EPTWhich commentator has the highest play skill level - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
vpatrickd
Indonesia279 Posts
| ||
|
hydra21
94 Posts
| ||
|
Weavel
Finland9221 Posts
Casters who cast time to time. I'd say Demuslim and TLO. | ||
|
Triscuit
United States722 Posts
On March 25 2011 01:30 Treemonkeys wrote: You only need to watch all GSLs to come up with that. Artosis does it all the time - he consistently underestimates what players are able to hold off and do, though he is much better now compared to season one. I think it was season 2 where he was saying "14 hatch doesn't work anymore" and then the zerg proceeds to hold 14 hatch perfectly fine every game rofl. He's really good but he also just bases too much on his own skill and experience and acts like he knows all. What on earth do you think he should base it on then? Artosis is a student of the game, and if he can't draw conclusions on what has previously worked or past results, what do you think a knowledgeable commentator is supposed to do? Surprising new builds and responses are supposed to fool good players, including commentators. If they didn't, then they wouldn't be as effective. | ||
|
Silmakuoppaanikinko
799 Posts
On March 25 2011 01:40 Treemonkeys wrote: I don't know if he wants to appear smart or is just like 'fuck, they are paying me to be analytical, what can I say, what can I say?', but he does fill a lot of the time talking with convoluted analytical talk which in the end often isn't true. That, or just simply bad calls.Yeah exactly. He also comes across as a person who just enjoys acting and being perceived smart which bites him in the ass when he acts way too sure and then is proven wrong. Personally I think it makes the cast more entertaining, so it's all good and maybe intentional, but he does in fact make bad calls all the time. I don't really mind either, he admits his wrong-ness when he's proven wrong.But his understanding of the game is greatly overstated, he just likes to come up with convoluted strategical explanations and analyses which are often made of air or disproven later on. Also, the hipster reasoning man, that's kind of painful how he's trying to rationalize his hatred for 2base colossus, be a man and just admit that you hate it because everyone does it, there is no gameplay rationalisation. I mean, I'm kind of hipster in this, I used to get ht when it was still underground, now I don't get these either and take on terrans with mass chargelots, immortals and kickarse forcefields. When this gets popular I'll probably switch to mass phoenix or something. I just like to be original in this. On March 25 2011 01:47 Triscuit wrote: He shouldn't be that confident in his judgement and use phrasings like '0% chance he'll hold this.', after which he proceeds to hold it with minimal losses.What on earth do you think he should base it on then? Artosis is a student of the game, and if he can't draw conclusions on what has previously worked or past results, what do you think a knowledgeable commentator is supposed to do? Surprising new builds and responses are supposed to fool good players, including commentators. If they didn't, then they wouldn't be as effective. Also, my criticism isn't even the bad calls or the phrasing, but the fact that he tries to rationalise his inner hipster too much with convoluted and nonsensical explanations. He also seems to often in hindsight concoct that there was some brilliant plan by some player while most likely it just rolled that way and they got lucky and they didn't plan it all ahead. | ||
|
Epsilon8
Canada173 Posts
| ||
|
Taniard
United States114 Posts
| ||
|
Kazzabiss
1006 Posts
But I would, and I'm sure most sane people would, go with Artosis. I would like to see a valid arugment against that. | ||
|
nayumi
Australia6499 Posts
On March 25 2011 01:42 Weavel wrote: From the guys who do casting for living I'd say that Artosis and Rotterdam got the highest skill level. Casters who cast time to time. I'd say Demuslim and TLO. Idra did cast a few games during the previous Blizzcon, i'm pretty sure he's better than both demuslim and TLO  | ||
|
Anomalist0032
United States47 Posts
While I agree that they do make some too definitive, such as the there is no way he can hold this, its always based just on what he is seeing at the moment. And about collosi, just because alot of pro's do it doesnt mean its the best. Season 2 was full of marine scv all ins, didnt mean it was the best... meant it was working cause people couldnt defend it. He brings up plenty of reasons he doent think its that great, mostly how much collosi cost off of two base and how if 1-2 of them get sniped its pretty much gg. | ||
|
Novalisk
Israel1818 Posts
Still, Artosis, Gretorp, and Incontrol have to be the most skilled based on their recent tournament achievements. | ||
|
dizzy101
Netherlands2066 Posts
| ||
|
Kazzabiss
1006 Posts
On March 25 2011 01:41 ELA wrote: As a 'pure' commentator, meaning that the person has no history as a pro player, but instead is a dedicated commentator that has improved his game while commentating, I will defenitely say HDstarcraft.. Ofc both Tasteless, Artosis, Day9, InControL are on another level, but they're all former pro's that switched or partially switched to commentating This is actually a really good point... | ||
Chill
Calgary25963 Posts
Further, it's easy to look like a fool when you have to make a call on the battle. If you say in your head "MC will win this fight" and then he gets destroyed, it's easy to forget that entire situation. When you hear someone else say it out loud and then it's wrong, it's very memorable. | ||
|
Yusafat
Estonia20 Posts
On March 25 2011 00:40 ppshchik wrote: No he didn't, he just played him.Or Psy? I saw him beating Piqliq before. He is damn good though. Not having much points on ladder doesn't tell us anything. Also, like someone said, you should define "commentator". If you count the pros in, I think IdrA and DeMuslim. | ||
|
gammAwolfa
Finland213 Posts
| ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On March 25 2011 01:47 Triscuit wrote: What on earth do you think he should base it on then? Artosis is a student of the game, and if he can't draw conclusions on what has previously worked or past results, what do you think a knowledgeable commentator is supposed to do? Surprising new builds and responses are supposed to fool good players, including commentators. If they didn't, then they wouldn't be as effective. People were saying he rarely makes bad calls and even blaming the bad calls on tatesless so all I was saying is that artosis does in fact make bad calls all the time. He's still a great commentator and I love the archon style. | ||
|
JMDj
United States454 Posts
| ||
|
Silmakuoppaanikinko
799 Posts
On March 25 2011 01:54 Chill wrote: I wouldn't doubt all this, but we were comparing commentators relatively to each other. Other commentators do this less so than Tastosis.It's extremely difficult to commentate and analyse the game simultaneoulsly. I've commentated for a couple years now and played Starcraft for over 10 and I still struggle to analyse the state of the game while listening to another commentator while preparing what I'm going to say. Further, it's easy to look like a fool when you have to make a call on the battle. If you say in your head "MC will win this fight" and then he gets destroyed, it's easy to forget that entire situation. When you hear someone else say it out loud and then it's wrong, it's very memorable. I mean, maybe they think it and don't say it, but part of understanding the game is understanding your own understanding of the game. If you feel the confidence that your own understanding is accurate while it is not it cannot be that good of an understanding. Whereas if you might have a hunch in your mind but you are humble about your understanding and know that it is not accurate enough to voice it, in the end this improves your understanding. The wise man knows there is much he does not know. As far as understanding goes I'm still a big fan of PsY though, his explanations are to the point and really make sense and often deal in simple numbers, he often pauses the game to look at numbers (something you obviously cannot do in GSL, I realize), does the math and explains a simple logic that's hard to fail, Artosis often comes with very complicated and convoluted logic that depends on perspective and is quite fuzzy and could be either way quite simply. Or maybe he doesn't per se understand more than Artosis or Day[9], but he doesn't talk about things he doesn't understand either, relating back to the above, he doesn't try to offer wild and convoluted explanations to a lot of stuff and just admits that he's not sure about what is going on or doesn't talk about it. And most importantly, he doesn't try to rationalize his inner hipster that much. | ||
|
Saracen
United States5139 Posts
On March 25 2011 01:38 Zedex wrote: You can guess all you like, but the most fun and effective way to find out is host a tournament. Although if I had to guess I'd say Artosis. It's not like they haven't tried: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=149540 | ||
| ||
