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

[Rumor] [MLiD] PSSR 2 Reportedly Doesn’t Have Frame Generation in the Plans: "developers hate it, hate it, hate it."

Will it be an option on console though?
I don't see any other way for it to even be on a console.
FG from 30 to 60 won't happen, the lag will be too severe and artifacts too obvious. Same is true for 40 base.
60 to 90-120 is the only option where FG makes sense on a console, and you can't ship your game expecting everyone to have 120 TVs with VRR to play it, let alone not provide a non-FG 60 FPS mode.

What's with the weird Technoskepticism lately?
 
At some point people need to start accepting the shriekingly obvious prospects of AI Neural Rendering, it is here, it is now, it is the future.

The good thing is this generation took the brunt of introducing 60 FPS performance modes across-the-board, half of the potential of this generation was wasted on games having to run at 60 FPS.

Next-gen will obviously have the same target ambitions with AI Frame-gen on top to take them to 120 FPS or even above, who knows? But the graphical leaps will be far bigger than this gen and that will be thanks to Neural Rendering, DLSS 5 (while it's still not taking the full 3D geometry/pipeline into account) is the beginning of what to expect FIDELITY wise for PS6 & Project Helix, just at much lower resolutions of course.
 
Because to me the over reliance on AI upscalers and frame gen is the gaming industries version of shrinkflation. Tools that make gaming worse in practice because developers lean on it to save on their own development cost.

They can make every game in native 4k performing 60fps - but those games need to looks like PS4 titles. There is no hidden secret here.

Same way we could have all PS3 games running 1080p/60fps (they would just have to look like PS2 games).
 
They can make every game in native 4k performing 60fps - but those games need to looks like PS4 titles. There is no hidden secret here.

Same way we could have all PS3 games running 1080p/60fps (they would just have to look like PS2 games).
Nothing wrong with that. Its preferable.

I would've been fine if this entire gen was PS4 graphics at native 4K /60fps with no tricks or artifact inducing techniques.

Is the chase of realism really worth all the trade offs now? For me they aren't.

RE9 on PC with no upscaling and no RTX running at 4k 120fps looks phenomenal. But we are being gaslit by Nvidia so they can sell more GPUs and they're successfully convincing people there's still more juice to squeeze.
 
Nothing wrong with that. Its preferable.

I would've been fine if this entire gen was PS4 graphics at native 4K /60fps with no tricks or artifact inducing techniques.

Is the chase of realism really worth all the trade offs now? For me they aren't.

RE9 on PC with no upscaling and no RTX running at 4k 120fps looks phenomenal. But we are being gaslit by Nvidia so they can sell more GPUs and they're successfully convincing people there's still more juice to squeeze.

RE9 looks like crap in raster compared to PT.

I don't want to be stuck with PS4 graphics, thank you. We have high end GPUs and Pro consoles - why not use them not just for framerate and resolution increases?
 
The laziness of developers. The song of the bean counters.

I think raster version still compares favorably to other current gen games. Path Tracing just shows how next gen games will look like with fully real time lighting (and RT is in between).
 
Top Bottom