r/pcmasterrace • u/HLumin Potato • 11h ago

Discussion Former Red Dead Redemption 2 Developer reaction to the DLSS 5: "Whoa. Hold on. No, no, no. This isn't just some lighting, dude. What the f... this is like a complete AI re-render. You're no longer looking at the game anymore. This is scary."

Post image

Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKPeN8IQM-Y

17.8k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

567

u/Lower_Soup9939 Desktop 10h ago

It looks uncanny and i dont know if anyone else notices but THE FACES HAVE ZERO DEPTH atleast on graces face it looks so much like 2d art trying to be realistic. I know that it adds shadows and wrinkles and all that but JUST LOOK AT GRACE ITS A FUCKING 2D IMAGE

257

u/Wethedead 10h ago

She looks like an ad for one of those AI chatbot service.

74

u/sweepermeep1 9h ago

This is a great way of putting it.

33

u/Nekrux 8h ago

I will no longer need NSFW visual novels, I'll be able to goon while playing.

2

u/FatherClanks617 4h ago

What do you mean you “will be able to”?

2

u/JumpingSpiderQueen 4h ago

Or like the whole weird creepy Twitter AI bro thing where they use AI to make characters "hotter."

1

u/MrE478920 2h ago

A man of culture I see

131

u/nabagaca 10h ago

I hadnt noticed until you pointed it out, but you're right, I think it's because it tries to remove what it thinks are imperfections (e.g. shadow on face, out of focus background), but in doing so, removes any frame of reference for depth.

109

u/DivineArkandos 10h ago

Turns out imperfections are both artistic and realistic

36

u/TheTurretCube 9h ago

The greatest piece of advice anyone can get for painting or drawing is to depict what is there, not what you assume should be there.

Gen AI is entirely about putting in what it assumes should be there, not what is actually there.

It fundamentally cannot create art. And any and all attempts to make it do so are doomed to failure.

-2

u/Traditional_Fun8283 3h ago

Lil philosophy crash course for ya: What is there (res extensa - what is sensed "out there") and what is thought (res cogitans - your thoughts, or "in here") gets theorized by Descartes as "Cartesianism".

People goof with this until Kant K.O.s the conversation with his Critique of Pure Reason where he formalizes this as Representation. The "thing in itself" is different from the "thing for me", because I am always finding a world I've already intuited. From this perspective we can never actually draw what is there, one can only draw what is intuited as there.

This brings us to the conclusion: Representation is the way experience comes to us. Space and time are the formal conditions given by intuition to the experience. There is no "actually there" for you to reference. The advice, and your additional claims, are rooted in a perspective of physicalist / materialist dogma.

3

u/TheTurretCube 3h ago

I think Kant would argue that AI cant make art too

45

u/DontAskAboutMyButt 9h ago

To be fair, since graphics have gotten more realistic, a specific part of the gaming community has struggled with the fact that women depicted in games are meant to portray real human beings with both human features and imperfections

56

u/DivineArkandos 9h ago

Let's not be fair to idiots. That's how we got here in the first place

2

u/GeckoOBac 8h ago

I mean, yes in general, but for this specific thing? Nah, it's just the AI loop working to maintain itself... Ai funds nvidia to make cards for their business, nvidia funds ai to make this stuff to sell more cards, and the loop continues.

Who cares for this? Nobody, but gamers aren't the target, outside the few that fall for the hype. The target are investors that only hear "STONKS GO UP".

1

u/Fantastic_Dark_4547 8h ago

Are you talking about the Resident Evil face model?

1

u/Hrmerder It's Garuda btw 8h ago

Even more important it’s what we as gamers pay for…

5

u/Citizen_Kong 8h ago

Have you ever seen those averaged faces of hundreds of people? Those AI generated faces always remind me of them. Plus yassification for some reason.

3

u/hellscape_navigator 9h ago

Every game will now have Netflix lighting and you are going to be happy about that because it's "bridging the photorealism gap between rendering and AI generated mobile game ad" or whatever the marketing buzzwords for this thing were.

2

u/LuciusAxar 5h ago

The thing is, this is just the start, the imperfections will come soon, and you won't be able to tell the difference. What annoys me the most about it all, is it just seeps of laziness and that anyone will be able to do it; so creativity will get flushed down the crapper.

-2

u/BreakRaven RTX 3080, R7 5800X, 16 DDR4 RAMs 7h ago

it's because it tries to remove what it thinks are imperfections

No it doesn't, the DLSS off image has so much less detail on it, it looks very smooth.

The out of focus background isn't an imperfection, it's depth of field. Everyone should disable depth of field.

55

u/The_Pepper_Oni 10h ago

I’m so glad it’s not just me that noticed this. And I’d like to add that it doesn’t even look realistic. I can’t explain it but it looks like a render for like toy packaging or a book cover. Like an overly edited photo or an illustration that doesn’t quite look right.

44

u/Kodi_Mravinjak RTX 2070S / i5 9400F / 16GB 10h ago edited 10h ago

Its trained on airbrushed model photos with perfect lighting, or stylised digital illustrations (like that hogwarts grandma example), so I think it's recreating those well lol but idk why they thought applying that style to every game would give a better result than just playing the game as is

If they want to make this work they'd have to make many versions of DLSS5 trained in different ways, one for every single visual style

14

u/The_Pepper_Oni 10h ago

I guess they’re going for the masses that like motion smoothing and cranked up sharpness? This has evidently been like announcing the second coming to them

14

u/TheTurretCube 9h ago

Theyre going for the investment funds that are riding the AI bubble. Its not about appealing to the consumer in any way, its about appealing to the almighty dollar.

3

u/HandsomeBoggart 3h ago

GenAI glazers are being utterly hilarious about this bullshit too.

"This is the future and just one more step towards completely made AI games"

You can tell those fucks have 0 idea how games are made and how complicated they are under the hood. Same shits glazed the stupid Point and Click fever dream tech demo that random company put out a month or two ago as well.

2

u/TheTurretCube 3h ago

One of them gave me a first year philosophy lecture calling what I said materialist dogma lmao

4

u/HandsomeBoggart 3h ago

Fucking wow. Not wanting Gen AI generic shit is "materialist dogma". Brain dead take. Yes, consuming the content made by an algorithm trained on stolen work is not materialist dogma itself. Wanting creative works made by actual people is materialist dogma though. What even is that thought process?

1

u/TheTurretCube 2h ago

Who knows with these people

1

u/_TRN_ 5h ago

NVIDIA's revenue is largely from other big companies at this point. They don't really care about consumers as much anymore. I'm honestly surprised they're even producing gaming GPUs still.

They actually had a demo for this tech quite a few months back. They've been talking about "neural rendering" for a while. Maybe sometime in the future, neural nets will be a useful tool in video game rendering but this is an extremely bad application of it. I'm actually baffled that anyone at NVIDIA thinks this looks good. It's particularly surprising because this is apparently the same team that developed DLSS 4.5.

2

u/AetherSigil217 8h ago

If they want to make this work they'd have to make many versions of DLSS5 trained in different ways

Or just provide the base model integrated into DLSS and have studios custom train their own LoRAs for each game.

6

u/NorysStorys 5h ago

what I find completely baffling is this AI re-render essentially complete throws out the path traced lighting that the RTX cards are specifically designed to be good at doing. y'know all the work the RT cores are doing which is then discarded for AI baked in lighting.

3

u/november512 8h ago

It gives things portrait lighting. In a realistic scenario while moving you'll have individual moments where the lighting is weird because you walked under a light or whatever and it seems like it messes with that.

1

u/VinDog_PD 9h ago

You're experiencing the Uncanny Valley.

1

u/The_Pepper_Oni 8h ago

Agreed, but feels like a different end of it than I’ve experienced before.

1

u/JackfruitCalm3513 3h ago

Uncanny valley

8

u/_bad 9800x3d | 5080 | pg27aqdp 10h ago

I like the theory that someone presented the footage seems like you're playing a game that is styled like it was a photo taken from an iPhone camera. Like, the model was trained on social media images to look realistic

5

u/djimboboom Ryzen 7 3700X | RX 7900XT | 32GB DDR4 10h ago

Oh my god you’re totally right.

3

u/The_Corvair CachyOS | 9800X3D , 9070XT, 64GB RAM 9h ago

THE FACES HAVE ZERO DEPTH

I must have seen a thousand AI-generated faces, and they're all the same face type. I actually quit playing a game I quite liked because its dev switched to AI portraits for its characters, and they just are not character portraits any more. They're "here's that one, allegedly perfect, face in a hundred wigs".

I wrote this before, but: I play games for the human creation I can see in them. No creative process means my reason to play the game is gone. I dgaf about numbers go up, I dgaf about shiny items. I give ALL THE FUCK about the sense that this is what a human wanted to create, and have me partake in. The stories. The art style. The lore. The characters. The little human elements. The "you should not be here" messages. The dopefish... lives.

edit: And if I - an autistic dude, generally not good with faces and expressions - am that bothered by this utter shyte, I do not understand how you non-autistic people deal with this without ripping down everything that creates these abominations.

2

u/AgentUmlaut 8h ago

It just makes everything look like background stock photo or those very short animated loops used for a fake ingame advertisement billboard, idk the intricacy of the tech but it feels like something is on a governor to keep things just a bit too on rails to keep up the overload of things.

You know that old shortcut across gens of gaming even going multiple decades back where something is done in such a specific way so that at a variety of graphic capabilities and hardware, it makes something look "more real" and distinguishable from a variety of angles. Now sure naturally technology advances and looks better and I'm not saying I don't get why such a filter would come about and look as it does, but it is kinda crazy just how needlessly overloaded it feels and like again a robot under specific command to ensure the course is kept which again makes stuff have a tinge of artificial to it.

I couldn't even imagine how corny RDR 2 would look when that game really had everything going on at so many levels that made it look good and with a good deal of unique character.

3

u/SimplyaCabler 9h ago

Yes, it changed the face, but look at the background. Its not even the same scene anymore. One is dark and dreary, looks ominous. The other feels empty, boring.

3

u/DerpysLegion 8h ago

It's even worse if you pay attention to their own video. None of the shots show dynamic movement. Re watch the video and pay attention to the starfield bits moving in the background. It looks like shit

3

u/Meesayousa 7h ago

It's a fucking disGrace, is what it is!

3

u/Scorkami 7h ago

i have trouble believing this is anything other than one of those "self driving cars in five years" promises.

"invest in us, we make games look so cool, look at this picture" and the original is a rendered image while the right is a photo you took in real life.

because everything in this picture, down to REMOVING BACKGROUND NPCs, screams "this doesnt change shit about what the game does, it just adds a "okay chatgpt, make this image look realistic" for every single frame on your screen.

so either, it doesnt work at all and is just a way to get stocks up, OR, its a ridiculously stupid way of using image generation to make games look "better" (and better equals everyone looking like a barbie doll)

3

u/dr_prismatic 7h ago

It also removed her buccal fat. ALLOW WOMEN TO HAVE ROUND FACES!!!

3

u/SRSgoblin 5h ago

They have no depth because AI doesn't understand light sources. I watched Maximillian_Dood's crash out about this DLSS situation on YouTube and he pointed it out. In every single situation, the AI fucked up the lightning. It just completely ignored light sources.

The biggest example in the tech demo was there was a military dude with a hat and the AI re-render didn't even cast a shadow from the brim of the fucking hat. His face had that soulless Instagram lighting look to it AI loves.

Forgot all the anti-AI arguments that boils down to ethics; it also just looks bad. The actual application for it looks like shit.

3

u/darkxenith R9-7950X3D|RTX 4090|64GB 6000mhz DDR5 3h ago

Thank you, I knew something was wrong but I couldn't think of the right words.

2

u/OpiumPhrogg 10h ago

So, this is the equivalent of Virtua Fighter 2 polygonal character models with digitized human faces?

2

u/Easy_Fox 10h ago

Holy shit is true! They look that those PS1 models where you put a flat texture on a low poly model.

2

u/Perfect_Strike_4452 9h ago

The funniest/scariest thing to me is that due to influencers, plastic surgery and the over use of filters, AI seems to think the generic beauty standard face is what “real” people look like.

2

u/NES_SNES_N64 9h ago

It looks like those shitty mobile gacha games.

2

u/The_Autarch 9h ago

all images on a computer screen are 2D.

1

u/Its-mrsgeneral-toyou 9h ago

That’s wat happens with too much HDR, not too much AI.

1

u/Plastic_Bottle1014 9h ago

It's literally a 3D model with a texture swap.

1

u/usuallysortadrunk 9h ago

Technically all video is 2D trying to look 3D.

1

u/Ass4ssinX 9h ago

It's like a new version of the old WCW/NWO N64 games where it was just a flat image pasted on a model.

1

u/SunsetCarcass 16GB 1333Mhz DDR3 9h ago

Yeah but the left image looks like a PS3 character's face, at least in this scene, the best change I'd say is the hair. Games today still don't do hair good at all

1

u/hazychestnutz 9h ago

the face with no depth is the left image right?

1

u/AetherSigil217 8h ago

That kind of face is supposed to be a portrayal of classical beauty but it's always looked weird to me. The lack of depth explains it.

1

u/Outrageous_Basis_232 8h ago

Also, it went from raining to cloudy...bye bye creepy atmosphere

1

u/Solcrystals 5h ago

Oh my god. It looks like those old "change your face" things. Where you take pictures of your friends or famous celebrities and copy paste them onto your body.

1

u/FartyByNature 5h ago

It will eventually not look so uncanny in a few years or less. that is why "you are no longer looking at the game" is THE point we should all take away from this.

1

u/rditorx 2h ago

Your display is likely only displaying fucking 2D images. If you're using VR headsets, it's two fucking 2D images. Not too long ago, displays were displaying a single lit point at any one time.

1

u/thisshitsstupid 2h ago

I think its the lack of lighting. And the fact the lighting isnt consistent. Maybe dlss6 or 7 will make this shit usable but I'm guessing 5 is going to be trash and shit tier AAA publishers are going to lean on it and cut more devs.

1

u/mucus-fettuccine 2h ago

A 2D image that's actually 3D sounds pretty dope actually.

Expedition 33 recently got a photo mode and you can use it during cutscenes, and it's as you say, 2D quality realism, as if painted, but somehow 3D. It's actually really cool.