- cross-posted to:
- games@lemmy.world
- games@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- games@lemmy.world
- games@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
Reminder: Nvidia does not care about gamers and is not targeting gamers. They couldn’t give a flying fuck if nobody ever bought a GeForce card ever again. This is them showcasing real time genAI performance as an advertisement to other AI companies.
Useful for modifying live footage, from say a security camera…
What could possibly go wrong.
Dlss in general just seems like shit, tbh. In every implementation I’ve seen, it’s essentially necessary to enable it to get a decent framerate, but it makes every game look like blurry shit.
At least on poorly optimized games without dlss, graphics are okay but sharp on low settings and decent framerates are still possible. It seems that dlss has enabled devs to do even shittier optimization, though, because dlss will pick up the slack and enable higher framerates. So on dlss enabled games, the choice is no longer between high framerates with okay graphics and low framerates with great graphics, the choice is now low framerates with terrible graphics or a slideshow with great graphics.
All of the huge problems that I saw with it so far.
-
1: It completely changes the lighting so everything is perfectly lit like it was taken in a professional photo studio, even where it makes absolutely no sense, completely running the atmosphere the developers were intending to set.
-
2: It sometimes downright changes the looks of the characters so bad that they look like another person
-
3: It creates a ton of distracting artefacts.
-
4: It makes everything look like it is of the same style
Seriously, it’s like they took the essence of the Half-Life 2 Cinematic mod and made an AI that applies it to any game.
-
That’s too far.
MSAA, SMAA, temporal AA, heaven forbid FXAA, they all suck. So does resolution scaling; if you can’t run native, you take a massive hit.
I don’t want to go back to that world of juggling between them or suffering with AA off or hacked in. It’s easy to say “oh, just code it better,” but all these solutions are inefficient on modern hardware; go back, and you leave performance on the table.
DLSS/XeSS/FSR4 and Unreal’s scaling are very convenient solutions. It antialiases perfectly, it scales to your monitor wonderfully. It’s not universal, but it looks fantastic as long as the hardware supports it base res and performance is alright.
Now, frame gen is too much of a mixed bag, and DLSS5 as demoed is obviously too far.
I disagree with you, but I respect your opinion
This is the same amount of disrespect as taking someone else’s artwork, put it through some yassification filter, and then call it ”fixed”
How many of our all-time favorite games even have photo-realistic graphics? Is this just the logical outgrowth, an endpoint, of a generation-long strategy to accomplish a goal that nobody really wants?
It’s wild how those who made this decision clearly think “hyper-realistic” is an improvement. Have they never heard of the Uncanny Valley? Have they ever actually played a video game? I’m guessing the answer is “no” to both.
I have spent more than enough time playing various games, and not once have I thought, “I wish the game I play to escape reality would better resemble reality.” Imagine the characters start looking like actual people you care about, and you’re in a game where you’re made to shoot them. Or what if one of the characters comes to resemble you, and now whatever that character says or does, it will be associated with you? And random strangers start to call out to you in public, treating you as if you’re actually that character?
Then of course, the Uncanny Valley itself is a treacherous pit to avoid. At a certain point in the journey toward hyper-realism, any minor flaw can become unsettling. That issue doesn’t happen with games that are clearly fictional renderings. There’s a reason many people consider realistic-looking porcelain dolls to be creepy, but they don’t feel the same way about a rag doll (except maybe for those with buttons for eyes. Thanks, Coraline.)
Well this was a no brainer, I don’t know if anyone in the topic really believed game devs liked it, Executive and financing though? They love it.
But… “leadership and executive love DLSS 5” sounds worse than “Game Dev’s Love DLSS 5”.
The game devs position gives a false sense of security of “oh well maybe it isn’t actually a bad thing”… the other just sounds like cost saving.
Well, it’s the only way to make Starfield seem alright.
…Albeit only in stills or YT shorts.
I bet game devs don’t even want DLSS anyway. I certainly don’t. For me it’s native or nothing.
Using it for upscaling and frame interpolation was reasonable - that felt like a good use of AI to emulate higher performance for a lower cost. But using it as a filter over the entire vision of the game? Utterly insane and strongly smells of NVIDIA targetting other companies for more investment/sales, not gamers.
