4A Games has released its GDC 2018 tech demo video for Metro: Exodus, showcasing the newly implemented NVIDIA RTX real-time raytracing effects. 4A Games has utilized true raytracing to render both Ambient Occlusion and Indirect Lighting in full real-time, in a practical in-game scenario, however the YouTube compression in this particular video is really awful and makes it hard to notice the improvements.
4A Games’ Chief Technical Officer, Oleksandr Shyshkovtsov, said:
“Previously, we had utilized a mix of several custom-made systems to satisfy our hungry demand for dynamic content of varying scale. Now we are able to replace it with one single system that covers all our needs and outputs the quality of offline renderers.”
Metro Exodus will support NVIDIA’s RTX tech when it comes out on the PC!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
that was… beautiful…
i hope to God they don’t downgrade the game for peasants
Umm. Why would they take this feature out of the game? Literally makes no sense. It just won’t be present in the console versions.
Tell that to CDPR and The Witcher 3. 4AGames is also not a huge studio and therefore they can not afford to make two separate renderers with drastically different effects quality-wise.
Because don’t you understand zeroax1s? There needs to be an evil boogie man/scapegoat for PC Gamers to blame just about anything on just encase the feature ends up being taken out of the game for being to taxing on systems or absolutely useless beyond looking nice.
The boogieman/scapegoat is the console users, despite them not effecting other computer games like FFXV having Nvidia hairworks and all that other wonderful FPS killing goodness in the game, MGS:V looking objectively the best PC, and pretty much any game with any graphics settings ever. They still need something to blame it on. Hopefully that clears it up for you.
Also they’ll use CDPR for a reason too time and time again because they admittedly compromised because god forbid the developer actually make their money back so the next game can potentially make a game with mind blowing graphics in Cyberpunk 2077.
But that’s the reasonable approach to this sort of thing. PC Gamer’s aren’t reasonable at all because they’re petulant children at best. I’ve begun to notice this the more and more I post on this website(few of you are actually OK but it would take seeing your user names again to know who you are).
They’re the most unreasonable people in all of gaming next to COD fan boys, and it’s hilarious to me.
The games probably going to have it since NVIDIA is more than likely going to finance it to be in the game. You have nothing to worry about if you thought it would be taken out. But of course NVIDIA is going to just pass up on the opportunity to show off some brand new technology for “Reasons” in a flag ship title that people are dying to play as much as Stalker 3
It already is. They did say last E3 that it would “look good on all platforms”, meaning that a form of parity has been involved.
For it to look good on all platforms, the game would then have to look the same via texture detail, lighting and shadows. They didn’t once say that “it’ll look miles better on PC”.
What may look “good” to a base Xbone owner relative to a high-end PC user will differ dramatically so the game could still be said to “look good on all platforms” while being markedly superior on PC. With the PC version featuring Nvidia RTX, for example, then we already know there won’t be parity across all platforms (including on PC itself) so perhaps we shouldn’t be taking their statement too literally. I’m remaining optimistic.
We’ve yet to see how it will look on PC with the final product. Knowing how these games are marketed, mostly has them being held back in one way or another. Take Ubisoft for example, as well as the devs behind Sea of Thieves, it’s obvious that the visuals were dialed back for their games.
I want to hope that ME looks stellar on PC, but the recent ray tracing demo shows us poor shadows and texture quality, which would have most likely been running with the PC version. I don’t see why they would use an X1 or PS4 dev kit to show off the tech, it just doesn’t make sense.
Also, going off of the demo, it really doesn’t look night and day, because they aren’t really making maximum use of the RT tech, especially considering that the game has been in development since 2013. it’s not something easy and simply dragging and dropping RT into the game. We’ve had games built in mind for consoles, and had half of a new tech implemented within the PC version. It wasn’t until some years later that we eventually saw said tech being used fully within a game, rather than being added in half baked at the last minute.
Notice as well, that while RT has been a thing for decades, it’s only now being talked about in regards to MS and Nvidia. Notice that devs haven’t been talking about it since 2010 or games being built in mind with it. So that also lends to ME not fully using RT to it’s full potential, and being completely designed around it either, otherwise we’d have heard of said development some years back, and even last year at e3 2017.
I’d want to remain optimistic, but seeing as how they have to design these games to run on current gen base systems, I honestly hold little hope for the PC version. You know that the only game that looked massively night and day was with the original Crysis, compared to the other two that followed down the line. It’s been a very long time since we’ve seen a dev going “here’s the console version (looks like PS2 visuals), now here’s the PC version (looks like PS5 visuals for example). We won’t be seeing such leaps and non parity practices like that because it clearly wouldn’t sit well with either of the big 3, let alone their legion of paying fans.
FFXV is a nice PC port, but it’s not a gen and a half above what we’ve already seen on the base console versions. Yes we have some purdy grass, slightly better textures, shadows, a bit of fur and some slightly better fire, but I was honestly expecting more than just a few additions, considering that those devs at SE claim it was “built from the ground up for PC”, because whenver I ehar that, I naturally expect it to look massively different, not marginally.
You certainly raise an interesting point there re: if we see it being the case that games designed from the ground up with Nvidia RTX in mind might look better than those games having it applied late on in development. I’m no expert in the field of graphics art so won’t attempt to guess either way.
I ‘get’ what you’re saying in general albeit (and as much as it pains me to compliment them) some Ubisoft games in recent years made a real effort on PC. The likes of Assassin’s Creed: Unity comes to mind which still looks damned fine today on PC and also The Division looks great in many ways despite the controversy of the post-E3 downgrade.
I wouldn’t even count Sea of Thieves because it’s by a Microsoft Studios dev’ so it’s no real surprise we’re getting little more than a bare bones console port featuring the usual expected improvements over console that any PC game should have.
I think you’re being a little harsh on 4A Games by way of your comment about Crysis. Metro 2033 was released at the same time on PC and Xbox 360 and they really pushed things hard on PC at max’ settings and it consequently looked so vastly superior to the console version that it wasn’t even funny.
I’m now fearing that Chris Roberts will be noticing all this attention being heaped on Nvidia RTX and consequently announce they’ll be delaying Star Citizen for a further ‘x’ months so to feature it in the game, lol!
I’m no expert either, but it’s easy to see a game using half a piece of tech compared to one making full use of it.
Remember how DX 11 Originally went in it’s early years, compared to now?. DX 12 isn’t really heading that way, more or less repeating what happened to DX 10 at the time.
Some Ubisoft titles have, but only because they have to, not because they want to. PC gamers have been wanting the bells and whistles that originally came with previous games from other devs. Ubisoft now uses this as a marketing tool (take a look at TD’s PC youtube ad and see them boasting 60fps+ and other trimmings as if it’s brand spanking new tech).
AC Origins doesn’t really hold much weight, seeing as the only differences that stand out are the slight increase of LoD and shadows. The textures were confirmed to being exactly the same as the ones found on consoles. it also didn’t help that they tossed on multiple layers, while also optimizing it poorly, as we even saw higher end hw (far higher than base consoles) being brought to it’s knees, which doesn’t say much considering the differences between the PC and console versions, the high end hw should never melt like that, that doesn’t make AC Origins a legit Crysis level demanding title.
Let’s put it this way; if you see a console boasting Crysis level visuals, and then it looks the same on consoles, with the addition of slightly better shadows and LoD, which system do you think the game was designed around?. To me it’d say it was designed for consoles in mind, because a PC version having slightly better shadows and LoD just doesn’t scream “made for PC”, because they aren’t giving you a plethora of enhancements.
The most we get these days out of AAA devs are slightly better shadows (which cripple performance anyway, and makes me wonder why on earth no one has figured out how to reduce the said power cost it requires), and LoD. The “4k” textures we get mostly end up being upscaled 1080p ones (Just looking at FF XV’s HD pack tells me this). We also end up with taxing AA options like MSAA rather than SMAA. We sometimes get TAA, but even that ends up blurring the image and costing a bit in the performance dept. TXAA is even rarer and Nvidia’s AA option is only supported by less than 5 games (to my knowledge).
Yeah SoT was pretty much designed around the base X1, because MS still wants to commit to their console brand, rather than putting all the chips in for a PC return. People like to say “oh but they are releasing their content on PC going forward”, which doesn’t really mean much, besides gaining a few console ports, and we still haven’t received their older ones like the Halo MCC. We’ve also heard zip in regards to MS making games for PC and making use of the higher end hw provided within the market.At this point I still don’t see MS returning to PC in full force, not as long as their console brand exists. It literally has to die to actually force them to finally pay full attention to PC again.
IN all honesty, I liked playing the Metro series thus far, but while there were some good textures, there were also some bad ones littered around that looked like something from the PS2 era.
With their new game, I doubt it will be legit demanding, because it’s being designed with base console systems in mind. If we do not see a drastic night and day difference between the console and PC versions outside of the usual shadow and LoD differences (which seem to be the main spots to see these days), then we’ll know it’s not being fair on the demand side of things.
What I would consider legit demanding, is full 2-4k res textures on everything, and I mean everything. Also the inclusion of physics on anything you can touch or shoot, and that other NPC’s can interact with, rather than having a baked animated scripted event to an NPC for you to watch.
CR won’t finish SC for some years. The game has an insanely large scope, and I know that he wants to set the bar so high, that he can comfortably say he has the game with the largest scope that no one can hope to top (because who is going to spend nearly a decade and a few hundred mil to make a game on his level, that isn’t tied to a console?.
Lol you clearly haven’t played a single game you refer to. The game looks exponentially better on PC and definitely has higher resolution textures. Just most of them are the same as on console.
I have actually.
I don’t know why you act like this towards other people though.
“No wonder Sp4ctr0 Spencer has been quiet!”
I’m quiet because I can’t believe that you say something good about DirectX 12 exclusive technology – Because you know that Nvidia RTX is library build on DX12
Mental gymnastics once more from you in the effort to praise your corporate overlord Microsoft. So predictable! Thanks for the laugh though. Nice to know you’re busily scanning every word here!
Nvidia RTX is a DX12 exclusive library… so no Windows 7 version for you 🙂
Your usual amateurish trolling that as always failed.
Except it will. Have you not played Metro 2033 or LL? Lol. Drastically different on PC.
I have, and they haven’t aged all that well.
You serious? I think the Metro games still hold up really well. Better than most third party shooters at least. If I gotta be honest I can’t really tell how much of a visual bump this game has compared to the previous installment yet. Kinda worried that there might not be much. Oh well, so long it looks as good as Last Light and has an engaging gameplay and story then I’m all good.
The games are most definitely a large step up from the Fallout franchise, and are quite atmospheric, but like previous Fallout titles, the assets haven’t aged all too well.
I’m watching a graphics comparison and I barely see a difference. I’d imagine in actual gameplay the only time you’d see it is if you focus your eyes and stop moving.
Fornite isn’t even made with Crysis visuals in mind…
well amd just announced that some upcoming vulkan game will have ray tracing.. i just hope to god that this does not go the way of the VR
I totally agree. But in this case it will not be the same for if you have a Nvidia card you will be able to play both Nvidia and Vulkan versions. In VR each one is locked out in many cases which totally sucks. Thank God AMD does not roll like that and GPU lock their tech(unless they are for RT?). Having said that no one should ever GPU lock their tech it just sucks for everyone in the long run.
I really want this tech to progress and be huge for it looks really nice.
I am not worried dat much , this is dx12 ray tracing from micro with hw async using direct compute.. amd will most likely be just fine
Exactly, I am sure they will be good to go, anyways fingers crossed there is some understanding between the crews and things work out in the end for everyone and it is positive. I really doubt this will turn into a Physx.
We do not know much about RTX, it could very likely use DC for non-nvidia and CUDA for nvidia HW. It would not be a first time as nvidia always use approach to make sure they run faster than competition. Very much same thing nvidia used in PhysX FLEX.
On the other hand we know even less about AMD ProRender in its newest version. Only thing we know it is free as part of GPUOpen initiative and essentially it does very same thing as RTX (real-time GPU acceleration of ray tracing techniques mixed with traditional rasterization based rendering). No word about compatibility between them. Hope DTX as new microsoft platform for DX RayTracing will somehow unify this field.
IF you don’t like proprietary approach then only thing you can do is support companies that does not do that. Or maybe someone can think of other solution, but I cant think of anything else.
Looks awesome, I can’t wait to play it.
well . what i RLY want is the promies DX12 / Vulkan Multi Gpu stuf . puting togeder what ever GPUs and make them work .
i lost hope long time ago so this blink blink S**t wont amaze me .
what i expet from this is to be a new GPU hot like Nvidia game works stuf . adding 10% on vizuals and -40% FPS . also Win 10 exclusive .
Stunning! This game when running maxed out at 4K with Nvidia RTX enabled may bring every current PC to its knees… which is commendable. After the temporary aberration of the two Redux editions they’re seemingly back to aiming for what’s possible not today but on the PCs of tomorrow.
Here’s hoping, perhaps naively, that once the game is released then the forums won’t be full of gamers whining that their high-end rig can’t do 4K/60fps with all settings maxed because they’ll be missing the point.
So 4A Games may be back on form if the gameplay matches the presentation. Akin to a modern-day Crytek, so to speak. Pay attention CD Projekt Red because these were once the kind of extreme high standards in visual fidelity on PC that you once targeted back in the days of The Witcher II Enhanced Edition.
Regretfully, people will likely still complain about the game being “unoptimized” just because they can’t max it out.
When your game looks like Crysis 3 but runs way, way worse that would be “unoptimized”.
muh gtx 1070 can’t run it max settings. Look at Crysis 3 it runs fine on max. This game unoptimized af.
This is beautiful, but with all due respect, what am I suppose to be noticing? If you told me this was made with Cryengine 3 without the ray-tracing I would have believed you. I can see inside the dilapitated house that the light is bouncing around nicely, but, again, I feel games have achieved this with sophisticated lighting techniques. Again, these are marvelous graphics but is the ray-tracing only being implemented to a lesser extent? Just curious.
“Stunning!”
I’m really surprised that you said “stunning” about DX12 exclusive technology
Pathetic.
God forbid you like a new technology from an exclusive DX because Windows 10 *insert excuse or scare tactic that can be shut off in instillation or by running a program*. You know how it is Bub, can’t possibly like anything windows has done after 7.
Your mental breakdown continues.
And you still don’t understand sarcasm. No surprise. I’m just going to block you already.
Like I give a damn what you do, lol! Continue having your meltdown.
Metro 2033 was very demanding mainly because of optimization issues. DOF settings were totally bugged. Without DOF game run fine and only during certain scenes with volumetric lights I could see occasional dips below 60 fps.
You do realize that when Witcher 2 was new, Metro 2033 was absolutely destroying any claim Witcher 2 could possibly have made to “high standards in visual fidelity.”
Are you sure you even played Witcher 2? It was almost as badly unoptimized and relied almost entirely on post processing effects and bad lighting.
Quite the exaggeration there.
So badly optimized they had to re-release the game to make it playable for most people.
Sorry but this doesn’t look that impressive compared to the RTX demos I saw today.
I think you failed to realize this is an actual game. Not a demo of a feature.
so thats it ? pff
Yeah, nobody’s going to buy hardware for this. Nobody is going to move to Win10 for this. All this is is another Microsoft Windows marketing campaign. Win10 has been a failure in terms of adoption, DX12 has amounted to literally nothing so far, and so here comes the next push, this time in collaboration with nvidia who hope that adoption of Win10/DX12 would force people to upgrade to newer GPUs despite unreasonable prices.
RAY-TRACING RAY-TRACING! EVERYBODY’S TALKING ABOUT RAY-TRACING!
Nv turf grass effects looks really nice but game looks very comparable to other AAA games. I would like to see RTX comparision on and off, because maybe I’m missing something
Wait, but… what in this video actually benefits from raytracing? Reportedly, it’s about indirect lighting and ambient occlusion. I don’t see any things typical to indirect lighting like color bleeding. Maybe it isn’t possible to see them because the environment is too matte?
Ambient occlusion is cool but we have solid techniques for it already, so a slight improvement may not even be worth the performance cost.
I guess some people just see the magic word “raytracing” and consider everything in this video revolutionary, while it could have been done with simpler techniques.
GI doesn’t cause color bleeding.
So what causes it in scenes like this?
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0fda82cbb6e4eb6509cd9f7bc78b596a8f4665fc57f84e5bf6725aff85feeac8.jpg
GOD DAMN it’s gorgeous! 4A better not downgrade this. The world looks very interesting.
Not pre ordering cuz u know… but still looking for a 1week buy if all stars align.
This is still just a tech demo. Playable levels won’t have this much polish in the placement of all the details and in the sheer amount of unique meshes and whatnot. Real game levels are going to look like any other game, or like any other Metro game to be specific.
Looks good but kinda downgraded compared to E3 2017. Well I guess that makes sense since it was pre-rendered for the E3 hype train.
I’ve seen other ray tracing demos out lately, but this one looked like the last Metro game, although nice, not showing off anything new in terms of lighting. other demos have a huge difference in light output and fidelity, but this one seems drap, perhaps because of the world its in..was hoping RT would make a bigger difference..we’ll see when it actually comes out.
Well no it’s not true ray tracing. It’s controlled raytracing. Like I’m tired of saying, true raytracing would be literally impossible to render in real time.
Oh. Boy! Im going to examine every last texture. That was one of my gripes about the past metro’s. When outside I hated being constantly rushed along due to expiring filters.
Yeah youre right! You probably shouldnt bother with this one. 😉
You’re right, they’ll probably fix it before release 🙂
😉
Not impressive in any way. New UT from years ago looks better. Not just as good, BETTER.
The responses on here are quite the polar opposite of the ones I’m seeing on Youtube. In a way I can see a visual downgrade from the initial trailer but it’s not that drastic. I can tell because I’ve seen the E3 trailer multiple times. Also I know that wasn’t actual ingame stuff but it was essentially the target visuals they’re aiming for.
This is without a doubt the worst vegetation animation ever.
Looks great! One thing though: That floating dust particle thing (or whatever they are) really needs to stop. They can start that trend again when the dust particles aren’t enormous and totally unrealistic looking. Don’t get why all devs need to put this everywhere.