The bolded makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Just sounds like gobbledygook. What's non-ML? What's a sub-mesh? What is BVH, BLAS, and TLAS? So mega geometry is just something to make ray tracing easier? Raytracing is a waste of resources IMO. I've never been impressed with it. 

Neural shaders sounds like something that benefits only weak hardware. I would rather see compute heavy shaders that are high quality than low quality shaders. 

Texture compression sounds good. 

non-ML - not machine learning, which is the majority of what we call "AI" today. 

BVH - bounding volume hierarchy (a class of data structure, ways to structure data, that help ray tracing algorithms identify geometry-ray boundaries, efficiently. They are used for other use cases though too, like physics or certain forms of culling [removing objects from a scene].) 

BLAS and TLAS are just types of BVH's that work at different scales. BLAS works at the level of individual objects and builds up, TLAS works at the level of the whole scene and builds down.

A mesh is the skeleton of a 3D object a sub-mesh is a part of that skeleton.

Mega Geometry just adds an intermediate data-structure where groups of triangles are treated alike because they are nearby. It makes real-time Ray Tracing easier, yes, by allowing it to compute on less geometry to achieve the same result. 

Ray tracing is the present and future of real-time rendering, and has been a staple of CGI rendering for decades. 

Neural shaders scale according to hardware, so no not just low-end. Also compute heavy =/= high quality. The whole point is that neural shaders can be scaled to higher qualities than non-neural assisted shaders, because you can have more of them, more intricate shaders, etc as you save on the per shader compute. The end result usually is higher quality or more performance at the same quality. Because it is trained on a per-game basis, it is perfectly compatible with the artistic-intent. 

Here is what mega geometry does. Basically it collects triangles together into clustered regions where it makes sense so that there are fewer collision calculations necessary for more dense geometry-ray interactions, which are becoming the default lighting systems in games (even Lumen, a hybrid system, has them.) Again, it doesn't use AI/neural networks/machine learning at all. With it off, you have to have fewer, often larger, triangles for the same compute, which will look worse in-game. 

These shills for Skynet are gonna get us all killed.

Seriously, Skynet is real.

AI is here to stay and it will permeate every field as much as it can, so it's useless to fight it.
I personally don't care whether something is "natural" or AI in entertainment, as long as it's good. Sucks of course for those who lose their jobs, but that is the history of humanity. Certain jobs will become obsolete and something else will come along.

We finally agree on something, I am being playful.  But we do agree. 

BotW from 900p/30fps to 1440p/60fps is, by itself massive, and the lighting is better too.  

Horizon Remaster was superb, lights out huge upgrade.  

Blood needs an update asap.  1080p/30fps blows, period.  

AI will decide humanity is obsolete and kill us all.

For me, art is about making a human connection with the artist. To experience his/her loss, joy, emotions and to share in their story. So the idea of a computer writing a song about an imaginary heartbreak, or reading a novel by a computer about an imaginary lived experience? It's literally worthless.

Same reason AI art and animation is worthless.

Many especially of the successful musicians get their songs written by someone else (or whole teams) completely or at least partly (some don't even tell you about it and have ghost writers). And just because they sing about something and cry a little while doing it doesn't even mean it really happened even if they wrote it by themselves. So probably a huge majority of songs nowadays aren't even out of the head of the singers anymore. That may have been different in the 70s but nowadays? Nahh... 

You would also never know if animation was made by AI if nobody tells you (if it doesn't look completely weird). So it's only worthless to you the moment you hear about it which shows that in reality you would enjoy it as much as if it wouldn't be AI. You only won't enjoy it because you think about how it's from AI and not because it's really worse. But almost nobody will play a game or watch an anime and think "oh no that sequence only looks like that because of AI". At least not in the future when it's getting closer and closer to how it would look if created by a human.

You can argue about paintings and how AI only uses what it has learned from to "create" something so that it won't create something completely new but in the end all of this is something a huge majority on this planet won't care about. People may not go in a museum to see something "created" by AI but just using that for their own walls in their home? Almost nobody will care if it was a human or AI that painting comes from. 

Heck, I already see people in my friends list on Instagram liking posts of fake people. I know a woman who always likes a fake dude on Instagram with "look me in my eyes" videos and she is like "ahhhhhhh". 

My point is, yes it would be nice if everything was made by humans and those humans would also create everything on their own and also don't let other humans do it for them (like musicians) but in the end this is all something which will only stop a tiny fraction of people to enjoy whatever is the result while the majority will enjoy it exactly as much if it's made by AI or a ghost writer or like with Beyonce, a team of 24 people writing one single song.