"are planned" is the key here. I've mentioned Blizzard just as an example, pipeline for releasing games takes years, look around and there is majority of DirectX11 titles...
No, that *has* to be the goal. Or it isn't ray-tracing. We have supplements already... Reason why they are implemented partially is most likely inability of any GPU today to do real-time ray-tracing. People (outside of circle who actually did some rendering), usually make mistakes - there is no partial ray-tracing. Each light wave is either calculated completely (with all recursions) or is not. No middle ground. I *did* said 'none full', meaning it's enough. True, *some* stuff may look better - and... it also can look better with any other CPU/GPU, depending of calculation capacity.
Don't get me wrong, it's just... that I was in this (rendering methods) for a long time. There is just one full or 'pure' ray-tracing method. There are few 'shortcuts' to do less math, but difference is typically quite noticeable. Also, ray-tracing is not necessarily photo-realism. I'm too excited to see this huge step in computer graphics, but also am bit skeptical about it happening that soon - more objects, vertices, light sources, shadows = exponentially more calculation. First true ray-traced game will need to reduce something (most likely - light sources; next - reflective surfaces and so on). Yet, they still can look good... We'll see, in time...
