this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2024
38 points (93.2% liked)

Games

16742 readers
770 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Talnar@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

My first thought was, "Huh, that's the opposite direction Star Citizen took" and this is someone who isn't hating on it. I play SC occasionally.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

That particular person appears to believe that upscalers, such as like DLSS and FSR, are "basic features"

Do people really like DLSS/FSR that much that they consider it a basic feature? I can't stand the look of it and I'd rather just run actually at a lower resolution since it ends up looking better.

[–] qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"Like" it? No, but it runs way better, and if you are using a high-resolution display, the quality upsampling methods are pretty decent on most games unless you are pixel peeping. I'd rather get 90+ fps with FSR3/DLSS3 with a 5 percent decrease in visual quality over ~45 fps at native resolution.

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (3 children)

My qualm is all of the visual artificing I see. Maybe it's just the games I play, but there are some pretty bad graphical glitches that bother me, and the frame timing is off or something because it makes the game feel less smooth. Part of the smoothness is probably the relatively weak CPU in my laptop. But even on my desktop the frame pacing doesn't feel the same as native.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think preferring a lower-than-native resolution over DLSS as a blanket statement is a bit of a wild take, but there can definitely be problems like artifacts, especially in certain games. I'm playing RDR2 at the moment and the TAA (which is forced to High with DLSS) is poorly implemented and causes flickers which is definitely annoying, as an example. I played Alan Wake 2 on an older laptop that barely ran it and I definitely noticed artifacting from DLSS there, though in fairness I was demanding a lot from that machine by forcing it to play AW2.

Frame time will of course be impacted so if you're playing something really fast and twitchy you should stay away from DLSS probably. It's also less bad if you don't enable Frame Generation. Finally, both DLSS and Frame Generation input lag seems to scale with your baseline FPS. Using it to try to reach 60+ FPS will usually mean some input lag, using it when you're already at ~60 FPS to get 80-100 or whatever means less noticeable input lag.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Finally, both DLSS and Frame Generation input lag seems to scale with your baseline FPS. Using it to try to reach 60+ FPS will usually mean some input lag, using it when you’re already at ~60 FPS to get 80-100 or whatever means less noticeable input lag.

In most cases DLSS actually reduces your input lag because you're getting a higher framerate. Not sure what you're talking about.

https://youtu.be/osLDDl3HLQQ?t=219

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Might be just frame generation I was thinking of.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah frame generation is crap, I wouldn't ever use it.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don't think frame generation is crap outright, it's still free frames, it's just only really useful when you're already at a solid frame rate.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 points 8 months ago

It's not really free frames though. It's no different to motion interpolation on TVs that makes everything look soap opera-like. The game is still playing at the lower framerate, and the disconnect between your input running at one framerate but what you're seeing looking like it's running at another is going to feel "off".

[–] zipzoopaboop@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I've had a horrible experience with fsr, but dlss I haven't noticed a single issue and always turn it on

[–] kiwifoxtrot@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

dlss

I tested it in BG3 and it didn't work very well with trees and other small objects.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 0 points 8 months ago

DLSS has nothing to do with the frame timing. DLSS also has very little, if any, visible "graphical glitches".

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Do people really like DLSS/FSR that much that they consider it a basic feature?

Absolutely, at least DLSS. DLSS is a gamechanger and a godsend. It can actually look better than native resolution while giving you massive performance increases. At worst it looks basically the same as native while giving you a massive performance boost. I've got a Ryzen 7/3070 PC and I'll use DLSS everywhere it's available as it's basically just free frames.

The same can't be said for FSR however, it's trash.

I can’t stand the look of it and I’d rather just run actually at a lower resolution since it ends up looking better.

DLSS rarely, if ever, looks worse.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 5 points 8 months ago

The wildest thing is combining DLSS with DLDSR if you're running say a 1440p system like I am. Set your monitor to 1.78x DLDSR resolution, run your game at 3413x1920 and enable DLSS quality. In the end you render at 2275x1280 but end up with way better image quality than native, and the upscaling+downsampling ends up being a great anti-aliasing method since it sorts out a lot of the bad TAA blur.

[–] SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world -4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Maybe complete the game fully before releasing it? Maybe people wouldn’t have an issue and you wouldn’t have to come up with excuses to justify a non-complete game.