• rustyfish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The brute forcing of AI into anything goes into the next stage.

    Good thing I don’t care that much about graphics since I’ve been a teenager.

  • recklessengagement@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    This feels like its establishing a precedent for widespread adoption/implementation of AI into consumer devices. Manufactured consent.

    “We compute one pixel… we hallucinate, if you will, the other 32.”

    Between this and things like Sora, we are doomed to drown in illusions of our own creation.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

      If the visuals are performant and consistent, why do we care? I have always been baffled by the obsession with “real pixels” in some benchmarks and user commentary.

      • ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        AI upscales are so immediately obvious and look like shit. Frame “generation” too. Not sour grapes, my card supports FSR and fluid motion frames, I just hate them and they are turned off.

        • MudMan@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s fine, but definitely not a widespread stance. Like somebody pointed out above, most players are willing to lose some visual clarity for the sake of performance.

          Look, I don’t like the look of post-process AA at all. FXAA just seemed like a blur filter to me. But there was a whole generation of games out there where it was that or somehow finding enough performance to supersample a game and then endure the spotty compatibility of having to mess with custom unsupported resolutions and whatnot. It could definitely be done, particularly in older games, but for a mass market use case people would turn on SMAA or FXAA and be happy they didn’t have to deal with endless jaggies on their mid-tier hardware.

          This is the same thing, it’s a remarkably small visual hit for a lot more performance, and particularly on higher resolution displays a lot of people are going to find it makes a lot of sense. Getting hung up on analyzing just “raw” performance as opposed of weighing the final results independently of the method used to get there makes no sense. Well, it makes no sense industry-wide, if you happen to prefer other ways to claw back that performance you’re more than welcome to deal with bilinear upscaling, lower in-game settings or whatever you think your sweet spot it, at least on PC.

          • ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            That’s because FXAA also sucks. MSAA and downsampling is so far superior. Also ai generated “frames” aren’t performant, it’s fake performance, because as previously mentioned they look like shit, particularly in the way that they make me think about how well I’m running the game instead of playing the game in front of me.

            • MudMan@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              MSAA is pretty solid, but it has its own quirks and it’s super heavy for how well it works. There’s a reason we moved on from it and towards TAA eventually. And DLSS is, honestly, just very good TAA, Nvidia marketing aside.

              I am very confused about the concept of “fake perfromance”. If the animation looks smooth to you then it’s smooth. None of it exists in real life. Like every newfangled visual tech, it’s super in-your-face until you get used to it. Frankly, I’ve stopped thinking about it on the games where I do use it, and I use it whenever it’s available. If you want to argue about increased latency we can talk about it, but I personally don’t notice it much in most games as long as it’s relatively consistent.

              I do understand the feeling of having to worry about performance and being hyper-aware of it being annoying, but as we’ve litigated up and down this thread, that ship sailed for PC gaming. If you don’t want to have to worry, the real answer is getting a console, I’m afraid.

              • tee9000@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                HEYY!!!

                thanks for the real discussion and not memeing. i appreciate you. lemmy appreciates you.

        • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          my card supports FSR

          Yeah this is “we have DLSS at home”. As someone who tested both, DLSS is the actually good one, FSR is a joke of an imitation that’s just slightly fancier TAA. Try DLSS Quality at 1440p or DLSS Balanced at 4K and you’ll see it’s game-changing.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      I mean… OK, but AMD just revealed a new set of AI-powered upscaling libraries along with Sony for the PSPro and is on record saying they’re backing out of high end gaming hardware to pivot to data center hardware, so… I hope you have more reasons than this, because I don’t think they disagree.

      • ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I do. Linux support is the big one. Nvidia has had their arm twisted and they still only barely changed their approach to their Linux driver.

    • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Great, so now all games require AI-upscaling you’re left out of any ability to play them

      • ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You mean AAA titles. AAA titles are mostly not worth playing. All “graphical fidelity” no substance.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Oh here he is again, talking AI AI AI… Their stock value is already so high it will take over 50 years for it’s value to match it’s current price.

      • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        Star Wars Galaxies private servers are not a good experience. They don’t allow two players from the same IP, so if you live with someone you want to play with you have to tell them, then send them pictures of BOTH copies of the discs and you and the other person’s hands. They hide behind “preventing gold farmers” but like, who is actually going to be a gold farmer in a private server, and who actually cares if they did? The other 25 players in the server?

        Nah, I’m good.

        City of Heroes has been golden by comparison.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Unfortunately PSU, as all my friends veto’d me for PSO first. But PSOBB is next, and hopefully by then Team Clementine will have released their PSO2 Original.

        • RustyShackleford@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 months ago

          You’re lucky to have friends into the same stuff, I couldn’t pay my friends to play an MMO. I got one girlfriend too, but she didn’t like how much I played. I never got to play BB, what’s it like? And PSO2 was my favorite, the memories… A chance to get back into that, dare I say, it almost felt perfect somehow.

          • Sanctus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Keep an eye on Team Clementine, they’ll launch it eventually. Blue Burst is just PSO with extra content at the end game. Pretty fun theres some private servers that show up first hit with a web search.

  • nanoUFO@sh.itjust.worksOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Chasing graphics has lead to directions nobody could predict and I’m glad I don’t play these games.

  • leaky_shower_thought@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    the premise seems flawed, i think.

    i feel what he’s saying is: we suck optimizing gfx performance now because gamers deem ai upscale quality as passable

    this feels opposite to what the ps poll says that gamers enable performance mode more because the priority is more stable frames than shiny anti aliasing/post processing.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t see how that’s the case. Most people prefer more fps over image quality, so minor artifacting from DLSS is preferable to the game running much slower with cleaner image quality. That is consistent with the PS data (which wasn’t a poll, to my understanding).

      I also dispute the other assumption, that “we suck at optimizing performance”. The difference between now and the days of the 1080Ti when you could just max out games and call it a day, is that we’re targeting 4K at 120fps and up, as opposed to every game maxing out at 1080p60. There is no target for performance on PC anymore, every game can be cranked higher. We are still using CounterStrike for performance benchmarks, running at 400-1000fps. There will never be a set performance target again.

      If anything, optimization now is sublime. It’s insane that you can run most AAA games on both a Steam Deck and a 4090 out of the same set of drivers and executables. That is unheard of. Back in the day the types of games you could run on both a laptop and a gaming PC looked like WoW instead of Crysis. We’ve gotten so much better at scalability.

      • leaky_shower_thought@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Most people prefer more fps over image quality, so minor artifacting from DLSS is preferable to the game running much slower with cleaner image quality.

        I don’t think we’re not much different in this portion. AI upscale is passable enough that gamers will choose it. If presented with a better, non-artifacting option, gamers will choose that since the goal is performance and not AI. If the stat is from PS data, and not from a poll, I think it just strengthens that users want performance more.

        There will never be a set performance target again.

        It’s not that there’s no set performance target. The difference is merely one, on the CounterStrike era, vs. many, now. Now, there’s more performance targets for PC than Counter Strike days. Games just can’t keep up. Saying “there will never be a set performance target” is just washing hands when a publishers/ directors won’t set directions and priorities which performance point to prioritize.

        It might be that your point is optimizing for scalability, and that is fine too.

        • MudMan@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah, optimizing for scalability is the only sane choice from the dev side when you’re juggling hardware ranging from the Switch and the Steam Deck to the bananas nonsense insanity that is the 4090. And like I said earlier, often you don’t even get different binaries or drivers for those, the same game has to support all of it at once.

          It’s true that there are still some set targets along the way. The PS5 is one, the Switch is one if you support it, the Steam Deck is there if you’re aiming to support low power gaming. But that’s besides the point, the PS5 alone requires two to three setups to be designed, implemented and tested. PC compatibility testing is a nightmare at the best of times, and with a host of display refresh rates, arbitrary resolutions and all sorts of integrated and dedicated GPUs from three different vendors expected to get support it’s outright impossible to do granularly. The idea that PC games have become less supported or supportive of scalability is absurd. I remember the days where a game would support one GPU. As in, the one. If you had any other one it was software rendering at best. Sometimes you had to buy a separate box for each supported card.

          We got used to the good stuff during the 900 series and 1000 series from Nvidia basically running console games maxed out at 1080p60, but that was a very brief slice of time, it’s gone and it’s not coming back.

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I never run the upscaling it looks and feels so bad.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    We can’t do the profitable thing without the more expensive and even more lucrative thing, please, think of our monopoly.