- Joined
- Sep 17, 2014
- Messages
- 21,807 (6.00/day)
- Location
- The Washing Machine
Processor | 7800X3D |
---|---|
Motherboard | MSI MAG Mortar b650m wifi |
Cooling | Thermalright Peerless Assassin |
Memory | 32GB Corsair Vengeance 30CL6000 |
Video Card(s) | ASRock RX7900XT Phantom Gaming |
Storage | Lexar NM790 4TB + Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 980 1TB + Crucial BX100 250GB |
Display(s) | Gigabyte G34QWC (3440x1440) |
Case | Lian Li A3 mATX White |
Audio Device(s) | Harman Kardon AVR137 + 2.1 |
Power Supply | EVGA Supernova G2 750W |
Mouse | XTRFY M42 |
Keyboard | Lenovo Thinkpad Trackpoint II |
Software | W11 IoT Enterprise LTSC |
Motion Blur is supposedly more "realistic" as well yet it's the first option I turn off when I jump into a new game. I'd take the "false" image with the sharper details and worse shadows over the "real" image with better shadows any day. Or better yet, a combination of both with the better RT shadows with the clearer non-RT image.
This is indeed an issue with RT in games. Many situations may be 'real' but they certainly are not playable that way. It will always have to be tweaked, I think.
A few years ago we were keen comparing games with movies, because CGI got so good and games gained graphical fidelity, mocap, and other stuff similar to what's used in film. But people seem to have forgotten that movies get edited too. The camera roll is often pretty horrible to look at on its own.
Question remains how much truly realistic RT will be left when all is said and done. That said I do like the low-key approach, noticing those finer details I think is where RT can shine, the technology needs to pick its battles, both for fidelity and performance.
And yeah... Motion blur, chromatic abberation and vignetting... whoever thought those were good ideas needs a punch in the face.