cucker tarlson yup,you get a game that looks beautiful and then physics look like crap.



as for the rt,since what I wrote above very much relates to shadows,I'm glad rt came along.we're wasting resources for incredibly accurate and sharp shadows,while the goal should be totally somewhere else.smooth,life-like and dynamic.



look at reflections too.SSR looks like crap in many cases.want high quality ssr reflections ? in rdr2 they perfected it at the cost of 40% performance hit.ridiculous,might as well get rtx option,would run the same and look better.

True, I remember how crappy old games, and hell even new ones are when you get stuck in places due to faulty game physics. Swings in GTA were deadly.I think a combined approach of "precooked" tables and vector data which can be handled easily on a CPU core handed to the GPU for Z depth pass, lookup tables of reflectivity values while running the ray tracing, then use the rendered angle values for objects and store that as long as its in frame and only have to update the angle relative to the "user" to update the shadow and reflection map. Its going to take new hardware, and its still computationally expensive, but so was AF for a long time, then we found the right way to do it in hardware with almost no performance penalty.Physics can do the same, its all just math, and a lot of it, but hardware acceleration for other things are just data tables or actual physical transistors in the right pattern to match an algorithm.