Currently Online 
| sc94597 said: I don't think asking about whose intent is the authoritative intent or if there even is one authoritative intent in collective enterprise is just semantics. It's a meaningful question that identifies a meaningful complexity. The point of considering artistic intent is that you are considering all that goes into a final product and the full inherited context thereof from the artist(s). Identifying who they are is important. If the issue is instead one of artistic cohesion or consistency, then that is an entirely different argument, and I think one less supported than even the intent one. This game looks drastically different depending on which render settings you play in the current version: no-RT vs. RT vs. PT. I've experienced this first hand playing on a 5090 vs. SW2, right after each-other. And you can even see how the real in-game model differs from concept art, in each of those rendering contexts. She is drawn with quite more angular/contoured features here than in the final game model, where her features are more rounded and "younger", as an example of one difference. The following image is not fundamentally any more distinctive than what we've seen above. Whose artistic intent matters here? The concept artist's? The 3D modelers'? The producers'? In reality, this is a product of collective force, the mixed labor of many people, and you're always going to get some inconsistencies unless the team is running a very tight, and rigid ship where all decisions are centralized. I also don't agree that DLSS 5 is doing the same thing in every image, and think that is something people are saying without any real evidence. It wouldn't make sense from a technology perspective where deep neural networks are very sensitive to inputs. |
This is exactly why I bring into discussion what is delivered in the product people have born a relationship with, what is a technical limitation versus what is not and what is established of audience expectations. Unless we worked on development, none of us are in position to actual authoritatively state where ownership lays but we can still make a judgement call on something appearing too deviating.
The point I'm making about semantics is to lean into proper understanding of someone's friction here without getting caught on 2 words when there's a whole wider sentiment to be understood behind those 2 words, which might better be expressed in nuanced ways. Unless of course you are just intent on getting into philosophical discussion about "artistic intention".
As mentioned there are many examples outside from DLSS 5 where similar discussions can be had where it seems obvious that contention over artist intention makes sense and is valid even if the feeling is not shared (Windwaker etc). That does not dictate how you personally move forward with your preference but you can understand someone else's resistance. The topic is obviously subjective, so I don't care to delve much further. I just wanted to respond in case you genuinely thought that the topic was put to rest because Capcom worked on it. I can assure you its not and by your own comments about the nuance of artistic ownership I presume you also agree. The same would apply to Nintendo working WWHD or SE working on FFX HD etc
