Shaky Cam Video - Battlefield 5 Ray Tracing Demos from NVIDIA RTX Editors event
Click here to post a comment for Shaky Cam Video - Battlefield 5 Ray Tracing Demos from NVIDIA RTX Editors event on our message forum
Jespi
Turn on the fckn FPS counter please. I sense NVIDIA is hiding two things. Potentional raw power of Turing. And fps drop with RT on.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Administrator
Fox2232
Weird. At 1st I thought that Raytraced images show distortion caused by gun covering large potion of FoV as rays are traced from camera's origin. But then I realized that clean image has additional reflections.
Transparency, reflection and refraction effects are definitely much better with raytracing. But why it was so broken without it? That's not normal.
schmidtbag
I must admit, that looks very nice. Unlike most demos of RTX where I'm like "this could easily be accomplished without an entire API" this actually has a noticeable and practical impact. Too bad it's an EA game though; I won't be buying it.
Amx85
GlennB
Noisiv
slick3
Ehh... Battlefield 5.
I will sadly skip. I tried to get into BF1 so many times now. I keep reinstalling, but sadly the pace of the game is too fast for me. Run, gun, die... run, gun, die! BFBC2 got it right 🙁
spectatorx
Crazy Serb
Ziggymac
Yes, I get it, it looks nice.
...But I'm sure as hell not paying $1100 for it.
Fox2232
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Administrator
Just played BF5 RTX on a build released today, I played it at the NVIDIA event. Butter smooth perf at least at 1920x1080. It does look really good to be brutally honest. Time will tell of course, but I felt impressed.
MaCk0y
I came here for some shaky cam videos but they were perfectly fine. Disappointed. 🙁 Now I am anticipating some vertical videos of a big screen. 😛
PolishRenegade
As a game dev... RTX is absolutely great news.
Slap some PBR shaders, put on an area light and vlam, 90% of the job is done. This is absolutely incredible and will revolutionize the industry in the next 5 years. Games that required teams of 200 artists will now only need half. No longer will hundreds of dev-hours be spent adjusting the light here, or removing a reflection there to increase performance or changing the level design to cheat a "mood" or making a specific shader for faking AO... imagine that!
You have to understand, that to accomplish the level of detail ray tracing gives you but with traditional techniques you will need 5x the GPU power. So at one point, we will reach an inflexion point where it's more efficient (& less costly) to have ray tracing vs using the old methods for an equivalent rendering quality.
Yeah, NVIDIA really rocked it. Your normal gamer might not have realized it yet but this is really groundbreaking stuff.
cliffgamerz
To be honest Skipping the 1st Gen would be better than spending twice the amount of performance and value for money 2nd gen might bring, Usually dont expect many good games with true Ray tracing to hit anytime soon as current consoles dont support it till next gen hits, so yeah i will be skipping for two reasons, one for money (still costly due to mining) worried about performance when true Ray tracing games hit the market which would not be good to sell the RTX 2070 or 2080 due to limited performance when 2nd gen true cards hit the market.
PolishRenegade
H83
Fox2232
pSXAuthor
So, I'll just explain something that is obvious to anyone who understands modern rendering tech but clearly not obvious to anyone who reads or writes for this site (and probably most people who watch those videos):
What they are showing is the difference between SSR (screen space reflections) and raytraced reflections. SSR works by approximating raytracing in screen space. For each pixel on a reflective surface a ray is fired out in and the camera's depth and colour buffers are used to perform an an approximation to raytracing (you can imagine drawing a line in 3D in the direction of the reflected light, reading the depth of each pixel until the line disappears behind another surface - nominally this will be the reflected point if the intersection point is close to the line - otherwise it is probably an occlusion - doing it efficiently and robustly is a little more involved than this but this explanation is very close to the reality).
This approximation can be quite accurate in simple cases however, because the camera's image is being used: no back facing surfaces can ever be reflected (you will never see your face in a puddle!), nothing off screen can be reflected, and geometry behind other geometry from the point of view of the camera can never be reflected. This last point explains why the gun in an FPS causes areas in the reflections to be hidden - the reason is very simple: those pixels should be reflecting something which is underneath the gun in the camera's 2D image. Also this explains why the explosion is not visible in the car door: it is out of shot. Actually: it also appears that the BF engine does not reflect the particle effects anyway (probably reflection is done earlier in the pipeline than the particles are drawn).
Using real raytracing for reflection avoids all of these issues (at the cost of doing full raytracing obviously 🙂.
Honestly I think these tech presentations often do more harm than good because the people who watch them don't actually understand what they are seeing. Probably better to just show shiny stuff and say "look! its shinier now! buy our new hardware!" 🙂