the fact a lot of players commented they really liked the original design of Grace and didn’t want to see it changed was a positive…
Title taking things out if context, is out of context.
Yeah that’s not even misleading, this is insinuating the opposite of what the dev means. That’s manipulative af. Whoever decided to use this title is a massive dick.
I understood the title exactly as it was intended. Having seen the reaction myself, and knowing that it was generally not well received, the title made perfect sense to me that the dev was happy with that reaction.
Same but you would have had to have known that there was backlash.
I personally think that these types of headlines are fine. Yes the headline is provocative with the wording but honestly they have to be a bit because if they don’t then they don’t get anyone to view their story. No views, no money and the whole cow, milk, and giving it away for free comes into play.
Click the damn link and give the journalist a some ad revenue because these guys also need to earn a living while most of us commenting, at least in this side of the world, we’re also making a living while having the luxury to read gaming news during work hours too and honestly, I don’t see anyone that’s complaining about the headline stepping up to the plate and providing any of their own original content and descriptive headlines that give you the whole story.
“Heated Reaction” usually doesn’t mean people liked it. That headline really isn’t ambiguous.
heated reaction
You guys are giving people ad revenue?
The “intent” of the title is to leave out context, to let readers jump to more clickbaity conclusions.
You yourself are saying “I got it right based on this additional detail I already knew”.
What would you have titled the article?
‘They Prefer our Original Design’: Resident Evil Requiem Dev Is Pleased by Heated Reaction to DLSS 5 Grace
Edit: Or even better:
‘We Got it Right the First Time’: Resident Evil Requiem Dev Is Pleased by Heated Reaction to DLSS 5 Grace
Either way, the issue is the paraphrased quote. “it was a positive” is literally just the same as the title that follows it. It adds no context.
Well in both your examples, you are putting slightly altered words in their mouth, as those are not direct quotes. Shouldn’t do that.
Edited to add, I think I misunderstood you slightly here, actually. I think we agree that they shouldn’t be altering quotes. Though I think theirs is slightly closer to the original quotes than the ones you used.
I think the “It meant we got the design right” snippet would work really well, but it is a bit long for the overall headline.
Paraphrasing happens all the time for titles to compress what someone has said. But often it’s done to confuse rather than inform.
If you want to stick with a true quote “we got the design right” fits. You could then alter the following title to further clarify:
‘we got the design right’: Resident Evil Requiem Dev Pleased Fans Prefer Original Design Over DLSS 5 Grace
Could someone explain? I’m not sure what is wrong here. Maybe I got the title right before reading. The way I read and understand the title is, that the developer is happy how people hated the DisGrace version. While the title wasn’t a 1 to 1 translation of this sentence, the core message of not liking the change is preserved, isn’t it?
To me the title suggests the dev made the DLSS design intentionally worse, to generate controversy and now he is happy with the result.
The text actually explains that the devs just heard about the DLSS 5 alterations and were happy people loved the old design so much. Nothing controversial from him, not even intentional new designs.
Sounds like you got it right at first glance and I didn’t. However, often these titles are intentionally misleading as to generate more outrage “you should be mad at the developer for creating controversies and being smug about the outcry”. Not a fan of those manipulative tactics in modern journalism or whatever it calls itself currently.
It removes enough context to enable other interpretations. Such as “all publicity is good publicity, who cares that they didn’t like it”.
It basically allows people to get it wrong, while technically still matching the original intent. This way, at least some people will jump to conclusions that are more clickbaity.
You got it right. But I, and clearly a lot of others, raised our eyebrows.
Kumazawa explained “the fact a lot of players commented they really liked the original design of Grace and didn’t want to see it changed was a positive…”
That’s actually pretty cool… If they actually end up going with the original design
Do you even have a clue what the article is about? The ‘original’ design is in use. It is in the game which was released and is being played by people.
No i have not played RE Reqium, so no i did not know it was out. That’s really awesome they stuck with the design.
Chill homebro, it’s just a video game.
It doesn’t really have much to do with the game, it was a tech demo by Nvidia with ai overlay that completely changed the look of the game. But it was also everywhere for like a week when it happened; surprising you are seeing this post here if you didn’t see the Nvidia reaction. Unless you’re a bot. 🤷
Sorry, try as much as Id like to ,but i simply am not on lemmy as much as you are. Shrug
‘It was a positive’
What was a positive?
heated reaction
Ah, okay, and who thinks that?
by dev
Heated reaction to what?
DLSS 5 Grace
You’re welcome.
Yikes. Reading comprehension scores must really be in the shitter… And I’m technically illiterate.
Almost like there’s an article to read, and the headline is thier way to get you to read it. Huh.
?
OP fuck you for posting this too. You are just as bad as the guy who wrote this article.
Did you read the article or just the headline?
You’re misunderstanding me
The headline is still manipulative af
Yes, a headlines purpose is to manipulate you into reading the article.
It’s supposed to get you to read the article, not outright lie. The reality is that a lot of people only read headlines, so this lying in headlines just spreads misinformation.
And as a rule I say “fuck that” to articles that do this. If you obviously lie and be manipulative in a headline, then I’m not reading your shit article
