- cross-posted to:
- pcgaming@lemmy.ca
- cross-posted to:
- pcgaming@lemmy.ca
This was actually the sub-headline of the article but I thought was the more important party of the article.
Speaking with developers and artists at studios that have agreed to DLSS 5, including CAPCOM and Ubisoft, Insider Gaming was told that the DLSS 5 tech was revealed to them at the same time as everyone else.
“We found out at the same time as the public,” said one Ubisoft developer.
Developers at CAPCOM tell Insider Gaming that the announcement and the publisher’s involvement were particularly shocking, as CAPCOM has previously been historically very “anti-AI” with projects such as Resident Evil Requiem and other unannounced projects in development. Some at the publisher fear that the DLSS 5 announcement could prompt a change in the publisher’s view on generative AI and its implementation in its games.
No, because the original information is still there, it’s just filtered on top. Exactly like how listening to the same audio on different headphones can sound completely different.
Edit: Because a dip/rise in a certain frequency can completely change the sound of any individual element of sound.
If you put new information on top of a pixel, the pixel is changed and it is no longer the original information. Your headphones example would be more accurately applied to the visual medium as running custom color profiles, like adjusting saturation and contrast. The original information is there (music waveform or pixel color) but affected by delivery (bass boost or colorblind adjustments).
I’m not sure I understand the difference when DLSS is a toggle.
You made exactly my point in your last sentence.
Then you didn’t understand it because that doesn’t apply to DLSS.