• Krotiuz
    link
    fedilink
    63
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m one of those people that uses DLSS, because I’ve got a large fancy 4k monitor that is big enough that is looks like shit at lower resolutions.

    DLSS is better than nothing but it’s no replacement for native rendering, it introduces a heap of visual anomalies and inconsistencies, especially in games with a consistent motion (racing games look like shit with DLSS), so I tend to be having lows of 50fps on medium before I’ll even think about DLSS.
    I’m also pretty sure Nvidia is paying devs to have it on by default, because everytime it’s patched into a game they clear all the current graphics settings to turn on DLSS, at least in my experience.

    • Nefyedardu
      link
      fedilink
      32
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I hate how AI upscaling looks and I really don’t get why everyone seems to be gaga over it. In addition to the artifacts and other weirdness it can introduce, it just looks generally like someone smeared vaseline over the picture to me.

      • @FooBarrington
        link
        101 year ago

        That’s not inherent to “AI upscaling” as a process. ESRGAN for example is pretty good at upscaling pictures while keeping the quality.

        • Nefyedardu
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          I’ve tried upscaling with ESRGAN as well and it has similar problems. It messes with the original textures too much. For example, it made carpet look like a solid surface. Skin looks too smooth and shiny. That kind of thing.

          • @FooBarrington
            link
            11 year ago

            It depends a lot on the source picture, but it’s definitely not a general problem inherent to AI upscaling. Otherwise there wouldn’t be so many positive examples of ESRGAN.

    • @RightHandOfIkaros
      link
      English
      181 year ago

      Just play in 640x360 and squint your eyes like we used to in the CRT days.

      • @TheYang
        link
        51 year ago

        Or 1600x1200 when most LCDs were 1024x768.

        CRTs really have gotten a bad rep, although they were great for a while still, after LCDs came on the market

        • timo_timboo
          link
          41 year ago

          they were great for a while still, after LCDs came on the market

          and they are still great, if not better. I’d take a high-end CRT over a modern LCD any day.

          • MrScottyTay
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I really wish there was still a market for new modern CRTs I’d have loved to have seen how that technology would’ve matured further

        • @RightHandOfIkaros
          link
          English
          11 year ago

          If you were gaming at 1600x1200 you either had a supercomputer, or you were gaming on a machine built after 2000.

      • @AnUnusualRelic
        link
        51 year ago

        CGA used to be good enough, you kids with your fancy pixels are just spoiled.

        • @Zombiepirate
          link
          English
          41 year ago

          Look at fancy-pants here rendering four colors at a time!

          In my day we had green and black. And we were greatful for it!

    • @Heavybell
      link
      51 year ago

      This is a big part of why I’m sticking to 1440p for as long as it’s a viable option. Not like my imperfect vision with glasses on would benefit from more PPI anyway.