Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA RTX-Remix 0.1 Released For Adding Path Tracing To Classic Games

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by dimko View Post

    uhhu, does it allow for FSR as part of it? DLSS is allowed all right.
    yeah right...
    Massive facepalm. FSR/DLSS is completely seperate/orthogonal to Ray tracing.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by piotrj3 View Post

      The code can be licensed under diffrent licenses, just they have to be compatible in certain aspects.

      Zlib license isn't "contagious" license like GPL, so you can license part of project under one license and part under another, as long as they are not directly conflicting (and MIT and Zlib aren't). Also Nvidia does fit all requirements of Zlib license as they did that by cloning DXVK repo with all license files/commit messages/commit history. So all alteration notices are there, and Nvidia doesn't misinterpret it as orginal software (project name/purpose etc are diffrent). In nutshell Nvidia codebase fills requirements of Zlib and MIT.

      The only problem is there is no clear indication what parts of nvidia code does touch zlib license parts and this is why mixed licensing is difficult. But there is 0 dick move here by Nvidia just wierd they didn't make everything under zlib as it makes things more difficult.
      As someone that had to go through similar/same issues with licensing on a major open source project this is indeed correct. In the worst case scenario git can resolve any legal concerns (and yes this can be done legitimately).

      Regarding using a different license, it's probably legal reasons. It's the same reason why companies prefer Apache 2.0 when possible and then fall back to other licenses like MIT.
      Last edited by mdedetrich; 16 April 2023, 04:35 AM.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by dimko View Post
        No, not screw up, too lazy to implement. why fix something that ain't broken?
        Too lazy to implement? Like how they're too lazy to implement anything else from the start?

        Only issues I've seen so far have been relating to performance and not re-doing the lighting properly when it's been added in after the fact. What's happening now is that it's being added in from the start instead of traditional bodge solutions like pre-baked lighting and traditional global illumination.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Arthus View Post
          Can we talk about the fact that Nvidia - a company that isn't really well known for supporting and publishing OSS - is using a fork of DXVK (https://github.com/NVIDIAGameWorks/dxvk-remix/) and don't even mention the original authors in the README or some kind of explanation of the software. Also no explanation of what they changed and why this isn't upstream?

          Instead you have to go to the original license file (Nvidia re-licensed DXVK from zlib to MIT) to even get the names of the original authors:


          They even do the bare, bare minimum to comply to the original license:

          The license even _asks_ for an acknowledgment and Nvidia chose to ignore it.


          Also it seems like the total open source code of Remix is basically _only_ their DXVK fork. It intercepts the calls and sends them to their (currently) closed source RTX executable (NvRemixBridge.exe) if I understand the documentation correctly.
          Yeah, that's the issue with "free" licenses that aren't copyleft. And then you have people defending them while being "disgusted" by this, which is so funny, since it's the one thing they allow you compared to copyleft licenses like the GPL.

          Cope harder. Reap what you sow and all.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by L_A_G View Post

            Too lazy to implement? Like how they're too lazy to implement anything else from the start?

            Only issues I've seen so far have been relating to performance and not re-doing the lighting properly when it's been added in after the fact. What's happening now is that it's being added in from the start instead of traditional bodge solutions like pre-baked lighting and traditional global illumination.
            Who are you talking about? i was talking about game developers.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post

              Massive facepalm. FSR/DLSS is completely seperate/orthogonal to Ray tracing.
              Software solution we discuss was to put raytracing WITH DLSS. No word of FSR anywhere

              Which sounds to me like pure marketing solution.
              "lets allow old games run with ray tracing and DLSS and fuck AMD with it, because any raytracing their cards will do will do much worse, since they can't enable FSR1 or 2 or any for that matter"

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by dimko View Post

                Software solution we discuss was to put raytracing WITH DLSS. No word of FSR anywhere

                Which sounds to me like pure marketing solution.
                "lets allow old games run with ray tracing and DLSS and fuck AMD with it, because any raytracing their cards will do will do much worse, since they can't enable FSR1 or 2 or any for that matter"
                FSR 1 just needs the final image to work, so it can be enabled for any game in a post-processing step. That's what the Steam Deck does.
                FSR 2 needs access to the game's velocity buffer. I strongly doubt it's possible to add it to a game that doesn't have a velocity buffer to begin with.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by dimko View Post
                  Who are you talking about? i was talking about game developers.
                  Game developers was what I was talking about there...

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Didn't Quake and Portal RTX work on AMD cards? So this remix should work with AMD cards via DXR, maybe older cards too. However the performance will not be good above 720p.

                    This sort of project needs some sort of FSR3.0 tech.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Nvidias stupid as fuck naming sense...

                      Raytracing is pretty much the ultimate realistic rendering technique.
                      Path tracing is a highly optimized version of ray tracing.

                      nvidia's raytracing was always path tracing, it was just partial path tracing implemented with a shitton of gimmicks. Nvidia now has support for full blown realtime pathtracing, this is great, but it was never raytracing, it was always pathtracing.

                      They're just trying to pretend that their original implementation wasn't a broken half assed product, whereas what they've got now is what the intended product was always supposed to be. Real-time raytracing (or pathtracing i suppose). Now they have finally implemented what they promised RTX 2000 series cards would have support for lol. Just a lot of false advertising between there and now leading us to finally having the complete product available to us.

                      But only if we have an RTX 4090 and a dedicated personal power station to power our PC while doing it. I'm personally more excited to see AMD's version of this tech. Now that Nvidia's actually done it AMD is gonna have to step up to compete.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X