I guess raytracing is slop as well then if "slop" is going to be a word applied to anything that can make the image quality better or more natural?
i want my games to look nice (natural, detailed), that's it.
There is no scenario where creating games will become harder and require more work or equal work as now, doing nice looking games will be easier as tech improves, this is one of those techniques you could argue. But you still need to do decent ground work for this to look good though, but yes, you can get away a bit easier.
I personally do not care.
If it makes my game look good to play, I do not care if 99% of my GPU is used to make 200fps, or 1% is used to make a frame and 99% is used to frame-gen the rest.
If it's good enough to look the same I see it as: My GPU is making 200 fps with its compute power. I do not care the tech doing it.
(Right now extreme frame gen doesn't look the same, but one day it will)
Like if a GPU could generate AI generated gameplay from nothing real time at 200FPS. If when I use it, it looks like a game. I do not give any care to 'how it did its compute math' to get the final result. As 'how' it did doesn't matter to me, what it produced and the quality of it only does.
Hell put a tiny hamster in it on coke hand painting 200 pictures a second and then scanning them in a tiny flatbed to shove to my monitor over Displayport. I don't care how, as long as he is a talented convincing gameplay image painter.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
For shitty games you guys play like survival games etc with no story or NPC's to follow, bring it. But for hand crafted games where artistic integrity is a thing, fuck no.
Even if I played them I personally wouldn't care.
While I respect intended artist visuals as being conveyed. I see it as user choice if they want to keep it: I bought it, I play it,I have to look at it. If I want to change that, my choice.
I could buy a mint classical red ferrari, and decide to add a ricer wing, gull doors, and paint it purple if I wanted. its my car
But thats me. Someone could buy the mona lisa, and decide she needs a mustache. If they now own the painting outright. Add it, you do you.
Whether I think it's wrong to, isn't my place to voice. They have the right to accidently outrage the masses by doing so. We didn't spend 100's millions for it, they did.
But do not expect everyone to side me with me on that. Just if asked myself if it happened, that would be my 2 cents: Do I think it's right? No. But should I be able to stop them? Also no.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
For me is that is two different questions:
Is adding it to games the way forward?
vs
Is adding it to games the way now?
First one is: Probably, Keep maturing it and see where it goes.
Second one is: Not yet, Keep maturing it and see where it goes.
Otherwise it's like shutting dreams of being an Olympic runner, because the 3 year old dreamer falls down now and then and is not fast at the moment.
Mature it, see if it still sucks. It will be like the basket of some past GPU tech: sounded good, never got it working.
If it does get better, adapt it.
Sort of (But not quite the same) as when Realtime volumetric shadows first started.
First games I played with it I turned it off: these suck, they are blocky, pixelated, and bad. This is not how to do it, this looks horrible.
Tech and power got better, process more refined, now its standard to expect a good game to have volumetric and contact shadows.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
It's also an easy way to make things look beter and devs will go for it.
While they will probably have the same result (and perhaps for les compute) actually developing real tools to render the same effects DLL5 adds afterwards.
With DLSS5, why even bother improving the actual moddeling? Just add a bit of AI sauce and it looks good enough anyway.
Again all that's all fine to me personally anyway.
If a dev could have a game idea and push a "make it so" button and make a game I enjoy and like how it looks. I myself do not care if he objectively is the best modeller and coder in the world, or a lazy dev looking for shortcuts that can barely google code to 'borrow'.
As I myself while playing a game never think: How much am I enjoying the game based on how competent the creator was?
If it's fun and looks good for me, I don't care how easy or hard it was on the competence level to the dev.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
For me this goes against two things: AI and 3D gameplay advancements.
For AI, because to me AI is a tool to speed up and enable developers, or future developers. Never to substitute art. And we're seeing how this is going. Music, pictures, literature, design, photography... this is bad imho. It's turning us lazy and entitled. Look fam, I've released 35 full albums in one week! This is really, really bad. Creativity is equally about the results and the path traveled. So with videogames, if the world and characters are designed one way, with the finite reources that the devs and artists had, let it be so. This is their vision. No enhancement can make it better, it's just derivative, even if it's just one accentuated shadow.
For 3D gameplay advancements, because to me this is a coat of painting, not enhanced geometry. So if we delight in the possibilities of x or y or z engine is because they achieve specific visuals in real time, with genius designed frameworks and with brute forced math through our GPUs. This can be moved around, navigated, turned into stereoscopic, VR... you name it. They're, in a way, real worlds to get delighted from and immersed on. When AI is plastered on top, it just makes it a 2D illusion. Yes, the engine is behind, moving everything and giving it the base to plaster that succulent baby face or masculine features on top of the last orgiastic RPG adventure we've decided to play, but there's something really disturbing in that. It's not tangible anymore, it's a billboard in movement. One can say that we'll reach a point when we'll see stereoscopy in real time and we'll be able to navigate such 3D engines and assets with AI engaged and we'll not notice any difference thus creating the illusion that everything is real, tangible. But then again, if we look deeper, we'll see the seams. And that will create a bad precedent. People will feel cheated, not all, probably just a few nerds like me but you'll see the lie, clear and simplified.
All in all this, to me, feels like a mockup. Like the derive the world is taking. More news at 9!
For modern games, it's straight up useless IMO. For example, re9 already looks great without it, really don't see the point of DLSS5'ing it up.The problem is going to be IMO modern day lazy derpelopers and money hungry publishers likely using and abusing it as a crutch to get better results faster instead of putting in the work, while not caring about the performance impact
boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote:
i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then
@jackbomb
I agree with you. Just the opposite side of the conclusion of if that is bad or good.
Someone wants to release 35 albums? If they sound like what I listen to, and are good. Awesome to me, I got 200+ new songs to listen to.
I guess I see it as this: There is TONS of music I don't like, and very talented people takes months to make that song, and I (personally) think it sucks. So time to make and talent taken to make, is not what determines if I find it pleasing to listen to. If I like listening to it does. So competence and talent clearly isn't the metric I should be standing on the hill of, on if its a good song.
And for games, if everyone and their brother could release games ideas they have by slapping at a keyboard. Also great. If I like the game I like it. How much training it took to make a game I like doesn't matter.
Same as music, TONS of VERY talented game devs make games I would never play. So competence and talent clearly isn't the metric I should be standing on the hill of, on if its a good game.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
I myself I'm dumb as fuck, I only know how to make music with Cubase, synths, drum machines, samplers and the fantastic resourceful world of hard feelings and dreams (been doing it for 29 years now) so this is close to home.
But when we talk about videogames and AI, I'm all for it! In fact I have a few projects that I'd like to release to the world, one is a big thing that'll turn a few heads (a specific port) but I'm a perfectionist and it's taking more because I have a mixture of imposter syndrome and not knowing how to make the AI games I did visible. Or mocked on by other devs. I need to sit with myself one day, in silence, and talk to my priorities but what I wanted to say is this: I believe that someone without an inch of programming language knowledge but with great ideas should be able to create a game from scratch. And polish it, and present it to the world. The difference between this and releasing a shit-ton of music with a simple prompt and 10 picks to choose is the projection, the involvement, the patience and the understanding. One-shot games suck, through and through. Great games are coming, and they've been developed in 3 or 4 months (10x faster than a full team of devs until now, mind) - that's the key word: developed. Music has pain, love, happiness, life behind. And I, for one, can enjoy a catchy song made by AI, but it'll never make me dream or let me cross a hard time easier than a human-made one. The feeling is different, no matter what.
For music its close to home too for me. I have more random music gadgets, instruments, and such that I wander around faking being a music artist for 30 years than I care to admit.
I see it the other way: If I had these tools when I was 16 and wanted to make music and didn't know how other than "I can play anything you want, long as its C major" I KNOW I would have used them. So I cannot fault someone for using them now, just because I already put the work in to learn music theory (badly, but I did) because I didn't have a chance to start out 'easy'.
To me my mini cheap mod synth long ago WAS my 'ai': Slap some patch cables, push buttons, spin some knobs, music happens.
Only reason I had a cheap ass late 90s' radio shack one: It was 'shortcut mode' to electronic music for me at the time. I didn't need to know music theory to turn knobs until it sounded 'right'. But it made me want to learn it.
That idea to me of: I suffered and climbed the hill. So you must suffer the hill too.
Doesn't hit me the same way. Go around the hill if you want. I climbed it because I wanted to, not because it's required to.
I see it from my sons POV too. while subjective and surely not the normal use case of it, but IS an argument for one of its pros. niche and rare maybe, but still a pro vs con.
He liked playing with music making with me, but never cared to learn it, so was hard to get him interested as he couldn't make anything that was 'good enough to care to learn more'. Now he is 30 with no musical skills past basic "play guitar just good enough to get girls to notice' type. But he played with suno, and made things that was 'his' that made him come ask me stuff about how to do that, thing he heard in songs, he made on suno.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Last edited by DXWarlock on Tue, 1st Sep 2026 22:19; edited 2 times in total
That's another way of seeing it, for sure. I respect that even if I don't share the sentiment. If it's a tool, even if I don't like it, or used as such... i wish your son the best! No irony.
What I did instead is, I recognized my faults on mixing and mastering (always released music through labels; my own mixing & mastering: not good enough to play in a big room without balance mistakes) and applied the knowledge I have to make AI apps and VST3 plug-ins to cover the holes and help me in that department. As I said, AI is a tool and I'd like to look at it this way. As a replacement for creativity: big nope.
I see it as:
If it takes 1000 hours of training, or 10 minutes of prompting, to express what you want to convey in music. Your choice on the path, getting it out in soundwaves is the purpose.
Is your goal to make what you want to relay? Or your goal to understand the meaning behind it, and fundamental understanding of how to convey it well.
To some just personal projection of the result is more the goal, than the feeling of personal satisfaction in mastering the art itself.
You know: I want people to hear what I want to say musically. Getting the message out is more the point, than the satisfaction of it being a 'handwritten letter' of emotional conveyance.
Like the difference of someone that learns to paint to make a painting for their house, vs someone that commissions a painting for it. Both are personal intent of an image they want to convey the personal meaning of. One wants to learn how, the other wants the results of how.
Now I DO agree: Mass market to earn money from churned out AI music is wrong. But I think a different, but parallel reasoning to yours.
In my eyes its no different than (most) the bands we love dearly: Mass pushed and deadline having record labels wanting dumptrucks of new songs made. The only difference is what is making it: Bands being exploited, or AI being exploited.
So I disagree with that purpose, but only on the same principle as real bands: Not thats its AI and fast and effortless. More than it's exploiting for profit only.
Because like say, AC/DC, if they could make a song every 25 seconds. We would be seeing "Top hits of AC/DC...volume #103"
Even the beloved beatles: Paul: “John and I literally used to sit down and say, ‘Now, let’s write a swimming pool.’ ” (make money for a pool next)
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Last edited by DXWarlock on Tue, 1st Sep 2026 22:36; edited 2 times in total
Yes, they have said its a 50-60% performance drop to use DLSS 5. The comparison is not fair since the DLSS 5 one uses e.g multi frame generation. while its stated its lame and kind of uninteresting, a fair comparison would in that case be MFG for the non DLSS 5 as well, that is an actual comparison and we would have seen a drastic decrease in FPS for the DLSS 5 one.
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
but what I wanted to say is this: I believe that someone without an inch of programming language knowledge but with great ideas should be able to create a game from scratch. And polish it, and present it to the world. The difference between this and releasing a shit-ton of music with a simple prompt and 10 picks to choose is the projection, the involvement, the patience and the understanding. One-shot games suck, through and through. Great games are coming, and they've been developed in 3 or 4 months (10x faster than a full team of devs until now, mind) - that's the key word: developed. Music has pain, love, happiness, life behind. And I, for one, can enjoy a catchy song made by AI, but it'll never make me dream or let me cross a hard time easier than a human-made one. The feeling is different, no matter what.
