@themightyant No need to get into the weeds at all - I do tend to have a very verbose writing style haha
And I really gotta learn to be more patient and perhaps read the entire comment thread before replying to the first comment I see, bc as you very rightly pointed out, Rich did use the opportunity of your question to respond himself - which I saw and read after replying to you when I continued to read the rest of the comment thread haha 😅
@Kashmir74 +1 to your comment mate. Unfortunately this isn't restricted to video games, but it's depressing the degree to which differing opinions seem to justify immediate hostility these days, as opposed to being a normal fact of life :/
@themightyant I obviously can't read Rich's thoughts or put words in his mouth, but I did not interpret his comment as "we should have waited to see the reaction so we could present an inauthentic opinion that aligns more with audience expectations." Maybe it is just my interpretation - who knows - but I took it more as "it would have been prudent to wait a bit before posting so we could have a chance to reflect on what we saw and review the materials without the buzz of having walked straight out of the demo, get input from other team members like Alex has in this video, take into consideration feedback we received in private from devs and their impressions, etc." Basically just recognising that given the charged emotional environment around anything AI-related atm, it would've been more beneficial to "lead" with the more nuanced piece vs DF's traditional approach of "these are literally our initial impressions having just seen the tech demo, we will bring you a much more detailed analysis in the coming days."
Personally I didn't really have any issues with the initial impressions video as a long time DF watcher because I'm so used to exactly this cadence - initial impressions of things recorded on-site at the trade show/hotel room, then a proper in-depth analysis later on when the team is back home. But for whatever reason - whether it's because of the emotions around AI, viewers not being familiar with the different types of DF content, just the depressing degeneration of our ability to interact and engage with different opinions in good faith online - it seems that a lot of viewers interpreted that initial impressions video as "here's a comprehensive Digital Foundry review of this new technology and we wholeheartedly endorse it."
I can't really guess as to why that is - because that certainly wasn't my impression of the video - but my sense is that Rich's comment re: prudent to wait is more that they were able to include context and nuance in this follow-up video that would have been useful to have in the initial video - not that they want to adjust their editorial direction or honest opinions based on "mob rule."
Comments 3
Re: DLSS 5: Game-Changing Tech That Poses Big Questions For The Future Of Gaming
@themightyant No need to get into the weeds at all - I do tend to have a very verbose writing style haha
And I really gotta learn to be more patient and perhaps read the entire comment thread before replying to the first comment I see, bc as you very rightly pointed out, Rich did use the opportunity of your question to respond himself - which I saw and read after replying to you when I continued to read the rest of the comment thread haha 😅
Re: DLSS 5: Game-Changing Tech That Poses Big Questions For The Future Of Gaming
@Kashmir74 +1 to your comment mate. Unfortunately this isn't restricted to video games, but it's depressing the degree to which differing opinions seem to justify immediate hostility these days, as opposed to being a normal fact of life :/
Re: DLSS 5: Game-Changing Tech That Poses Big Questions For The Future Of Gaming
@themightyant I obviously can't read Rich's thoughts or put words in his mouth, but I did not interpret his comment as "we should have waited to see the reaction so we could present an inauthentic opinion that aligns more with audience expectations." Maybe it is just my interpretation - who knows - but I took it more as "it would have been prudent to wait a bit before posting so we could have a chance to reflect on what we saw and review the materials without the buzz of having walked straight out of the demo, get input from other team members like Alex has in this video, take into consideration feedback we received in private from devs and their impressions, etc." Basically just recognising that given the charged emotional environment around anything AI-related atm, it would've been more beneficial to "lead" with the more nuanced piece vs DF's traditional approach of "these are literally our initial impressions having just seen the tech demo, we will bring you a much more detailed analysis in the coming days."
Personally I didn't really have any issues with the initial impressions video as a long time DF watcher because I'm so used to exactly this cadence - initial impressions of things recorded on-site at the trade show/hotel room, then a proper in-depth analysis later on when the team is back home. But for whatever reason - whether it's because of the emotions around AI, viewers not being familiar with the different types of DF content, just the depressing degeneration of our ability to interact and engage with different opinions in good faith online - it seems that a lot of viewers interpreted that initial impressions video as "here's a comprehensive Digital Foundry review of this new technology and we wholeheartedly endorse it."
I can't really guess as to why that is - because that certainly wasn't my impression of the video - but my sense is that Rich's comment re: prudent to wait is more that they were able to include context and nuance in this follow-up video that would have been useful to have in the initial video - not that they want to adjust their editorial direction or honest opinions based on "mob rule."