Casters Power Ranking

On July 19 2014 01:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:

Also, what about pros who spend a significant amount of time casting like iNcontroL? I think his casting is top notch, because it has great analysis and his style keeps me interested. Which is something that other people might completely disagree with me on.

On July 19 2014 01:29 NarutO wrote:
TAKE AND NARUTO

:[

On July 19 2014 01:29 NarutO wrote:
TAKE AND NARUTO

:[

On July 19 2014 01:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Unfortunately, this is a lot more subjective than player rankings, because you can actually look at results of players, but community feedback and even the number of gigs casted might be dependent upon vocal minorities and availability. You also have no facts or statistics anyway, so you'd need to do a lot more research if you wanted to make this into a credible idea.

Also, what about pros who spend a significant amount of time casting like iNcontroL? I think his casting is top notch, because it has great analysis and his style keeps me interested. Which is something that other people might completely disagree with me on.

Also, putting Apollo last... lol.

And you need a lot more casters... Khaldor, Wolf, etc.

On July 19 2014 01:34 KingAlphard wrote:
I would consider the single casters rather than the "teams"; usually tournaments have 3-4 casters who rotate so you have a different team every match.

At the moment Nathanias and Rotterdam are probably my favourite, followed by Apollo, Artosis, Day9, Incontrol, ToD, Kaelaris, Khaldor. I wouldn't list axeltoss, but he is ok to me, just not amazing.

I must also note that there are many progamers which we've heard casting occasionally who were quite enjoyable, in particular qxc did a really good job in wcs america.

Yes this is subjective, just like everything, what makes a caster "good" is when most people say that he's good. Statistics are also subjective anyway as they can be manipulated and interpreted.

On July 19 2014 01:43 oGoZenob wrote:
no Mr.Bitter / rotti ?

On July 19 2014 02:23 swag_bro wrote:
Where is incontrol???

On July 19 2014 02:19 SixStrings wrote:
Where's DoA, by the way? I loved the guy.

Other than that, Tastosis have been my favourite pair for as long as I can remember.

On July 19 2014 04:07 stormssc wrote:
Wow, so little love for Kaelaris?

On July 19 2014 04:07 stormssc wrote:
Wow, so little love for Kaelaris?

On July 19 2014 09:34 pigmanbear wrote:
I think Rotterdam + qxc would be the best duo (besides Tasteless and Artosis back when they played and followed StarCraft).

On July 19 2014 02:02 BisuDagger wrote:
Sayle - yes he casted SC2

On July 19 2014 13:34 Kaizen[7] wrote:

So then, what objective criteria can be applied to ranking a casters performance? I haven't perused the entire thread yet but from the conclusions I can draw at this point, establishing objective ranking criteria for casting is going to be nigh impossible. I'm going to think a bit more about this though because it could seriously help the scene if it can be done. But can it be done?

On July 19 2014 13:36 BreakfastBurrito wrote:
1. Moletrap
2. Painuser and his co caster (cant remember his name)
3. CatsPajamas

+ Show Spoiler +

On July 20 2014 01:03 darthfoley wrote:
Why doesn't Mr. Bitter co commentate with Rotterdam anymore?

On July 20 2014 01:03 darthfoley wrote:
Why doesn't Mr. Bitter co commentate with Rotterdam anymore?

On July 19 2014 09:48 Darkhorse wrote:
We should remain this the, "Everyone Post Your Opinion on Which Casters are Good/Suck Thread"

his isn't a good or bad thing and in fact, I believe both Tasteless and TotalBiscuit have explicitly stated that they strive to deliver a professional experience that is easy to digest for those with less experience with the game.

On July 20 2014 08:33 iNcontroL wrote:
Lololll

this is kind of like saying. You are a horse dont try to pass yourself off as a elephant. Of course they would say they cater for the nubs . . cos they are nubs. gets my goat when they chime in after the game or describe things as poor. Yes it may have been, but i dont feel these people are qualified to say it . . no idea why i think like that, i just do. its like when im at work and the goddamn tea guy offers a suggestion which i didnt ask for and you seriously cant begin to explain on how many levels his solution isnt as simple as that. As for the professional experience . .as i said, all seems like they are far too self aware and trying to insert large words and that slapstick comment like they are talking down or tounge in cheek tones all the time. Fucking irritating

On July 20 2014 08:50 Darkhorse wrote:

This thread is silly and will bring out a vocal minority. Every caster will have at least one hater who makes himself known here. Best to ignore the whole thing.

On July 20 2014 16:05 Yakikorosu wrote:
I make it a point not to badmouth casters, and I think the problem with these threads is not the haters (which are easy to spot and ignore), but the completely random ridiculous criteria many think are important to casting.

On July 21 2014 03:33 TotalBiscuit wrote:
Number of these threads posted over the last 5 years - 627

Number of these threads that resulted in a constructive discussion - 0

On July 21 2014 04:06 HN_KrO wrote:


I do like how the two least constructive posts in this thread have both come from casters.

On July 21 2014 09:39 pure.Wasted wrote:


Somehow I didn't take you for the kind of guy who worries that some assholes might flame him if he says the wrong thing...

I remember you were very open to feedback, honest, and constructive in RootCatz's power rank thread, so if you really feel that your opinion here couldn't elevate the level of discussion, that's a shame.

I think you and Artosis made a fantastic team at SanDisk. I really appreciated how prepared you were with background information for the matches. More play-by-play casters need to follow suit, because too often legitimate SC2 analysts (Artosis, some others depending on MU) end up doing all the work during a cast.

I wonder if the current go-to method of cycling through 5 different casting duos at each tournament isn't responsible for all casters saying to themselves "I'm not just a play-by-play, I dabble in everything!" When in reality many don't have the skillset to do "everything" on a professional level, and end up just slacking in play-by-play as a result.

On July 19 2014 01:36 Jer99 wrote:
I'd like to see Nathanias/QXC cast together, they're great at hyping up a fight, wonder what it would sound like with both of them doing it

On July 21 2014 21:50 jdsowa wrote:
What makes nearly all casters unlistenable is that they cannot resist lapsing into the mode where they literally and unimaginatively call out every step of the action on the screen:

"He's moving in with his stalkers, tries to snipe a building, oh it downs to 5 health, oh but that's a lot of roaches..and he's gotta blink outta there..meanwhile a drop happening in the back.."

That's appropriate for a radio broadcast, but we can all see the same action on the screen as you. It's like these casters are challenging themselves to cram as many words in as possible just fo the sake of it.

Much better to focus more on the high level, strategic aspect:

1. he likes to be aggressive with this build
2. he knows he can pressure here because of his tech advantage
3. his opponent is known to do [this]
4. he's just looking to distract here
5. we saw him put similar pressure before on [map]/[opponent]
etc.

On July 21 2014 10:46 TotalBiscuit wrote:


What annoys me most about the threads is that you rarely see any actual examples of things casters are doing wrong, rather just vague assertions about "knowledge levels" "bias" and so forth.

What I would like to see from threads like this is "Well I think this about Caster X. To support my opinion, here are some examples of recent casts where the faults I've pointed out have occurred".

You'll get much better responses that way. I get criticized for my knowledge level but the last time I actually recall someone pointing out something I said that was wrong was like 2 years ago. It does make the experience of taking feedback and improving based on it very frustrating, because it's hard to distinguish between trolls and those with legitimate criticisms.

Then of course you have the ever eternal debate of "how to cast", which rages between people that want pure analysis and despise any sort of hype, justified or otherwise and those who prefer the more traditional play-by-play/analyst dichotomy. That'll never end and good luck convincing anyone otherwise. That might very well have got worse lately since the Destiny fake hype thing, which a few too many idiots took literally and thought applied to hyping any fight ever.

Is the caster also the camera man and production?

On July 21 2014 04:39 TotalBiscuit wrote:


We aren't allowed to be constructive in these threads because it will result in people flaming casters for daring to disgree with community members on the subject of casting.

On July 21 2014 23:57 shin ken wrote:
1. Korean casters constantly shouting and being hype as fuck "PLAGUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!!11!!11"
2. Oldschool Khaldor in his mother tongue screaming as much as the the koreans
3. That italian caster who was so emotional that he started crying during a Grubby vs. Stareagle game

While I really like to play SC2 myself, I think it isn't the best specator sport. It can become a bit boring at times as an observer. I like it when casters try to counter that with their casting like the koreans.

I often ask myself the "ousider" question: Would somebody who was no idea of starcraft be entertained by the the current cast? While Apollo, Artosis and co. are excellent casters and rightfully on top of many lists, I think they would fail said test most of the time. I can see someone getting into the game and being entertained by exessivly passionate casting 'though. Korean casters being korean casters were probably a big reason for the popularity of Broodwar TV-broadcasts in korea reaching a big audiences, many of whom having never played starcraft themselfes.

tl:dr I WANT MORE HYPING AND SCREAMING for the sake of entertainment and the growth of eports.

On July 20 2014 06:47 Kaizen[7] wrote:
Pretty much sums up my sentiments. I'm starting to doubt the existence of objective, unbiased criteria that can be utilized to rank a caster. For instance, anyone who is going to cast absolutely must have "game knowledge" but how on earth can this be measured objectively? I mean, there is pretty much only one attribute that comes to mind and it isn't really a requisite for being a caster: game skill. Sure being good at the game helps and lends credence to your casting but it isn't the end all be all and in fact, some people are bound to be better at playing the game than discussing it with passion

Still, perhaps some kind of interaction between fans and casters that results in an improved experience can be gleaned from this thread. In fact, I'm going to make it my personal mission for the time being. Heres what I'm thinking:

Instead of the usual ranking casters numerically and listing generic reasons for why you like a caster we could give the whole thing some specificity and direction by presenting a series of agreed upon attributes that you rank a caster on from 1 to 10 (or maybe 1 to 5). Those numbers could be compiled and rankings generated periodically from those numbers. It won't be a true "ranking" system in that sense that its objective and unbiased but we can simply acknowledge right off the bat that objective and unbiased ranking for casters just isn't possible and that said ranks simply reflect the ever-changing opinions of the fans.

Additionally, I also think that it might be interesting to include ones personal 1v1 rank in the game. That way, we can see in a general sense how ones own skill level in the game impacts their perception of quality casting. For example, Tasteless or TotalBiscuit are likely to be the favorites for the more casual players and people new to the game whereas people who play at a higher level (Masters) might perceive another caster to be number one in their opinion.

This isn't a good or bad thing and in fact, I believe both Tasteless and TotalBiscuit have explicitly stated that they strive to deliver a professional experience that is easy to digest for those with less experience with the game. Having people include their own 1v1 rank is just another way to add some dimension to the numbers and help casters take a look at their performances and see where they might improve their games the most.

In the end, its all about creating tangible interaction between casters and fans that results in a better experience for everyone involved with the game. Casters should not take the numbers too seriously and remember they simply reflect fan consensus at any given time. Its nothing personal and in fact will be implemented with the intention of helping them gauge their skills and improve them.

Another thing I think we should do is have casters rank other casters using the system. It should be quite interesting to compare the differences in numbers. Heck, casters can even rank themselves and then compare those numbers to the ones being generated by the fans.

So then, what should we rank when looking at casters? The following things come to mind

1) Voice: I think of Tasteless and TotalBiscuit when I think about the best voices in the game right now. I'm pretty sure both of these guys have actually trained to speak "from the belly" or with proper utilization of the diaphragm. An obvious quality to rank for casters

2) Game Knowledge: Another obvious one for obvious reasons. Sure a caster might have proficient knowledge of the game in a general sense, but are they up to date on the current meta and popular builds? Might be worthwhile to have a separate category for "meta knowledge" and "game knowledge" but obviously we want to avoid having too many categories.

3) Humor Not a requisite skill but certainly those who can deliver with impromptu humor are well liked. Again, Tasteless scores pretty well here or at least has in the past

4) Passion Almost a joking reference to how people used to complain about Tasteless "losing his passion" but honestly this is a very dynamic and important quality for a caster to have. When I think passion I think about the Korean casters from Gom. When a caster has TEH PASSIONZ they have an obvious love for the game. Hard to maintain over a 4 hour period but when it is maintained its glorious to behold.

5) Play-By-Play Difficult to execute without stepping all over a partners toes but awesome when executed well and critical to high quality casting that sounds professional.

6) Co-cast Ability Does the caster do well with others? No stepping on toes, cutting off their partner, etc? In contemplating this category I began to wonder about ranking individuals vs ranking established duos. I suppose with the relevant casters they can be ranked both ways. Still, now I'm starting to wonder if anyone will care enough to rank according to these categories in the first place, let alone do it twice!

7) Professionalism Basically a balance between the various categories with the inclusion of some other aspects like quality of dress, fan interaction at events (Day 9 and Tasteless score off the chart in this aspect, seriously they are GREAT to their fans and extremely professional). Also just a general gauge of how they handle themselves on camera, while conducting interviews etc

8) Clairvoyance Ability to accurately predict game outcomes. Difficult to rank in my opinion and is kind of cutesy. I actually think this aspect of ones casting might be better encapsulated in a different category

9) Analysis Pretty self explanatory here. The accuracy of ones analysis in addition to their ability to convey said analysis

10) Overall Self explanatory. Might include this might not as overall score will be determined by numbers associated with the various categories

So basically it would work something like this. A dedicated thread will be created (or perhaps this one suitably reworked) with guidelines for ranking casters included in addition to some basic presentation criteria. I'm thinking about asking for all rankings to be based off a certain minimum number of casts. Essentially, ranking a caster or duo after you've watched them one time is silly and doesn't help. Ranks for established teams and the individuals that comprise them might also be included as separate entries.

Then, in addition to the guidelines and minimum requirements on the first post, the current overall scores for the casters will be listed. Obviously, its possible that a caster only be ranked once or twice and as a result have numbers that are higher than they would be had they received a higher number of votes. Considering this, a certain minimum number of votes will be required to be included in the rankings. By that I mean the list that results from compiling the vote numbers. Profiles for each caster might also be included as hidden tabs that one can reveal as they so desire to check out the latest numbers for a caster.

In the end the power of these ranks will be derived from the effort the community manages to muster in generating the individual "votes" for a particular caster or duo. Basically each post will count as a vote for a certain caster with the individual scores for each category including ones personal best 1v1 ranking and whether or not you consider yourself a caster. When and if the votes reach a sufficient number we can take a look at the numbers and see if lower level players rank casters differently than higher ones, how casters rank each other, etc.

So then...thoughts and feedback on the presentation of the numbers, the categories to include, whether the scores for each category should be 1-10 or 1-5, and anything else relevant would be greatly appreciated. In the end the goal is to foster interaction between fans and content producers in a way that ultimately improves the Starcraft experience for everyone. Also, to create a thread where casters can be analyzed and analyze others with some specificity in a friendly environment while also providing and/or receiving constructive criticism

4) Passion Almost a joking reference to how people used to complain about Tasteless "losing his passion" but honestly this is a very dynamic and important quality for a caster to have. When I think passion I think about the Korean casters from Gom. When a caster has TEH PASSIONZ they have an obvious love for the game. Hard to maintain over a 4 hour period but when it is maintained its glorious to behold.

Overall Self explanatory. Might include this might not as overall score will be determined by numbers associated with the various categories

7) Professionalism Basically a balance between the various categories with the inclusion of some other aspects like quality of dress, fan interaction at events (Day 9 and Tasteless score off the chart in this aspect, seriously they are GREAT to their fans and extremely professional). Also just a general gauge of how they handle themselves on camera, while conducting interviews etc

On July 21 2014 04:39 TotalBiscuit wrote:


We aren't allowed to be constructive in these threads because it will result in people flaming casters for daring to disgree with community members on the subject of casting.