|
Really pointless blog, but this keeps bothering me:
- I watch a match where one player ends up winning. - Later on someone will frame this match as one person destroying, roflstomping, crushing, raping the other player.
(Yet if someone uses the word outclassed in the LR thread everyone gets upset.)
It's petty of me to be annoyed by this, I know, but I sometimes wish that what is said actually reflects reality, especially since wanting to rewrite history to improve your argument is such an ugly tendency.
|
Depends. What would you define as destroying/roflstomping/crushing/raping? I mean there's the usual 'end up alwys picking the good fights and overrun opponent with too many units early on throughout the game' or 'defend everything easily/counter everything easily/harass everything easily and use advantage to win game earlier than expected', but there are plenty of things that aren't necessarily highlighted by the VODs that can be thought of as absolutely dominating the metagame or overall game plan in general, such as expo/upgrade timings from set to set.
|
I understand when casters use hyperbole for enthusiasm and hype, but I'd also like any relevant analysis to properly reflect the relationship between the two players and how the match ended up looking. It may very well be the case that one player roflstomped another. It may also simply be the case that it was incredibly close and one player barely edged a win over the other. Give credit where credit is due, unless it's established you're just an exaggeration machine without any credibility.
|
|
|
|