DLSS 5-? Here we go...
I honestly find the argument “I’m against AI, but DLSS 5 is just a feature, so it’s different” a little contradictory.
DLSS 5 isn’t simply a normal graphics filter. NVIDIA itself describes it as 3D-guided neural or generative rendering. The system uses a trained model to generate parts of the final visual presentation, including things like lighting and materials.
Of course, it’s up to everyone whether they want to use it. And someone trying out a mod out of curiosity isn’t automatically financially supporting NVIDIA.
But if you generally say that you don’t want to support the increasing use of generative AI in creative media, you should at least honestly acknowledge that voluntarily using technologies like this still contributes to that development.
Because companies don’t only look at who buys something. They also look at which technologies people actually use and accept.
So if a lot of people say, “I fucking hate AI,” but at the same time say, “I use DLSS 5 in every game because it looks fucking awesome,” that isn’t exactly a signal to NVIDIA that people are against this development.
The signal is more like: “People accept AI as long as we package it as a practical feature.”
And that’s exactly what I find problematic about it.
Personally, I also don’t see any need for generative DLSS 5 to make games look “better.” We already have powerful engines specifically designed to create high-quality and, in some cases, photorealistic graphics. Unreal Engine is just one of many examples. Developers can already create incredibly detailed lighting, materials, shadows, skin, hair, and environments.
Of course, AI can be useful as a tool for developers if it helps speed up certain workflows or simplify repetitive tasks. That’s a different discussion for me.
But if the actual engine is already designed to create the graphics of a game, and then you put another neural system on top of it that partially generates the final visual presentation itself, at some point I have to ask: what do we even need the original graphical design and the work of the engine for in that form anymore?
Personally, I don’t need generative rendering layered over an already fully designed game to make me think it looks “better.”
I don’t play that many games in general. But when I do play, I really enjoy games with mods Skyrim, Dragon’s Dogma, Fallout, The Sims, Red Dead Redemption, and others. And to me, that’s a good example of what I actually want to support instead: mods where people invest their own time, creativity, and work into building, animating, designing, or expanding an existing game in their own way.
To me, that’s something completely different from a generative system that automatically alters the visual presentation based on a trained model.
You can absolutely use DLSS 5. But in my opinion, you should then also be honest enough to say: “I reject AI in other areas, but I make an exception for this technology because I consider its benefits to me more important.”
At least that’s a consistent position.
“I fundamentally reject AI, but I use generative AI rendering everywhere because it’s just a feature” is much harder for me to reconcile.
And that’s exactly what I’m getting at: It’s not about telling anyone what they’re allowed to use. It’s about recognizing that our actual usage also sends a signal to companies about which technologies we accept and which ones we simply don’t need.
Just my two cents, because I see a lot of people trying it out, and of course, they’re more than welcome to do that. But yeah… I think the signals we send by doing so are actually more important. But maybe that’s just my opinion. I don’t know.
#noai #humanwork
Comments (7)
fair points, im not anti ai altogether but the ease of people becoming dependant is like any addictive technology that removes a skill for humans to develop. im torn because holy hell i want to see my highly edited sims look even better. good thing i cant even afford the graphics card for it. *I also only play the world games i can roleplay in lol like skyrim, fallout, red dead, sims, inzoi, cyberpunk 2077. OH i want to add that my friend is a developer and wants to murder AI because it makes convoluted code that is almost unreadable and makes mistakes everywhere, he thinks its going to destroy the internet. so theres that...
The point is: AI is being used in the wrong ways. AI can be useful, or even extremely useful, in so many areas of life. Development aid, economic assistance, science, medicine, research, industry, or wherever it can actually help people. For example, AI can assist doctors by analyzing data, help researchers calculate things or find patterns, give people suggestions, or help with complicated processes where a human still makes the final decision. In industry, it can take over dangerous, exhausting or repetitive tasks, like assembling cars or whatever. Actual progress. Especially in situations where people would otherwise suffer, or potentially suffer more than they would if an AI were doing the task instead. But when it comes to anything creative, whether it’s music, art, gaming, whatever, then yeah, maybe you can use an AI assistant that tells you where there might be mistakes or what options you have for correcting them. That’s fine. But bringing AI in to do entire workflows for you, to completely take work off your hands, to replace actual skills, whatever, that’s where AI has no place. Right now, AI is being used by people who simply think, “I want to make money quickly,” or “I want to become famous quickly,” or whatever. By every random nobody who thinks, “Yeah, I can’t really do much, but I’ll just use AI and then I can become rich and famous,” or whatever. And that’s the problem: the capitalism behind it. People are using AI to farm money simply because they can. It starts with someone calling themselves an AI artist, uploading some random anime girls, and thinking they’ve made it, and then monetizing it and saying, “Yeah, why not?” That kind of thing. And we also can’t forget the ongoing controversy around the data used to train AI models, including copyrighted work being used without the creators’ consent. And that is exactly why I don’t think AI belongs in the creative media landscape. Not in the form it currently exists in, and not in the direction it’s being developed. It simply shouldn’t be there. And that’s the problem. That’s why I’m so against it in this particular field. Like I said, it can be useful almost everywhere else. In medicine, science, research, wherever it can actively help people, absolutely. But not when the purpose is to replace people, take away their ability to create and develop things themselves, or simply because people are greedy and want to make money from it. Yeah, AI is useful, but it’s not useful in every area of life. That’s just a fact. And that’s exactly the point right now. Especially in the creative industries, no matter where you look, it’s being used more and more simply because there’s quick money to be made from it. And that’s what I find genuinely sad. And people just accept it and go with the flow, simply because it’s being sold to them as, “Well, this isn’t really AI. It’s just the future. You can use it if you want, or you don’t have to. And it only improves things a little bit, so that’s still okay.” It’s the same thing. It’s still AI. And that’s exactly what I see with DLSS 5. People act like it’s just a graphics feature or some kind of filter, but NVIDIA itself describes it as AI-powered neural rendering and generative rendering. It uses a trained AI model to contribute to the final visual output. So if someone says, “I would never use AI to alter my creative work,” but then happily uses AI to alter the final appearance of a game because it is called a “feature,” I don’t really understand the distinction. That’s my problem with it. 🤔
From what I understand this system is built into the graphics card software, is there even an option to turn it off? And if not does it actually improve the graphics in the Sims 4? My only issue is if it artificially enhances how a sim appears in my game, but it doesn't do it for the next user. I share sims I create, I don't use Reshade or Blender to misrepresent how my sims look. I'd also worry if this AI enhancement is going to drain resources and slow my game down.
I think there may be a misunderstanding here. DLSS 5 isn't something that automatically changes Sims 4 just because you own an RTX GPU. The DLSS 5 examples people are currently showing in Sims 4 are using unofficial mods that inject the DLSS 5 neural-rendering component into a game that doesn't natively support it. You have to deliberately install and enable that. So yes, you absolutely have a choice here. Nobody is forcing DLSS 5 onto your Sims, and nobody else needs to see the result. That's precisely why I find the “it's just a feature” argument interesting. If you choose to install a mod specifically to make an AI model alter the final appearance of your game, that's a conscious choice to use the technology. And that's where my criticism comes from. I'm not saying people aren't allowed to use it. I'm saying that if someone normally says “I don't use AI because I don't want AI altering how my creative work looks,” then voluntarily installing generative neural rendering into their game is at least something worth acknowledging. Calling it “just a graphics feature” doesn't change what the technology is doing. Also, if your concern is that your Sims might be “misrepresented” to other people, then DLSS 5 actually isn't fundamentally different from using ReShade in that respect: both can change what you see on your screen without changing the underlying character or game files. The difference is the technology used to create that visual result. And personally, I'd rather support creators who make ReShade presets, CC, lighting mods, animations, etc. by hand than add generative AI to the rendering pipeline. That's a personal choice too. ✨
This is a breath of fresh air to read, thank you!
This is exactly! thank you so so much for speaking out against the hypocrisy! I feel exactly the same. Just be honest with...their audience aren't stupid...just say you wanted to try and you know its bad but you wanted to do it. i hate ai and dont' trust/like people who use it but i have less ill will towards people who are open about using it vs people who try to bullshit their way around why they're using it and why its "ok actually~" anyways thank you for being honest
Exactly, that’s the point. Recognizing the difference when something is essentially the same thing, but people package it differently, give it a different name, and then people think it’s something completely different. But it isn’t something completely different. So at the very least, you should be honest with yourself and say: “Okay, this is AI, which is something I actually don’t want, but it’s okay when it’s used in my game.” Well, I don’t know if it’s really okay, but everyone has to decide that for themselves. Personally, I don’t know. I’ve seen several examples now, and I don’t think it looks good. With modern games, you could maybe still say, “Yeah, you can see some differences,” perhaps if you look very closely. But Final Fantasy 7 Remake, for example, is one of those cases where I was genuinely shocked when I saw the characters. And well, older games have their own charm precisely because they’re old and not photorealistic. They’re not supposed to be, and they were never meant to be. That’s what mods are for. If you really want to improve the graphics a little, use mods. There are so many mods. Please, use mods. But yeah, I think we should at least put honesty front and center here. 😮💨