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

[The Verge] Nvidia has lost the plot with gamers

LectureMaster

Or is it just one of Adam's balls in my throat?



Nvidia surely thought it was doing a good thing for gamers by "upgrading" the faces of our favorite video game characters. But that just shows how much the company has lost the plot.

Nvidia could've marketed its new DLSS 5 real-time lighting technology as a way to make future, next-gen games look better. Instead, it told the world that games people already know and love look bad. It focused on retconning characters' faces. And now, confronted with the predictable backlash, Nvidia's CEO is telling critics that we're "completely wrong."

Regardless of how it works, the tech presents as an AI filter that tries to optimize everyone and everything — artists be damned.

A 15-year-old Hogwarts student? Now he's like an adult soap opera star trying to pass as a teen:



An already-aged professor at Hogwarts? What if we made her look even older?



Who wants any of this?

One answer: investors. Nvidia is now a $5 trillion AI company, and the average gamer probably seems like an afterthought when you spend all day selling chips to companies making chatbots. (Financially, even Nvidia's networking business is bigger than gaming now.)

Other answers may be darker. Some gamers have railed against companies for years because, among other terrible things, their characters aren't sexy enough.





Ouch.

Down the road, there's another problem: Everything might start looking the same. As my colleague Andrew Webster points out, that's what happens when your tech looks like AI slop. So what is Nvidia doing about this?

Damage control is underway. Nvidia GeForce PR director Ben Berraondo quickly told my colleague Tom Warren that developers like Capcom have "detailed artistic control" over their look of their characters, while also implying that the game's developer approved the changes to Resident Evil Requiem protagonist Grace, above.

Meanwhile, Starfield game developer Bethesda tweeted, "This is a very early look, and our art teams will be further adjusting the lighting and final effect to look the way we think works best for each game. This will all be under our artists' control, and totally optional for players."

Here's the pinned comment atop Nvidia's YouTube video saying much the same:


Image: YouTube

But in an industry that just can't stop having layoffs no matter how well games perform, people are skeptical that the artists will have creative control, and journalists are ready to hear from disgruntled developers among Nvidia's DLSS 5 partners. (BTW, I'm sean.hollister01 on Signal.)

What I want to know is: How did Nvidia not see this backlash coming, especially after previous controversies?Why didn't it take this new tech in a completely different direction, one focused on the future of gaming instead of the present?

Gamers seem less impressed with each new generation of gaming graphics. The graphical advances don't seem as big as they were between Super Nintendo and N64, between PS1 and PS2, between Half-Life and Half-Life 2. Photorealism has managed to stay elusive even in the 4K era, with many games still delivering muddy graphics, rough textures, and cutscenes that look "more real" than gameplay.

That photorealism is exactly where Nvidia's tech seems to be leaping forward, and I can't help but agree with some of Digital Foundry's enthusiasm when I watch their whole video at once. I want to see a generational leap in graphics, too. There's an opportunity here.

But Nvidia's examples kill me. No one should be retconning game characters' faces like the examples we've seen above, regardless of whether they're doing it with AI or different human actors.

It didn't need to be this way! This same exact technology could have been a win for Nvidia — if it had marketed it for future next-gen games.

Imagine this: It's March 16th, 2026, and Nvidia has one more thing to show us on the GTC 2026 stage — not a puppeteered Disney robot and a cringeworthy AI-generated music video, but a tech demo like none we've seen before. It's a brand-new game we've never heard of, and the level of detail is incredible. Look at the water! Look at how light naturally seems to envelop those video game objects you could practically reach out and touch! Look at how you can make out every stone in that castle wall, and how these characters naturally cast shadows on themselves! Look at this world filled with natural light and gorgeous characters that actually belong, because they don't clash with the art direction for this brand-new title!

Surely that took the power of an entire server to prerender, right? Nope, Nvidia reveals: It's "the company's most significant breakthrough in computer graphics since the debut of real-time ray tracing in 2018."* Some would say, Wow, I'd buy a new GPU or a GeForce Now subscription to play games that look like that!

*A real line from Nvidia's press release.

But the real gasp would come when Nvidia's CEO flicks a switch to turn it on and off. Not only is this next-gen game demo running in real time, the base graphics are so much more rudimentary — they don't require an investment in next-gen tech! It can build off what developers are already doing today. It's like having an entirely new graphics engine, except you can keep using the engines you already have. Bethesda, Capcom, and Ubisoft could tell us — without showing us yassified faces — that they've seen such excellent results applying this to existing games that they can't wait to bring us new ones.

Unfortunately, Nvidia didn't decide to market the tech this way. Nvidia lumped it in with DLSS, the same suite of AI-enhanced performance-enhancing technologies that many gamers love to hate, at the same time PC gamers are reeling from Nvidia-powered AI servers creating a worldwide shortage of RAM. We're only a year on from Nvidia's latest "fake frames" controversy, and a month on from Google's generative AI gaming backlash. By now, Nvidia should know better.
 
amz1f8.jpg
 
The technology is great. I'm excited. It's a bit depressing that our media flocks to drama and tries to amplify it. At the end of the day the backlash to all things AI is more about people's feelings about AI and less about artistic integrity. An AI filter that makes old games look better as an option is simply cool technology. I do feel like we have been led around a bit by the nose here. In this industry the very people who print the news are the first ones to lose their job. The game developers are likely second. I feel most of the hatred from AI has emanated outwards from those groups and spread deeper into the zeitgeist.

It puts the most vocal group about this, PC gamers, in a direct confrontation with the main company that makes PC gaming in general actually good. Will PC gamers stop buying Nvidia cards over this? I doubt it. It's just an unfortunate and ugly(for gamers) news cycle that shows we have really gotten toxic and take everything to an extreme whenever possible.

Also the shots across the chud bow for no reason in the article....lol. I mean, it's a great idea, but no way they made this to allow us to up breast size.
 
Last edited:
There is so much misinformation about dlss 5 that it hurts my head.
Take a IRL person, remove the highlights, reflections and shadows dlss5 creates and that IRL person will look flat as fuck as a video game model.
Then watch that person complain they look like a video game character.

well well fuck well....
 
Way too early to judge. Wait for devs to implement it themselves.

Looks like a generational leap in some instances but a bit weird in others.

People on BlueSky always seem to be having mental breakdowns.
 
Last edited:
The technology is great. I'm excited. It's a bit depressing that our media flocks to drama and tries to amplify it. At the end of the day the backlash to all things AI is more about people's feelings about AI and less about artistic integrity. An AI filter that makes old games look better as an option is simply cool technology. I do feel like we have been led around a bit by the nose here. In this industry the very people who print the news are the first ones to lose their job. The game developers are likely second. I feel most of the hatred from AI has emanated outwards from those groups and spread deeper into the zeitgiest.
AI is not magic, it can only replicate what is has already seen. Originality is integral to art.

Besides that, I don't know how anyone can see the faces in motion and not cringe, the lip and the eye movements in particular. Watch the dudebro clip from the Starfield opening again. It looks shit and I'd love to hear someone try to argue otherwise.
 
Last edited:
I don't know, I like what I saw with DLSS 5, perhaps I'm an outlier. I think it's pretty incredible to be able to offload this level of details to the GPU. Normally, I would expect that games will be cheaper to create but who am I kidding... I fear for my friends who work in the industry though.
 
I don't know, I like what I saw with DLSS 5, perhaps I'm an outlier. I think it's pretty incredible to be able to offload this level of details to the GPU. Normally, I would expect that games will be cheaper to create but who am I kidding... I fear for my friends who work in the industry though.
Fake details ooh pretty pictures lol
 
Expect technology to plateau even harder than it is right now, so this kind of advance is very much welcome to offset the inevitable diminishing returns in visuals. The demonstration may have produced questionable results, but the potential is undeniable. As with every new tool, there will be lazy/untalented people who will produce slop, and the talented ones who will leverage the tool for higher quality output. And then, there will be the morons who will reject the said technology not for artistic reasons, but because they're just incapable to adapt. Those people will become irrelevant, and honestly, fuck them.

I am very optimistic.
 
bafkreiffprm7uw2xxs6fpozljrox3j2d7fwnjw6bcgjuwbiayhm6njtgre

My problem here is, this is not about putting more "detail" it's more about turning the character to entirely different person.

In DLSS5 on picture looks like she has bigger lips and has more makeup which doesn't at all match to Grace's character.

It's like most generic and soulless way to make her "hot" for porn pop up ads.
 
Last edited:
Another easy low-hanging fruit article which then gets a thread. I don't think people should worry and if anything they should be rooting for competition to continue to push Nvidia in different ways.

You can be upset about the company and what the cost of things with AI is doing to economies but you can't be upset at their engineers and people that work hard on implementing the graphics and features that we have before us.

Think about what the article is saying, NVIDIA has lost the plot with gamers as if they care less about them when these technologies are specifically being built for gamers. Plss, which is advanced a hell of a lot, is absolutely amazing. We all know when it was less than that and it was not as good but look what the time is done and what they continue to do to invest to try to make gaming experiences more efficient for the hardware that we have.

I don't know how you can extrapolate that other than because it's the flavor of the day to be shitting on them over this technology that isn't even fully understood yet in dlss5.
 
I'll be honest, if you like this tech; that is fine. That's your choice. But this will push me away from PC gaming and back to consoles if Nvidia keeps down this path and AMD avoids this type of shit.

Luckily AMD doesn't have an incentive to force AI into everything.... for now at least.

All I see for PC gaming is a future where developers get fucking lazy and just let AI handle the image on screen.
 
Last edited:
Hold up, there is an incredible tidbit buried in the article.

"Meanwhile, Starfield game developer Bethesda tweeted, "This is a very early look, and our art teams will be further adjusting the lighting and final effect to look the way we think works best for each game. This will all be under our artists' control, and totally optional for players."

Originally looking at Starfield NPCs I thought Todd saved cash by using some middle and high school kids to model them. But no, Bethesda has an actual art department!

🤯🤯🤯🤯
 
So if I'm reading the Nvidia dudes comment correctly, this is totally optional, and devs will have full control on how the end product actually looks. Claims they got permission to use this likeness of Grace from Capcom, which likely means they just turned this feature on in RE9, and just asked Capcoms permission to use it as an example, because at this point they can't give Capcom creative control. But for actual games, devs will have the say over how shit will actually look? What exactly is the problem here then? If it did fundamentally change the look the developers were going for then yeah it's shit, but if the developers have control over this then fuck it.
 
Eureka! I have developed the perfectly objective, expert approved, pyschometric test for you all to gauge where you are on this topic.

STEP 1: Stare at this GIF for a few seconds:

qKCaB9vsdEDC5d7T.gif



STEP 2:

Choose the appropriate answer and reflect on it:
  1. It's the same picture
  2. It's an intentional race swap. Those goddamn bigots at Nvidia!
  3. It's an intentional race swap. Gaming needs more light skinned girls and women. Representation FTW!
  4. It's an unintentional race swap. I wonder why though?
  5. It's an unintentional race swap, but I love it! The whiter the better
  6. It's not a race swap at all. But may be the lighting effects are over exaggerated?
  7. It's not a race swap at all. Just DLSS 5's beautiful content-control generative AI doing all the work. Artist-approved!
  8. I have no clue, dude. It's just videogames.

What's your number, GAF?
 
Last edited:
Eureka! I have developed the perfectly objective, expert approved, pyschometric test for you all to gauge where you are on this topic.

STEP 1: Stare at this GIF for a few seconds:

qKCaB9vsdEDC5d7T.gif



STEP 2:

Choose the appropriate answer and reflect on it:
  1. It's the same picture
  2. It's an intentional race swap. Those goddamn bigots at Nvidia!
  3. It's an intentional race swap. Gaming needs more light skinned girls and women. Representation FTW!
  4. It's an unintentional race swap. I wonder why though?
  5. It's an unintentional race swap, but I love it! The whiter the better
  6. It's not a race swap at all. But may be the lighting effects are over exaggerated?
  7. It's not a race swap at all. Just DLSS 5's beautiful content-control generative AI doing all the work. Artist-approved!
  8. I have no clue, dude. It's just videogames.

What's your number, GAF?
9. This slop is better at bleaching than my detergent.
 
I am shocked, shocked, I tell you.

Who could've possibly foreseen that the crowd screeching "tech bros bad" 24/7 would reflexively hate every single new feature, every incremental advance, and especially anything involving AI?

After hyping up one flop after another, calling it peak modern audience gaming, furiously posting in their perfectly curated Bluesky echo chamber about how AI is literally Satan's autocomplete and will end creativity/jobs/humanity/good taste forever.

Never saw that one coming from the Verge.
 
bafkreiffprm7uw2xxs6fpozljrox3j2d7fwnjw6bcgjuwbiayhm6njtgre

My problem here is, this is not about putting more "detail" it's more about turning the character to entirely different person.

In DLSS5 on picture looks like she has bigger lips and has more makeup which doesn't at all match to Grace's character.

It's like most generic and soulless way to make her "hot" for porn pop up ads.
I dunno.
She looks about right to me.
Any examples of what you think she would look like if more realistic?
She doesn't look emo in the pic to me if that's where you're going.
 
The Verge has lost the plot with reality.

Also, fuck Tom Warren.

This is becoming the new way of virtue signaling.

Nobody likes Tom Warren because of his excessive defense of Microsoft.

However, if he joins the anti-AI crowd, maybe they'll like him.
 
Last edited:
I dunno.
She looks about right to me.
Any examples of what you think she would look like if more realistic?
She doesn't look emo in the pic to me if that's where you're going.
If DLSS had a slider and the left is 0 and the right is 10, I'd like to see what it would look like in incremental stages. I think a less aggressive 20-40% would look better than either. I wonder if that will be an option at all, like we'll have an ability to determine a strength, like sharpening, or if it will just be an On/Off switch?

Right now it looks uncanny, but I'm not really concerned. it's an extremely high end feature and still half a year away, either it gets better and people come around, or it doesn't and no one will want to use it anyway. It's not like like DLSS 4 is going anywhere.
 
This is becoming the new way of virtue signaling.

Nobody likes Tom Warren because of his excessive defense of Microsoft.

However, if he joins the anti-AI crowd, maybe they'll like him.

Being against AI slop is virtue signaling? This is getting to be a bit too much...
 
Last edited:
Everyone almost shows Graces face, the most sensitive aspect of the game apparently, even though you don't see her face 99% of the game (if you play 1st person). But what about Leon shot, that looked sick you can't deny. Then lighting change in TES4R was also alright, Hogwarts was changed alot as well, perhaps not too great with characters but still, it can change no? We don't know enough about this yet, but I'm still excited. If it disappoints, whatever. Man if Jensen pulled out his dick on stage, it wouldn't be such an outrage lmao.
 
Last edited:
What I see is pure anti-AI.
People no longer know how to distinguish good from bad, they categorize everything AI as bad.

People want the games they pay for to be intentionally crafted with artistic intent. In general, using generative AI flies in the face of that and gives an impression of low effort and something not worth bothering with (hence: slop). Not saying there is no potential ever, but the implementations thus far, including this DLSS5 nonsense, looks laughably bad to a lot of us.
 
bafkreiffprm7uw2xxs6fpozljrox3j2d7fwnjw6bcgjuwbiayhm6njtgre

My problem here is, this is not about putting more "detail" it's more about turning the character to entirely different person.

In DLSS5 on picture looks like she has bigger lips and has more makeup which doesn't at all match to Grace's character.

It's like most generic and soulless way to make her "hot" for porn pop up ads.
What do you expect. Jensen Huang's a souless cunt!

Money and art are like oil and water.


The article mentions that this is not a post_process thing, and that it works on mesh and render level, in that case I want to see wireframes of the crackwhore Grace version because my initial opinion is that Jensen is talking horseshit...
 
Last edited:
People want the games they pay for to be intentionally crafted with artistic intent. In general, using generative AI flies in the face of that and gives an impression of low effort and something not worth bothering with (hence: slop). Not saying there is no potential ever, but the implementations thus far, including this DLSS5 nonsense, looks laughably bad to a lot of us.

No, people don't really care about that. If they presented these games as next-gen remasters without revealing they were made with AI, everyone would be saying how revolutionary it was. If Mark Cerny presented it, wow, the headlines would be positive.

True artists used to draw sprites by hand or build polygonal models using math. From the PS360 generation onwards, an artist has become someone who opens the Unreal Engine editor, puts together some pieces, and calls it a game. In other words, a large part of the artistic work was already automated. AI is just another tool. To achieve the same level of fidelity, an artist would take months to do it.

There used to be artists who spent a lot of time positioning lights in scenes. Today, that artist has been replaced by ray tracing.

The truth is, these people don't want to update their skills, they're afraid of losing their jobs. I understand that point, but the world keeps running, whether they like it or not.
 
They lost the plot long before when they decided to put out insane prices like 750 for a 5070ti, 900 for a 5080, and 2,000 for a 5090. Even base mrsp were already overpriced.
 
No, people don't really care about that. If they presented these games as next-gen remasters without revealing they were made with AI, everyone would be saying how revolutionary it was. If Mark Cerny presented it, wow, the headlines would be positive.

True artists used to draw sprites by hand or build polygonal models using math. From the PS360 generation onwards, an artist has become someone who opens the Unreal Engine editor, puts together some pieces, and calls it a game. In other words, a large part of the artistic work was already automated. AI is just another tool. To achieve the same level of fidelity, an artist would take months to do it.

There used to be artists who spent a lot of time positioning lights in scenes. Today, that artist has been replaced by ray tracing.

The truth is, these people don't want to update their skills, they're afraid of losing their jobs. I understand that point, but the world keeps running, whether they like it or not.

Nah, I disagree, simply for the fact that we can tell when something is expertly crafted vs. made by generative AI or just an asset flip UE5 "game."

If it ever gets to the point where we can no longer tell the difference in quality between Red Dead Redemption 2 and something like the The Day Before, then I'll agree with you, but there's no indication that future is coming.
 
By the sounds of it you can probably tun on/off DLSS 5. So if someone doesnt like it, just turn it off and enjoy looking at those dark last gen looking character models.

No doubt it's not perfect, but the DLSS pics IMO looked better as a whole than the before pics. The Hogwarts old lady was the worst one for me. Looked totally overdone and rubbery. But for the most part, it looked better to me.
 
Last edited:
The argument to defend AMD on that isn't sufficient anymore, Nvidia are just doing their own thing. I'm not actually against nvidia's tech on itself, I'm against Blackwell's dlss not being forward compatible on newer games going forward.
 
Last edited:
bafkreiffprm7uw2xxs6fpozljrox3j2d7fwnjw6bcgjuwbiayhm6njtgre

My problem here is, this is not about putting more "detail" it's more about turning the character to entirely different person.

In DLSS5 on picture looks like she has bigger lips and has more makeup which doesn't at all match to Grace's character.

It's like most generic and soulless way to make her "hot" for porn pop up ads.
It's just a more accurate representation of a person instead of the plastic looking person without any expression.

All the changes to Starfield and Skyrim should have been applauded because those games look like dog shit.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom