Jesus, this looks pretty bad. And the best parts are nowhere nearly good enough to justify the average, let alone the worst parts.
Horrid.
Ideally the effect isn't applied universally across the scene, it's supposed to be configured by devs so different elements of a scene get different treatment. Retrofitting it to a game is going to produce the worst possible results compared to a more narrow targeted use where its intentionally applied by artists during the dev process.
I don't see a clear and obvious reason why they won't model e.g. faces initially the way they want it to be and instead involve a process that applies a rather unpredictable mask over the scene.
I can see engine developers seeing gamers now having all these additional raytracing and tensor cores collecting dust and jumping at the opportunity to put them to work, possibly lowering the load on other hardware parts. E.g. instead of populating the landscape with debris, grass, trees procedurally via CUDA-like cores draw them over bare land, add detales that weren't there on objects where consistency is not needed.
But for now it lack any thought behind it. The tool is there but it has not found a purpose. And it needs to find one fast, because there is a short window before it gets written off as a chip-melting waste of frames. A more universally applicable and useful raytracing technology is still not a standard, there is like one Doom game that doesn't have baked in lighting at all, and DLSS5 stays on even lower platform. We need to see at least one good example of it.
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
Rules: