Just finished watching JF vs Terran. Nice set, but the observer needs to improve. A lot of times it's the observer who paces the game for the audience. If you can't hit the action spots as they occur, the game becomes much more boring.

I know the TSL isn't a Korean tournament,, and I don't expect ex-progamer level observers. But some of the mistakes were just inexcusable. One particular case would be not checking JF's base after his probe sees Terran's scv scouting the wrong direction. When protoss knows that terran is going to scout it really late, it pretty much gets a free pass for going into gay cheese mode. And there was no show of JF's base that whole time despite very little action occuring.

floor exercise

Canada5847 Posts

February 07 2010 14:48 GMT

#1202

I think it was explained that the observer was last minute and not prepared for the matches. I think it bothered me more when the commentators missed things more than the observer. I mean the observer is clearly trying to capture all the action but typically the commentators will just be going on about some theoretical build order crap that has absolutely no basis to the present game because even as they are saying it it is just not unfolding, and had they just been watching the game they would clearly see that and stop with their tangent instead of missing all the action in an attempt to look smart. Sorry for the run on sentence

There was a marked improvement in the casting from the first match to the second. Both of them were having more fun even and there was more joking and back and forth and less trying to be Brood War Scientists and failing at it

Chill is by far the best at talking about strategic insight. Artosis does it pretty well when there's a terran in the game, but I think Tasteless strongest asset is his comedic relief/energy level (granted thats hard to pull off at 4 am) and when he delves into strategy not only loses his own grasp on the action but is also pretty off base most of the time

onmach

United States1241 Posts

February 07 2010 14:53 GMT

#1203

That isn't really fair. The commentators in this case are mouse in hand. That is multitasking. I imagine it is hard to both navigate, catch everything that is happening, and give meaningful commentary the entire time. It would be easier for them if they were watching the observer doing his thing instead, which is why the koreans do it that way.

floor exercise

Canada5847 Posts

February 07 2010 15:09 GMT

#1204

You're right but they would be infinitely more successful at it if they tried harder to do play by play instead of trying to forecast the game, right up until the end. It makes the commentary almost pointless if you are exclusively talking about things that can't or aren't going to happen in the game. There's definitely a time for both. If you are missing critical moments in the game and you spend the majority of the time gazing into your crystal ball, there is some correlation there

baubo

China3370 Posts

February 07 2010 15:34 GMT

#1205

On February 07 2010 23:48 floor exercise wrote:
I think it was explained that the observer was last minute and not prepared for the matches. I think it bothered me more when the commentators missed things more than the observer. I mean the observer is clearly trying to capture all the action but typically the commentators will just be going on about some theoretical build order crap that has absolutely no basis to the present game because even as they are saying it it is just not unfolding, and had they just been watching the game they would clearly see that and stop with their tangent instead of missing all the action in an attempt to look smart. Sorry for the run on sentence

Oh, so he was a replacement. Then sorry for my rant. Although in that scenario, I'd rather have Artosis or Tasteless be the observer instead, and do the "play-by-play" while the other guy provides the color commentary, so to speak.

I personally don't mind the commentators rambling too much. Probably because I've watched so many Korean casts that I can easily tune out the casters if I want. But yeah, I do find it surprising that they would miss so many important details that a noob D player like myself can easily see. Chill is definitely much better than other casters in making sure to hit the important points.

yarkO

Canada810 Posts

February 07 2010 15:41 GMT

#1206

The only thing I don't like is when the game is pretty obviously over, you don't have to keep saying "Oh the GG is gonna come any second" until it happens. Also predicting the doom of one player off of a mid-game attack may prove to be right later, but it really takes away from the game imo.

Basically stop trying to be psychics and just call the game.

Craton

United States17281 Posts

February 07 2010 18:03 GMT

#1207

But what if they are psychics Yarko?

Then what!?

404.Delirium

United States1190 Posts

February 07 2010 18:17 GMT

#1208

I agree with several of the above posts: there's some fair room for improvement. While the observer does a decent job (and granted I believe Carnac was sitting in for intrigue), sometimes I'll be watching a still screen wishing he'd click at this place on the minimap.

Also, I feel the commentators talk too much about Starcraft, and not enough about the games, if that makes sense. Explanations and discussion on builds and strategy's are alright to an extent, but it feels like the game just becomes secondary or a kindle for conversation rather than the focal point.

I didn't even notice there in fact were starcraft sounds until there was the audio problem and the game was paused; again, not sure if this was because of a hiccup with intrigue or not, but there's a lot of immersion lost with no explosions =(

That said, I'm still very impressed at how good it is as-is!! Keep up the fine work! ^^