NVIDIA-DLSS5-HERO-1536x799
Video-News

Someone has debunked all the “visual issues” of NVIDIA DLSS 5

12 Comments

Last month, NVIDIA revealed DLSS 5, which aims to bring major visual improvements to PC games. And, since DLSS 5 uses AI, a lot jumped on the hate bandwagon. Funnily enough, a lot of misinformation spread out in the blink of an eye. However, if you had a pair of working eyes, you’d know that all of the reported visual anomalies and issues are not caused by DLSS 5.

The first example of misinformation was the eyes of an NPC in Oblivion Remastered. People immediately claimed that the AI couldn’t properly regenerate his face, which is why there was a bug with his eyes. However, the exact same issue occurs without DLSS 5. The funny thing is that you can see these bugs both with and without DLSS 5 in the very same video. And despite that, some still tried to mislead people about it.

Then we have the EA Sports FC 26 example. Some people immediately claimed that DLSS 5 was altering a player’s shirt. However, the visual issues with the player’s shirt also occur without DLSS 5. The same applies to the visual artifacts on the ball. Even without DLSS 5, you can clearly see major artifacts. This is yet another case in which people deliberately tried to mislead others. The most obvious explanation for the “missing hand” and the other visual artifacts is DLSS 4 Frame Generation. You can see the exact same artifacts in my DLSS 4.5 article. So I’m one hundred percent certain that these visual bugs are caused by Frame Generation, not by DLSS 5.

The last example of misinformation I’m going to mention is the supposed “appearance” of hair on an NPC in Starfield. People used a still image and claimed that DLSS 5 was adding hair where there previously wasn’t any. However, even without DLSS 5, there are already some strange mesh and hair issues. So, ironically, DLSS 5 is once again accurately reproducing the visual problems that exist in the vanilla version.

YouTube’s ‘WhizzDumbPlayz’ has debunked all of the DLSS 5 visual anomalies that people tried to use to mislead others. So, I suggest watching his video as he zooms in to prove his points.

This Isn't Caused By DLSS 5 And I Can Prove It

For what it’s worth, I agree with everything that WhizzDumbPlayz says. I’ve been using DLSS 4/4.5 Frame Gen, and I can immediately spot its visual artifacts. Both Starfield and EA Sports FC 26 suffer from them, and these artifacts have nothing to do with DLSS 5.

In case you’re wondering, I completely agree that this is a post-process effect. Otherwise, it wouldn’t suffer from the screen-space issues we’ve seen, or from the other visual problems the games had without it. But you’d have to be a complete idiot to tell me you prefer the vanilla version of Starfield over its DLSS 5 version.

I also agree that NVIDIA should have used another name for it. DLSS stands for Deep Learning Super Sampling. That’s not what DLSS 5 does. Instead, NVIDIA should have named it DLSS Neural Rendering. Now that makes more sense to me.

Ideally, I’d love to see NVIDIA implementing better versions of DLSS Super Resolution, Frame Generation, and Ray Reconstruction in DLSS 5. Then, I wouldn’t have any problem with them calling it DLSS 5. But, if the only change is the inclusion of Neural Rendering, then this doesn’t feel like a true DLSS 5.

And look, I get that a lot of people hate DLSS 5 simply because it uses AI. Because if it didn’t use AI, many of you would be screaming nonstop, flipping off console players for having games that looked two or three generations behind. If this were a mod, you’d be calling it the best thing ever.

A lot of people fear that because DLSS 5 uses AI, it will somehow harm the gaming industry. I have no idea how anyone can think that, considering we’ll still need artists to create and design the characters, environments, and pretty much everything else.

Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that AI will make it easier for companies to create games, potentially allowing big publishers to lay off employees. By that same logic, what’s stopping those developers from starting new studios? If AI really makes game development easier, shouldn’t it empower smaller teams to create the games they want without relying on publishers telling them what to do? So what’s actually preventing developers from forming new, smaller studios? Is it because the most creative and talented developers have already left, and others are now using AI as a scapegoat?

And before some of you say, “Well, it doesn’t impact you, that’s why you say it,” bitch please. You can’t imagine what’s been happening in the media space. Before AI, big gaming websites were “borrowing” our stories, and those stories would surface on Google thanks to their higher rankings. Then came Google and its algorithms. Sometimes they would penalize us and cut our traffic by 50% for no reason, only for the next Core Update to fix everything. And now, with AI, you can bet your ass some sites are stealing one or more of our stories. Still, you’d have to be an idiot to rely on a single story to succeed in this job. My motto is simple: “Steal whatever you want. I’ll keep finding more interesting stories to share.”

Anyway, AI is here to stay, and DLSS 5 looks incredible in my opinion. That has been my take from the moment I first saw it. It’s not perfect, and it still needs some work. But you’d have to be blind to prefer the DLSS 5 Off images in any of the games that NVIDIA showcased. And no, that has nothing to do with the “artistic design.” Low settings completely destroy the so-called artistic design, yet plenty of you use them to play your games. Some of you use “Optimized Settings”. Wait a second, what if the games are only meant to be played on “Ultra” with their higher quality meshes? Does this mean you haven’t been playing them the way the artists wanted?

A lot of you were calling Ray Tracing and Path Tracing “gimmicks” just a couple of years ago. And now, suddenly, Path Tracing is “the way the artist intended the game to be experienced”? Is it not a gimmick anymore? Why? Most of you don’t even own a high-end NVIDIA GPU that can run Path Tracing. Did you also know that most path-traced games do not use a lot of rays, something that has a major impact on the visual image? And what about AMD owners who can’t use Path Tracing? See how hypocritical this whole “artistic design” argument is, or are you really that stupid? And why are some of you using mods in your games? You’re “destroying the artistic design,” aren’t you? How dare you?

The only ones who use the “artistic design” argument are those who don’t own a GPU that can use DLSS 5. It’s similar to what we saw when Frame Gen was announced. Remember when a lot of people were calling it a “TV interpolation shitty plugin“? Funny how most of them have changed their minds the moment they tried it. So, how about you try DLSS 5 first? If you don’t like it, you can play your games without it. After all, it’s optional.

And now, feel free to crucify me in the Comment section. Because that’s what some of you are really here for. You are not here to learn something. You are here to act like angry babies. So… DEW IT!