Forum Overview :: Gamerasutra :: The worst possible take

[quote name="Not a Wired article?"]<a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/nvidia-is-reskinning-games-with-ai-gamers-are-angry-about-it-and-wrong/ar-AA1YYH48?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=69d7f587ea7846e092a08568aa9885ee&cvpid=74e08840bee34cf1d078aaf8a53fe842&ei=42">What a dumb fuck</a> [quote name="Dumb fuck"]The way I see it, DLSS 5 looks fantastic most of the time. The intense backlash feels like it’s half posturing, and half psychological disconnect. Our brains are used to filling in the blanks of lower-fidelity graphics. And when faced with a highly detailed reality, we experience a jarring dissonance. It reminds me of how bad it feels to hear a beloved comic book character’s voice for the first time in an animated movie, and realize it doesn’t match the one in your head. With apologies to critics, I simply do not see how DLSS 5 is bad. Every demo I’ve watched looks perfectly in-line with the original games, showing no fundamental style change—just vastly more detail and dramatically improved lighting. Both my gamer and non-gamer friends agree that the processed graphics look superior in most instances. To me, the true uncanny valley—that creepy feeling when a digital human looks almost real but not quite—is a product of robotic motion and stiff facial expressions in big-budget games, not the sheer fidelity of the rendering itself. Analyst Ryan Shrout rightly pointed out that “the early ‘it’s just a face filter’ isn’t the right take,” adding that the enhancements to shadows, water, and foliage are incredibly impressive. Another Redditor summarized the reality of the situation perfectly: “DLSS 5 isn’t replacing good rendering. It’s amplifying it.”[/quote][/quote]