EPTTotalBiscuit Audio Interview by Reddit - Page 11
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
This thread is about discussing the interview, not about judging people who contribute way more to the community than you. If you have a valid criticism, make it, but if you're going to spew hate you will get banned. | ||
|
kazansky
Germany931 Posts
| ||
|
TrickyGilligan
United States641 Posts
| ||
|
NotJack
United States737 Posts
People who don't understand Starcraft (which is a much higher % then those for those other sports) need a commentator to teach them how to get excited; people who understand need them to properly observe. | ||
|
diophant
United States7 Posts
On March 01 2011 08:42 NotJack wrote: Really e-sports are not like real sports, especially in how casters present the material. People who don't understand Basketball don't need a commentator to get them excited, and people who do understand Basketball don't need a commentator at all. People who don't understand Starcraft (which is a much higher % then those for those other sports) need a commentator to teach them how to get excited; people who understand need them to properly observe. I disagree. As a huge basketball and Starcraft fan, I can tell you the play by play and color commentary greatly impact how much I enjoy both. I understand basketball quite well, but a good commentator will not only understand it better, but also have access to information I would not. Here is a great example of a commentator making a quite exciting moment significantly more exciting. | ||
|
NotJack
United States737 Posts
Of course a commentator raising his voice will increase the excitement, but a basketball commentator doesn't need to say that someone jumping 10 feet in the air to dunk is a good move. Starcraft commentators need to explain how a good response or good building placement or even more obvious things like good micro is entertaining, for the casuals because they don't know, and for the veterans because they aren't in the game watching freely. | ||
|
adeezy
United States1428 Posts
As for sports casting, it doesnt affect me enjoying the game, its the game itself. I would say the same for E-sports casting. To be honest my favorite Caster was Jason Lee. I personally don't need game analysis every moment of a game because I can do analysis of myself anyways, but it's definitely welcomed to get a casters opinion on how things will end out. The role of a starcraft commentator isn't really defined for me, I can't honestly what role they play for me when I watch the game. Interesting to think about.... | ||
|
TotalBiscuit
United Kingdom5437 Posts
On March 01 2011 08:42 NotJack wrote: Really e-sports are not like real sports, especially in how casters present the material. People who don't understand Basketball don't need a commentator to get them excited, and people who do understand Basketball don't need a commentator at all. People who don't understand Starcraft (which is a much higher % then those for those other sports) need a commentator to teach them how to get excited; people who understand need them to properly observe. This is once again not really based in fact. I'm fairly sure commentators in real sports don't get paid as much as they do, for a service that nobody actually needs. This particularly is puzzling People who don't understand Basketball don't need a commentator to get them excited This is the exact opposite of the truth. They absolutely do need one. If we go back to eSports for a second, how do you explain non-players enjoying my/Huskys/other play-by-play guys material yet not the material of other, more analytical commentators. Magic? The evidence is right there, people do enjoy this kind of commentary, in large numbers, yet are either casual or non-players. It obviously enthuses them, that's not even up for discussion. | ||
|
diophant
United States7 Posts
In fact basketball and Starcraft are very similar in what new and experienced fans are looking for from commentators. Someone new to basketball is only going to be listening to and digesting basic things from the commentators. Basic rules explanations (how FTs work, how scoring works, what fouls mean etc), generalized strategies (the Suns like to shoot 3s, the Celtics are very defensive minded, etc), and only learning the names of the biggest players. Someone new to Starcraft is similarly only going to listen to and digest basic things also. How the game works (3 different races, supply, how buildings make units), generalized strategies (Zerg makes lots of units, Protoss units are strong and expensive, Terrans make marines etc), and only learning what the different basic units are. In both cases the excitement the play by play commentator generates is very important to keeping someone with limited understanding interested long enough to become and expert. In the case of someone who knows a lot about Starcraft or basketball this once again holds true. When I watch a basketball game I am looking for Doug Collins, or Hubie Brown to explain to me what specific changes the the Knicks are going to make defensively to deal with Dwight Howard. I want them to point out when a team is rotating late on defensive or when a team is double teaming or not double teaming a specific player and I want to know why. Even though I understand basketball well enough to watch it without commentary, I still get a lot of information from the commentators. Similarly once again, when I watch Starcraft I am looking for Artosis to tell me how someone might change their play style because they are going up against Idra. I want Day9 to point out when someone isn't spreading their creep well, or has full chronoboost on their nexus. Even though I understand Starcraft well enough to watch without commentary, it is still more enjoyable with this high level commentary. | ||
|
Nayl
Canada413 Posts
If you watch soccer, or football w/e, dominant commentary is play by play, on who currently has the ball, which player the ball is being passed to, who caused the foul and the goal moments. Technical analysis only comes after a play has been done. The most popular Korean commentators are mostly play by play and for a good reason. They follow this soccer model where their primary focus is play by play, and follow it up with small analysis whenever a crucial play happens. In the west, we have yet to see this kind of style yet (Day9 sort of is but still not quite there) done successfully, and this is kind of commentary in my opinion, that is going to open up esports to the mainstream. These guys make starcraft easy to understand, (Why do you think there are so many female viewers of esports in Korea?) build up excitement, all the while adding some analysis here and there. It all flows naturally instead of what we see most of the time in the west, where "High level commentary" means constant analysis of the game which actually turns off casual viewers because it counteracts the excitement factor. When you know everything that's probably going to happen, it is no longer entertaining for the average viewers, and it may even confuse them. It's almost pathetic to see how a commentator's "ability" is judged based on how well he can predict game play in the west. It is important to have this kind of ability, but it should not be the main focus. | ||
|
diophant
United States7 Posts
| ||
|
Nayl
Canada413 Posts
On March 01 2011 10:05 diophant wrote: Actually when you watch soccer, or football w/e, technical analysis is delivered throughout the game before and after plays happen exactly like in Starcraft. But play by play is still much more dominant. What do you think an average viewer finds more exciting, some analysis of formation/strategy a team is using, or that guy going "Messi to Chavez..Chavez..back to messi..MESSI SHOOTS! GOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLL" at the back? | ||
|
diophant
United States7 Posts
| ||
|
TotalBiscuit
United Kingdom5437 Posts
| ||
|
NotJack
United States737 Posts
On March 01 2011 09:41 TotalBiscuit wrote: This is once again not really based in fact. I'm fairly sure commentators in real sports don't get paid as much as they do, for a service that nobody actually needs. This particularly is puzzling This is the exact opposite of the truth. They absolutely do need one. If we go back to eSports for a second, how do you explain non-players enjoying my/Huskys/other play-by-play guys material yet not the material of other, more analytical commentators. Magic? The evidence is right there, people do enjoy this kind of commentary, in large numbers, yet are either casual or non-players. It obviously enthuses them, that's not even up for discussion. Saying something is true doesn't always make it so. When someone goes to a basketball game without knowing anything about it, they won't hear commentators and many of them enjoy the game because of the spectacle. If that happened with a gsl or live tournament for starcraft, non-players wouldn't know what the spectacle is, and thus not be entertained. The difference is very clear. You don't have to look past the commentating format of live games to understand that e-sports and sports are different mediums of entertainment. This is the very reason commentators are given so much more attention with e-sports; because when they are better, SC is significantly better represented. John Madden has been stating that scoring points is a good strategy in football for years and no one minds because the importance is not the same. Also you have a pattern of misquoting/misunderstanding posts. It's not surprising people prefer your casting to other styles. I would even say it's easier to understand why people prefer non-player casting as opposed to detailed analysis, but that doesn't mean it should be the way tournaments represent their gameplay. | ||
|
Painting
15 Posts
On March 01 2011 08:59 NotJack wrote: You're missing the point. Of course a commentator raising his voice will increase the excitement, but a basketball commentator doesn't need to say that someone jumping 10 feet in the air to dunk is a good move. Starcraft commentators need to explain how a good response or good building placement or even more obvious things like good micro is entertaining, for the casuals because they don't know, and for the veterans because they aren't in the game watching freely. What? Read what you wrote then edit it. | ||
|
EnderCraft
United States1746 Posts
As much as many hardcore players in this community thirst for that constant hardcore analysis style of commentating. This model simply not work in the main stream... We must recognize that fact. | ||
|
NotJack
United States737 Posts
On March 01 2011 12:18 Painting wrote: What? Firstly, why would a "veteran", as you say, need a commentator to tell them certain moves were good because they aren't "in the game watching freely" -- I'm sorry but that makes no sense. Secondly, off topic -- "Casual" is a term that is tossed around frequently and misused. It doesn't mean that they're stupid or not in the know. Firstly, it makes plenty of sense; no matter how much you know about the game, when you're watching the GSL you need someone with similiar knowledge in Korea pointing out the aspects of the game. Secondly, you're the one thinking casual was used with a negative connotation. Just because they're less knowledgeable then someone who decides to specialize in sc2 doesn't take anything away from their lives. It is however necessary to show the difference when making points about the difference. | ||
|
Painting
15 Posts
On March 01 2011 12:57 NotJack wrote: Firstly, it makes plenty of sense; no matter how much you know about the game, when you're watching the GSL you need someone with similiar knowledge in Korea pointing out the aspects of the game. Secondly, you're the one thinking casual was used with a negative connotation. Just because they're less knowledgeable then someone who decides to specialize in sc2 doesn't take anything away from their lives. It is however necessary to show the difference when making points about the difference. I understand what you mean but your wording was off. I thought you meant "players who know what's good and bad need to be told what's good and bad" | ||
|
Flying_Cake
Canada117 Posts
| ||
|
kazansky
Germany931 Posts
On March 01 2011 08:59 NotJack wrote: You're missing the point. Of course a commentator raising his voice will increase the excitement, but a basketball commentator doesn't need to say that someone jumping 10 feet in the air to dunk is a good move. Starcraft commentators need to explain how a good response or good building placement or even more obvious things like good micro is entertaining, for the casuals because they don't know, and for the veterans because they aren't in the game watching freely. You are also missing a point. Watching a basketball game as sitting in the stadium is not the same as watching an esports game via stream or even live event, it is more like having a spec spot (like on WaaghTV or HLTV), you are comparing apples and grapes with some of you're arguments. Compare commentated content with commentated content or not commentated with not commentated, don't mix them up to make your point. | ||
| ||
