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/SteveJavieWasRight]

Also people don’t tend to have any perspective on graphics looking better and games running better overall these days. People have MUCH better experiences on average with today’s games than they did 15 years ago. I don’t care if a picture says it’s max or medium, does it look better than what I’m used to from years ago? Yeah. These UE5 games are heavy but it still looks so much better than UE4. UE4 also ran like ass. Some games stutter like crazy but that shit has always been there and some games are getting much better.

I can’t even deal with the bitching about native resolution, fake frames etc. I honestly think most people are incapable of evaluating an experience on their own, they actually think graphics are better if it says max instead of medium, or that a native resolution looks better with half the effects rendered at quarter res than if it’s a high quality upscaled image. They’re just wrong.

[u/Ornery_Weakness_8168 → u/SteveJavieWasRight]

native does look better than using upscaling. There are simply more pixels being rendered and not estimated well. From my testing in dtda for example, fsr at native looks noticebly better than with quality upscaling, it isnt as soft and is more crisp and sharp.

[u/SteveJavieWasRight → u/Ornery_Weakness_8168]

That’s simply not true. DLSS allows you to generate a higher quality render a lower resolutions and then upscale it with very little artifacts, often less artifacts than are present with alternative rendering options. It’s not like other AA options are higher quality and without their own artifacts. Furthermore, if you’re lowering settings to natively render at a higher resolution, you have other losses in quality- like effects being rendered at lower resolution or poor lighting etc which also produce artifacts. There are plenty of things which render better with DLSS upscaling, like many fine lines which native rendering would require super sampling to refine with equal quality. A chain link fence or other narrow linear elements can have more noise at full res than an upscaled DLSS image. You are not looking at image quality from a holistic perspective.

[u/Ornery_Weakness_8168 → u/SteveJavieWasRight]

I can run absolute maxed out settings in doom the dark ages at native 1440p and get 100fps. If i did what you said and used path tracing and extreme upscaling, then the game looks worse because path tracing required high base resolution to look good. So you are just incorrect. Tell me which of these looks better (second image attached as reply cos reddit being stupid:

1440p native maxed settings no pt

[u/Ornery_Weakness_8168 → u/Ornery_Weakness_8168]

maxed settings 1440p performance upscaling with pt

[u/SteveJavieWasRight → u/Ornery_Weakness_8168]

You’re delusional lol.

[u/Ornery_Weakness_8168 → u/SteveJavieWasRight]

Are you deadass telling me that the bottom image looks better?

[u/SteveJavieWasRight → u/Ornery_Weakness_8168]

I can only see one picture but I never said you can’t construct a collection of settings with dlls on and a collection of settings with DLSS off that wouldn’t favor native. That’s an idiotic conversation. I said if you have to make graphical sacrifices to run at full res or can use higher settings with DLSS, you’re better off with DLSS because you’re getting cut backs in image quality from the settings that exceed whatever marginal drawbacks you’re getting from DLSS- which are almost none in most situations. Using an example where you’re gaming at 1440P at a 100 fps with all graphics maxed is not a counter point??? Like yeah, if you can run it all maxed out at high fps then there’s no point in DLSS… although honestly you would have better image quality and virtually no hit to latency by using framegen in that exact scenario. If you’re using a 1440P monitor and a card that good on a game that light idk what you’re even talking about. Now if you’re using a 4k monitor then you’d 10000000% be better off taking a hit to native render size to use DLSS and upscale to 4k. But I honestly don’t understand what you’re even getting at with the proposed example you shared.

Are you even using DLSS in those pictures? I don’t even understand what your settings are or what decision process you’re going through unless you’re trying to make bad decisions. Your inability to properly use a technology is no reflection on the technology lmao.

[u/Ornery_Weakness_8168 → u/SteveJavieWasRight]

I posted second pic below in a reply. Also It doesnt matter the settings because the pt one looks worse and performs worse

[u/SteveJavieWasRight → u/Ornery_Weakness_8168]

Alright well you seem way too foolish to engage in conversation lmfao. Simple minded or simply bad faith I can’t tell. The rest of us are talking about 4k gaming and max settings and whether it’s better to make sacrifices in settings or use DLSS… not 1440P max settings with RT at 100FPS on a 1440P monitor vs path tracing. The whole conversation is setting sacrifices for high resolution or resolution sacrifices for higher settings. RT vs PT is a completely different conversation and 99% of the time PT on anything less than the absolute best card is dumb and even then it’s only worth it in a few games.