this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2024
79 points (92.5% liked)

PC Gaming

8615 readers
1078 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 107 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 54 points 2 months ago

Can’t or won’t?

"money"

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Bosses said use AI so we use AI.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 2 months ago

That's rather depressing to hear. AI is often used as a crutch used to pave over crappy code that would cost money to properly optimize. Maybe Nvidia is also using AI as a crutch instead of developing better GPUs that can actually render more pixels?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

This just seems like they are trying to take a shortcut that might end up having unforeseen consequences. I have no problem with AI upscaling as a technology. It's already proven its merit with almost all triple A games that have come out in the past few years. But this just seems like a way to push the cost off onto consumers by making them buy more expensive hardware at the cost of efficiency. Games are so poorly optimized these days that this just seems like another way to release games that run like ass. If you see this as a benefit in any way, just remember that we will all be paying the extra cost that they get to save.

And of course there's gonna be people that'll just be like "upgrade your PC, bro" which just makes us fight amongst ourselves instead of fighting the companies that are fucking us over. We'll fight each other for hours on end about how shitty someone's PC is before we even consider that the game they are playing is so poorly optimized it's a miracle it even works on a high end PC. It's already to the point that a $4,000 PC isn't even enough to play some common triple A titles at a good frame rate. I can play God of War at the highest setting with no issues whatsoever but can't even play Jedi Survivor at a stable frame rate. Sure a better PC would achieve better results, but that's not a hardware issue.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Games are so poorly optimized these days

Yeah. Valheim runs with 2 FPS in the menu on my iGPU that runs even badly optimized Ark Survival on medium settings.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago

Fuck off Nvidia.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You better look for a new job then and let someone tale over who can, then.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Lazy CEOs just don't want to work anymore!

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Gotta sell more video cards!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

Yeah, that's a big load a bull crap

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

Can't be bothered to*

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Can someone EL5 the pros and cons of upscaling? Why is this so controversial with some gamers?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Pros, more fps on low end hardware.
Cons, worse image, ghosting, blur, artifacting, lower overall performance because devs rely on upscaling.

It's existence is a crutch. Games should be made properly and not rely on ML upscaling for meaningful performance.

Hardware is insanely powerful at the moment, the problem is time isnt spent making the most out of it anymore, which then increases demand for more powerful hardware (that we dont need). The sales loop for Nvidia, except now they want to sell you ML optimised cards, which cost more.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Thanks! So, from what I grok, the claim is basically that the games could probably run fine if they were written and optimized properly, but since they’re probably not, people have to buy a GPU that applies a bandaid solution. Right?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

Yep. As more people buy GPUs that have the capabilities to use machine learning upscaling (the bandaid) then the more likely developers are to use it instead of spending time improving performance.

I see it the most in Unreal Engine games, Unreal Engine allows devs to make a "realistic" style game fast, but performance is often left in the dirt. UE also has some of the worst anti-aliasing out of the box, so DLSS for example, is a good catch all to try and improve framerates and provide some AA, but instead you just get a lot of blur and poor graphical fidelity. The issues probably don't exist at higher resolutions, like 4K (which is maybe what they develop with), but the majority of people still use 1080p.

Oops sorry for the rant! I just got pissed off with it again recently in Satisfactory!

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

Basically, they use AI as a crutch instead of making the games better. This is bad because it will require more power and more expensive hardware to run the AI.

[–] szczuroarturo 2 points 2 months ago

Yes they cant. Dlss is something they developed and every single one of their GPU has cuda cores ( not only for ai , they are just generaly usefull ). Pepole are expecting them to work with dlss. Its kinda stating the obvius