The surface of the scene is represented as Surfels / disks with DFGI so the methods have that in common. But indirect occlusion (which is by far the harder part) is provided by distance field cone tracing, which is a totally different approach than the Nvidia one, which uses the same disks for occlusion. You have to have 10x or 100x times more disks than DFGI uses to also use them for occlusion, and it scales really poorly with surface area. Just think - how many disks does it take to represent a ground plane?
Hard for me to say, but it looks like maybe you’re still on 4.7? DFGI is NOT in 4.7, but I stupidly had something hooked up to the ‘r.distancefieldgi’ cvar so now whenever someone tries that in 4.7 they think it’s DFGI. Lesson learned.
Honestly I think you guys should just wait, DFGI is still early and has lots of problems, that’s why I’m working on it. You may notice it has not been announced anywhere, there’s a reason for that.
If you want hidden tweakables, all the cvars are under ‘r.ao*’ for DFAO related stuff (sampling rate, etc) and ‘r.dfgi*’ for GI. The main ones for DFGI quality are the Surfel density and the bounce distance. I can’t remember what the cvars were atm. You probably have to reload the level after changing those, as Surfels are generated on load right now.
Not yet, planned though.