this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
122 points (96.2% liked)
PC Gaming
9158 readers
783 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's true. Ray tracing libraries and engines like UE5 are a lot easier to develop on than older engines.
But I'm not sure it's such a simple comparison. 3d acceleration made games look better, and the weakest gpus didn't make your fps tank afaik. Your average gpu these days will tank your FPS in ray tracing and cause awful visual artifacts, either from bad denoising algorithms, or from the upscalers used to hide the bad FPS and bad denoising.
This move reduces development costs, but given that the consumer doesn't get any benefits from it, it's hard not to have the cynical view that this is just greedy cost cutting on Microsoft's part.