RTX picking up steam - Cyberpunk 2077 & Watch Dogs: Legion join the growing list of RTX titles

[illegalwater]

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/cyberpunk-2077-nvidia-partnership-ray-tracing/

Quote

Featuring CD PROJEKT RED’s hallmark concept of choices and consequences, players will face difficult decisions that ripple through the entire game, and will have unprecedented choice on how to tackle missions and scenarios. And of course, everything will play out at an incredible level of detail, beyond anything previously seen, just as it did in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.

For Cyberpunk 2077, we’ve partnered with CD PROJEKT RED as an official technology partner to bring real-time ray tracing to the game.

“Cyberpunk 2077 is an incredibly ambitious game, mixing first person perspective and deep role-playing, while also creating an intricate and immersive world in which to tell this story. We believe the world of Cyberpunk will greatly benefit from the realistic lighting that ray tracing delivers,” said Matt Wuebbling, head of GeForce marketing at NVIDIA.

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/watch-dogs-legion-nvidia-partnership-ray-tracing/

Quote

Ubisoft’s Watch Dogs® games have been at the forefront of open-world gaming, with massive cities, plenty of NPCs, and numerous other cutting-edge effects not found in other titles. Furthermore, the PC editions of both Watch Dogs® and Watch Dogs 2® benefited greatly from partnerships with NVIDIA, which has seen PC-exclusive tech and experience-enhancing features introduced, delivering the definitive experiences.

Now, we’re partnering once again, to bring DXR real-time ray tracing to the newly-announced Watch Dogs®: Legion, which is set in a photorealistic near-future London.

Honestly wasn't expecting Cyberpunk to have RTX, very cool. I wonder which games are next?

[PlayStation 2]

Oh, you mean Nvidia's finally getting their hardware utilization in order now? Like what they should've done from the get-go?

[illegalwater]

8 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Oh, you mean Nvidia's finally getting their hardware utilization in order now? Like what they should've done from the get-go?

This stuff takes time, they couldn't just snap their fingers and have 100 titles lined up on day one for their first gen RT hardware.

[PlayStation 2]

1 minute ago, System32.exe said:

This stuff takes time, they couldn't just snap their fingers and have 100 RTX titles lined up on day one.

They had about three at launch. I'm not expecting too much from hardware and software developers but I always felt like the RTX cards were a rush job because there was not a lot of software to go off of.

[illegalwater]

Just now, Dan Castellaneta said:

They had about three at launch. I'm not expecting too much from hardware and software developers but I always felt like the RTX cards were a rush job because there was not a lot of software to go off of.

There wasn't much software support at launch because it's first gen hardware..

[Senzelian]

13 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

They had about three at launch. I'm not expecting too much from hardware and software developers but I always felt like the RTX cards were a rush job because there was not a lot of software to go off of.

NVidia wouldn't be able to convince game developers to include raytracing if there wasn't a way to show it off.
So, of course, it's hardware first, software later.

 

But back to topic:
Looks good I guess, but without cheaper hardware to run it I'm not interested yet.

[mr moose]

So in 8 months they have more supporting titles than any other tech development gained in it's first 5 years?  And people are still trying to argue it is a pointless tech being used to con the consumer...

 

It is supported, it does something, it's bigger than gaming, and if you don't like it you don't have to buy RTX, you can buy NAVI.

[grayperview]

Gonna be a couple more generation of cards before RT gives a good experience at a reasonable price to frame rate and your wallet, so not really arsed what games its in now, the hardware just isn't affordable enough for me to care.

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, grayperview said:

Gonna be a couple more generation of cards before RT gives a good experience at a reasonable price to frame rate and your wallet, so not really arsed what games its in now, the hardware just isn't affordable enough for me to care.

 

It doesn't matter how many generations come out, the top 3-4 cards will always be shit price/performance.   The sweet spot for Price/fps has always been XX60 and AMD equivalent.     Even the 2060 is only a few percent worse than the RX 590 in this regard.

[SpookyCitrus]

In my personal opinion they should have waited until RTX was ready. It's poorly optimized and only has had 3 AAA titles and 2 early access titles that use it officially in the 264 days since launch, yes more are being released soon but still... Don't get me wrong the lighting, and reflections look really nice but it's nowhere near worth it purchasing a new card specifically for RTX features especially when the performance drop off for anything under the 2080 is as bad as it is. The new turing architecture is fast and if I were to get an RTX card I wouldn't use the RTX features, not until the performance and game base is where it needs to be.

Basically what I mean.

Buying a card specifically for RTX = Not worth it, at this time.

Buying an RTX card for performance and not using RTX features right now = Worth it if you get the card at a reasonable price.

 

 

[grayperview]

18 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

It doesn't matter how many generations come out, the top 3-4 cards will always be shit price/performance.   The sweet spot for Price/fps has always been XX60 and AMD equivalent.     Even the 2060 is only a few percent worse than the RX 590 in this regard.

exactly my point your looking at the RTX5060 equivalent before RT is financially viable for the masses. Buying an RTX2060 is pointless for RT as it can barely do it.

[PlayStation 2]

32 minutes ago, mr moose said:

So in 8 months they have more supporting titles than any other tech development gained in it's first 5 years?  And people are still trying to argue it is a pointless tech being used to con the consumer...

 

It is supported, it does something, it's bigger than gaming, and if you don't like it you don't have to buy RTX, you can buy NAVI.

My argument wasn't really "it's useless" but rather "it was launched prematurely". Maybe I'm a bit unrealistic on how Nvidia could've gone about it but I felt like they could've came out with more than the same amount of titles that the Nintendo 64's Japanese launch received. I'm glad to see more games supporting the RTX hardware but I just feel like they could've released it a bit later.

That being said, I await the future of ray and path-tracing itself in PC gaming and how it'll benefit games visually.

[mr moose]

32 minutes ago, grayperview said:

exactly my point your looking at the RTX5060 equivalent before RT is financially viable for the masses. Buying an RTX2060 is pointless for RT as it can barely do it.

The 5060 when it releases will still be the same Price/perf for it's time as the 2060 is now as the 1060 was and as the 960 was also.    The whole thing scales. 

 

28 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

My argument wasn't really "it's useless" but rather "it was launched prematurely". Maybe I'm a bit unrealistic on how Nvidia could've gone about it but I felt like they could've came out with more than the same amount of titles that the Nintendo 64's Japanese launch received. I'm glad to see more games supporting the RTX hardware but I just feel like they could've released it a bit later.

That being said, I await the future of ray and path-tracing itself in PC gaming and how it'll benefit games visually.

My point about it being pointless was from another similar thread where someone claimed it was unusable tech being forced onto consumers (like they don't have an option).

 

Nintendo control both the games and the hardware,  slightly different kettle of fish but I get your reasoning. 

 

I just don't know why people think their personal opinion carries more weight than an objective technology, we can count the games, we can measure the performance.  What makes sense to me may not to someone else, which is why I said no one has to buy it, they can buy NAVI if they want.  This idea that people are being somehow burdened because RTX exists is mind numbing.

[Brooksie359]

28 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

My argument wasn't really "it's useless" but rather "it was launched prematurely". Maybe I'm a bit unrealistic on how Nvidia could've gone about it but I felt like they could've came out with more than the same amount of titles that the Nintendo 64's Japanese launch received. I'm glad to see more games supporting the RTX hardware but I just feel like they could've released it a bit later.

That being said, I await the future of ray and path-tracing itself in PC gaming and how it'll benefit games visually.

How do you propose they could have done that? It's not like they could have released the Turing gpus and not said anything about raytracing when a large portion of the silicon is dedicated to it. You can't really develop games for nonexistent hardware so it's not like they could have asked developers to develope games for it before it came into existence. My guess is that they had been working with people behind the scenes to add raytracing into games that were still in development and not too close to launch to allow time for them to implement it properly. We will likely see more and more games with raytracing as more games that had the technology available earlier in the games development start to come out.  

[ch3w2oy]

 

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

So in 8 months they have more supporting titles than any other tech development gained in it's first 5 years?  And people are still trying to argue it is a pointless tech being used to con the consumer...

 

It is supported, it does something, it's bigger than gaming, and if you don't like it you don't have to buy RTX, you can buy NAVI.

I don't think there's many people arguing it's a pointless tech.. In fact, I see more people believing that is in fact the future of gaming..

 

I also think Ray Tracing (and whatever comes with it) is awesome, it is..

 

I think the biggest question ISSS.. Can we use Ray Tracing? Anyone gonna trace rays with their 2070s? If the 2080 TI is the only card capable of delivering 60fps with RT enabled, then all the other cards are overpriced and utilizing a tech still in it's infancy.. I haven't kept up to date with this specific feature so correct me if I'm wrong, thanks.

 

The BIGGEST problem with Nvidia doing this shit is the fact that they could have released cards without the Ray Tracing but with the same performance (w/o RT) for less than what the 2080 TI costs.. But they wont do that will they?

 

They are putting features in cards that can't utilize the tech and over charging for it. That is what makes everything about Ray Tracing seem stupid and off putting. 

 

(didn't mean to sound any type of way, not trying to argue).

[PlayStation 2]

7 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

How do you propose they could have done that? It's not like they could have released the Turing gpus and not said anything about raytracing when a large portion of the silicon is dedicated to it. You can't really develop games for nonexistent hardware so it's not like they could have asked developers to develope games for it before it came into existence. My guess is that they had been working with people behind the scenes to add raytracing into games that were still in development and not too close to launch to allow time for them to implement it properly. We will likely see more and more games with raytracing as more games that had the technology available earlier in the games development start to come out.  

I guess there is a chicken-and-egg problem here, but it was known that Battlefield V's ray-tracing features were developed for a while using Titan V's (or were it the XP's? I forget but it was one of the newer Titans). I dunno, maybe Nvidia could've pushed that on more devs beforehand, but as I said, maybe I'm a bit unrealistic on how this shit gets done.

[mr moose]

8 minutes ago, ch3w2oy said:

 

I don't think there's many people arguing it's a pointless tech.. In fact, I see more people believing that is in fact the future of gaming..

 

I also think Ray Tracing (and whatever comes with it) is awesome, it is..

 

I think the biggest question ISSS.. Can we use Ray Tracing? Anyone gonna trace rays with their 2070s? If the 2080 TI is the only card capable of delivering 60fps with RT enabled, then all the other cards are overpriced and utilizing a tech still in it's infancy.. I haven't kept up to date with this specific feature so correct me if I'm wrong, thanks.

It's new tech and that comes with performance hits.  All new tech has entered the market the same way.   For some people 30fps is worth it for the eye candy, for others anything less than a 100FPS is nono regardless of the price.

 

8 minutes ago, ch3w2oy said:

The BIGGEST problem with Nvidia doing this shit is the fact that they could have released cards without the Ray Tracing but with the same performance (w/o RT) for less than what the 2080 TI costs.. But they wont do that will they?

If they don't offer an RTXless version and it costs them sales then that is their problem,  there is absolutely nothing wrong with AMD cards as an alternative (assuming they get their performance act together in the top end).  If you want 2070 performance without RTX then buy NAVI when it releases.    If you want 2080 or 2080ti performance then you have to buy those cards.  I wanted 1080ti performance but without the "we have no competition" price tag, it was never going to happen. 

 

8 minutes ago, ch3w2oy said:

They are putting features in cards that can't utilize the tech and over charging for it. That is what makes everything about Ray Tracing seem stupid and off putting. 

Over priced is still a personal opinion,  I get it, I will never buy an RTX card because to me the price is just to high for what you get (in that regard we are in the same boat),  but that doesn't mean it isn't for other people and it certainly doesn't mean Nvidia have jacked the prices beyond reasonable market conditions.

 

8 minutes ago, ch3w2oy said:

(didn't mean to sound any type of way, not trying to argue).

That's cool, the problem with text based communication is not being able to read intention.  If I get too "you're wrong wrong wrong" it's only because the internet has a bad habit of echoing certain notions to the detriment of consumers, it's not a personal judgnement.   Like the old AMD hot and loud trope, or that apple never gets viruses,  or even the idea that Intel's TDP is a lie or wrong to con consumers.   People just don't bother with all the other facets of the industry and when you have too many people all agreeing with each other over an opinion then a whole narrative is born treating that as a fact.

 

So for the most part I agree, for many people the performance is not there for the price tag, but let's not forget that that is the case for all top end products and always has been, it's not unique to RTX.

 

 

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

I mean if Minecraft could look better than these games, who wouldn't want to jump onboard?

[grayperview]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

The 5060 when it releases will still be the same Price/perf for it's time as the 2060 is now as the 1060 was and as the 960 was also.    The whole thing scales. 

 

And at that point you'd hope these cards would have much better RT performance that the 2080Ti has now.

[S w a t s o n]

Yeaaaaaaaaaa fuck navi, nvidia probably going to sell me an RTX card even if it's second hand or heavily discounted.

[xg32]

i'm a believer. Playing metro with RTX on after the updates (for any1 with an rtx card, i strongly recommend trying metro exodus on ultra with game pass, it's unlike anything i've ever seen), 

 

It's best to treat it as a bonus feature rather than a requirement atm. However with Sony and Microsoft implementing RTX into next gen consoles (and somehow the current RX 5700 doesn't), devs will have more experience with it, and it'll pick up momentum.

 

Looks like current gen RTX cards, albeit too weak with RTX on, will serve a purpose while navi will leave buyers with a pc that's weaker than a 2020 console for 450usd for just the gpu, i tried very hard to make sense of 5700 pricing, and i just couldn't(at least it's a blower XD)

[Ravendarat]

I have an RTX2080 Ti and I play Battlefield, its one of my favorite games, but Ray Tracing just doesn't do much for me. Im hoping I see a real difference on Cyberpunk because as it is I usually just turn it off

[D13H4RD]

I’ll probably still give it some more time.

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, grayperview said:

And at that point you'd hope these cards would have much better RT performance that the 2080Ti has now.

By that time all cards will have much better everything.  Remember the 980TI and Titan X? both of those barely pushed 60FPS at 4K when they came out.  In fact they average 30-40FPS across most AAA releases.   The 980ti was a $650 card while the 2080 (it's tier replacement) was $800.  So in 5 years we've seen a $150 increase (not completely bad considering all the factors), added hardware features and so in general maintained  price/performance.  If we look at history and extrapolate forward the top end will still be in the shit price/perf category, the XX60 and AMD equivalent (whatever they call it) will still be the sweet spot and all cards will generally perform better than the generation before.

[SenKa]

Cyberpunk is getting DXR!?

 

Thats gonna look sooooooooo goooooooooooooood...

 

Ugh. I want it now. I want an RTX card and i want this game. Also a new display so I can enjoy that sexy raytraced beauty at 4k/144Hz...