• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

DLSS5: 12 minutes uncut video of Starfield

Fess

Member
Thought this was interesting. It's hard to hear what they're saying but it's a 12 minutes video where they walk around in New Atlantis, talk to NPCs, flip it on/off talking about shadows and so on.

I get that it's not a popular game here but for me this is like magic. Needs SLI 5090s but I don't care I want it NOW!

 
Last edited:
I think it looks very good in that footage. Doesn't even look overdone like in those screenshots that have been shared around.

Call it AI slop or AI filter or whatever makes you feel better, but that just looks good.
 
DLSS 5 should focus on accuracy first and not just "make it pretty". The lightning, the character geometry, etc, all should be fed from in-game values and only then it can enhance based on developer's tunings.

With their presentations, it looks like DLSS 5 model takes a lot of creative liberties and that's an issue.
 
DLSS 5 should focus on accuracy first and not just "make it pretty". The lightning, the character geometry, etc, all should be fed from in-game values and only then it can enhance based on developer's tunings.

With their presentations, it looks like DLSS 5 model takes a lot of creative liberties and that's an issue.
Yeah, there are multiple screenshots where the characters have a totally different lighting over their faces not corresponding with the scene lighting, like it removes shadows over their faces and so on
 
DLSS 5 should focus on accuracy first and not just "make it pretty". The lightning, the character geometry, etc, all should be fed from in-game values and only then it can enhance based on developer's tunings.
That's exactly what seems to be happening here, so I don't understand why you appear to try to avoid looking at it.
 
Jensen was right, gamers don't know shit. But then again, nVidia fucked up by not releasing a proper footage like this.

If you had shown this to someone in 2020 before the "AI Slop" narrative took hold, they would have their fucking minds blown.
 
So it costs two 5090s to give Starfield decent character models...

I think reception would have been a little better had they demonstrated some non-photo-realistic face applications. Though we'd probably end up with generic AI-anime art face instead.
The lack of 'developers will be able to train their own custom models' in the promo wasn't a good sign.
 
and this is like the "alpha" of this tech. the worst its gonna be. the future gon be crazy.

especially when they figure out how to hook in to the game engine (like jensen lied about) for proper world lighting and materials, less hallucnation, less perfectly ring lit faces.

imagine for skyrim babe mods its just like a quick toggle , or make an old emulated game have a borderlands style with a flip of the switch.. hnnngg
 
VtORu5Zb3IAns61E.jpeg
g820HAWKBNyqc2jd.jpeg


God damn. Looks like a generational leap in lighting quality on the character.

Fuck the haters. Bring on the slop.
 
But it's not as if the developers actually made the game. It's more like putting a filter over an existing game, which feels unfair, misguided, and disrespectful to the original developers' vision and effort—assuming there was genuine effort involved at all, since this could easily become a lazy shortcut for future games.
 
and this is like the "alpha" of this tech. the worst its gonna be. the future gon be crazy.

especially when they figure out how to hook in to the game engine (like jensen lied about) for proper world lighting and materials, less hallucnation, less perfectly ring lit faces.

imagine for skyrim babe mods its just like a quick toggle , or make an old emulated game have a borderlands style with a flip of the switch.. hnnngg

The whole point is that it's inferring game engine elements from the final render. That's why it's so damn performannt.
 
But it's not as if the developers actually made the game. It's more like putting a filter over an existing game, which feels unfair, misguided, and disrespectful to the original developers' vision and effort—assuming there was genuine effort involved at all, since this could easily become a lazy shortcut for future games.
Developer implements this. DLSS5 does not happen in a game unless developer specifically works it in.

Although in the future I would not be surprised to see this as part of Reshade.
 
VtORu5Zb3IAns61E.jpeg
g820HAWKBNyqc2jd.jpeg


God damn. Looks like a generational leap in lighting quality on the character.

Fuck the haters. Bring on the slop.

Omg what's that? It's ADDING shadows now?! Bu bu bu but I thought it removed shadows!!

No idiots, it just calculates light sources from the render and applies missing effects, be it shadows, AO, bounce etc.
 
But it's not as if the developers actually made the game. It's more like putting a filter over an existing game, which feels unfair, misguided, and disrespectful to the original developers' vision and effort—assuming there was genuine effort involved at all, since this could easily become a lazy shortcut for future games.

Who gives a shit about the developer's feelings if the users like the effect?

It's not like it is replacing everything on screen with something else. Some of you guys are being way too sensitive and hyperbolic.
 
This is the game shown so far where it's hard to act like it doesn't look objectively better. A lot of that has to do with the games mediocre assets and lighting, but from what I've seen, this is the best demonstration of DLSS5 other than FC. I'm still skeptical of it, I'll wait and see if it can actually run on a single 50 series GPU when they release it.
 
Who gives a shit about the developer's feelings if the users like the effect?

It's not like it is replacing everything on screen with something else. Some of you guys are being way too sensitive and hyperbolic.

It just seems like a totally illegitimate complaint. As long as it does what they're saying it does - hugely improve lighting - then it's just a technical effect like path tracing.

The only complaint that's really valid at that point is where it's so radical that it can kind of kill the mood a bit just by virtue of being so much more accurate than what the developer was working with that it has these kind of unintended consequences like Grace looking too prettified. But that's a pretty minor issue, and needn't apply to games built with it in mind. And on Grace, the REAL question we should be asking is: why exactly does she look so terrible even with fucking path tracing enabled?! She looks nothing like her cutscene model.
 
Last edited:
The whole point is that it's inferring game engine elements from the final render. That's why it's so damn performannt.

fair enough, they need to figure out a way where the artist can determine the world lighting somehow then so shadows from hats and shit work properly and as intended for mood , leading the eye etc.
 
Will be cool to see this in practice this fall because it's new stuff that some of us get to play with. This will be iterated and I hope they refine it
 
I got insulted for saying Starfield looked incredible the other day.

I was right. They were wrong.

But, as long as artists and the studio control this. I'm ok. All for demos but we need creative control with the people that should have it.
 
Looks great in all honesty. Starfield is one of the games that looked extremely ugly in its character models and lighting, and this fixes that for the most part.

Interested to see lighter implementations of DLSS 5 for already good looking games.
 
Last edited:
But it's not as if the developers actually made the game. It's more like putting a filter over an existing game, which feels unfair, misguided, and disrespectful to the original developers' vision and effort—assuming there was genuine effort involved at all, since this could easily become a lazy shortcut for future games.


Raw graphics purist over here. It's finally an advancement that gives us a gen leap like we used to have. Take it or leave it, I'm sure devs will have to make DLSS 4 versions for many years to come since most cannot and will not be able to afford this for a while.
 
Omg what's that? It's ADDING shadows now?! Bu bu bu but I thought it removed shadows!!

No idiots, it just calculates light sources from the render and applies missing effects, be it shadows, AO, bounce etc.
That's not what it's doing at all. It doesn't have any understanding or data access to the actual light sources or objects in the game. It just guesses what the end result should look like based on screen space and motion vector data and transforms it based on the AI's training data. It's not calculating anything. It's basically a realtime AI video to video generator, like those youtube videos going around the last few years.
 
I don't like it.
Yes some stuff (like the lighting) look "better" (in quotes because of the lack of accuracy) with it here, but that's also because Starfield is a game that looks bad in the first place.
I personally have no interest in playing something that's randomly generated in real time, with no real vision, just a filter that might look different from one session to another.

I could see it potentially being interesting if it can be very accurate, like a precise lighting tool, and lighting only, without changing faces or textures. Some kind of alternative to raytracing, although for now this seems as demanding, if not more, as raytracing, so I don't really see the point. But I really don't want randomly filtered textures and geometry, keep these true to the original artistic design.

In a similar way I also don't like stuff that relies too much on procedural generation. I was never interested in starfield because of the randomly generated planets that will be different for each player, with no real specific level design. So in a way... I guess DLSS 5 is fitting here... :messenger_grinning_sweat:
 
Last edited:
I wonder how this tech will deal with stuff that isn't "real". as in things that are an original creation by an artist so won't have been in any training data. Things like unique monster designs etc. Even something like RE's zombies it could have issues with.
 
My god Nvidia did it again.

I would thought so much chatter about 2D screen space blah blah that DLSS5 will look like an extra layer of makeup smeary in motion.

This looks pretty infused into the original rendering
 
Last edited:
And you think NVIDIA is just going to give this away for free? Just like that, with all the computing power behind it?
My fear is that DLSS5 will only be fully available with a subscription or some similar financing option. Somehow, all this AI stuff has to be financed and generate profits. It might look nice in Starfield, but I remain very, very skeptical.
 
That's not what it's doing at all. It doesn't have any understanding or data access to the actual light sources or objects in the game. It just guesses what the end result should look like based on screen space and motion vector data and transforms it based on the AI's training data. It's not calculating anything. It's basically a realtime AI video to video generator, like those youtube videos going around the last few years.

No, I'm right.
 
Top Bottom