- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
I’m completely speechless. This looks so terrible I thought it was a joke, but apparently Nvidia released these demos to impress people. DLSS 5 runs the entire game through an AI filter, making every character look like it’s running through an ultra realistic beauty filter.
The photo above is used as the promo image for the official blog post by the way. It completely ignores artistic intent and makes Grace’s face look “sexier” because apparently that’s what realism looks like now.
I wouldn’t be so baffled if this was some experimental setting they were testing, but they’re advertising this as the next gen DLSS. As in, this is their image of what the future of gaming should be. A massive F U to every artist in the industry. Well done, Nvidia.
Important details from a post-demo writeup:
The demo showing the tech running at 100% is not going to look the same as full games built with it over the next year before release.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the only thing it’s changing is the lighting effects. The models aren’t changing at all (even when this looks hard to believe).
Yes, at full strength the effect at times looks pretty bad (anyone remember when devs could suddenly use bloom effects and entire games looked like Vaseline was smeared across the screen?). But it’s not going to be flipped on at 100% across the board for most games.
My guess looking at the demos so far is that a lot of material lighting like stone, metal, etc will have it at higher strengths and characters, particularly faces/skin, will have it considerably lower (the key place where it’s especially uncanny valley).
Yes we know. The games will look worse prior to DLSS because “why bother? The slop will fix it” and then worse after because it’s homogenized crap.
Eventually maybe, but I really doubt devs are going to build their entire game in an unfinished way for the less than 1% of their audience that is going to have one of the cards that can run this.
PS5, Xbox, and all PC gamers not dropping $1k on a new rig this fall are still going to be playing the games without this.
In 3 years, sure, maybe the PS6 has similar features on AMD by then and the market share for cards running real time ML adjustments to scenes has widened enough devs can depend on the tech.
But it’s a bit premature to throw a fit about the likelihood of devs cutting corners because of a feature only accessible to the most expensive setups owned by a fraction of their target audience.
Have you seen Borderlands 4? They went full “use frame gen if you want 60fps”.
Devs might not want it, but CEOs sees they can cut corners and brag on using the new shiny toys and despite Dev’s warnings they will use it.
Well to be fair most people have not seen borderlands 4 as it was not exactly as sucsessful as the earlyer titles (partly due to stupid shit like frame gen)
Hey remember when rtx was going to great and not turned off by almost every gamer? Remember when 3d TVs would replace regular ones? Remember when Crossfire/SLI was not just a waste of time?
I am sure this time for sure they will eventually get it working in a non ass way.
Because it is clearly messing with more than just “lighting”. While the spatial models appear untouched, it heavily changes textures, inventing details that simply were not there before, no matter what lighting. And then some of that “lighting” is also used to imply spacial details that were not there before.
All of that creates that incredibly artificial and sloppy overall impression at “100%”. At lower percentages it likeky won’t be better, the sloppiness will be merely more diluted and therefore more tolerable.
Introducing the new wonderful tech! Your shoes have nails sticking out on the inside now! But don’t worry, if you don’t walk, they aren’t actually painful. Well, a little bit painful, but you’re not walking all the time so we’ve decided it’s OK.
It’s definitely changing more than the lighting. In the picture above the before picture shows a natural blonde and the after has brown roots
Yes, the difference between hair in video game lighting and in actual chiaroscuro with the way light really works is going to be different.
Here’s a painting from over a hundred years ago. The subject doesn’t have brown roots, but is in shadow. And a comparison image of the exact same hair in different lighting conditions.
Performing complex lighting on individual hair strands is really expensive so in the base image you have a kind of diffuse lighting throughout the hair. With the DLSS 5 on, the distribution of light throughout the hair is variable leading to darker unlit strands underneath lit surface strands.
Literally the only thing DLSS 5 is changing, literally in the technical sense, is the lighting. It’s just that lighting can have dramatic results in how the eye perceives what’s lit.
And yes, the hair looks very different, but that’s how hair actually looks in mixed light and shadow (though a fair complaint with DLSS 5 is that it looks like it’s sliding the contrast unnaturally high).
That painting doesn’t look anything the same, and nor do those pictures. In the bride she’s a natural blonde. In the after she’s a bleach blonde