I'm one of those people that uses DLSS, because I've got a large fancy 4k monitor that is big enough that is looks like shit at lower resolutions.

DLSS is better than nothing but it's no replacement for native rendering, it introduces a heap of visual anomalies and inconsistencies, especially in games with a consistent motion (racing games look like shit with DLSS), so I tend to be having lows of 50fps on medium before I'll even think about DLSS.
I'm also pretty sure Nvidia is paying devs to have it on by default, because everytime it's patched into a game they clear all the current graphics settings to turn on DLSS, at least in my experience.

Another excuse to release overpriced weak GPUs

Why is native gaming out and dlss here to stay? I hate the feel and look of dlss and fsr.

It's not a prediction, {Company} will simply push whatever future that benefits {Company}.

Its here to stay since people cant afford overpriced GPUs.

So long games don't force it to be on, then whatever. Although I expect it to become a requirement for a usable framerate for next gen games. Big developers don't want to optimize anymore and upscaling/framegen technologies are a great crutch.

But it looks bad and frame gen has very noticeable latency.

Maybe I did something wrong but I tried DLSS in BG3 with my 2080 and it looked really bad.

I like the concept. I don't like Nvidia making up neat gimmicks as anti-competitive behavior.

I prefer native. If you can't render something, then just don't. Not make everything else worse too just so you can claim to use a feature, and then try to make up junk to fill in the gaps. upscaling is upscaling. It will never be better than native.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

During their discussion with Digital Foundry's Alex Battaglia and PCMR's Pedro Valadas, Bryan Catanzaro — Nvidia's VP of Applied Deep Learning Research — stated that native resolution gaming is no longer the best solution for maximum graphical fidelity.

Catanzaro's statement was in response to a question from Valadas regarding DLSS and whether Nvidia planned to prioritize native resolution performance in its GPUs.

Catanzaro pointed out that improving graphics fidelity through sheer brute force is no longer an ideal solution, due to the fact that "Moore's Law is dead."

In the case of Cyberpunk 2077, both Valadas and CD Projekt Red's Jakub Knapik said that full path-tracing would have been impossible in that game without all of DLSS's technologies — especially in terms of image upscaling and frame generation.

Catanzaro continued by saying the industry has realized it can learn much more complicated functions by looking at large data sets (with AI) rather than by building algorithms from the ground up ("traditional rendering techniques").

With the alleged "death" of Moore's Law, AI manipulation may be the only thing that continues to drive 3D graphics forward for the foreseeable future.

The original article contains 416 words, the summary contains 188 words. Saved 55%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

I can agree but with two conditions. Benchmarks must always be done in native resolution. Hardware capability / system requirement must not take any upscaling into account.

For example, if a studio publishes the requirements for playing at 1080p, 60 FPS, High RT, it must be native 1080p and not 1080p with upscaling.

This seems more like just a reality of LCD / LED display tech than anything. CRTs (remember those?) can do a lot of resolutions pretty well no problem, but new stuff not so much. I remember using a lower rez on early LCDs as a 'free AA' effect before AA got better/cheaper. This just seems like a response to folks getting ~4k or similar high rez displays and gfx card performance unable to keep up.

I was just playing around with gamescope that allows for this kind of scaling stuff (linux with AMD gfx). Seems kinda cool, but not exactly a killer feature type thing. It's very similar to the reprojection algos used for VR.

It won't be until it becomes more universally adopted. I'm sure they thought the same thing about ray tracing, and no one gave a shit lol.

I don't get this "raw pixels are the best pixels" sentiment come from, judging from the thread everyone has their own opinion but didn't actually see the reason behind why people doing the upscalers. Well bad news for you, games have been using virtual pixels for all kinds of effects for ages. Your TV getting broadcast also using upscalers.(4k broadcast not that popular yet.)

I play Rocket Leauge with FSR from 1440p to 2160p and it's practically looking the same to 2160p native AND it feels more visually pleasing as the upscale also serve as extra filter for AA to smooth out and sharpen "at the same time". Frame rate is pretty important for older upscaler tech(or feature like distance field AO), as many tech relies information from previous frame(s) as well.

Traditionally, the render engine do the stupid way when we have more powerful GPU than engine demand where the engine allows you to render something like 4x resolution then downscale for AA, like sure it looks nice and sharp BUT it's a bruteforce and stupid way to approach it and many follow up AA tech prove more useful for gamedev, upscaler tech is the same. It's not intended for you to render 320x240 then upscale all the way to 4k or 8k, it will pave way for better post processing features or lighting tech like lumen or raytracing/pathtracing to actually become usable in game with decent "final output".(remember the PS4 Pro checkboard 4k, that was a really decent and genuinely good tech to overcome PS4 Pro's hardware limit for more quality demanding games. )

In the end, consumer vote with their wallet for nicer looking games all the time, that's what drives developers gear toward photo real/feature film quality renderings. There are still plenty studio gears toward stylized, or pixel art and everyone flip their shit and praise while those tech mostly relies on the underlying hardware advance pushed by photo real approach, they just use the same pipeline but their way to reach their desired look, Octopath Traveler II used Unreal Engine.

Game rendering is always about trade-offs, we've come a LONG way and will keep pushing boundaries, would upscaler tech become obsolete somewhere down the road? I have no idea, maybe AI can generate everything at native pixels, right?