|
On November 17 2011 20:40 Scarecrow wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 19:56 SeaSwift wrote:On November 17 2011 17:54 Squalish wrote:
artosis is the analyst, tasteless is the color commentator. it's hard not to like the guy, he's interesting and funny. analyzing caters to one crowd of viewers, and tasteless' personality/wit/humor keeps those who don't necessarily play sc2 at masters+ league entertained. try to look at it from a bigger point of view. I'm only in Platinum at the moment, but Tasteless just isn't funny/witty enough to make up for his obvious lack of game knowledge. Just because people are in lower leagues doesn't mean they don't care about what is going on at all, and I'm willing to bet a number of Gold or lower players could cast a game without missing as many obvious things as Tasteosis. Lack of game knowledge? I can guarantee you Tasteless knows WAY more than you about starcraft lol.
And what do you base this on? His casting? Because it doesn't show through at all then. If he truly knows a lot about SC2, he needs to make it obvious that he knows what he's talking about, instead of just parroting whatever biased opinion Artosis comes out with.
On November 17 2011 20:40 Scarecrow wrote:
He'd be masters if he played semi-regularly.
1) No evidence for that, you're just making an assertion about a player. "Oh, Stephano could be a bonjwa if he played more". No evidence. Just talk.
2) He SHOULD play semi-regularly. How do you expect to cast a game if you never even fucking play it?
On November 17 2011 20:40 Scarecrow wrote:
Tastosis don't have to commentate on every little thing, if you can already see what they've chosen to skip over, what's the issue?
Completely missed the point. If the casting doesn't add anything to the game, why have casters? More to the point, they are distracting and force me to miss things, too. How can I tell the scouting patterns of Oz when Tasteosis are moving the mouse over the base of MVP, where he is doing everything standard, nothing interesting at all, and Tasteosis aren't even talking about the fucking game, but instead about how amazing/Godlike Nestea is?
The only argument I've seen in favour of Tasteless' casting is that: a) he knows more than he lets on, and b) it's fine for the casting to be mediocre.
I call bullshit on both accounts.
|
On November 17 2011 20:47 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 20:40 Scarecrow wrote:On November 17 2011 19:56 SeaSwift wrote:On November 17 2011 17:54 Squalish wrote:
artosis is the analyst, tasteless is the color commentator. it's hard not to like the guy, he's interesting and funny. analyzing caters to one crowd of viewers, and tasteless' personality/wit/humor keeps those who don't necessarily play sc2 at masters+ league entertained. try to look at it from a bigger point of view. I'm only in Platinum at the moment, but Tasteless just isn't funny/witty enough to make up for his obvious lack of game knowledge. Just because people are in lower leagues doesn't mean they don't care about what is going on at all, and I'm willing to bet a number of Gold or lower players could cast a game without missing as many obvious things as Tasteosis. Lack of game knowledge? I can guarantee you Tasteless knows WAY more than you about starcraft lol. And what do you base this on? His casting? Because it doesn't show through at all then. If he truly knows a lot about SC2, he needs to make it obvious that he knows what he's talking about, instead of just parroting whatever biased opinion Artosis comes out with. Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 20:40 Scarecrow wrote:
He'd be masters if he played semi-regularly. 1) No evidence for that, you're just making an assertion about a player. "Oh, Stephano could be a bonjwa if he played more". No evidence. Just talk. 2) He SHOULD play semi-regularly. How do you expect to cast a game if you never even fucking play it? Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 20:40 Scarecrow wrote:
Tastosis don't have to commentate on every little thing, if you can already see what they've chosen to skip over, what's the issue? Completely missed the point. If the casting doesn't add anything to the game, why have casters? More to the point, they are distracting and force me to miss things, too. How can I tell the scouting patterns of Oz when Tasteosis are moving the mouse over the base of MVP, where he is doing everything standard, nothing interesting at all, and Tasteosis aren't even talking about the fucking game, but instead about how amazing/Godlike Nestea is? The only argument I've seen in favour of Tasteless' casting is that: a) he knows more than he lets on, and b) it's fine for the casting to be mediocre. I call bullshit on both accounts.
Okay, first of all. Tasteless knows a LOT about the game. If you cannot tell that from the casts then your knowledge is lacking yourself I suppose. Second, they don't explain everything that happens like the audience doeson't already understand it. They assume the majority of the GSL audience knows how SC2 works and they don't need to comment on simple things.
If you want casters that will comment on those simple things, there are plenty of them out there.
Second, he plays. He talks about playing the game regularily during the casts.
His casting does add something to the game, entertainment. I would rather hear a witty joke than how Oz choose to do a 14 gate instead of a 13 gate. Or if he scouted whichever way, you can watch the minimap, supply, and production tab to see those kinds of things yourself. Once the game starts moving and they actually have something interesting and high level to talk about that we have not heard a million times before( Except when someone goes mech. Artosis freaks out in joy ), they do.
" They are distracting and force me to miss things "
Use your eyes. You're forcing yourself to miss things.
In closing, not everyone likes certain casters and that is fine. You don't need to come rage about it in the LR thread with incorrect statements.
|
On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
Okay, first of all. Tasteless knows a LOT about the game. If you cannot tell that from the casts then your knowledge is lacking yourself I suppose. Second, they don't explain everything that happens like the audience doeson't already understand it. They assume the majority of the GSL audience knows how SC2 works and they don't need to comment on simple things.
An ad hominem attack without anything substantial behind it. "If you don't see that Tasteless is smart, you're stupid." Nice logic there. The fact that numerous people have commented on his apparent lack of game knowledge should be enough to show that either there are a hell of a lot of ignorant people, or that Tasteless genuinely does not show off any extensive game knowledge in casts.
On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
If you want casters that will comment on those simple things, there are plenty of them out there.
And Tasteless is one of them. Seriously, show me ONE game in which his cast includes a sophisticated note of an intelligent play which isn't blatantly obvious to anyone without a blindfold.
On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
Second, he plays. He talks about playing the game regularily during the casts.
Funny. I was just responding to a guy who claimed that Tasteless would be Masters if he played "semi-regularly". Is it a shock that someone who appears to rarely play the game can still talk about playing it? I've only played CoD a few times in my life, but I can still easily describe getting quickscoped from a few feet away. Or does his play on ladder produce some startling insights into the game? Clearly not.
On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
His casting does add something to the game, entertainment. I would rather hear a witty joke than how Oz choose to do a 14 gate instead of a 13 gate. Or if he scouted whichever way, you can watch the minimap, supply, and production tab to see those kinds of things yourself. Once the game starts moving and they actually have something interesting and high level to talk about that we have not heard a million times before( Except when someone goes mech. Artosis freaks out in joy ), they do.
I'm all for witty comments and entertainment, but there are two major problems here:
1) I don't find his jokes all that funny, and
2) they come at the expense of other things in the cast.
I've explained both already numerous times in my comments in this thread, so I won't bother rehashing my explanation here. Suffice to say, claiming that you prefer "witty jokes" to explanations on the game, and then trying to make that relevant to why I find Tasteless boring, ignorant and generally a parrot of Artosis doesn't ring true when the jokes aren't witty and the explanations even when they aren't being "witty" are sparse and obvious.
On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
" They are distracting and force me to miss things "
Use your eyes. You're forcing yourself to miss things.
What? Just.. what? I explained how difficult it is to understand and enjoy the game when Tasteosis are off on some overdone, unoriginal, irrelevant tangent and you tell me it is my fault I can't see the game? I would be shocked if this weren't the Internet. But it is, so I don't really care. All this statement tells me is that you aren't worth responding to any further.
|
Seaswift had a bad day? You're trying really hard to start an argument with all this quote by quote sophistry. You're an admitted platinum, both casters were BW semi-pro's at one point and I can tell from listening to them that by and large they know their shit in SC2 (I'm master level NA/KR) as they played heavily in beta and just after release. They've also watched a ton of GSL and other matches. If anything the joking around is because they've seen so much SC2 they can't be bothered walking you through everything that's happening all the time. At worst just put them on mute and do a platinum level commentary in your head 
On November 17 2011 20:47 SeaSwift wrote:
How can I tell the scouting patterns of Oz when Tasteosis are moving the mouse over the base of MVP, where he is doing everything standard, nothing interesting at all, and Tasteosis aren't even talking about the fucking game.
You poor thing! Tastosis are such bad casters for not showing you Oz's scouting pattern. If you're that desperate just watch the minimap and the fog of war will show you the probe movement. Besides, it's SC commentary 101 to have some banter at the beginning to cover the lull of the openings. There's only so many times you can commentate standard openings and talk about the players.
|
On November 17 2011 21:50 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
Okay, first of all. Tasteless knows a LOT about the game. If you cannot tell that from the casts then your knowledge is lacking yourself I suppose. Second, they don't explain everything that happens like the audience doeson't already understand it. They assume the majority of the GSL audience knows how SC2 works and they don't need to comment on simple things. An ad hominem attack without anything substantial behind it. "If you don't see that Tasteless is smart, you're stupid." Nice logic there. The fact that numerous people have commented on his apparent lack of game knowledge should be enough to show that either there are a hell of a lot of ignorant people, or that Tasteless genuinely does not show off any extensive game knowledge in casts. Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
If you want casters that will comment on those simple things, there are plenty of them out there. And Tasteless is one of them. Seriously, show me ONE game in which his cast includes a sophisticated note of an intelligent play which isn't blatantly obvious to anyone without a blindfold. Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
Second, he plays. He talks about playing the game regularily during the casts. Funny. I was just responding to a guy who claimed that Tasteless would be Masters if he played "semi-regularly". Is it a shock that someone who appears to rarely play the game can still talk about playing it? I've only played CoD a few times in my life, but I can still easily describe getting quickscoped from a few feet away. Or does his play on ladder produce some startling insights into the game? Clearly not. Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
His casting does add something to the game, entertainment. I would rather hear a witty joke than how Oz choose to do a 14 gate instead of a 13 gate. Or if he scouted whichever way, you can watch the minimap, supply, and production tab to see those kinds of things yourself. Once the game starts moving and they actually have something interesting and high level to talk about that we have not heard a million times before( Except when someone goes mech. Artosis freaks out in joy ), they do. I'm all for witty comments and entertainment, but there are two major problems here: 1) I don't find his jokes all that funny, and 2) they come at the expense of other things in the cast. I've explained both already numerous times in my comments in this thread, so I won't bother rehashing my explanation here. Suffice to say, claiming that you prefer "witty jokes" to explanations on the game, and then trying to make that relevant to why I find Tasteless boring, ignorant and generally a parrot of Artosis doesn't ring true when the jokes aren't witty and the explanations even when they aren't being "witty" are sparse and obvious. Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 21:19 Dodgin wrote:
" They are distracting and force me to miss things "
Use your eyes. You're forcing yourself to miss things. What? Just.. what? I explained how difficult it is to understand and enjoy the game when Tasteosis are off on some overdone, unoriginal, irrelevant tangent and you tell me it is my fault I can't see the game? I would be shocked if this weren't the Internet. But it is, so I don't really care. All this statement tells me is that you aren't worth responding to any further.
Someone alert the GSL. A handful of boring dudes are unhappy with Tasteless. *yawn*
In the NBA the TNT commentators are always going off on some weird tangent leaving you wondering 'htf did we get here'. No, you wont find all their jokes funny but its important to remember that you really aren't all that special :/.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
On November 17 2011 20:47 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 20:40 Scarecrow wrote:
Tastosis don't have to commentate on every little thing, if you can already see what they've chosen to skip over, what's the issue? Completely missed the point. If the casting doesn't add anything to the game, why have casters? More to the point, they are distracting and force me to miss things, too. How can I tell the scouting patterns of Oz when Tasteosis are moving the mouse over the base of MVP, where he is doing everything standard, nothing interesting at all, and Tasteosis aren't even talking about the fucking game, but instead about how amazing/Godlike Nestea is? The only argument I've seen in favour of Tasteless' casting is that: a) he knows more than he lets on, and b) it's fine for the casting to be mediocre. I call bullshit on both accounts.
Well, first you look at the minimap
Second you realise that neither Tasteless or Artosis controls the camera you see. That's the observer, normally ST_Legend. Tasteless sees the same thing we do, and Artosis has another observer account so he can add to the analysis part, since he can happily zip around the map to see other things, check on production etc.
Do you even listen to the casters? If you did you'd realise the number of times they've been getting the observer to show something instead of where the camera is, or the hundreds of times they've said "guess we won't see that on the camera"
|
So SeaSwift, what's your ideal commentary then?
|
so much hate to the casters .. Sometimes i laugh sometimes i nod my head , but they are perfect for the job..
Have you haver listened to moletrap? its so bad , so so bad... He talks like a child , only says stupid things and is always making mistakes... seems like a bronze player... Wolf is nice.. So let things be , and slowly retire moletrap
|
|
|
It sounds like he's blaming Tastosis for his lack of a sense of humor. SeaSwift is one of those NEEEEEEEAAAARRRDDD guys that Tastosis was talking about.
|
I wouldnt want to speak bad about casters and especially our beloved Tasteless. I am not very experienced player, I dont play 1v1 but even for me hes casting is overly simplyfied and dump (I love his jokes though), Its like "NOW GUYS the thing is if your army is too small you CAN ACTUALLY sometimes pull your workers, they do can attack enemy units also" :| He doesnt seem to almost anything about actual strategy and hes just repeating what artosis is saying and then throwing in some really really basic noob stuff like for people who have not ever watched sc2.
|
Thread on teamliquid with arguments over casters?
Where have I seen this before?
|
On November 17 2011 23:23 Trowa127 wrote:
Thread on teamliquid with arguments over casters?
Where have I seen this before?
Must have been a dream. In fact this must be a dream since this never happens on TL. Must explain the scary horse head on top as the banner.
But on the same note as a Platinum Protoss player this season I learn plenty of Artosis and Tasteless from the way they view the game and how they evaluate things. The way they pose their thinking is the most beneficial thing for me. Even if they say don't lose units, the way they view things like, assure your 95% win rate chance goes to 100% by expanding, or I would sacrifice a unit to assure correct information is worthwhile in helping someone in how they approach the game.
If you can't gain any insight from then, then what you are lacking to get farther in the understanding of the game is pure mechanics or applying all your insight to discover new things you can do while reviewing your replays after each game that you win or lose.
Summary, I'm more impressed by how they pose the context of the situation and how it leads to there answer. In there lays great insight in how to approach the game.
|
Tastosis has proven themselves time and time again as THE most competent/entertaining casting duo we have today. Day[9]/Husky are the only duo who come close to effectiveness and marketability.
Anyone who claims otherwise is an idiot.
Now, if you seriously don't like their brand of casting, then that's a different story. That's your opinion. But facts say that Mr. Chae and all the higher-ups in GOMTV see that Tastosis, Tasteless in specific, is a special brand of caster, which is why they are willing to keep him around for like what, over 5 years?!
Your opinion is just that, your opinion. Outside the realm of personal preferences your arguments are literally worthless.
On the note of the games, I haven't seen them yet but I don't know if I want to see MC sucking it up... T_T
|
On November 17 2011 22:48 ZenithM wrote:
So SeaSwift, what's your ideal commentary then?
It seems I've gone on for too long arguing about how good/bad Tasteosis are, and other posters are starting to join in the fray with either sarcasm, personal attacks or memes so I won't go on about it. Wouldn't want to ruin a thread with just caster bashing/defending. I've made my position clear, and I'll leave it at this:
My ideal commentary would either:
a) be focussed entirely on the game (high-level analysis), and be correct with their analysis
or b) be more casual, but actually funny.
If Tasteless jokes were fresher, different ones than he used last year and the duo weren't so biased and often plain wrong, I would prefer their commentary far more. As it is, I wouldn't call it terrible. But there are other casters who are far better (Bitterdam, K[9] etc). Partly because they are less blase about actually talking about the game, partly because both parts of the duo have their own views, and partly because the jokes they make haven't been repeated for months.
I still enjoy watching GSL, but seeing as Artosis recently said people need to be more critical about casters, I think that Tasteosis, and particularly Tasteless, need to do something to improve the quality of their casting. I know that Moletrap (like him or not), D'Apollo and Husky all take time to prepare before they cast a game. I'd be interested to know how much preparation goes into Tasteosis GSL casts. Given that Tasteless often seems to find it hard to remember names of players (not the ones in that game, but others they talk about), the material they use for laughs seems to be used enough to become memes, and Tasteless never seems to have an original thought about the players, I would imagine not much. But hey: what do I know, right? And neither caster is likely to come out and state themselves how much preparation they put in.
|
On November 18 2011 00:49 SwizzY wrote:
Now, if you seriously don't like their brand of casting, then that's a different story. That's your opinion. But facts say that Mr. Chae and all the higher-ups in GOMTV see that Tastosis, Tasteless in specific, is a special brand of caster, which is why they are willing to keep him around for like what, over 5 years?!
Your opinion is just that, your opinion. Outside the realm of personal preferences your arguments are literally worthless.
On the note of the games, I haven't seen them yet but I don't know if I want to see MC sucking it up... T_T
So true.
It sounds like moody pants seaswift just isn't into their style (well tasteless's style). That's fine, commentating is a subjective thing we don't all have to like the same people. But it's pretty pathetic to come into this thread the way seaswift has, clearly the guy has a personal bias against tasteless.
edit: I know feel bad as the post above actually is the first reasonable post made...  (not that I agree but at least it's constructive)
On November 18 2011 00:53 SeaSwift wrote:
It seems I've gone on for too long arguing about how good/bad Tasteosis are, so I won't go on about it. Wouldn't want to ruin a thread with just caster bashing/defending. I've made my position clear, and I'll leave it at this:
My ideal commentary would either:
a) be focussed entirely on the game (high-level analysis), and be correct with their analysis
or b) be more casual, but actually funny.
If Tasteless jokes were fresher, different ones than he used last year and the duo weren't so biased and often plain wrong, I would prefer their commentary far more. As it is, I wouldn't call it terrible. But there are other casters who are far better (Bitterdam, K[9] etc). Partly because they are less blase about actually talking about the game, partly because both parts of the duo have their own views, and partly because the jokes they make haven't been repeated for months.
I still enjoy watching GSL, but seeing as Artosis recently said people need to be more critical about casters, I think that Tasteosis, and particularly Tasteless, need to do something to improve the quality of their casting. I know that Moletrap (like him or not), D'Apollo and Husky all take time to prepare before they cast a game. I'd be interested to know how much preparation goes into Tasteosis GSL casts. Given that Tasteless often seems to find it hard to remember names of players (not the ones in that game, but others they talk about), the material they use for laughs seems to be used enough to become memes, and Tasteless never seems to have an original thought about the players, I would imagine not much. But hey: what do I know, right? And neither caster is likely to come out and state themselves how much preparation they put in.
|
Btw i'd love to see GOMTV doing some switching up every Casting Dou once in a while not just the Code A guys. I know Tastosis works well but it'd interesting to see if Artosis and Tasteless work well with other casters as well . There might be something new and interesting discovered that people like. Especially in the earliers rounds GOM could do some experimenting. Could especially help Tasteless in my mind . When he casts with Artosis he defers so much when it comes down to strategic insides , which gives alot of people reason to believe he doesn't know much. When in my mind in fact he knows plenty he just knows Artosis knows more and rather agrees with him.
I don't know might be an interesting idea. Wolf and Tasteless , Artosis with DoA or whatever. Can't hurt in my mind .
|
besides the only reason tastosis talk the way they do is because they have no actual live audience that can hear their banter. During mlgs they really dont make all the side conversation because they have the live audience, theyve said it before at blizzcon. Thats why i think day9 and wheat are better than tastosis during a live crowd. Tastosis was good back in open 1 and 2 before they were bias.
|
I enjoy games that Tastosis cast more than games that any other casting pair cast.
I hope they keep Tastosis doing Code S--I am always disappointed when there are top games and it is any duo other than Tastosis.
|
On November 18 2011 00:53 SeaSwift wrote:
My ideal commentary would either:
a) be focussed entirely on the game (high-level analysis), and be correct with their analysis
or b) be more casual, but actually funny.
If Tasteless jokes were fresher, different ones than he used last year and the duo weren't so biased and often plain wrong, I would prefer their commentary far more. As it is, I wouldn't call it terrible. But there are other casters who are far better (Bitterdam, K[9] etc).
1. Taste is subjective. You think Tasteless isn't funny, other people laugh their asses of at Wolf and Moletrap's casting. I think you're gonna have trouble getting around how the majority prefers Tastosis over any other casting duo. Khaldor and Day[9] are an amazing casting duo as well. Bitter is ok, and doesn't deserve all the unfounded criticism he gets. Rotterdam? Please. But once again, taste is subjective. Personally I loved IdrA's casting on the few occasions he casted, because of the high level correct analysis he provides.
2. If you keep writing Tasteosis, nobody is gonna take you serious.
3. People should first of all do stuff they are good at, and not do the stuff they suck at. Artosis isn't good at being objective, so he just doesn't do objective. Doa, moletrap and wolf are in most cases not good at being funny, but somehow have gotten it in their head that casters are some kind of comedians, leading to a lot of criticism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
