Post

last post on this for now, since i don't want to litter my account with slop that doesn't represent the kinda stuff i like making with my own hands

if you expose a setting to this feature in your game in any earnest way because you simply couldn't author your rendering well enough after laying off your overworked tech art team, i will make you regret it

hot take: i think efficient & unique style-transfer rendering can be interesting when done with technical intent & nuance but to gate it to one brand of gpu and market it as a feature for improved intended fidelity, while embracing the arbitrary visual clutter of modern slop, is unbelievably stupid

3 reposts57 likes

it's this type of "i paid for the whole gpu so i need make everything have #unbelievable graphics or my purchase was for nothing" gamer that really bugs me

i know i said i didn't want to post any more but i caved in and tried psychonauts 2 and i'm kinda freaking out at the nightmarish results it spat out

does any of this stuff also work in motion and does it work on anything? could you make this work with the banjo kazooie decomp?

oh it absolutely does, though for games without a proper DLSS workflow I have to estimate new motion vectors via an optical flow shader which is noticeably worse for resolving in motion (but not all that terrible) also for some of these I wrote a feedback buffer system that slowly worsens the frame

i will give it one thing: it's a much smaller model than i had expected (150mb) and it runs okay-ish on previous gen hardware, but none of that really impacts any of my actual criticisms of it being added into games. it's shit taste & a step in the wrong direction for both devs & consumers.

it's such a shame The Market™ or whoever has congealed around style transfer as a gimmick to impersonate influential artists... i yearn for a tiny style transfer machine that can make me arbitrary tiling textures of Rocks but Weird or turn heightmaps into Novel and Interesting Soup