this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
27 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
10929 readers
136 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Am I alone and being firmly against upscaling, never tried it, and everything is played or native resolution only? There have been games that only used 20% of GPU so I doubled game reaultion, but never upscaling.
I'm sure you're not alone but can I ask why? Some games use it better than others, and the tech has come a long way. If I have to choose between native 4k and 40fps, or 80 or even more fps with tiny artifacts that I only really notice when I'm actively pixel peeping... I mean, I'll take the latter, personally.
I view upscaling as giving a developers a cop out for not having to optimize games, as well as an admission of noting capable of enginner gaming GPU's that can do 4K ultra path tracing 165fps.
I'm also getting suspiciois that AAA+ games are dismissing original wring and story development to replace with flashy graphics and then sell it on how good the game looks. Indie studies don't have the budget for upscalling, no 6 year old games from anybody has upscaling, I find it to be more of a gimmick than a solution. Nobody plays a game 4 years after release because of how good the game looks for grahics.