On May 01 2012 06:21 Day[9] wrote: Oh dude that segment was awesome! A+ :D.
Pretty nifty history on the sentry too. I barely remember when it was called the nullifier, and I would personally love to be able to lift units w/ the sentry LOL. I wonder if you could go zealot sentry all game long in PvZ hahaha :D.
I wish I could go back and alter the way I posted it, it wasn't that the entire show wasn't good... I suppose you're the expert on everything eSport, what is your take on the specific portion of build discussion and how it relates to lower level players? Most people have generally said that, it is fine for low leagues, but I still hold my reservations especially from wtaching enough of your dailies way back in BW when I went from D- to B in a matter of months, where you said the biggest problem was getting a build order when your learning (or at least a major issue) and having no execution or endgoal (midgame) to look at, which is what was given.
So I suppose, what is your take on the build discussion.
I think Soe did an appropriate job w/ her presentation, but I understand how you might have apprehension. Fortunately, in answering your question, I can shed some light on the problems that commentators have to solve w/ their word choice!
In commentary, you have to be super aware of what you're actually trying to do in any cast, or at any moment within that cast. This will greatly color the way the commentator speaks. For example:
Situation A Terran player opens with an aggressive attacking play vs an early expoing protoss. He needs to finish his warpgate research so his 3gates can get an extra warpin of 3 stalkers to defend the push. Suppose that, with this particular build, if Protoss chronos 4 times on his warp gate, he'll finish the warpgates just in time to defend the push. In the game, warpgate is half done, Protoss has already spent 2 chronos on the warpgate, and Protoss sees the push gathering at the Terran front.
Case 1 - I'm doing an educational daily: My goal is to be educating people. As someone who's played StarCraft competitively for 12 years, I know that a 5 second window can actually be plenty of time. I want my viewers to know that so they can feel comfortable doing it too.
In this circumstance, I can say "Ok Protoss needs to spend 4 chrono on warpgate total to defend this push. So, as long as he uses this stalker to delay the push by 10 seconds, he'll get the warpgate finished + stalkers warped in with 5 seconds to spare." If I can point out this particular issue (the 4chrono on the warpgate), tons of players who chrono probes too much are now able to defend early pushes. Moreover, they'll be able to spot situations where they can devote that chrono to probes instead. Huzzah!
Case 2 - I'm casting a major tournament: My goal is to be a storyteller and to build excitement. A 5 second window might be enough for a pro to feel safe, but 5 seconds is a REALLY short amount of time!!! It would be a HUGE error to say "oh this is going to be no problem at all. He just chrono boosts twice and warps in with 5 seconds to spare." That would kill all tension immediately. If Protoss lands the 2 chrono boosts, nobody would ever realize it was a close call. Worse, in the circumstance that Protoss misses the 2 chronos and loses, I'm now in a weird corner. The only thing that makes sense is to say "well Protoss messed that up." Though true, that makes the Protoss look bad, doesn't give due credit to the Terran, and the viewer is left kinda going "oh I guess that guy made a dumb mistake."
A much smarter play is to say "Oh man this is going to be razor close. He needs to get that warp gate chronoboosting NOW if he wants to hold up in time!!" Suddenly, the audience can sense that tension. They may have never known that there's a 5 second window with 4 chronos on the warpgate, but they feel excitement with me saying things like "It's going to come down to seconds!!"
I could share that information about the 4 chrono boosts on the warpgate and look knowledgeable, but that's not my job. The cast isn't about me dropping knowledge bombs at every opportunity. Sure dropping SOME knowledge helps make for a cleaner show, but you have to consider the case you're in.
Relating back to Soe's bit, consider what she's producing and where it's being placed. It's clearly a bit more broadly focused. Should she be going into heavy in depth information? Probably not. The content that flanks her show is game casting, content littered with in depth information from Gretorp, FrodaN, Bitterdam etc. If she did too much in depth stuff, the overall NASL look would be fairly one dimensional. So, it seems pretty reasonable to say it's more broad, introductory SC2 type stuff, or just "miscellaneous" type content. Moreover, with the time limitation, there can only be so much that's stated. What to do now?
Soe smartly accounts for this by having a simple topic "the sentry," and then breaks it into two halves: history + gameplay. I think anyone would appreciate the history stuff (I didn't know any of the info she mentioned). So, let's examine the gameplay stuff (I'll pick just the PvZ portion n' whatnot) in the same way I did before.
Situation: Soe wants to present the basic idea that immortal+sentry is a key core composition in PvZ midgame. Stalkers + upgrades round off the mixture to be pretty deadly, particularly vs roaches. Our target is the non-core SC2 players.
Possibility 1 - Speak in generalities: I could say "a few immortals" and "a lot of sentries" but a non-core player might not have any clue what this means. Sure, most players know that "a few immortals" is 2-4 and "a lot of sentries" is ~7-12 for a normal midgame, but the non-core player might not know that. He might only play 4v4 games and might attack with 15 immortals at a time. It's not clear enough.
Possibility 2 - Speak in ranges: I could say "2-4 immortals" and "7-12 sentries" and it may work pretty decently. But, if you use too many numbers/ranges, it distracts from the core goal. You're trying to highlight immortal+sentry as a strong composition, not nail down the exact ranges. It can sound clunky. Just say this sentence out loud: "2 to 3 potatoes, 4 to 6 leeks, 1 to 5 sticks of celery, 1 to 2 cups of creme." Now say "2 potatoes, 4 leeks, 3 sticks of celery, and 1 cup of creme." Notice how in the first instance, you can hear how much more emphasis is on the numbers and in the second case, it ends up being on the ingredients (for potato leek soup no less xD). I'm not saying that the "range way" is bad, but I have a personal preference to steer clear from it unless it's super relevant.
Possibility 3 - Give some exact(ish) numbers: It sounds the cleanest to say "3 immortals and 10 sentries," but does this break our goal? We want a non-core player to understand the basic composition of immortal+sentry in approximately the correct proportions. I would argue that this does satisfy our original goal by considering the different possibilities. If Naniwa performed a 2 immortal, 8 sentry push, would the non-core player think to himself "This must be a completely different attack than Soe was talking about" ?? Probably not. The non-core player would probably think "Oh, this must be kinda like what that Soe girl was talking about." I mean, hell, think about how YOU first got into StarCraft. You probably heard all kinds of stuff that you processed, thought about, considered when you saw slightly different spots etc. The average viewer is pretty damn smart about translating and building understanding.
So, all in all, I really commend Soe for how she presented it. Nothing she said was particularly deep from a "oh shit I didn't know that" perspective. But, consider how brilliantly it's stated to both be true to core strategy, but also be understandable to someone who is a non-core player. It's funny to remember that Soe has been commentating for about 3 years longer than I have. And, she's done a huge variety of games to a huge variety of audiences. Cool to see her apply her knowledge to SC2!
Cute section, harmless, well intended, and informative in regards to the history of the unit. It's very ironic that the OP keeps going on about "I'm not sexist, no sexism, blah blah," because I'm willing to bet this topic would never have been made if soe's corner was hosted by a guy, even with identical content.
whats wrong with the video, its actually interesting when you get past a girl is hosting it. it keeps attention well imo and that is what these segments are for aren't they? i don't see how you're a sexist or a hater but i do think you are trying to get your voice heard, just next time try to make it over an actual issue
I am actually speechless. Can't believe the OP here really...
I watched the segment and was very happy to see Soe there. All you have writen so far does not seem to be based on proper facts really. She said for constructive feedback you could send her an email, yet you choose to openly insult her on a public forum, even going as far as to make a poll to decide if the show should continue or not. So clearly this whole thread serves no other purpose than trying to beat on someone you seemingly dont like very much and not, as u said somewhere in between ur invalid statements, to improve the show and give the NASL feedback etc.
Keep insulting all the normal, decent and hardworking girls in eSports such as Soe, untill they cant be bothered to work in such an industry anymore and we will be left with all those cheap attention seeking ****** which get their jobs for anything but their qualifications and skills.
I agree with the majority here, Soe is a great and amazingly talented person in many ways and surely, as the show goes on she will improve and it will only get better (which does not mean that its not good already).
Thumbs up for the NASL guys, you did a great job adding someone like Soe to the team.
On May 01 2012 13:41 figq wrote: They still do quite regularly, but it got cool to pretend they're all about fundays and noobsdays. /sorry for the off-topic
On the contrary I hate this sudden (read: SOTG) notion that D[9] isnt putting his all into it. The guy works harder than anyone, and for much less. But there is no denying that the daily has become slightly more focused on entertainemnt value and attitude, and less on actual knowledge.
Disagree - and I don't even care if Day[9] works hard or not, that's his own business. But I care when people pretend the dailies don't contain serious analysis days anymore, because it's just not true. That's of course not every day - which is how the format has been since forever.
On May 01 2012 13:41 figq wrote: They still do quite regularly, but it got cool to pretend they're all about fundays and noobsdays. /sorry for the off-topic
On the contrary I hate this sudden (read: SOTG) notion that D[9] isnt putting his all into it. The guy works harder than anyone, and for much less. But there is no denying that the daily has become slightly more focused on entertainemnt value and attitude, and less on actual knowledge. But lets not derail.
Soe is a baller, she actually has a really cool segment developing. That being said, if Soe read the nutritional values off the back of a carton of milk for 5 minutes I would still watch because she is so damn cute.
On May 01 2012 06:21 Day[9] wrote: Oh dude that segment was awesome! A+ :D.
Pretty nifty history on the sentry too. I barely remember when it was called the nullifier, and I would personally love to be able to lift units w/ the sentry LOL. I wonder if you could go zealot sentry all game long in PvZ hahaha :D.
I wish I could go back and alter the way I posted it, it wasn't that the entire show wasn't good... I suppose you're the expert on everything eSport, what is your take on the specific portion of build discussion and how it relates to lower level players? Most people have generally said that, it is fine for low leagues, but I still hold my reservations especially from wtaching enough of your dailies way back in BW when I went from D- to B in a matter of months, where you said the biggest problem was getting a build order when your learning (or at least a major issue) and having no execution or endgoal (midgame) to look at, which is what was given.
So I suppose, what is your take on the build discussion.
I think Soe did an appropriate job w/ her presentation, but I understand how you might have apprehension. Fortunately, in answering your question, I can shed some light on the problems that commentators have to solve w/ their word choice!
In commentary, you have to be super aware of what you're actually trying to do in any cast, or at any moment within that cast. This will greatly color the way the commentator speaks. For example:
Situation A Terran player opens with an aggressive attacking play vs an early expoing protoss. He needs to finish his warpgate research so his 3gates can get an extra warpin of 3 stalkers to defend the push. Suppose that, with this particular build, if Protoss chronos 4 times on his warp gate, he'll finish the warpgates just in time to defend the push. In the game, warpgate is half done, Protoss has already spent 2 chronos on the warpgate, and Protoss sees the push gathering at the Terran front.
Case 1 - I'm doing an educational daily: My goal is to be educating people. As someone who's played StarCraft competitively for 12 years, I know that a 5 second window can actually be plenty of time. I want my viewers to know that so they can feel comfortable doing it too.
In this circumstance, I can say "Ok Protoss needs to spend 4 chrono on warpgate total to defend this push. So, as long as he uses this stalker to delay the push by 10 seconds, he'll get the warpgate finished + stalkers warped in with 5 seconds to spare." If I can point out this particular issue (the 4chrono on the warpgate), tons of players who chrono probes too much are now able to defend early pushes. Moreover, they'll be able to spot situations where they can devote that chrono to probes instead. Huzzah!
Case 2 - I'm casting a major tournament: My goal is to be a storyteller and to build excitement. A 5 second window might be enough for a pro to feel safe, but 5 seconds is a REALLY short amount of time!!! It would be a HUGE error to say "oh this is going to be no problem at all. He just chrono boosts twice and warps in with 5 seconds to spare." That would kill all tension immediately. If Protoss lands the 2 chrono boosts, nobody would ever realize it was a close call. Worse, in the circumstance that Protoss misses the 2 chronos and loses, I'm now in a weird corner. The only thing that makes sense is to say "well Protoss messed that up." Though true, that makes the Protoss look bad, doesn't give due credit to the Terran, and the viewer is left kinda going "oh I guess that guy made a dumb mistake."
A much smarter play is to say "Oh man this is going to be razor close. He needs to get that warp gate chronoboosting NOW if he wants to hold up in time!!" Suddenly, the audience can sense that tension. They may have never known that there's a 5 second window with 4 chronos on the warpgate, but they feel excitement with me saying things like "It's going to come down to seconds!!"
I could share that information about the 4 chrono boosts on the warpgate and look knowledgeable, but that's not my job. The cast isn't about me dropping knowledge bombs at every opportunity. Sure dropping SOME knowledge helps make for a cleaner show, but you have to consider the case you're in.
Relating back to Soe's bit, consider what she's producing and where it's being placed. It's clearly a bit more broadly focused. Should she be going into heavy in depth information? Probably not. The content that flanks her show is game casting, content littered with in depth information from Gretorp, FrodaN, Bitterdam etc. If she did too much in depth stuff, the overall NASL look would be fairly one dimensional. So, it seems pretty reasonable to say it's more broad, introductory SC2 type stuff, or just "miscellaneous" type content. Moreover, with the time limitation, there can only be so much that's stated. What to do now?
Soe smartly accounts for this by having a simple topic "the sentry," and then breaks it into two halves: history + gameplay. I think anyone would appreciate the history stuff (I didn't know any of the info she mentioned). So, let's examine the gameplay stuff (I'll pick just the PvZ portion n' whatnot) in the same way I did before.
Situation: Soe wants to present the basic idea that immortal+sentry is a key core composition in PvZ midgame. Stalkers + upgrades round off the mixture to be pretty deadly, particularly vs roaches. Our target is the non-core SC2 players.
Possibility 1 - Speak in generalities: I could say "a few immortals" and "a lot of sentries" but a non-core player might not have any clue what this means. Sure, most players know that "a few immortals" is 2-4 and "a lot of sentries" is ~7-12 for a normal midgame, but the non-core player might not know that. He might only play 4v4 games and might attack with 15 immortals at a time. It's not clear enough.
Possibility 2 - Speak in ranges: I could say "2-4 immortals" and "7-12 sentries" and it may work pretty decently. But, if you use too many numbers/ranges, it distracts from the core goal. You're trying to highlight immortal+sentry as a strong composition, not nail down the exact ranges. It can sound clunky. Just say this sentence out loud: "2 to 3 potatoes, 4 to 6 leeks, 1 to 5 sticks of celery, 1 to 2 cups of creme." Now say "2 potatoes, 4 leeks, 3 sticks of celery, and 1 cup of creme." Notice how in the first instance, you can hear how much more emphasis is on the numbers and in the second case, it ends up being on the ingredients (for potato leek soup no less xD). I'm not saying that the "range way" is bad, but I have a personal preference to steer clear from it unless it's super relevant.
Possibility 3 - Give some exact(ish) numbers: It sounds the cleanest to say "3 immortals and 10 sentries," but does this break our goal? We want a non-core player to understand the basic composition of immortal+sentry in approximately the correct proportions. I would argue that this does satisfy our original goal by considering the different possibilities. If Naniwa performed a 2 immortal, 8 sentry push, would the non-core player think to himself "This must be a completely different attack than Soe was talking about" ?? Probably not. The non-core player would probably think "Oh, this must be kinda like what that Soe girl was talking about." I mean, hell, think about how YOU first got into StarCraft. You probably heard all kinds of stuff that you processed, thought about, considered when you saw slightly different spots etc. The average viewer is pretty damn smart about translating and building understanding.
So, all in all, I really commend Soe for how she presented it. Nothing she said was particularly deep from a "oh shit I didn't know that" perspective. But, consider how brilliantly it's stated to both be true to core strategy, but also be understandable to someone who is a non-core player. It's funny to remember that Soe has been commentating for about 3 years longer than I have. And, she's done a huge variety of games to a huge variety of audiences. Cool to see her apply her knowledge to SC2!
Oh and her drawings are cute xD
I think its more to the point that the entire segment about PVZ sticks out like a sorethumb when she went over it. The fact when she says "You forcefield the ramp...." it seems as if she attempts to lean forward to make sure shes reading something right. I guess its more the way she conveyed the whole thing with the general idea of it seemingly out of place. It would have been much better if she skipped the whole explaining an entire build order and exectuion in 30seconds to actually stating what uses the sentry is good for in pvz (blocking ramps, stopping run bys etc whatever), and then maybe mentioning the last bit about its FFs complimenting units like immortals with their longer range.
It would have achieved her overall idea of giving nice tid bits of info without actually attempting to direct gameplay. It just seems odd if you're taking so much about new comers learning off this, the fact she mentions its the one strategy she always thinks about leads to new comers pretty much going "Gee this is the best then ill always do this" rather than maybe actually educating them on how to learn the game (Ie what the unit compliments, what its uses are)
On May 01 2012 04:53 Liquid`NonY wrote: That seemed good to me. Soe has a genuine interest and a great personality.
This is not inappropriate sex appeal. While she certainly looks good, her style isn't cranking up the sexuality. As a general rule, you put attractive people in front of the camera. That can be done without abusing sex appeal. I think Soe's Corner is pretty close to perfect in this respect.
I think having a girl do it is great because it'll make girls viewing NASL a little more comfortable. I am a fan of diversifying content so that we can get as many people interested in SC2 as possible. I don't think we need to appease the core fans anymore. While they might prefer some Day[9] clone doing this segment, they can live without it. So this helps get girls into it. And as is completely clear from the whole thing, it helps ease new SC2 fans into the complexity of the game.
I think she'll get more comfortable making these segments and become really good!
i always thought woman were used to bring in the men. 0_0
I watched the first episode; it really doesn't seem that horrible to me. Granted the analysis isn't super high level, but who says it has to be? Seems interesting enough, and at least gives people, newer players especially, a little bit of a glimpse into the topics covered.
On May 01 2012 04:53 Liquid`NonY wrote: That seemed good to me. Soe has a genuine interest and a great personality.
This is not inappropriate sex appeal. While she certainly looks good, her style isn't cranking up the sexuality. As a general rule, you put attractive people in front of the camera. That can be done without abusing sex appeal. I think Soe's Corner is pretty close to perfect in this respect.
I think having a girl do it is great because it'll make girls viewing NASL a little more comfortable. I am a fan of diversifying content so that we can get as many people interested in SC2 as possible. I don't think we need to appease the core fans anymore. While they might prefer some Day[9] clone doing this segment, they can live without it. So this helps get girls into it. And as is completely clear from the whole thing, it helps ease new SC2 fans into the complexity of the game.
I think she'll get more comfortable making these segments and become really good!
i always thought woman were used to bring in the men. 0_0
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Perhaps all of the negative feedback from player to pro is based on sarcastic remarks?
It's not all based on sarcastic remarks.
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: I have yet to insult any professional player, and/or caster I even refrain usually from making fun of Blizzard employee's until Mr. Kim decided "imbalanced maps make the game more fun" and that crossed the line...
You're the only person that cares about this. And you're probably offended by me saying that even though that's ridiculous.
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Constantly you have been labeling me, and the community as these stereotypical idiot trolls...
I also label the community a lot of positive things. More often than negative things.
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: I'm sorry, but myself personally, cannot agree with that.
Your all-or-nothing statement makes this either obvious or ridiculous. Did you think that I think every individual making up the community is a "stereotypical idiot troll"? That's absurd. But on the other hand, you are being equally absurd if you think there isn't an individual in the community that is a stereotypical idiot troll. It's easy to provide a counterexample to disprove the former and an example to disprove the latter.
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: I have supported you as a professional player, and for the past 2 years in your horrendous slump I have always said "Nony's gonna come back" and I've been a loyal fan...
Not a slump. My results never got significantly worse. In BW, I was rapidly improving and destined for Proleague when I was in Korea. I quit playing and then briefly resumed about a year later to win TSL2. Then I switched games. I've never properly practiced SC2 and I've never gotten good at SC2. My results reflect that. If you want to compare my relative standing among non-Koreans between BW and SC2, then you can technically call it a slump. But that's just a useless technicality. Practically speaking, I've never slumped.
Thanks for the support.
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: You have continually been arrogant and rude, for no reason at all, and as I've said before you really just won't care, but I am no longer a fan...
How do you know I have no reason? I have lots of reasons. What do you mean by reason? Is a reason a justification or an explanation? Do things with no benefit have reasons for existing? If your only point here is that I've done something wrong it's useless because everyone has. You may as well dislike someone because you saw them sneeze once.
If you've got a particular gripe with arrogance and rudeness, then you should consider how much more time and attention I give to random community members than other pro players. Some of it is in a rude tone and even less of it is actually rude and arrogant. But that's nothing compared to the pros who are disgusted by TL.net discussions and are completely uninterested in interacting with any members of the community that way.
Also consider that you get only a tiny glimpse of the personalities of the people you are judging. There are many situations partially reported to the public of which I have known the full story and all the facts. There are always a ton of people (often a very strong majority) who get it wrong. It is fine to enjoy the bliss of ignorance but it is not helpful to be ignorantly indignant. The fact is that you don't know a person unless you know the person and even then you are seeing only one side of them. Know the limitations of your limited data. Learn when it is wise to truly reserve judgment (as opposed to judging and not telling anyone).
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: I tried to make this thread as unbias as possible, that doesn't matter...
Why do you say a random remark and then state that it doesn't matter? You're raving.
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Perhaps instead of condeming the community as a group that "are bigger fans of stuff outside the game than the game itself"
Condemning isn't a very time consuming activity. But I didn't condemn the community. I just told MrBitter that he shouldn't tell the community that they're bigger fans of stuff outside the game than the game itself. That is one hypothesis for explaining the data he pointed out. But he shouldn't say it even if it's true. But even if he did say it, he still wouldn't be condemning. It's just a neutral observation and description.
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: you should perhaps invest your time in "the game itself, instead of stuff outside the game" to perhaps improve...
Wow three times perhaps. This is quite a contrast with some other bold statements you've made. Now it's all perhaps. It's funny though because you're advising that I spend more time practicing to get better. That's common knowledge. But you hide behind three times perhaps now. I agree that I should invest my time into the game itself. I do it on occasion already!
On May 01 2012 05:59 NeMeSiS3 wrote: But what do I know, I'm not a professional player, so probably nothing.
If you aren't going to stand behind the things you say at all then you shouldn't say them. If you changed a few things without changing the meaning, like put this statement at the beginning and state it more simply, "I don't know what I'm talking about", then it's easier to see how ridiculous it is.
If you too want to play with a.... wait for it... DARK PYLON AND STAR RELIC, search (Bread) and pick either outpost, megaton, or lava flow (the rest aren't updated). Also the only reason I am shamelessly plugging is because the Star Relic is neat in action.
Also I liked the background music (it's catchy).
As for analysis, people can get better.
GSL, GSL Off The Record (well it wasn't bad except the MC episode where they made it awkward for MC), etc weren't too good at the beginning.
But anyway, seriously that was entertaining enough that I'd want to watch more of them. Good job NASL team. Watch the second episode if you haven't.
As for what other thing NASL could do? Well they could get Polt his own segment where he talks in English for the fangirls. Polt Speaking English + Show Spoiler +
Also play that catchy background music too (is that NASL composed music or from somewhere else? It is seriously catchy >.>).
Edit - Also it seems mining out will be a regular thing now:
Umm, I enjoyed this quite a bit. It's better than the learn Korean bit in the GSL, that only tells me information that I will probably never use. The learn korean is a nice novelty because it introduces a bit of korean culture, but I really enjoy this a lot more!
I never knew that stuff about the development of the sentry. Yes it has pretty basic info, but I still think it's very useful. It's a 2-minute segment to appeal to lower level players and let's face it, the majority of players are lower level.
I'm really interested in seeing where this will go.
Is this what people are talking about? I'm sorry, but you hardcore people need to realize your not the only people that play/watch/ love starcraft...bleh
Just saying "This thread is not sexyst" does not give you a moral dispense and allows you to say anything whitouth being tagged as sexist... off course it is sexist; you are basically assuming things (like scripting) based on the fact that she is a girl. The show is was it is, there's no need to try to find a different role for it (its ovbiously not meant to be a really deep analysis). Shows like this are good for e-sports, I think most people found it really interesting.
On May 01 2012 04:53 Liquid`NonY wrote: That seemed good to me. Soe has a genuine interest and a great personality.
This is not inappropriate sex appeal. While she certainly looks good, her style isn't cranking up the sexuality. As a general rule, you put attractive people in front of the camera. That can be done without abusing sex appeal. I think Soe's Corner is pretty close to perfect in this respect.
I think having a girl do it is great because it'll make girls viewing NASL a little more comfortable. I am a fan of diversifying content so that we can get as many people interested in SC2 as possible. I don't think we need to appease the core fans anymore. While they might prefer some Day[9] clone doing this segment, they can live without it. So this helps get girls into it. And as is completely clear from the whole thing, it helps ease new SC2 fans into the complexity of the game.
I think she'll get more comfortable making these segments and become really good!
i always thought woman were used to bring in the men. 0_0
Like The View?
Every milf hunter knows that the View contains the largest fap collection a man could ask for
EPT
.
