AMD recommends good TAA as well, meaning their is a temporal component for the game frame being resolved. Yes no AI for that frame but in most cases there is TAA being done with motion vectors. In addition, any developer can add onto the code for their game and make it better due to being open source. Does look like DLSS 2.3 resolved the final issues I've had with DLSS, wonder if one can just drop 2.3 DLL into a game using a 2.x version and if it will work and give all the benefits? Now AMD could add an AI component to FSR as in an optional AI stage, same stage or replacement for TAA, before going to FSR frame rendering, making it maintain compatibility for most cards with or without AI capability. Also FSR is available for developers in Unity as well as Unreal Engines.I don't think there is much debate on if DLSS looks better than FSR. Not really up for contention imho. DLSS 2.x does look better.
What they are trying to really draw more attention to is their drivers already having a spatial scaler built in. And while it is similar in that is use's the Lanczos method it's missing parts of what makes FSR better. In that FSR resolves edges better and resolves ringing issues with the regular Lanczos resizing methods. And when FSR is built in by the developers, they can choose to not have everything scaled by FSR. Allowing for other elements to remain properly sharp at native resolution.
I also hope this gives AMD a nudge to implementing an FSR like scaler driver side.