On NVIDIA GeForce RTX and the state of competition in the graphics card market

On August 20, 2018, NVIDIA launched a new line of graphics cards based on their new Turing architecture. Branded as GeForce RTX, these new cards boast several significant new features, including:

• Fixed-function ASIC ray-tracing units, enabling real-time ray-tracing for the ultimate in realism (more on that below)
• Tensor cores for AI. There are myriad applications for this, one of which is faster and smarter anti-aliasing.
• Datacenter-grade NVLink connectivity for SLI, providing as much as 50 times the bandwidth of conventional SLI connections.
• Redesigned shader cores with new features like Variable Rate Shading for higher performance.
• More CUDA cores and higher efficiency enabled through the TSMC 12FFN process designed specifically for NVIDIA.

Undoubtedly, the most important new feature is the real-time ray-tracing capability. Ray-tracing enables the most realistic lighting effects possible by actually computing the paths that light rays travel. This process is extremely computationally expensive, which means it's long been been limited to movies and other media which do not require real-time graphical rendering. Instead, video games use simpler rasterization techniques which provide approximations of lighting effects. NVIDIA's new RTX graphics cards contain specialized hardware designed specifically to accelerate ray-tracing, enabling cinematic lighting effects that would otherwise be impossible to implement in video games and other real-time applications. NVIDIA has also developed RTX middleware, built on the DirectX Raytracing API, to enable game developers to take advantage of this functionality more easily.

However, there is a more sinister side to these new graphics cards.

$60 is not enough: The problem with video game development costs and monetization

As a video game consumer, I am deeply concerned about recent trends in game design and monetization.

Over the last few months, several major premium "AAA" game titles, including Middle-earth: Shadow of War, Star Wars Battlefront II, and Forza Motorsport 7, have launched with a relatively new and controversial type of in-game item known as a loot box. Loot boxes, when opened, provide one or more random in-game items, which are not known until they are opened. Depending on the game, these can range from cosmetic modifications such as skins that have no impact on gameplay, to weapons, armor, and other equipment which significantly alter gameplay. Items in a loot box are typically grouped by rarity, and some items available from loot boxes can be more desirable than others, such as a rare skin for a playable character or a particularly powerful weapon. This encourages players to acquire more loot boxes for more chances to get better items. Depending on the game, loot boxes can be obtained over the course of normal play, with in-game currency, and/or with real money.

The random nature of loot boxes leverages the same psychological principles behind gambling to make the process of obtaining and opening them addictive. This is further reinforced by the fact that games which use loot boxes often do not permit players to purchase specific items directly, even with real-world currency. The game's mechanics are also often designed to encourage purchasing loot boxes by making it difficult and time-consuming to progress in a game through normal gameplay. As a result, loot boxes have drawn regulatory attention, with some jurisdictions considering treating loot box systems as gambling. The gambling-like nature of loot boxes has also drawn sharp criticism from both the press and the player community, which consider such systems to be predatory to consumers while degrading the game experience for those who do not pay for loot boxes. Compounding this is the fact that players already need to spend up to US$60 to begin playing the game in the first place.

More generally, the use of microtransaction systems which allow players to purchase in-game items with real money has drawn criticism, especially where such purchases allow paying players to obtain a significant advantage over others in competitive multiplayer gameplay or where the game's mechanics are balanced in such a way that they make normal progression unusually tedious without real-money purchases.

These trends in video game monetization have led to gamers claiming that the video game industry has become greedy and exploitative of its customers. With major game publishers like Take-Two Interactive reporting significant increases in revenue and profit, this can certainly appear to be the case. However, the truth is far more complicated than this.