Support NeoGAF

[Fess]

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!

 

[mrqs]

As expected, it looks dope. The gun at the end looks insane.

This will blow up in a good way, for sure. It's almost too good to be true.

 

[Esquie]

My god it looks incredible

Still want to see footage of action like combat and fast movement but yeah unbelievable

 

[Von Hugh]

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.

 

[Exentryk]

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.

 

[nemiroff]

That looks pretty damn nice.

Starfield appears to be the perfect use case for DLSS5.

 

[Kataploom]

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

 

[Rentahamster]

That's not that bad.

 

[Represent.]

Looks fucking incredible.

 

[buenoblue]

Looks great. The hive mind was over reacting as usual.

 

[nemiroff]

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.

 

[Denton]

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.

 

[Haint]

It very obviously looks 100% better than the base game, to claim otherwise would require you to be so full of shit you're drowning it it.

 

[DavidGzz]

Erhmagerd Tiktok fiter! As usual people being toxic af these days about everything. Apologize to Jensen, boys.

 

[epicurius-seven]

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.

 

[Simpdimples]

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

 

[Comandr]

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

Fuck the haters. Bring on the slop.

 

[andreacusi]

 

[Alan Silvestro]

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.

 

[Jam Dingo]

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.

 

[Denton]

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.

 

[Jam Dingo]

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.

 

[Von Hugh]

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.

 

[EverythingsOverrated]

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.

 

[Cakeboxer]

I'm especially impressed by the faces. It shifts from "Clearly a game" to "Damn, is that television?"

 

[Jam Dingo]

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.

 

[Simpdimples]

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.

 

[Thebonehead]

 

[LiquidMetal14]

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

 

[DenchDeckard]

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.

 

[hinch7]

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.

 

[Shane89]

it looks good, but that's not good

 

[DavidGzz]

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.

 

[Critical Hit]

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

Yeah, because there is no RT/PT in Starfield.

 

[neocycle]

I hope it comes to PS6, but we will probably have to wait until PS7.

 

[Cyborg]

It looks like evrything (even the buildings) are from plastic.

 

[Midn1ght]

 

[yogaflame]

Ignore the bashers. It is an impressive tech

 

[mrMUR_96]

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.

 

[Larxia]

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...

 

[mrMUR_96]

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.

 

[Chittagong]

Cerny delay PS6 and implement PSSR 5 or you can kiss your business goodbye

 

[peish]

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

 

[Three]

IntentionalPun G General Lee remember what I was telling you about that chin shadow becoming an asymmetrical chin with DLSS5 on Hogwarts and how the geometry is not more accurate?

Well look at this now. Little doubt left:

 

[kat_on_the_roof]

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.

 

[Kenneth Haight]

assuming there was genuine effort involved at all

 

[Jam Dingo]

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.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Reminds me of those fx enhancer and realistic bodies mods or something

 

[seb85]

It only looks good on starfield because the characters look like shit .

 

[Topher]

I think I liked it more in other games than in Starfield. Everything looks......plastic.