Yeah sure it looks more “real” but you are losing so much expression and you are making the image look like it was badly photoshopped.
I think half of their comparison screenshots look flatout worse with DLSS 5
Comment on Fixed it.
purrtastic@lemmy.nz 2 days ago
Digital Foundry are gushing over how amazing this is. digitalfoundry.net/…/nvidias-new-dlss-5-brings-ph…
pewpew@feddit.it 2 days ago
Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 2 days ago
How is the removal of shadows considered to be better lighting in any way?
StellarSt0rm@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Yeah i was thinking that, using the comparison tool i was able to see it better and it completely ruined the atmosphere in the first image. The image without DLSS5 looks darker and personally i think it looks better like that, DLSS5 then just completely removes that darkness and makes it look awful.
Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 1 day ago
In one scene from Starfield DLSS just removes the shadow from the baseball cap bill and replaced it with a soft shadow. That’s not “realistic lighting”, that’s a smear filter with extra steps.
idealotus@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Ehhhh. I saw the text (“The Real Deal” poster on the window in one comparison). There’s still some artifacting, which to me is a deal breaker, especially if I have to DLSS everything instead of selected items.
But I’m also not a game developer, so I don’t know if the modeling differences are worth the tradeoff for something that most people won’t see in motion.
OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It looks impressive and bad at the same time to me
Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Impressively bad.
OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Im a console player so the background in the Skyrim clip looked impressive to me, but everything else looked really weird and boring even though it ‘technically’ looked better to me