I like quite a few but gamingbolt is not one of those.

This is an out of context quote from a one month old interview with a dev that didnt even have access to any dev kit and moreover was talking more generaly about next gen consoles.
Thats typical of Gaminbolt but if you want to praise them for wasting everyones time with their constant clickbaits its up to you.

Some devs don't think so, but RTX based Ray Tracing is not even close to the Software based Ray Tracing I have seen from Crytek and Unreal Rebirth Demo, Especially when you compare them to the RTX based Demo's. We will just have to wait and see who can deliver a really good Software based Ray Tracing that works and is worth a dam. I would love to have an entire setup running AMD parts, but for now I will stick with Nvidia, AMD just isn't on their level yet with GPU's.

3 Games currently have RTX Features Metro:Exodus, Shadow of The Tomb Raider, & BFv. Minecraft and
Quake II got an RTX update, but who is really looking for a visual upgrade in either of those games. Neither have impressive visuals with RTX on or off and Quake II is like 2 decades old now. BFv only uses it on Reflections, and its piss poor for optimization. Tomb Raider only uses it on Shadows (Like the pun they delivered :D) so not much, very small difference with it on or off. Metro Exodus is the only game yet to make the features worth while and actually stand out, all while still running at 80fps+.

I don't think we have any Software based Ray Tracing games yet, which PS5 and Xbox Scarlett are claiming they have. Well they must be claiming that, because Navi is lacking any type of Ray Tracing, AMD said next architectural design will have it, and I have yet to see a Software based version that looks as good as RTX features Nvidia is delivering. BTW you are crazy if you think a system with 10-12TF of compute power will be able to achieve 4k60fps with Ray Tracing... Lol My GPU alone almost has that much power and it struggles on 1080p to achieve High-Mid settings with RTX features on Medium.

Side note, I don't see the point in 8k or 4k gaming but then again I am a PC gamer that sits less then 3ft from a monitor so its alot different then sitting on a couch playing on a TV. Such a waste of time for game devs imo to try to deliver 4k 60fps experience. 1080p Ultra 144fps+ > 4k 60fps High. Even CD Projekt Red realize this, Cyberpunk 2077 demo was running on 1080p Ultra 144fps with RTX features on and looked amazing.
Microsoft saying they are aiming for 4k 60fps and 1080p 120fps with the Scarlett made me so happy, console players will finally get to see the light of day. Games run so much smoother when you run them at a higher fps. I was a PS4 guy this entire gen and finally pulled the trigger on upgrading my PC, games I use to play at >60fps felt so clunky on PS4 and now feel so smooth on PC. This entire gen I have been getting held back by my platform of choice.

Just figure I would inform you, not trying to be a dick or anything just like spreading information so if it comes off wrong my bad. Next gen consoles could not possibly have RTX because none of them have a Nvidia based GPU. Doesn't mean they won't have Ray Tracing just means they won't have RTX version of Ray Tracing, let alone a GPU based Ray Tracing so I don't see it being very impressive, more just a bullet point to sell consoles. Don't get me wrong, in the long run Software based Ray Tracing could end up beating out the Nvidia's highly touted RTX features, simply due to the fact Software will always outpace Hardware. But I have yet to see a good Software based Ray Tracing demo that even compares to any of the RTX based ones... So only time will tell at this point. Either way the next 5 years in gaming is going to be great I know that much.