The approach of each renderer is vastly different.
All the scenes in question were heavily optimized. This is what Vray is very good at, so translating their experience on the foundation of VrayRT was not very hard.
But they sacrificed a lot with that approach, namely compatibility with their own materials. Now you don't have to learn one renderer, but you have to reevaluate how you approach your scenes with Vray RT.
The same goes for Octane.
They have built from the ground up on experimental tech, that struggles to find wide adoption, as you cannot blindly throw large scenes with fluids and particles at it, without knowing where the limits are and adjusting accordingly.
Take a look at coronas feature description.
Just press render and let Corona do its magic.
This stands in direct contrast, with the amount of optimisation has to be done, to make it possible.
This is not compatible, although you are right, that nothing technically speaks against using corona standalone with the corona benchmarks top PC (4 xeons with 44 threads) and setting VFB refresh to 12ms (90fps)
But the engine is not built that way and you will again have to optimize what is rendered. This goes against what corona tries to achvie, so look for more experimental GPU setups, like those 8GPU motherboards for Raytracing in realtime
(Which is still not a thing for a loooong time)
« Last Edit: 2016-11-19, 16:04:22 by SairesArt »

Logged
I'm 🐥 not 🥝, pls don't eat me ( ; ; )