01011001
Banned
ffff
Quake 2 RayTracing is a tech demo of a game that is 100% rendered using raytracing. this means everything you see on screen is rendered using data from lightrays that are shot from your view and bounced off of things.
in normal games this doesn't happen. usually games render the game like they would normally but use raytracing for rendering reflections or shadows only.
this is why quake 2 is so demanding
but the technique used is the exact same... it's just not used as extensively, but it's the same.
so raytracing is a useful term as it describes a certain way to render things
Isn't Ray tracing a bit of a meaningless term?
I'm no expert but correct me if wrong. But we have stuff like quake raytraced, which is fully raytraced and can barely be handled by the most expensive gpus these days, in spite of its antique geometry etc.
And then we have stuff like metro and what not, where Raytracing means some puddle of mud's reflection looks slightly different to another when directly compared via Screenshots.
Given such a range of usages (and hardware requirements) , can we really infer anything meaningful from that statement?
Quake 2 RayTracing is a tech demo of a game that is 100% rendered using raytracing. this means everything you see on screen is rendered using data from lightrays that are shot from your view and bounced off of things.
in normal games this doesn't happen. usually games render the game like they would normally but use raytracing for rendering reflections or shadows only.
this is why quake 2 is so demanding
but the technique used is the exact same... it's just not used as extensively, but it's the same.
so raytracing is a useful term as it describes a certain way to render things
Last edited: