The characters just end up looking like different people and I highly doubt the lighting of the scenery actually looks how the artists somehow originally intended.
this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2026
-16 points (23.3% liked)
Technology
82750 readers
2787 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
A lot of people seem to be missing that none of this is being forced on developers. They are not required to enable this. If they have a way they intend for things to look, they can just not implement it.
If you've ever worked in a big company you know that's not how this is going to work, it's going to be requested by executives or higher ups that are not involved in art direction at all.
Executives for...the developers?
Yes, developers work at companies that have org charts
So that IS, in fact, how it's going to work...?
So far....
Interesting...Now I'm curious to see what happen if..
OHMYGODNO!!! MAKE IT STOP!!! MAKE IT STOOOP!!!
that... isn't good tho. Like sure it adds "details" but I bet this is going to make lightning wacky other places.
"artistic intent" is dead
The artists don't really have to make it an option if they don't want to.
isnt this a shareholder decision? i.e. not the artists choice? 😅
but yes, and hopefully most people will turn off this stuff for looking ugly 🤷 but probaby mostly cus they cant afford it
If you're working under shareholders who don't respect your artistic integrity, you're not getting any artistic freedom anyway.
eh, if it pays you usually would. You would be responsible for presenting a finished artistic product, while maybe not your vision it would be within the scope I'd say.
wheras here it's... just slapped on afterwards by an algorithm that changes, will change and neither you nor shareholders can control how it looks.
I was expecting the worst from the comments here, but what I saw looked really good. Lighting has always been the one thing games have struggled with and ray tracing was a nice step in the right direction but we know its just to taxing on hardware and even 5 years later still not to much better. Offering new ways to bring high quality lighting to scenes really does make scenes stand out. It really works well with cracks like when they showed cobblestone paths each stone looks like its own unique step now and everything looks pronounced.
I have been following Crimson Desert for a bit and the new videos that came out highlight just how much better landscapes and rooms are using the highest settings which include realistic lighting and not only looks insane but they found ways to make it less taxing on the system as well. Although it's different from what this is offering I do believe this will be the focus of the industry for the forseeable future.
I am not sure why there is so much hate.
The tech seems to have yassified Grace in the main promotional image that’s being used by every publication.
The rest of the images look improved, for the most part, and I do think it does make sense to offer this functionality as an option in the upscaling pipeline.
I’m sure that those repeating artist’s intention have never dared use a reshade or texture swap.
Hopefully, that yassification will be a side effect of the current state of the tech and not something that ships to end users.
There is hate because this is business encroaching on art, which is always abrasive to artists and art appreciators. This tool adds content to the art that was not put there by the artist, making it a different derivative work.
Furthermore, it can be regarded as frivolous waste. Using AI in real-time to add new details to graphics as they are rendered dramatically increases the amount of energy it takes to run that game. If the gamer had to bear the real costs of these technologies, there would be no gamers.
I mean, nobody turns on ray tracing to reduce a games energy demands.
Nvidia shoveling shit right into games now. Wow. How shameful
BARF.
Holy shit, people. I feel there are comments from non-gamers and all "AI" haters.
A. Game developers are constantly chasing the photorealism aspect, and if there's a chip that helps to achieve this in real-time, they'll want to get help achieving this.
B. It's not film, not even close. There's not 1 single director who wants it done 1 way. It's not ruining the "artists original intent" because so many aspects are developed in fragments and then pieced together to make characters or scenes or certain elements, etc. Most goals are to captivate the player, get a lot of time spent playing, and this is a way to do it.
C. It's also taking advantage of some hardware elements to enhance the player experience. I remember jumping from a GTX 10 series to a RTX 30 series and seeing improvements since it had ray tracing lighting effects. Most people want the realism in more than just cut scenes. They want to feel they're inside something real. It's also just fun to spend time admiring the realism inside a game. And people insulting this ate clearly ai haters. This is sort of a different system of inelegance, not some LLM trying to interpret what it thinks you want, smh.
I dont think you know what you're talking about 😅😅
B. yes games have directors. art director would be the appropriate one here. there isn't much of a difference between film and games in artistic intent. both have artistic intent and directors of various roles intent on ensuring that.
C. no, Nvidia is quite clear that the 50-series is buildt to run a "LLM" in this case LIM, imagemodel that is approximating. it's supposedly only doing Ai to the lighting and shaders - but I personally don't beilive it 😅 due to the weird faces ppl got in these pictures.
also A. no game devs are not "constantly chasing photorealism" higher fidelity I'd agree with, but that has always been within the intent of making stuff look a certain way. the muted colors of skyrim for the nothern climate. Oblivions garish colours of the central fantasy life.
gears of war wanted to be "realiastic" but that meant a very spesific color pattern.
so no, I'm sorry to say most people in these comments are "gamers" and this stuff looks like shit 😅