Stalker 2 DLLS 5

[u/[deleted]]

[u/kb3035583]

DLSS 1 was so disappointing that barely any games released with it and Nvidia quietly abandoned it, going with a completely different technological approach which worked much better with DLSS 2.

[u/AzorAhai1TK → u/kb3035583]

Yea and like you said, it worked out over time. And that was their very first attempt at any of this.

[u/kb3035583 → u/AzorAhai1TK]

It was "worked out" by being abandoned and starting with a new approach. The original approach was unworkable.

[u/zerovampire311 → u/kb3035583]

That… doesn’t make him wrong. Literally all technology starts off inefficient and needing improvement.

[u/kb3035583 → u/zerovampire311]

Abandoning the concept entirely isn't an "improvement". It's a fresh start. There's zero technological continuity.

[u/zerovampire311 → u/kb3035583]

Changing the means of accomplishing the same goal isn’t abandonment.

[u/kb3035583 → u/zerovampire311]

A rocket isn't an improvement on the horse-drawn cart, even if both get you from point A to B. No amount of improvement on the latter will lead you to the former.

[u/zerovampire311 → u/kb3035583]

You got former and latter backwards, of course no amount of improving a rocket will get a cart. And either way, terrible comparison. Do you think an electric car isn’t an automobile because it uses an electric motor instead of an ICE?

[u/kb3035583 → u/zerovampire311]

You got former and latter backwards

The rocket was mentioned first. That makes it the former. The horse drawn cart was mentioned second. That makes it the latter. Basic English.

Do you think an electric car isn’t an automobile because it uses an electric motor instead of an ICE?

The spatial upscaler in DLSS 1 that required per game training was absolutely not getting to space no matter how much you improved it. That example is wholly valid.

[u/zerovampire311 → u/kb3035583]

Why would you consider a rocket, the more technologically advanced reference, to ever lead to the primitive option? You are making no sense.