There might be a good reason for this. Raster effects were already really good in newer games, and ray tracing could only improve on that high bar. It’s filling in details that are barely noticeable, but creap ever so slightly closer to photorealism.

Old games start from a low bar, so ray tracing has dramatic improvement.

  • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    It’s just because newer games have too much to effectively ray trace, so they have to use it in a very limited manner. There are very few games fully ray traced.

    Ray traced quake looks more like real video than a lot of those modern games do; it just looks like some kind of theme park/old theater costume type of deal with a lot of rubber because the materials aren’t as good.

    • moody@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Yeah, for sure. Raytracing is very computationally intensive. It doesn’t make sense to do full-scene raytracing unless you have hardware that’s specifically designed for it. It works for something like quake since none of the scenes are particularly complex, but obviously you don’t hit anything close to the same framerates as you would with raster rendering.