EPTTasteless is always explaining things for noobs in his casts, talking about bringing people into starcraft to watch the gsl, hashtag on twitter. So wouldn't it make sense that he would want to appeal to as broad an audience as possible? Appearing professional, comical, while not being even slightly offensive. When he tells you to bring your parents to watch, don't you think that is how he wants to appear to them? Like I said, I think he would appreciate the insight as it's sometimes hard to see every point of view.
Some constructive criticism for tasteless? - Page 20
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Reborn8u
United States1761 Posts
Tasteless is always explaining things for noobs in his casts, talking about bringing people into starcraft to watch the gsl, hashtag on twitter. So wouldn't it make sense that he would want to appeal to as broad an audience as possible? Appearing professional, comical, while not being even slightly offensive. When he tells you to bring your parents to watch, don't you think that is how he wants to appear to them? Like I said, I think he would appreciate the insight as it's sometimes hard to see every point of view. | ||
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
I think the original poster was motivated the "sex" comment that popped out during Alicia-Polt match. (Maybe he was watching with his kids or something?) Need to relax a little bit there. It's a fleeting moment and no one is perfect. If they keep talking about sex for 5 minutes or every other game then that's a problem but I did not think it's offensive in any way, shape or form. And if anything Artosis shuts off Tastless much more often than vice versa. I think the OP has got things backward there. | ||
|
lyk503
United States261 Posts
Mike Breen, Mark Jackson, and Jeff Van Gundy. Now, these guys are pretty damn good at what they do. They each have assigned roles on what to talk about. As Mike Breen is talking about the play-by-play (Lebron passes to Dwayne. Bosh cuts in and dives into the lane! What a dunk!), Mark Jackson is more of an analyst (Dwyane Wade is a special player. The way he brings in defenders leaves guys like Chris Bosh to go in for the dunk. What an emphatic play.) And there is Jeff Van Gundy, the "conversation starter" (Dirk is now a household name. You ask around to Brazil, China, or anywhere. Ask them about Dirk, and they'll know you're talking about Nowitzki.) These guys know the game inside out, and know the players well enough to bring character to the commentating. I am interested in what they're saying, and it's entertaining for me to watch these guys talk to each other about the game. Artosis and Tasteless are the casting duo of Starcraft 2 for GOM. Artosis is clearly the analytical player who brings insight, and Tasteless is the color commentator that brings in more conversation to the table. I find Tasteless' lack of knowledge about the game to be dissatisfying, or the perception of the knowledge he has seems inadequate. He's a color commentator. Why is Artosis the one talking more about the Player bio's? Why is Artosis the one bringing in way more interesting information about the game itself, while Tasteless is sitting back, just bouncing off of Artosis' commentary? Where is the personality that everyone seems to love? He tries to bring in jokes that aren't funny, he has the same reaction for everything that happens in the game, and he has filler that would be way better implemented if he was actually talking about the players. I see something completely different from other people I guess. | ||
|
TheSubtleArt
Canada2527 Posts
| ||
|
jlim
Spain943 Posts
| ||
|
Axiom0
63 Posts
On June 12 2011 18:58 Tachion wrote: They were doing their usual tastosis banter in the early stages of a game, and the topic of cramps came up, and tasteless said something like "You ever get a foot cramp during sex? That's like the flat tire of sex". I am so astonished that anyone would actually be offended by this. Unbelievable. I'm not offended by that joke, but I could see how someone would find it inappropriate for the setting. I think it's probably best that he avoids this in the future. The quality of his casting will be in no way diminished if he doesn't make such jokes, but his employers might not like him saying stuff like that on air. But I'm sure he knows the full ramifications of acting in a so called "unprofessional" way so it's not like we all need to criticize him for doing so. | ||
|
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
| ||
|
LostBLuE
Canada188 Posts
| ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
| ||
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
| ||
|
eiger
Belgium98 Posts
We are we so neurotic that we have to overanalyse everything He's practically the perfect caster, even his flaws are what keeps us coming back Great caster, never change | ||
|
Alabasern
United States4005 Posts
| ||
|
Incursus
United States415 Posts
| ||
|
lyk503
United States261 Posts
On June 13 2011 08:40 Incursus wrote: Offering Tasteless constructive criticism is funny considering he is the first real successful English commentator ever. I mean what is the standard of casting if not Tasteless, he was the first he really revolutionized casting in my mind. I don't want a professional I want to be entertained and hear about that one time that Tasteless stole some kid's ladder points. 'tis a sad day when someone says Tasteless is the standard of casting... The one who REVOLUTIONIZED casting. | ||
|
eiger
Belgium98 Posts
Actually he's better than any professional sports casters I've ever heard.. if just purely based on humour and charisma.. its just a good caster, nice guy and funny bastard all rolled into one.. plus add on the next best caster in the game.. plus add on the fact they've got great chemistry.. unbeatable.. light years ahead of the best professional casters I've heard on TV | ||
|
ZUR1CH
United States108 Posts
| ||
|
nvs.
Canada3609 Posts
1.) overly repetitive in diction- for example "he's so SOLID", "he's playing so GOOD", "it's going to be so COOL". I don't understand why he can't use... more descriptive words whenever he's trying to add something to the cast. Not only that, he just constantly overuses these words, making him sound like a broken record sometimes. It's weird since he seems quite articulate in casual settings. Seems like a dilemma for casters, since Gretorp seems to cast about for synonyms just for the sake of variety and he gets called on it (although a lot of the time the words he uses are just wrong) | ||
|
jexxto
United Kingdom284 Posts
Now, to cover my own ass from the moderation, I will play ball and presume it is infact a genuine post and not a troll: Tasteless and Artosis compliment eachother's casting flawlessly. Tasteless is to Artosis' Ying, what Artosis is to Tasteless's Yang. They click. So well infact they are known as the Casting Archon, the ultimate unifcation of two beings into one. So to sum it up, I disagree strongly. | ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On June 13 2011 08:23 lyk503 wrote: I would like to compare this to the NBA finals that we are watching (or at least I am.) There are three commentators, so this isn't the perfect example, but it makes enough sense to grasp the concept. Mike Breen, Mark Jackson, and Jeff Van Gundy. Now, these guys are pretty damn good at what they do. They each have assigned roles on what to talk about. As Mike Breen is talking about the play-by-play (Lebron passes to Dwayne. Bosh cuts in and dives into the lane! What a dunk!), Mark Jackson is more of an analyst (Dwyane Wade is a special player. The way he brings in defenders leaves guys like Chris Bosh to go in for the dunk. What an emphatic play.) And there is Jeff Van Gundy, the "conversation starter" (Dirk is now a household name. You ask around to Brazil, China, or anywhere. Ask them about Dirk, and they'll know you're talking about Nowitzki.) These guys know the game inside out, and know the players well enough to bring character to the commentating. I am interested in what they're saying, and it's entertaining for me to watch these guys talk to each other about the game. Artosis and Tasteless are the casting duo of Starcraft 2 for GOM. Artosis is clearly the analytical player who brings insight, and Tasteless is the color commentator that brings in more conversation to the table. I find Tasteless' lack of knowledge about the game to be dissatisfying, or the perception of the knowledge he has seems inadequate. He's a color commentator. Why is Artosis the one talking more about the Player bio's? Why is Artosis the one bringing in way more interesting information about the game itself, while Tasteless is sitting back, just bouncing off of Artosis' commentary? Where is the personality that everyone seems to love? He tries to bring in jokes that aren't funny, he has the same reaction for everything that happens in the game, and he has filler that would be way better implemented if he was actually talking about the players. I see something completely different from other people I guess. I respectfully disagree, I think his jokes are quite funny, his commentary and responses to Artosis are pretty hilarious, his analysis of the game is pretty adequate, he talks about the players enough, but trades this off with Artosis and he fills in the blanks for Artosis pretty well. | ||
|
lim1017
Canada1278 Posts
| ||
| ||
