playing it one PS5 and waaaaay better with Ray Tracing. So much more immersive looking at business shop windows and seeing yourself and cars go by in the reflection. I can imagine playing COD or Battlefield and passing by a window and seeing another player trying to creep up on you but you now know, like IRL they are there now. Side note and the reason I clicked on this video is I am playing “Bowsers Fury” on my Switch and I swear it is using Ray Tracing, IDK.
I honestly don't see much of a difference with RTX off vs on, except for games with rainy stages and lots of puddles
Probably because all games use different aspects of the tech, three main branches being global illumination, reflections and shadows.
Not all games use all three or even 2 of them depending on how demanding the game is with geometry and light sources
Using all three kind of gels everything, it's when they use a combination of RT and traditional rasterization techniques to fake the rest it gets a little uncanny
I didn’t know ray tracing had been out for this long
It was actually the original way to light 3D models but for real time rendering it was far too slow.
HDR looks best on OLED. VA panels have great contrast, but they sacrifice on everything else and still can't match the infinte contrast of OLED.
Mm my 2021 LG OLED, with a 3080ti driving ith through a 2.1 HDMI cannot be beaten on colour or contrast.
I had a £1000 Samsung panel with HDR before my current setup and the difference is remarkable.
This man is uninformed in many areas
@@scislife2398
That comment might not be aging too well after QD OLEDs enter the market
@@Katzelle3 of course it won't 😉 I look forward to what comes next though.
What you really want to keep your eye on is light field tech, star trek holodeck inbound 👍
ok so why talk about n64 but only show us switch games and minecraft?
Ray tracing was never a big thing for me. Framerate/resolution should be the focus for next-gen.
Raytracing doesn't have to look better to be better. theres other things important for a rendering system, like behaving predictably for developers and artists using it to create games, behaving consistently for various kinds of 3d information, and achieving a desired look with minimal complications.
There's a lot of things that ray tracing just does better that are under the hood and not immediately visible when you boot up a game.
that, and nothing beats raytracing for colored lighting.
So they are reusing technology and advertising them as new?
Have you heard of the iPhone
Ray Tracing was used in Star Trek and Star Wars
If we could fake ray tracing better we would need less calculations to generate a dynamic detail image for up-scaling. Things that could be up-scaled include geometry, physics, colour, texture. It could all be up-scaled at the point of denoising which with more fake ray tracing should require less effort. This way you might be able to do the impossible and make a 1.5 to 2 terraflop system equivalent to a ps4 with extra AI cores using Nvidia and ARM that infers so well that you would be close to matching the performance of a ps5 or xbox 4. It's a gamble but the new Nintendo could be a disruptive force.
I didn't even know what ray tracing is lol
Rtx just takes a lot of superpower to run. However. When you graphics are simple its easyer.
Man this is insane. Ray Tracing since I was a kid. What's their excuse now???
That it was always too demanding and raising the resolution increases the number of rays you need to fill the image. For the 360-480p image the N64 used you would only need about 2000 rays a frame vs current 1080p displays at about 5,000,000 rays a frame and 4K with 20,000,000 rays a frame. It's why ray tracing has always been out of reach. We are only attempting it now as we have better AI to fill in gaps so we can use a few less rays by cheating.
Same reason of ps4 30 fps and game boy 60 fps.
Title should have been: Nintendo claimed to use ray tracing in the 1990’s. There is no credible evidence that any playable game used ray tracing on the n64 hardware. Its doubtful any of the gameplay footage shown by Rare 1 depicts ray tracing, and 2 on n64 hardware. I vividly recall reading in Nintendo Magazine, or maybe it was Ultra Gamers, that the nintendo disk drive would allow for ray tracing to be used, but even child-me knew that to be false. I don’t know how many of you recall just how prevalent doctored game images taken from a PC were during this time period.
if you could record on 1080p that would be seriously sweet man. 720p is ehh. if you can't I understand. :(
The original recording is likely only in 480p or even 360p as the rays needed are far less and more easy to achieve.
Is this the PC version? If so, what you're saying is untrue. Raytracing was add via a mod.
The cores are build for the math and it's alot faster.
4:50 ya, sure, it's technically considered real ray tracing, it's just the most bottom of the barrel version/experience you can use without losing much FPS or dropping thousands on something that could do it for you without even caring. Tbh, I have reshade on Phasmaphobia and it changes the whole games looks, even with the somewhat modern tech they use for lighting already lmao. But real time ray tracing done on hardware vs a rebranding of the lighting system (i.e reshade) is not a good comparison as one is full fledged and calculated and one is just a glorified global illumination filter. Lol I have a 3060, for anyone curious
Yeah... Just like the Virtual Boy lol 😂😂😂
Nice history lesson
What if I told you that ray tracing has been existing since the MS-DOS era? Like, the early DOS days? It's not that "hardware" ray tracing works better or worse. Every real ray tracing is hardware assisted, it's either calculated by your CPU (what you'd call 'software rendering') or your GPU. What nVidia does is to implement an AI algorithm with an already trained model that somewhat predicts how the lighting would work, had it been real ray tracing (which is still kinda expensive for our current hardware if we want to achieve photorealism). Hence why the first versions of the RTX were so bad. Raytracing has been around for a very long time and it's how 3D modeling software renders the scenes. But we're still a few years from achieving real time ray tracing without tricks and magic like RTX does.
Ray tracing goes back even further. Hardware RT is the new thing..
Nintendo leading in technologies since the 90s now.
It was prior to Nintendo. They didn't make it, it was originally made for 3D modeling. It was intended to be used in games but it was cut as it was far more demanding than they thought and could push 3D gaming back another 5-10 years if resolutions never went up which they did.
@@Skylancer727 I hadn't watch the full video yet when I made the comment and had forgot to delete it.
Mario kart or Zelda or Metroid with ray tracing would be dope
The first time I heard about the raytracing hype, I be like is that even new?
Not new but nowadays it can be ran in real time
I need more context for the Rare example. Ray tracing may have referred to mathematical rays, not light rays. These rays may have referring to bullet trajectories or something.
But yes, the idea is not new. Games need to be designed to take advantage of ray tracing, and things like multiple light sources and reflections make ray tracing much more valuable. The BOTW videos here had neither of those. (Maybe some dull lighting in the dungeon? Hard to tell.)
That would be the same thing as that's exactly what ray tracing is. Plus today we have far higher resolution displays which need drastically more rays to fill the image. We need thousands of times more rays to fill the image now so back then it was actually easier especially for some N64 games that were 20fps or 360p.
@@Skylancer727 Yeah, I know. I just noticed the reflections used on the floor at one point, so it is a similar concept after all. My main point is that ambient light is still the primary lighting in that video. Modern ray-tracing is trying to incorporate that wholly instead of situational.
@@danielevans7439 well this does do it for the whole image, it's just that the base lighting can't be removed entirely witb just screen spaced shaders but it can get close. I still say the best game to look at is Halo 3 for why reshade ray tracing can look good. You really need a lot of small points lights and dynamic lights scattered around the map to make it shine as shadows are usually done fairly decently on the game naturally.
m.ruclips.net/video/6A-tEa5-4Vg/видео.html
Just don't get too out of control and make something disgusting like this. Plus you'll also learn fast reshade doesn't understand your hud.
m.ruclips.net/video/_gZruam6tKA/видео.html
mario 64's mirror room, thats all i need to say
That is not ray tracing, its planar reflection.
@@asanstudio Actually, it's just the same room modeled on the other side of the "mirror", along with a second model of Mario copying the player's movements. It's a clever and convincing workaround though.
Nintendo be doing it since forever
Ray Tracing is not physically possible on N64 hardware. The only reason it works now is deep learning. None of what showed up on your N64 was a ray tracing example. The colored spheres would have their bright colors bleed onto each other as the rays of light bounce between objects. That clearly isn't happening here. You cannot have ray tracing in software and expect it to run more than a frame every few hours. That's the nature of having a ray of light physically simulated bouncing between multiple objects then back to the camera let alone multiple physical ray simulations. They didn't even have realistic physics by the N64 era let alone realistic light physics. Ray tracing has always been the penultimate graphics achievement because until now, multi server render farms would take hours just to render a few frames for CG movies because the physical ray based light simulations were literally impossible to do in real time. You literally have zero idea what you're talking about.
Its raytracing bro. And ray marching. The reflections are path traced. Even Digital Foundry has a video on it.
I like the campfire scene more with raytracing than without, but really dislike the change in the look to the light sources in the shrine scenes - both interior and exterior (Though I suspect that's just a property of how the light sources for shrines are designed specifically to look good in the BotW light engine). Most scenes, I can sort of see a difference in these side by sides but not enough of one to have an opinion on which I like more - Was expecting to like the water more, since I thought reflective surfaces was where raytracing was meant to really shine.
Art style may be king, but fancy rendering tricks can be used to enhance non-realistic art styles as well as the more realistic styles they're usually associated with. Animal Crossing's use of e.g. anisotropic highlights really does help give its cartoony aesthetic that little bit extra versimilitude, and the ability of modern rendering techniques allows for 3d games to have aesthetics that just wouldn't have been viable on the PS1 and PS2 - I can't imagine Little Big Planet, Yoshi's Wooly World, Yoshi's Crafted World, and Kirby's Rainbow Paintbrush's aesthetics working nearly as well prior to the PS3 - The raw power of visuals aren't something that can get me excited about something but I do acknowledge that they can enhance the part of visuals I actually care about and make additional non realistic art sytles viable, some of which we may not even be imagining yet - You need a certain amount of ability to sell detailed realism to sell that this world is made of yarn rather than a realistic one - Without that you're likely to just read a tree as a tree, rather than a knitted tree, or one molded from clay, or made of plastic.
So what about Turok 2? Thats the best fps on the n64(graphically)
Rareware lied. There is *ZERO* realtime ray-tracing at play in Perfect Dark! The only things on display are pre-baked vertex shadows and fake polygonal reflections done by mirroring objects upside down and putting a transparent floor in between, two very common techniques of the late 90s considering that even per-vertex lighting was still expensive, let alone per-pixel.
In fact, not a *single* commercial N64 title had any form of realtime ray-tracing. The demo shown in the video is just that...a demo, a proof of concept...the concept of being able to do *any* form of realtime ray-tracing, regardless of framerate (which as we've seen is very low).
Clickbait title.
I love how you called it clickbait just because you disagree.
Real time ray tracing is a mind blowing computing feat to anyone a little knowlageable on rendering technics... All those ray tracing shader are fake you just can't approximate ray tracing with a shadder that's not possible
nae nae, if the hardware itself struggles to do rtx then the software will struggle even more
I wonder if Nintendo still has it.
Funfact the ps5 and xbox series X are not capable of raytracing the consoles actually do path tracing
Same thing lol.
I played roblix with rt and it was amazing (legends of auroa) the best part is you can do it with low hardware like Intel HD graph8cs
I am very surprised.
Real time... weapon change?
I did all except the last three because I can’t afford it
Ok I didn’t know that
I actually prefer no ray tracing for botw. I think if the game has it built in I think I’ll look great but if it’s not, it won’t always make it look better.
Real life lighting sucks, that's why ray tracing don't look impressive or necessary, at the end of the day you want improved lighting in your video games to actually be able to see everything going on on the screen.
Ray tracing on minecraft looks cool but seems awful to play with
Nintendo are very clever when they are being successful like they are now,the super Nintendo had many graphics advantages over the mega drive so you never know, dlss2 on switch pro or switch home with 4k upscaling could look as good as real 4k on more powerful hardware so hope they go with that.
Thanks for all of the good videos 🙂
Not serprising, i fact am amezed that ray tracing has been sooo overhyped on both the ps5 & xbox s andx.
Yep
Perfect Dark N64 and ray tracing lol
no