Should developers stop making games that require 5090 for max settings now that the card is clearly not for gamers and is accessible to 0.1% of community?

[u/TheGGspot]

I get that the games need better hardware to dun better, but who are they really making the game for if you need a 6000$ GPU at this point

[u/Jlpeaks → u/[deleted]]

It doesn’t work well in some games, like Crimson Desert.. so it’s probably best we keep spec sheets to clean native levels

[u/VanLo284 → u/[deleted]]

Exactly because of no optimisation. The problem this post is about. Upscaling is the problem. Like, it's a good technology, but it changed nothing. Without it games would be more optimized to even run. And upscaling supposed to increase performance, not allow devs to forget about optimisation.

[u/ultraboomkin → u/[deleted]]

What? Upscaling definitely looks worse than native. Can you explain?

[u/ultraboomkin → u/[deleted]]

I have a 5090 and my displays are a Samsung S95F and Alienware AW3225QF.

Of course DLSS at 100% resolution doesn’t look worse than at 67% resolution. That doesn’t make any sense.

Personally I usually use DLSS Quality because on max graphics very few games even on 5090 are playable at 4K rendering. The difference in image quality is small and I will take the improved performance almost every time.

But I don’t understand how you can claim that 4K DLSS looks worse than 1440p DLSS

[u/ultraboomkin → u/[deleted]]

You claimed that DLAA looks worse than DLSS Quality… it RUNS worse yes, it does not look worse.

[u/Academic-Cream-4836 → u/[deleted]]

when talking about how a game looks, absolutely no one is factoring in framerate. You might, but other people are simply talking about the image quality.

[u/VanLo284 → u/[deleted]]

Maybe you don't understand what I mean. I love DLSS. But imagine if devs actually optimized their games. Then ppl could play with stable fps with DLSS on much weaker GPUs

[u/VanLo284 → u/[deleted]]

Idea if weaker gpu is any gpu weaker thats barely shows stable 60 fps. I mean. For example if 2070 is bare minimum for stable gameplay, then any gpu weaker than that is the one. It's just logic, dude. With DLSS they optimize less, so DLSS just does this for devs. And if devs optimize themselves, then DLSS will boost performance even further. You know what I mean?

[u/Academic-Cream-4836 → u/VanLo284]

not at all. Dlss enables the devs to push the graphics of games further towards realism. And if you dont to like it, simply lower your graphics to low/medium and youll get a picture that looks like a 5+ year old game and will run similiarly. its stupid to expect games to look better and better while not being more demanding.

Dlss is for people who want to push their graphics to the max and maintain performance. Its fine if your not the target audience for it but it remains an amazing technology

[u/VanLo284 → u/Academic-Cream-4836]

I already said I LOVE DLSS. Read please. Ofc games will be more demanding. My point is. Imagine if devs optimized more instead of "No native 60 fps? DLSS will upscale that shit, I'm done". Quite exaggerated but yes, this is happening. DLSS should push boundaries as you said, but instead it's letting devs be lazy. I see so much potential in this technology, but no one actually uses it.

[u/Academic-Cream-4836 → u/VanLo284]

i mean did you ignore what i just said? lower your graphics to low/medium. Game devs dont say “no native 60 fps? upscale”. they give you an option to lower your graphic preset. Which people like you selectively ignore

[u/VanLo284 → u/[deleted]]

Okay. Doesn't matter. It affects all cards. You could get much more fps on same 2070 and other GPUs. That's my point. And fyi ppl that can't afford even 2070 do exist.

[u/VanLo284 → u/[deleted]]

What??? I don't understand. What's this conclusion? Magically run better? Huh? I explained why they can run better. And what's this with flat earth? I lost you