Agent KaryoAMD and Sony’s PS6 chipset aims to rethink the current graphics pipeline
LainTrainUgh games of this era are gonna age like milk with this forced upscaling and blurry TAA smear shite.
More compression and upscaling… How about just better graphics? How about you make a console that can do path tracing that you can get going with a fairly cheap PC setup.
All these years and these consoles still run 720p30fps like the PS3, but it’s ok with some people because it’s using AI to be dishonest and not just lying like back in the good old days with fish AI.
GethForced upscaling and blurry TAA is compensating for the fact that they can’t push graphics much further on the hardware we have. The current hardware progression has stagnated, combined with the fact that we are seeing more diminishing returns in graphics as they improve, requiring more power to deliver less of a noticeable difference.
But it doesn’t mean these games won’t look great when you disable the fakeness and run it with brute force GPU power 10 years from now.
I honestly think the current graphics we can achive are fine and where the true improvements should come from are better animation and actually good art direction.
I’m no expert on the matter, but I know this yt channel argues that the technology is already available, but big players like unreal engine devs make sub-optimal decisions when implementing these new features, leaving a lot of games being blurry and/or mal-ajusted simply by not knowing any better. Of course, art direction will always be important for a games graphics, but when the vast majority of tools available make things look bad by default, it makes sense that a vast majority will just assume a better result is just not available yet
The Top 10 Most Neglected Areas in Modern Graphics | [Revised Upload]
That’s the guy who’s asking for a million dollars to “fix” unreal engine 5 despite having 0 programming experience and sends out dcma strikes for any videos that call him out on it, lol
Idk his render pipeline breakdown videos seem fairly in-depth. Is it just mumbo-jumbo? I saw some discussion where some devs seemed to acknowledge the perspective but say basically past 10 years of graphics make non-deferred render pipelines utterly unfeasible and thus MSAA, not to mention the issues that TAA “solves” like particularly fine geometry (see guitar strings in TLOUpt.2) or shimmering on stuff that can’t be optimized e.g. hair.
Frankly though I think in practice the difference between graphics in 2015 and 2025 is negligible compared to the difference between TAA (or DLAA/FSR/XeSS/FXAA/SMAA) and x4 MSAA. The only that comes even close is Path Tracing in CP2077.
I agree he seems like a sketchy af grifter, but I’ve not seen a single good rebuttal of his actual points, and even if he was a grifter, that doesn’t invalidate what he’s saying.
That Half-Life Alyx render in flatscreen with MSAA looks better than practically any game I’ve seen.
Idk his render pipeline breakdown videos seem fairly in-depth. Is it just mumbo-jumbo?
Not especially, but it’s deceivingly surface level and doesn’t (and can’t) get into why those decisions might have been made by the programmers. The big issue is that because of his lack of experience and insight into why certain decisions were made, he somehow comes to the bizarre conclusion that there is a set of rendering techniques that are either:
- Being hidden from us by “them” to sell hardware
- Have become lost arcane knowledge because modern renderer architectures are by and large incompetent
Frankly though I think in practice the difference between graphics in 2015 and 2025 is negligible compared to the difference between TAA (or DLAA/FSR/XeSS/FXAA/SMAA) and x4 MSAA. The only that comes even close is Path Tracing in CP2077.
“Modern rendering features are expensive and not worth it” is a reasonable take, but it’s not what he’s pushing.
I agree he seems like a sketchy af grifter, but I’ve not seen a single good rebuttal of his actual points, and even if he was a grifter, that doesn’t invalidate what he’s saying.
The examples he demonstrates in some of his videos are “not false”, at least to the extent that he does click on some buttons on unreal engines and it does behave the way he says he does. So in this way it appears to a casual viewer that his “actual points” can not be refuted. But the grift isn’t in what he shows, it’s in the massive gap between what he shows and what he says afterwards.