It has always been his style, you can check for yourself by watching some of his early videos. Over the years, he has refined it and fully committed to it.

I usually don't like too much sensationalism, but he gets a pass. That's just his style and I think he does it well without compromising on the information content. He acknowledges that the technique is slow by the way, but that's late in the video.

But I agree that the title is poorly chosen in this case and I think it would be more appropriate for the previous video about a similar paper [1] where the simulation is less accurate, but runs in real-time. It is as if the titles were swapped.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NF3CdXkm68

Edit: And of course, it is entertainment, what did you expect of a YouTube channel covering state-of-the-art research in less than 10 minutes! If you want to get serious, read the actual paper. Short(ish) YouTube videos is simply not the right format for serious work, sensationalism or not.

> Short(ish) YouTube videos is simply not the right format for serious work, sensationalism or not.

I disagree. For example SIGGRAPH presentation videos manage to be short, informative, and largely non-sensationalist. You can see some of them in this playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1PdIP1lGMJJzRFjlDajK...

StiffGIPC presentation makes good contrast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TBoTX2vag4

Yeah, love it or hate it, I do think they thread the needle between genuine excitement and overhyping.

The titles and thumbnails are getting clickbaity though.