There is an aspect to professional tournaments that has irritated me for a long time, one that crept into and took root in StarCraft II casting a while ago—hyperbole, and the reduction of players to a few lazy narratives and stereotypes of their play or personalities.
We have seen a lot in StarCraft II's history. Eight years worth of games, tournaments, and maps, in fact. Suggesting that something seen in any given tournament is better than everything that came before is a big claim. Are you really sure that what we saw at IEM Katowice/GSL Code S/Tournament X is the best in this game's long running history? Are you certain that you didn't just get caught up in the excitement of the moment? Are you sure you're not taking your responsibility to entertain the fans a step too far and blowing moments hugely out of proportion?
The best finals in StarCraft II’s history is most likely not the latest grand final you just witnessed. StarCraft II has seen a number of brilliant tournament climaxes. MMA vs DongRaeGu had the entire community talking for weeks. HerO and Polt played one of the most amazing PvT series to date at the criminally overlooked IEM Cologne. Life vs sOs presented us with a scenario we had never seen before on the biggest stage—two BlizzCon winners fighting it out in a nail-biter series to see who would become the first two-time champion. Mvp vs Squirtle is, to this day, commonly referred to by fans as the greatest final played in StarCraft II (an opinion that I share). Think about it for just a second, think about the story behind that series—Squirtle’s royal road, Mvp’s broken body. Think about the way it unfolded—Mvp taking a 3-0 lead, Squirtle clawing his way back in the series, that mass Battlecruiser game, that game 7. Think about the incredible tension in the air, the heartbreaking twists and turns, the constant edge-of-your-seat-excitement, and then tell me again that [insert the latest finals here] was the best we’ve ever had.
When TY's reaper distracted Stats' mothership core in the grand finals of IEM Katowice 2017, so that his widow mine drop could come in unchallenged, Artosis claimed "no one can do that". That's absolutely, totally untrue (the links provided show the same scenario unfolding in front of exact same casters). Similar distraction maneuvers are performed by even Masters players on the ladder every day. That statement effectively devalued the skill of all the other players in StarCraft II. Imagine being INnoVation—arguably the best player in the world at that time—hearing that only TY could pull off a move as simple as that. Imagine being Maru—who spent years winning impossible matches through his superb unit control and ability to take immaculate fights—hearing that ByuN was better at it than you ever were. Imagine being MMA, GuMiho, Life or Liquid'HerO—who revolutionized and mastered harass-oriented playstyles using the clumsy tools of Wings of Liberty—being told that ByuN was better at it than you ever were, after two expansions that intentionally shifted the game toward harassment and multi-tasking.
These are merely examples meant to put into perspective the absolute nature of what it means to call someone or something the best of all time, and the amount of different players and factors it ignores. Of course, excitement and hype are a key part of a cast, integral in making a game entertaining for the viewers. Unfortunately, nuance is often the first thing to be dumped in favor of hype. Games, players, finals, tournament are either the best we’ve ever seen, or just simply bad. There is a lot of uncovered ground in between. Even bad games can be fascinating, and what on paper looks like a great seven-game series can be utter garbage. And sometimes a move—like TY’s reaper distraction—really isn't all that special. And that is fine, too. More important moments will come, if you can identify them.
Another problem that develops with hyperbole is that, at a certain point, once too many moments are claimed to be the best ever, that label loses all meaning and value. It becomes a platitude. Perhaps at some point, a move will be made or a game will be played that is so incredible it truly qualifies as one of the best of all time. Then, and only then, is that label is justified. Epic moments can never be truly appreciated if everything that came before has already been blown out of proportion. Context and comparison enriches the experience of watching StarCraft II, and makes certain moments in time truly exciting and unique. There is no light without shadow. No game or player can be the best ever if all the others are as well.
Now, you may say that this is not exclusive to StarCraft II, but an esports-wide phenomenon. But that is not true. Over the past couple of years, I’ve watched a lot of Dota 2, watched and attended League Worlds, and even caught the occasional CS:GO match. One situation I distinctly remember happened at IEM Katowice 2017, when dupreeh made one of the most important plays of the grand finals by winning Astralis an eco-round with a Desert Eagle ace. It was arguably the turning point of the entire series and certainly a championship-caliber play, but not one of the casters or analysts went as far as to say that nobody else could have pulled it off. It just wasn't true—several players had the capacity to come through in the clutch, even players on dupreeh's own team. It doesn't mean that another player would have pulled it off, or that the play was by any means easy. It was simply an amazing play by an amazing player, and the casters called it as such. It made that moment feel far more genuine.
I felt similarly following the Dota 2 circuit this past year. When something amazing happens in other games and is labelled amazing, you know that it was, in fact, amazing. In StarCraft II, you often don't.
Less is not more
In the same vein I've noticed a trend that, ironically, is part of the same phenomenon, yet results in the opposite effect. Commentators and even esports writers—I fully realize that we at TeamLiquid.net are at fault as well—tell stories by reducing players to a handful of core attributes. TY is strategically intelligent, INnoVation is a mechanical monster, Dark "bends the rules of Zerg". BYUN. HAS. THE. BEST. MICRO! I criticized ESPN in the past, particularly for their coverage of ByuN during his BlizzCon run. Every single one of their articles seemed to read "ByuN has great control, therefore he is a great player". For all the praise he received through continued repetition of that narrative, that did not do ByuN justice.
Good control in a vacuum is not what made ByuN, or anyone else, a great player. It ignored his ability to read a game, his positioning, his execution of strategies and the thought process behind picking them, his army movement, his multitasking and his crisis management, even his ability to perform in high pressure situations—it's the sum of all these and more abilities that made ByuN a player worthy of a BlizzCon championship. And yet we rarely heard those abilities talked about at length, if at all. It was perfectly fine to highlight his unit control as one of his key strengths—but his micro was almost all that that we ever talked about.
Not every victory is a function of a player's most notable trait. If INnoVation uses clever mindgames to take a series, then ditch the ‘mechanical robot’ stereotype and focus on his intelligence instead. If ByuN routinely mows through a pack of slow-banelings off creep, don't try to sell us on his incredible micro. Instead, tell us what he did to force the Zerg to resort to such a desperate move. StarCraft II is an incredibly difficult game, and you’re not giving players the credit they deserve when you don't explore the many other skills they've mastered.
Every time I criticize hyperbole and simplified casting, I hear the counter-argument that it's done to cater to casual or new audiences. Having worked with Blizzard before, I know first-hand that they put a large emphasis on breaking down barriers of entry for new viewers in WCS Circuit tournaments and on establishing narratives anyone can follow without watching every tournament. On paper, that makes perfect sense. However, it assumes that newer viewers cannot appreciate complex analysis and commentary. I don’t entirely agree with that—even if a newcomer doesn't completely understand expert analysis, they can still appreciate the deep foundation it's drawing from. Furthermore, I disagree with the extent to which newcomer-friendliness is being pushed. The notion that these 'plebeian StarCraft II viewers' need the same narrative spoon-fed to them constantly throughout a series really does not hold up in my eyes.
Let’s say a player performs an impressive micro maneuver. Is it not enough to point out the quality of that move without going so far as to say nobody else could pull off the move? Go back to the dupreeh deagle ace, for example. The commentators’ excitement alone told me enough to know that this was an important moment, and I was able to come to my own conclusion myself that dupreeh was a good player, just from watching it and feeling that excitement—I was by all means new to CS:GO then. Even new viewers are intelligent enough to realize players’ traits and key strengths on their own rather quickly if they are true. ByuN, lauded for his great control, will surely produce enough good micro moves across a match for even newer viewers to come to the realization that he has good control. If he does not do this, then we should question whether he's deserving of that reputation in the first place.
This, to me, is a good example of amazing casting in such a scenario. At this point in the game, it had been well established that whoever won this fight was going to win the game. Kaelaris specifies during the fight that blink micro will be essential in it. herO wins the fight through that blink control. Any new viewer would have realized this. After the fight is won, Apollo and Kaelaris could have fallen into a frenzy praising herO’s blink control, but they didn’t. Instead, they got right back to focusing on the game to put into context what the won fight meant. Any viewer watching this game would have been left with the impression that herO won this game through great control, and come to the realization that he was a competent micro player all by themselves.
The purpose of analysis and commentary is to provide perspective that a typical fan cannot offer—insight that only experts possess. Commentary should enrich the viewing experience by putting single moments into context, explaining exactly why a player's actions are skillful and special. At the same time, commentators shouldn't force contrived narratives onto the game. To do that, the commentators and analysts must keep a nuanced, thoughtful perspective in the midst of intense matches, punctuating exciting moments without making unreasonable claims. Instead of asking us to live in a bizarro-world where target-firing slow banelings off creep is considered unbelievable, they can unlock the depth and beauty of StarCraft II for the audience.
It's a task that requires a lot of knowledge, discipline, and presence of mind in emotional situations—part of what makes casting a difficult job. I believe that all major commentators currently active in professional StarCraft II have the experience and talent to excel with this approach, but too often they succumb to the temptation of hyperbole and simplistic storytelling. I have no doubt they are doing this with good intentions, but it distorts the truth, detracts from the vast stylistic diversity in StarCraft play, and ultimately does the opposite of what commentary is supposed to do—it sells the players short.
I don't particularly agree with all the sentiments here (a good story is WORTH telling over and over again, simple or not), but I was quite entertained by your many, many caster clips. Also, how DARE you not mention the TRUE best game of all time, INnoVation vs TaeJa???
The statement that I hate the most is: "If anyone can do it, it is [Player]" It gets used in such stupid situations that make absolutely no sense at all.
"If anyone can win this late game ZvP play it is Elazer".
Well no? Serral, Dark, Rogue etc could also win this game.
Nice read, I am not sure where I stand since I like hype, but often casters are going too far for sure. If every new final is the best final ever, it really lowers the value the actually best games.
Olli on the Pylon next week maybe?
Btw shoutout to Rotti and Incontrol, they basically always keep it real and will straight out say it when they are disappointed with a final or think that the games weren't good.
Part of this comes from all the dead game talk I think that people think they have to counteract this by constantly circlejerking about how awesome the game and the players are.
100% agree with this. There's really no need for casters to dumb down the game when the remaining community at this point mostly consists of hardcore fans anyway. For me, the hype does nothing at all, it's just tiresome.
One example of a caster who didn't do this was mOOnGLaDe during Proleague. He always stayed level-headed and actually tried to explain the complexity of what was going on in a given situation. Here's hoping NoRegreT can develop in the same direction.
Is this actually that rampant? Does anyone really do what you’re describing besides tastosis, who do it often enough that you’re not supposed to take it literally? Sure, if you don’t like it then I can dig that. But it seems like a hyperbole to say it’s a rampant issue in all casting for years now.
I also don’t feel like casters are in the habit of dismissing the real reason for someone winning as just because of an unrelated strength they have. Sure, we as a community will talk about specific strengths a player has like byun is a good micro player, but I don’t think the context of those statements are “look at how that trait is singlehandedly the reason they win all their games!!” But there’s nothing wrong with identifying what makes a player unique if you’ve also explained what it actually was that won a player a game. Why is it an either or thing?
Obviously excluding myself from any of my defense of caster statements cause I’m a shit caster. But overall I really disagree with a lot of the article.
FIRST OFF, the herO vs HyuN clip of "great casting" by Kaelaris and Apollo is absolutely missing the bigger picture of "We need Apollo back!", we never gave him a proper goodbye, he absolutely was one of the best SC2 casters of all time, and I would argue could only be topped by the casting archon Tastosis, but only when in archon-mode.
Apollo leaving SC2 is about a big of a disaster as Life getting banned, and Rain moving to SC:RM.
On July 26 2018 23:29 almightytivi wrote: FIRST OFF, the herO vs HyuN clip of "great casting" by Kaelaris and Apollo is absolutely missing the bigger picture of "We need Apollo back!", we never gave him a proper goodbye, he absolutely was one of the best SC2 casters of all time, and I would argue could only be topped by the casting archon Tastosis, but only when in archon-mode.
Apollo leaving SC2 is about a big of a disaster as Life getting banned, and Rain moving to SC:RM.
He didn't totally leave SC2 and he's an important part regarding the quality of the last IEM events we got, which were excellent.
The first part of the article reads like a criticism of Artosis and Tasteless specifically, and doesn't do a great job at establishing that it is a wider problem.
On July 26 2018 23:20 feardragon wrote: Is this actually that rampant? Does anyone really do what you’re describing besides tastosis, who do it often enough that you’re not supposed to take it literally? Sure, if you don’t like it then I can dig that. But it seems like a hyperbole to say it’s a rampant issue in all casting for years now.
I also don’t feel like casters are in the habit of dismissing the real reason for someone winning as just because of an unrelated strength they have. Sure, we as a community will talk about specific strengths a player has like byun is a good micro player, but I don’t think the context of those statements are “look at how that trait is singlehandedly the reason they win all their games!!” But there’s nothing wrong with identifying what makes a player unique if you’ve also explained what it actually was that won a player a game. Why is it an either or thing?
Obviously excluding myself from any of my defense of caster statements cause I’m a shit caster. But overall I really disagree with a lot of the article.
The reason someone is winning is dismissed, even if mentioned by the casters, because of all the hyperboles. It just gets drowned. I agree that this is more of a tastosis issue, but I guess the article targeting them directly would cause more backlash :>
I did not watch heart of the swarm, but since lotv started it feels like tastosis abuse this more and more. Lately I can't watch 10 matches in a row from them before the "BEST X EVER" is dropped. I don't know when it started but it has become annoying for sure, especially knowing that they are awesome casters and that everything else they do is pretty much top tier.
So all in all, agreed 100% with the article, don't need to add examples as plenty are linked already, but theres been way more just this year. This is definitely targeting specific casters rather than all of them though.
I agree a lot with Ravi and will probably have more to add but some of the comments here...I just really feel the need to correct before further discussion is had.
On July 26 2018 23:10 Aesto wrote: 100% agree with this. There's really no need for casters to dumb down the game when the remaining community at this point mostly consists of hardcore fans anyway. For me, the hype does nothing at all, it's just tiresome.
Aboslutely not true currently. There's A LOT of new players, and new players are attracted to 1) the greatest games with the greatest casters (so people point to Tastosis) and 2) community casts that are live at peak hours (that I would argue don't have this problem but certainly have others).
On July 26 2018 23:01 Charoisaur wrote: Part of this comes from all the dead game talk I think that people think they have to counteract this by constantly circlejerking about how awesome the game and the players are.
Doubtful. We all know there was a time SC2/GSL was hurting, for a fact, thanks to the recent article on Variety(?). But c'mon. This type of hype build-up by finalist casters has been from beginning to now in SC2. Do you think every caster is sweating because they look at the crowd and there's only 20 people and they look at the stream and there's only 6.5k viewers and go 'well if I say this is the best they'll be more likely to come back!'. I really doubt it. Perhaps the current batch of passionlord casters just really do believe that's how you hype up a crowd,and that's how you respect what they truly believe is the hardest, best game in the world.
On July 26 2018 23:29 almightytivi wrote: FIRST OFF, the herO vs HyuN clip of "great casting" by Kaelaris and Apollo is absolutely missing the bigger picture of "We need Apollo back!", we never gave him a proper goodbye, he absolutely was one of the best SC2 casters of all time, and I would argue could only be topped by the casting archon Tastosis, but only when in archon-mode.
Apollo leaving SC2 is about a big of a disaster as Life getting banned, and Rain moving to SC:RM.
I'm not exactly a 'stop talking about the past' type of person but this type of stuff...man...yes, Apollo was great, but this type of thinking really sucks sometimes. I'm going to start keeping a notebook full of times where I thought Rotti 100% called the game correctly and gave a killer cast because there are AMAZING casters right now.
With those comments responded to, I would like to say in general I do not believe this to be a rampant issue in the casting of SC2. I don't mean to shut down all discussion, which I hope becomes more nuanced throughout the thread's lifespan. Even when I am aware of casters being overzealous I just shrug my shoulders and say 'yeah I hope it's hype' or 'yeah that was pretty cool'. Perhaps if Byun was still dominating I'd get frustrated with the amount of micro comments but yknow, right now, after how great Valencia was...I think it's alright.
It's a global trend in most of shows, it has to be the best this, the game of the century that , the clash of titan etc.
( taking appart tastosis as it is clearly a trademark)
I agree, that most of the time this is not very true and maybe it’s part of what the shoutcasters have to do but I always thought it’s also their way to translate their emotion of that moment.
We all have different best series, games, players, move and that’s good.
All in all, it’s good to point out that it’s not necessarily the last one the best and it’probably don t serve the game but it doesn’t hurt it too.
On July 26 2018 23:39 ArtyK wrote: This is definitely targeting specific casters rather than all of them though.
You might say Oli is using a hyperbole about how often hyperboles are used by “casters” in the scene.
You're ignoring the second part of the article entirely. This isn't just about hyperbole.
I responded to the 2nd part in my first post. Someone else responded only to tge first partvof my post so I was only responding to their argument there.
"I have no doubt they are doing this with good intentions..." Absolutely, WRONG.
I have no doubt they are doing this with upper-management intentions, corporate intentions, maybe Blizzard intentions.
This is the classic issue of those with boots-on-the-ground know what to do and would be better off if left to their own devices, but upper-management, those that sign their checks, or choose whether these casters will be invited again to cast the next tournament, keeps trying to micro-manage the shit out of our casters.
The casters are one of us... let them be like us... if it was a Meh final, let them say what we think... it was a Meh final. We don't need so much positivity. We need and want caster expertise as well on psychology of the players.
I'm SO DAMN ANNOYED that Zest getting 4-0'ed didn't have a huge 10 minute commentary on how this could happen to him, dissect, the re-dissect WTF happened... not taking ONE game, or how Maru really bested Zest 4-0, where did all of Zest skills just miss the mark? Or convince us how really Maru is that much better, or how Jin Air is the best player in the world... Maru wins, he gets what... 60-70% of the prize winnings? If Zest wins, well he gets 100% + maybe some fees or buying some dinners and gifts for those that helped him practice.
To me, a 4-0 finals doesn't deserve less commentary and analysis, it deserves more for how this could happen, how or why was Maru's play so exceptional, how or why Zest's was so failing.
Instead, we get positivity commentary about how periods of domination can be so exciting and great.
On July 26 2018 23:39 ArtyK wrote: This is definitely targeting specific casters rather than all of them though.
You might say Oli is using a hyperbole about how often hyperboles are used by “casters” in the scene.
TBF, if we mainly look at offline events and neglect online stuff tastosis make up a big part of the casting now that they also cast wcs regularly. Maybe even most of the offline casting. So the point still kinda stands that way
I agree with the general statements in this article, why hyperbole is bad for the casting, etc. Don't really think it is a widespread issue among the casters though, calling out tastosis for it is still worth something though
This article has been soooo long in the making and I really agree with a lot of it.
I think sc2 as a community sometimes has the need to validate the game, by saying stuff like 'sc2 is better than its ever been!' 'this is the best player ever!' 'this is the best game ever!'. Stuff like that just isn't true, at least not absolutely true, if you go through and look at the history of the game, and other esports don't do it. You never see LoL casters being like 'holy shit, is Royal the best team ever?' or 'wow, Kingzone are the best korean team of all time!'. Other esports are very cautious about putting things into context, even traditional sports. You don't really see commentators for regular sports ever call something the greatest ever until it is well-vetted.
It's easy to brush it under the rug and say 'oh, but it doesn't happen THAT often!' but no, it really does, and it seriously irks me - and a lot of TL writers, I imagine - to hear it so consistently in events. It's just part of how people cast, I guess.
On July 26 2018 22:47 Waxangel wrote: I don't particularly agree with all the sentiments here (a good story is WORTH telling over and over again, simple or not), but I was quite entertained by your many, many caster clips. Also, how DARE you not mention the TRUE best game of all time, INnoVation vs TaeJa???
My boy Waxangel with the real truth.
IMO Squirtle vs MVP is the most overhyped final. Parting vs Flash from HSC is the way better PvT final, IMO. Polt vs HerO in the final IEM Cologne 2014 was also at least as good (that series started off with a DRAW in game #1!)
In the same vein I've noticed a trend that, ironically, is part of the same phenomenon, yet results in the opposite effect. Commentators and even esports writers—I fully realize that we at TeamLiquid.net are at fault as well—tell stories by reducing players to a handful of core attributes.
I think this has mostly to do with viewers/fans making their own narratives. We like to see players confirm what we say. See anything from the Artosis curse to the ByuN micro, like you said. This gives an extra dimension to watching the (E-)sport. Giving an extra reason to view: "Hey will this curse happen again???". Same thing happened recently during the world cup: This goal is a: - Banger - Set piece - Own goal - etc...
Huh, that's funny, I made the exact same point several years ago, but back then I got jumped on by all the tastosis fanboys, even though it wasn't specifically about those casters. I guess nowadays, all the overly excited people have left or soemthing.
Most criticism of this I've seen so far says that this isn't something that applies to all casters. While I think that is fair as far as the hyperbole part of this piece is concerned, I think it absolutely applies to the second issue it tackles—lazy narratives.
I think most casters are 'guilty' of it, even despite not pushing these on purpose. It's just that narratives originate somewhere, and then sort of become standard repertoire for all casters. I think the problem with that standard issue of caster phrases or player stereotypes is that it often overwrites talking points that are actually more pressing. But I've talked about this in the piece, and I don't know how better to put it than I did there.
Not every victory is a function of a player's most notable trait. If INnoVation uses clever mindgames to take a series, then ditch the ‘mechanical robot’ stereotype and focus on his intelligence instead. If ByuN routinely mows through a pack of slow-banelings off creep, don't try to sell us on his incredible micro. Instead, tell us what he did to force the Zerg to resort to such a desperate move. StarCraft II is an incredibly difficult game, and you’re not giving players the credit they deserve when you don't explore the many other skills they've mastered.
My issue with it is that players become these 'one-trick ponies' (ByuN's control, Rogue wants to take every game to lategame, TY does smart tactical moves, INnoVation's mechanics are awesome, etc.). And this is something I still see in almost every tournament.
Agreed with the article, was a nice read and something that I also felt that is "amiss" in the current sc2 scene that everything is "the best that has ever been". Good to see that I am not the only one that has issues with this narrative.
I think part of the issue with the lazy narratives angle is that we have a small core of casters that functionally cast everything of note, so their narratives are going to be repeated since they were the ones to push them in the first place.
The other issue is that they don't have time to prepare something to say about every player that could possibly have a run in a weekend tournament so they just default to the defaults. Compare that to more traditional sports where casters are assigned a single game or series at a time and have days if not a week to prepare extensively. I'd say they still are just as lazy. Take a player like Brett Favre. At some point in time, he was given the label of gunslinger and any and all attempt to provide additional analysis completely stopped.
On July 26 2018 22:47 Waxangel wrote: I don't particularly agree with all the sentiments here (a good story is WORTH telling over and over again, simple or not), but I was quite entertained by your many, many caster clips. Also, how DARE you not mention the TRUE best game of all time, INnoVation vs TaeJa???
My boy Waxangel with the real truth.
IMO Squirtle vs MVP is the most overhyped final. Parting vs Flash from HSC is the way better PvT final, IMO. Polt vs HerO in the final IEM Cologne 2014 was also at least as good (that series started off with a DRAW in game #1!)
There are so many great finals that got swept under the rug. Leenock vs jjakji, Soulkey vs Innovation, sOs vs Innovation, Dear vs Maru, Puma vs MC, Life vs Mvp....
ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
On July 27 2018 01:12 Fango wrote: ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
I think the biggest difference is, when casters from other games mention this sort of thing, it's legitimate. Kennys, at one point in history, was pretty unanimously the best awper in csgo. Niko has a very, very good case to be the best person deagling. Shox is known for his one-taps. So if you do hear this sort of thing, it has meaning.
Absolutely nobody I know believes ByuN to be anywhere near the best micro of all time. Not even top 3, in most cases. Nobody believes Rogue is 'the best late game zerg ever'. I've never heard that take, and if I have, it's people parroting Tastosis. That's incredibly annoying to deal with.
On July 27 2018 00:18 Olli wrote: Most criticism of this I've seen so far says that this isn't something that applies to all casters. While I think that is fair as far as the hyperbole part of this piece is concerned, I think it absolutely applies to the second issue it tackles—lazy narratives.
I think most casters are 'guilty' of it, even despite not pushing these on purpose. It's just that narratives originate somewhere, and then sort of become standard repertoire for all casters. I think the problem with that standard issue of caster phrases or player stereotypes is that it often overwrites talking points that are actually more pressing. But I've talked about this in the piece, and I don't know how better to put it than I did there.
Not every victory is a function of a player's most notable trait. If INnoVation uses clever mindgames to take a series, then ditch the ‘mechanical robot’ stereotype and focus on his intelligence instead. If ByuN routinely mows through a pack of slow-banelings off creep, don't try to sell us on his incredible micro. Instead, tell us what he did to force the Zerg to resort to such a desperate move. StarCraft II is an incredibly difficult game, and you’re not giving players the credit they deserve when you don't explore the many other skills they've mastered.
My issue with it is that players become these 'one-trick ponies' (ByuN's control, Rogue wants to take every game to lategame, TY does smart tactical moves, INnoVation's mechanics are awesome, etc.). And this is something I still see in almost every tournament.
The lazy narrative point is a good one for sure. While it is definitely true that you can characterize players for certain things in their gameplay, it's probably not too much to ask from a professional caster to put in a little more effort and actually tell us what is going on in the specific instance we are spectating (or even tell us something about the growth of the player in the last few weeks, these guys still try to come up with new things after all) With that being said i understand why it happens though, some casters cast so many different games and players to the point where it would be a lot to ask to prepare for every single one with new insight, etc. Falling back to some of these narratives seems fine, the density of it might just be a little much these days.
On July 27 2018 01:12 Fango wrote: ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
In this particular fight it was not really a problem of micro but army composition, and the supply was probably misleading since there wasn't that much in this army at this place.
He might not be the best at engagements, but he is one of the best if not the best at micro on certain micro situations. However that won't always translate well depending on the current meta / patch, etc.
Yet, if you can abuse some units with micro to win games, ByuN does it very well and that's how he won Blizzcon (reaper micro, medivac tank micro, MM micro...), so saying that he has the best micro is not that far fetched since there were not many blizzcon won with such specific abuses afaik?
Plus I don't think large army engagements are suited to assess micro skills, it's often decided by army positionning / army composition / baits / upgrades or whatever, more than "microing well", as in mechanically micro well, where he is very good at.
most of the points are fair and while i like the extensive clip usage, it could be a bit more diverse :D as others have already pointed out, all but one clip in that first paragraph are from tastosis. there are a lot of casters like rotti, geoff, tod etc. who, i firmly believe intentionally, avoid hyperboles and try to hype things up in proper context by saying things like "this is a really great series" or "serral is playing insanely well" instead of resorting to calling everything the best ever. when they actually do believe that something might be better than everything we've seen before, they make it a discussion about comparably good plays / series'/ tournaments from the past and try to evaluate everything fairly. i think our casters in general handle this "issue" pretty well, but i agree that it can be very annoying when it happens (like with that TY distraction play, lol)
the 2nd part is a bit of a trickier topic. i wish there were more example clips because i dont really feel like i've noticed that a lot. sure, the standard narratives about the players' most evident characteristic will be repeated over and over because thats how you build those, but the only player where i've noticed the casters neglecting his other skills and qualities while overhyping his standout attritbute (micro) is byun. listing all the things a player is good at is just not a comprehensive narrative / overview for a casual viewer and as i said before, i dont think casters fail significantly often to point it out when a player won due to something else than his key strength.
i'll try to pay more attention to these issues in the upcoming events. right now i feel like its annoying when it happens, but it doenst happen often other than maybe during gsl downtime when tastosis try not to only talk about starcraft unrelated stuff. its an intersting topic and a worthy discussion though
On July 27 2018 01:12 Fango wrote: ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
I think the biggest difference is, when casters from other games mention this sort of thing, it's legitimate. Kennys, at one point in history, was pretty unanimously the best awper in csgo. Niko has a very, very good case to be the best person deagling. Shox is known for his one-taps. So if you do hear this sort of thing, it has meaning.
Absolutely nobody I know believes ByuN to be anywhere near the best micro of all time. Not even top 3, in most cases. Nobody believes Rogue is 'the best late game zerg ever'. I've never heard that take, and if I have, it's people parroting Tastosis. That's incredibly annoying to deal with.
Even so, when KennyS is doing badly or even average, the casters tend to treat him as such. I haven't seen any games like that where they will outright say he's the best awper of all time, that he breaks the rules of cs or anything like that. If he actually pulls of a ridiculous clutch, then they might make references to classic Kenny and hype him up as one of (or the) best in the world.
As far as Rogue having the best lategame ever, I believe it started with Artosis after the one lategame he beat Stats in GSL S3 last year. Rogue went on to lose most his lategames against Dear, herO, Neeb etc right after, and then Artosis would say stuff like "Rogue NEVER loses the lategame" which I find bizarre.
On July 27 2018 01:12 Fango wrote: ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
In this particular fight it was not really a problem of micro but army composition, and the supply was probably misleading since there wasn't that much in this army at this place.
He might not be the best at engagements, but he is one of the best if not the best at micro on certain micro situations. However that won't always translate well depending on the current meta / patch, etc.
Yet, if you can abuse some units with micro to win games, ByuN does it very well and that's how he won Blizzcon (reaper micro, medivac tank micro, MM micro...), so saying that he has the best micro is not that far fetched since there were not many blizzcon won with such specific abuses afaik?
Plus I don't think large army engagements are suited to assess micro skills, it's often decided by army positionning / army composition / baits / upgrades or whatever, more than "microing well", as in mechanically micro well, where he is very good at.
PartinG and Maru are miles above of what anything ByuN has done with micro. No era has ever featured the sort of abuse-able tricks that this era has; PartinG/Maru won, and won hard, with much more difficult tricks than reaper micro with LotV reaper. Nobody won blizzcon with those sort of micro abuses because the game didn't feature things that are as busted as early LotV reapers, or lifting tanks.
On July 27 2018 01:12 Fango wrote: ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
In this particular fight it was not really a problem of micro but army composition, and the supply was probably misleading since there wasn't that much in this army at this place.
Not just that fight, for the entire rest of that game ByuN takes bad engagements. Sometimes horrific ones that lost him the map. Yet Tastosis kept talking about him being the best with micro. Even when ByuN was behind, Tasteless thinks he's gonna win of control alone, and unless he was watching a different game that's a more than a bold statement to make.
On July 27 2018 01:28 Fango wrote: As far as Rogue having the best lategame ever, I believe it started with Artosis after the one lategame he beat Stats in GSL S3 last year. Rogue went on to lose most his lategames against Dear, herO, Neeb etc right after, and then Artosis would say stuff like "Rogue NEVER loses the lategame" which I find bizarre.
Rogue was winning a lot of late game situations in smaller tournaments. I'd have put his win rate at around 50% which is much less than the hype would suggest and something I doubt Tastosis knew since they don't watch non-GSL stuff but still a lot higher than other Zerg players. Possibly because they avoided those situations like the plague while Rogue didn't.
casters are basically TV presenters, which means their job is to hype the game. they're paid by people who have sponsors who want viewers to be excited to watch. yes, we all love when commentary is realistic and not overhyped, but a commentator's job is literally to be a hype man for the game. not to discount what you've written, but our world is funded by advertisers. i don't agree with it, but it's an ubiquitous reality
also, critiquing casting as someone who doesn't cast is a bit masturbatory by nature, and i say this as someone who has done it before too. they do their best and they say things based on their personalities. it's absurd to expect any caster to ever change how they cast to please fans unless it's obvious things like "don't make jokes about cancer"
On July 27 2018 01:12 Fango wrote: ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
Nobody believes Rogue is 'the best late game zerg ever'. I've never heard that take, and if I have, it's people parroting Tastosis. That's incredibly annoying to deal with.
Might be some truth to Rogue's lategame actually being that good. 2012 Symbol, RorO, Soulkey and perhaps prime Dark are the only ones who might've been better than him.
On July 27 2018 01:45 brickrd wrote: casters are basically TV presenters, which means their job is to hype the game. they're paid by people who have sponsors who want viewers to be excited to watch. yes, we all love when commentary is realistic and not overhyped, but a commentator's job is literally to be a hype man for the game. not to discount what you've written, but our world is funded by advertisers. i don't agree with it, but it's an ubiquitous reality
also, critiquing casting as someone who doesn't cast is a bit masturbatory by nature, and i say this as someone who has done it before too. they do their best and they say things based on their personalities. it's absurd to expect any caster to ever change how they cast to please fans unless it's obvious things like "don't make jokes about cancer"
Yes, their job is to hype the game. Which means they should do so as well as possible. There's good hype and bad hype. Also, the 'you can't critique X unless you have already done it' mentality is kinda stupid. Should none of us critique players then, since they're all obviously better than us?
On July 27 2018 01:45 brickrd wrote: casters are basically TV presenters, which means their job is to hype the game. they're paid by people who have sponsors who want viewers to be excited to watch. yes, we all love when commentary is realistic and not overhyped, but a commentator's job is literally to be a hype man for the game. not to discount what you've written, but our world is funded by advertisers. i don't agree with it, but it's an ubiquitous reality
also, critiquing casting as someone who doesn't cast is a bit masturbatory by nature, and i say this as someone who has done it before too. they do their best and they say things based on their personalities. it's absurd to expect any caster to ever change how they cast to please fans unless it's obvious things like "don't make jokes about cancer"
Yes, their job is to hype the game. Which means they should do so as well as possible. There's good hype and bad hype. Also, the 'you can't critique X unless you have already done it' mentality is kinda stupid. Should none of us critique players then, since they're all obviously better than us?
We shouldn't critique casters, players, the cooks at restaurants, the bagger at the grocery store who doesn't put the bread on top, politicians who spend all their time bickering or sucking up to special interests, the truck driver who cuts us off, the writer who delivers the dumb plot twist, or anyone in a field in which we aren't gainfully employed. After all, since they are paid to do it, they know better and never make mistakes that a layman could identify.
On July 27 2018 01:12 Fango wrote: ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
Nobody believes Rogue is 'the best late game zerg ever'. I've never heard that take, and if I have, it's people parroting Tastosis. That's incredibly annoying to deal with.
Might be some truth to Rogue's lategame actually being that good. 2012 Symbol, RorO, Soulkey and perhaps prime Dark are the only ones who might've been better than him.
He's certainly among the best lategame Zergs but to say he's THE best ever you'd have to think with absolute certainty he's heads and shoulders above the players you mentioned and that's just absurd. Also you forgot Byul who won lategames against one of the most imbalanced compositions in the game's history.
On July 26 2018 22:47 Waxangel wrote: I don't particularly agree with all the sentiments here (a good story is WORTH telling over and over again, simple or not), but I was quite entertained by your many, many caster clips. Also, how DARE you not mention the TRUE best game of all time, INnoVation vs TaeJa???
On July 27 2018 01:45 brickrd wrote: casters are basically TV presenters, which means their job is to hype the game. they're paid by people who have sponsors who want viewers to be excited to watch. yes, we all love when commentary is realistic and not overhyped, but a commentator's job is literally to be a hype man for the game. not to discount what you've written, but our world is funded by advertisers. i don't agree with it, but it's an ubiquitous reality
also, critiquing casting as someone who doesn't cast is a bit masturbatory by nature, and i say this as someone who has done it before too. they do their best and they say things based on their personalities. it's absurd to expect any caster to ever change how they cast to please fans unless it's obvious things like "don't make jokes about cancer"
Yes, their job is to hype the game. Which means they should do so as well as possible. There's good hype and bad hype. Also, the 'you can't critique X unless you have already done it' mentality is kinda stupid. Should none of us critique players then, since they're all obviously better than us?
There's a way to do it correctly that is respectful.
Calling out that a player misread a situation or didn't react appropriately isn't disrespectful. Saying a player isn't as good as X level competition is something else entirely.
As far as the article is concerned.
I think your second part of the article has some merit. There is a LOT about the game that gets glossed over or not properly respected in most SC2 casts, however as you very accurately pointed out, casters have a duty to cater to newer players or people that don't play altogether. Part of that involves hyping the game up, although I'll agree that saying "the best ever" dilutes the meaning of the phrase if it's used too often.
However I don't think any of that criticism is worth a full article about it. I don't think it's that big of a problem.
This article is so true, please casters we love you, really, but sometimes... there is too much over hype, for me just rotti does justice. But the best part is not the oeverhype, but the not dumbing down the plays and the mind games or players perception of whats going on i nthe game.
specifically about that example: "Instead of asking us to live in a bizarro-world where target-firing slow banelings off creep ..."
I feel like Artosis does put it into the perspective of the game quite ok and the micro was amazing. but I completely get your point. Out of those two casters, I feel like it's typically more the Tasteless who is riding out the hyperbole a bit too much.
When recently I heard more of Noregret in GSL casting, I really came to appreciate his more calm and analytical style.
I don't have a problem with casters saying something "is the best its ever been" considering all of the changes StarCraft II has had over the years. Had the game been the same this whole time, then yeah I would be annoyed with the "greatest ever" hype, but with an ever changing game I think it's fine, and a lot of those clips I actually agree with. It doesn't mean the excitement / anxioness / happiness I felt during Squirtle vs MVP finals means nothing now, but I enjoy the game interactions in LotV much more than I did in WoL and HotS eras.
As far as simplified casting goes, I do think there's a lot of repetition with stereotyping players, but in some cases I think it's justified. I don't get annoyed when someone hypes ByuN sniping banes off creep, to the trained eye that isn't all that special, but it still LOOKS cool and the casters should definitely hype the moment, maybe just tone down the "GOAT" analysis.
Tastosis gets criticized quite heavily in here, probably rightfully so I just want to mention that despite this they are still by far my favourite casters and get me hyped like no other ones while also having the best in-depth analysis.
I wonder why they feel the need to always use those hyperboles though. if they would just replace "The best" with "one of the best" it would already annoy me far less.
This article is only really talking about Tastosis as far as I can tell, no-one else really does this. I do agree that they overhype things, but getting the perfect balance between too much hype and too little is easier said than done. No-one wants boring casts.
It's easy to criticise, but proposing a solution is more difficult. In the one clip you posted showing how it should be done, I actually found the casting a little more annoying than the Tastosis clips. Apollo & Kaelaris were basically just repeating what was happening and screaming over it. Not sure what you found so impressive about that. I don't mean to criticise them, I'm just saying casting is a difficult job to do well.
As I say though, Tastosis are probably still the best SC2 casters, but I agree they could improve their casting a little by toning down some of the over the top praise for players/tournaments.
On July 27 2018 01:12 Fango wrote: ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
Nobody believes Rogue is 'the best late game zerg ever'. I've never heard that take, and if I have, it's people parroting Tastosis. That's incredibly annoying to deal with.
Might be some truth to Rogue's lategame actually being that good. 2012 Symbol, RorO, Soulkey and perhaps prime Dark are the only ones who might've been better than him.
any discussion about late game Zerg should not include the second half of 2012. The skill involved in lategame Zerg in that period was far lower than at pretty much any other other point in Starcraft history, including early WoL.
Also in my experience, a lot of us that have been deeply involved in SC2 for years are really grumpy about over-hyped casters (and just bad strategic analysis in general).
I think this was a wonderful article. Not to be hyperbolic(heh), but I think the points raised by this article simply cannot be overstated. There's a really strong desire people have - not just casters - to have been around for "the best X moment ever", and to be able to tell the story, but as the article goes to great lengths to explain, it often backfires in a spectacular way. If every moment is special, then none are. Agree with article 100%. Not more than that though, let's not get carried away.
On July 26 2018 22:47 Waxangel wrote: I don't particularly agree with all the sentiments here (a good story is WORTH telling over and over again, simple or not), but I was quite entertained by your many, many caster clips. Also, how DARE you not mention the TRUE best game of all time, INnoVation vs TaeJa???
? You mean Life vs Dream?
Slightly irrelevant to the overall direction of the thread, but I just want to maybe give a perhaps slightly "outsider" perspective on the discussion at hand. As a BW player that nevertheless watches all of the "Best Games of the Year" that TL puts out, I found Life vs. Dream to be the one that really appealed to me the most. Not that Innovation vs. TaeJa was a bad game by any means (it's up there for me as well), or many of the others that have been mentioned. But, if I were to pick THE ONE, it would be this one.
'The purpose of analysis and commentary is to provide perspective that a typical fan cannot offer—insight that only experts possess'
I think this is the problem, in most sports this is really lacking, commentary is always dumbed down and largely observational, this is partly why independent blogs have sprung up to cater for an audience who want real analysis.
On July 27 2018 03:35 Charoisaur wrote: Tastosis gets criticized quite heavily in here, probably rightfully so I just want to mention that despite this they are still by far my favourite casters and get me hyped like no other ones while also having the best in-depth analysis.
NO!!! you can't possibly think they have a good in-depth analysis of the game. Just listen to Rotti or NoRegret cast and you'll hear what you have been missing. Especially Tastless, he has been out of the loop far too long. I don't play, just watch, and I find it bad
On July 27 2018 01:12 Fango wrote: ByuN and Rogue are proabably the biggest examples I can think of. Just because someone wins blizzcon and prefers a certain style doesn't make them the best in history at it. You never see this in other esports (from what I've seen at least). CSGO casters might say "we've seen incredible shots from X in the past", but not "X is the best awper ever in counterstrike"
Even when he's massively behind Tasteless still seemed to think he can win just because of ByuN micro, although I'm not sure whether he genuinely believes this or is just saying it for the hype.
Nobody believes Rogue is 'the best late game zerg ever'. I've never heard that take, and if I have, it's people parroting Tastosis. That's incredibly annoying to deal with.
Might be some truth to Rogue's lategame actually being that good. 2012 Symbol, RorO, Soulkey and perhaps prime Dark are the only ones who might've been better than him.
He's had some good lategames. But nothing to suggest he's the GOAT. Artosis started that narrative after GSL S3/Super tournament 2 last year because of (Iiterally) one or two games that Rogue actually won against Stats' skytoss.
By blizzcon he was already saying that Rogue "NEVER loses in the lategame". Even though most of the games he lost to Dear, herO, and Neeb around that time were, in fact, when the game went late.
Dark's lategame is much more reliable and well rounded, as it has been for years. Even ByuL would have more of a case than Rogue. Any zerg from 2012 doesn't count. And that's forgetting about other races (Rain, Zest, Stats, Taeja, TY, and now Maru have all done incredible things in the lategame).
As much as I agree with the general sentiment in this article, the Irony in calling it "The Best Article in the World" which was obviously chosen for that reason (as well as clickbait), gets me.
Lead by example and all that, calling something out then using the same tactics kinda feels off.
On July 27 2018 04:48 Tictock wrote: As much as I agree with the general sentiment in this article, the Irony in calling it "The Best Article in the World" which was obviously chosen for that reason (as well as clickbait), gets me.
Lead by example and all that, calling something out then using the same tactics kinda feels off.
On July 27 2018 03:35 Charoisaur wrote: Tastosis gets criticized quite heavily in here, probably rightfully so I just want to mention that despite this they are still by far my favourite casters and get me hyped like no other ones while also having the best in-depth analysis.
NO!!! you can't possibly think they have a good in-depth analysis of the game. Just listen to Rotti or NoRegret cast and you'll hear what you have been missing. Especially Tastless, he has been out of the loop far too long. I don't play, just watch, and I find it bad
Rotti and Noregret have good in-depth analysis about the matchups that include the race they play but they're lacking knowledge in the other matchups. Artosis has incredible understanding of all matchups. Tasteless is just there for the hype and jokes but that's okay.
I like hype. This article is just worthless. I love when casters hype and it has nothing to do with reality. Who cares if it is not realistically the best tournament ever! It is the best tournament ever right now! And this is the best micro right now etc. We want to see world class things and our world class casters hype well! Without those casters I would not watch this game at all! Worthless pieace of text.
On July 27 2018 05:14 435 wrote: I like hype. This article is just worthless. I love when casters hype and it has nothing to do with reality. Who cares if it is not realistically the best tournament ever! It is the best tournament ever right now! And this is the best micro right now etc. We want to see world class things and our world class casters hype well! Without those casters I would not watch this game at all! Worthless pieace of text.
This doesn't make sense. Ever and right now are opposite things. I get where you're coming from, I like hype too but I think we can hype the game up without stating blatantly untrue things.
On July 27 2018 05:14 435 wrote: I like hype. This article is just worthless. I love when casters hype and it has nothing to do with reality. Who cares if it is not realistically the best tournament ever! It is the best tournament ever right now! And this is the best micro right now etc. We want to see world class things and our world class casters hype well! Without those casters I would not watch this game at all! Worthless pieace of text.
But this is the Best Article in the World right now, how can you say all of those things you said? I mean, clearly you're not grounded in reality as you said, so why can you make an allowance for calling one thing the best micro ever or the best tournament ever, then disagree that this is the best article ever right now? Hypocrite.
I think the over-hyping thing is a stylistic choice for Tastosis, and perhaps a certain dutch who loves Serral oh so much. (Note: I like very much both Serral AND the casting of that particular dutch, I just think they might not be the match made in heaven).
But personally I find myself quite used to hyperbole, and don't feel the need of overthinking whether everything I'm hearing is completely accurate and not, perhaps, massively exaggerated for the sake of hyping.
When it comes to the desire for insightful and complex analysis mid/post game, there I do agree with OP. I would love to hear a sentence every now and then, that I wasn't expecting. A deep thought about the fundamentals of a particular game scenario or something. And I also think, like OP does, that it would only make beginner viewers appreciate that these guys actually might know what they are talking about.
Very interesting article! Certainly gave me something to think about.
I think you guys have already done a pretty good job of explaining both sides of the argument, so I don't really have a whole lot to add.
I will say that taste is subjective, which is why I think there is so much disagreement on this topic. I guess I'll note that I do think it's possible that the people who speak in hyperbole really do have conviction in what they're saying. While it's possible that they could be saying what they say just to generate excitement, I don't think it'd be a hard sell to me that the casters genuinely believe that X was the best game/player/series in history.
On July 27 2018 09:03 [F_]aths wrote: "Imagine being Maru—who spent years winning impossible matches"
He did not. No-one did the impossible ever. He might did the improbable, but not the impossible. No-one did, not even once, ever.
I think the hyperbole is quite clear and appropriate there. Maru spent years winning games that would have been impossible (or at least highly improbable) for literally any other player.
Maybe there are multiple best players in the world in different situations? One must consider fact that some players play against the best players in the world (later in bracket/pools). The fmeans that those players themselves are the best players in the world that day. And therefore their exhibition of victory against the best players in the worlds is that of the best in the world. They came into the best situations in the world. Hence, their prior plays are the best in the world after victory. Their current play today is the best in the world after victory.
The best part about the hype is that my wife actually tires of hearing it and all the hyperbole when I've got the games on the TV. She definitely has her preference in SC2 casters for the very reasons in this article lol. Although some of her caster bias may come from her attraction to Germans (quarter German myself ) So maybe it is good for new comers, but it can have negative impact on those who hang out with us as we watch.
While I do think this article addresses a real and valid problem in caster overhype, Tastosis are obviously being paid to cast, and that includes hyping things up. I vividly recall one instance where Player X's situation was so hopeless that Tasteless bluntly admits that even as the hype man, he can't find a way to sell Player X's situation. Tastosis have no way of measuring how much or little hype the audience wants at any given moment, so erring on the side of too much is forgivable in my eyes. Faulting Tastosis for doing their job as they see best seems like quite a stretch.
Personally, I am far more annoyed by the persistent and systemic overhype of players by the community. Especially fan favorites. Whenever certain players win a game, or pull off a sick micro clip, or so on and so forth, it seems as though the community immediately rushes out to proclaim them the "GOAT this" or "Bonjwa that." This is made painfully obvious in the specific case of reddit's upvote system–I guess they call it a circlejerk for a reason. While I can understand people getting caught up in the moment and getting swept away by hype, it's still pretty damn cringeworthy to watch when it happens every single time. And they have no excuse of just doing their jobs. Are they fans or fanatics? (yes I know the etymology)
I'm less inclined to worry about the overuse of player narratives, since progamers are people like any other, and people are complex. Casters need handy narratives to frame the context of a game. That's not to say the narrative should override the reality of what's playing out on-screen, but shoehorning specific players–to some extent–doesn't strike me as a huge problem.
Something that tends to happen with Tastosis, but I'm sure with others also, is that they often decide what the narrative of a game is and then try and stick to it, rather than let the game follow its own narrative. Most of the time it goes unnoticed because you can kind of tell what most series are going to be about, but when something unexpected happens and they have to course correct everything they'd been saying it looks quite bad. Last time I noticed that was Dear vs soO in Ro16 season 2.
This is a really elaborate way of saying you don't like over-exaggeration during casts. But it got me to watch Squirtles archon toilet again so I'm fine with it.
[clip of herO vs hyun ending]The purpose of analysis and commentary is to provide perspective that a typical fan cannot offer—insight that only experts possess. Commentary should enrich the viewing experience by putting single moments into context, explaining exactly why a player's actions are skillful and special.
But what makes this particular minute of cast great (for me) is not expert analysis, it's the passion and emotion from Apollo and Kaelaris. "Blink like you've never blinked before herO!' and that cry after the dust settles with a handful stalkers left 'wooohooaoorrg'. and Kaelaris just losing his mind 'omg omg omg'. Like you can imagine them jumping around just by the sound of it, that's how much energy they bring to this finale moment.
It's hard to believe that this is so rare in other esports, since it seems to permeate conversations about anything, lately. The best restaurant ever, the best movie ever, "simply the greatest piece of music ever composed, imo", blah blah.
They could tone it down a little. Arty gives good in depth commentary imo. Tasteless seems a bit more out of the loop. I've watched all GSL vods recently, and he mostly just adds a lot of unrelated stuff.
Maybe their dynamic has grown quite stale after all these years. They need to take a different approach, or challenge themselves more.
On July 27 2018 11:21 BisuDagger wrote: The best part about the hype is that my wife actually tires of hearing it and all the hyperbole when I've got the games on the TV. She definitely has her preference in SC2 casters for the very reasons in this article lol. Although some of her caster bias may come from her attraction to Germans (quarter German myself ) So maybe it is good for new comers, but it can have negative impact on those who hang out with us as we watch.
Anecdotally on the opposite end, my wife only enjoys watching Starcraft with me when we watch Artosis because she finds him funny and his love for the game comes off as genuine.
I agree with the points made in the article but I do think they paint a bleaker portrait of that casting style than the reality is. I also think that very high level players are always more upset at the lack of super in depth analysis. I think this article could serve as a guideline for casters to use for improving their craft because nothing that has been noted is flat out wrong, but I don't think that certain casters are unwatchable because of the hype and hyperbole as some people have suggested.
This is a great write-up and useful just for the discussion it provokes in the community. Thanks for the content!
On July 27 2018 11:21 BisuDagger wrote: The best part about the hype is that my wife actually tires of hearing it and all the hyperbole when I've got the games on the TV. She definitely has her preference in SC2 casters for the very reasons in this article lol. Although some of her caster bias may come from her attraction to Germans (quarter German myself ) So maybe it is good for new comers, but it can have negative impact on those who hang out with us as we watch.
Anecdotally on the opposite end, my wife only enjoys watching Starcraft with me when we watch Artosis because she finds him funny and his love for the game comes off as genuine.
I agree with the points made in the article but I do think they paint a bleaker portrait of that casting style than the reality is. I also think that very high level players are always more upset at the lack of super in depth analysis. I think this article could serve as a guideline for casters to use for improving their craft because nothing that has been noted is flat out wrong, but I don't think that certain casters are unwatchable because of the hype and hyperbole as some people have suggested.
This is a great write-up and useful just for the discussion it provokes in the community. Thanks for the content!
Since you mentioned Artosis(Tastosis) specifically, I actually enjoy their Brood War casting very much despite being a 20 year veteran of the game. I do not require their in depth analysis because I think they are having a lot of fun when casting the game. They are enjoyable as SC2 casters too, but I think they do fall in the hype trap or the focus on specific skill type casting just a bit more.
On July 27 2018 11:21 BisuDagger wrote: The best part about the hype is that my wife actually tires of hearing it and all the hyperbole when I've got the games on the TV. She definitely has her preference in SC2 casters for the very reasons in this article lol. Although some of her caster bias may come from her attraction to Germans (quarter German myself ) So maybe it is good for new comers, but it can have negative impact on those who hang out with us as we watch.
Anecdotally on the opposite end, my wife only enjoys watching Starcraft with me when we watch Artosis because she finds him funny and his love for the game comes off as genuine.
I agree with the points made in the article but I do think they paint a bleaker portrait of that casting style than the reality is. I also think that very high level players are always more upset at the lack of super in depth analysis. I think this article could serve as a guideline for casters to use for improving their craft because nothing that has been noted is flat out wrong, but I don't think that certain casters are unwatchable because of the hype and hyperbole as some people have suggested.
This is a great write-up and useful just for the discussion it provokes in the community. Thanks for the content!
Since you mentioned Artosis(Tastosis) specifically, I actually enjoy their Brood War casting very much despite being a 20 year veteran of the game. I do not require their in depth analysis because I think they are having a lot of fun when casting the game. They are enjoyable as SC2 casters too, but I think they do fall in the hype trap or the focus on specific skill type casting just a bit more.
I was actually curious what some of the Brood War veterans thought about their casting style. As someone who was introduced to esports with SC2 they have made me fall in love with competitive BW. I can't play at all, I don't understand the intricacies beyond what they share with me, but the game is so beautiful and the skills of the players are so amazing that the ASL and KSL now have become my favorite esports broadcasts to watch. I don't know if in depth analysis would be something I would appreciate more or if it would have pushed me away.
Something that I think is left out of the discussion is that perhaps more hype is needed in SC2 because the observing interface gives us so much detail. It's been mentioned before, but the suspense in BW and the narratives within individual games are at a completely different level than in SC2 because of how little information you have while watching. This might only be a minor factor but I believe it actually makes the caster's job harder in SC2 because the interface does a lot of the work for them. The second half of the article concerning oversimplification might be the answer to this issue though. It might be even more important to paint a broader narrative of the player's skills and their previous results if you have less tools to build a narrative in each series.
I like how people are defending it as "hype", well yes ofc it is used to hype things up but there would be a lot of possible techniques between "this game is shit" and "this is the best game ever" to generate excitement. Is it really too much to ask to get it a little more nuanced?
Olli, I've heard similar things said in commentary enough in SC2 that it definitely strikes a chord with me. Hardcore analysis does it for me while over the top hype doesn't. Sometimes it's fine.
On July 27 2018 11:21 BisuDagger wrote: The best part about the hype is that my wife actually tires of hearing it and all the hyperbole when I've got the games on the TV. She definitely has her preference in SC2 casters for the very reasons in this article lol. Although some of her caster bias may come from her attraction to Germans (quarter German myself ) So maybe it is good for new comers, but it can have negative impact on those who hang out with us as we watch.
She must’ve been sad af when Khaldor left for Heroes of the Storm.
On July 27 2018 23:44 zealotstim wrote: I just wanna hear Tastosis laugh at each other's jokes and imagine how cool it would be to be friends with them.
To be perfectly honest, I love them for their humor and the casual banter more than for ingame knowledge and analysis, and I totally agree with you :D
On July 27 2018 11:21 BisuDagger wrote: The best part about the hype is that my wife actually tires of hearing it and all the hyperbole when I've got the games on the TV. She definitely has her preference in SC2 casters for the very reasons in this article lol. Although some of her caster bias may come from her attraction to Germans (quarter German myself ) So maybe it is good for new comers, but it can have negative impact on those who hang out with us as we watch.
Anecdotally on the opposite end, my wife only enjoys watching Starcraft with me when we watch Artosis because she finds him funny and his love for the game comes off as genuine.
I agree with the points made in the article but I do think they paint a bleaker portrait of that casting style than the reality is. I also think that very high level players are always more upset at the lack of super in depth analysis. I think this article could serve as a guideline for casters to use for improving their craft because nothing that has been noted is flat out wrong, but I don't think that certain casters are unwatchable because of the hype and hyperbole as some people have suggested.
This is a great write-up and useful just for the discussion it provokes in the community. Thanks for the content!
Since you mentioned Artosis(Tastosis) specifically, I actually enjoy their Brood War casting very much despite being a 20 year veteran of the game. I do not require their in depth analysis because I think they are having a lot of fun when casting the game. They are enjoyable as SC2 casters too, but I think they do fall in the hype trap or the focus on specific skill type casting just a bit more.
I was actually curious what some of the Brood War veterans thought about their casting style. As someone who was introduced to esports with SC2 they have made me fall in love with competitive BW. I can't play at all, I don't understand the intricacies beyond what they share with me, but the game is so beautiful and the skills of the players are so amazing that the ASL and KSL now have become my favorite esports broadcasts to watch. I don't know if in depth analysis would be something I would appreciate more or if it would have pushed me away.
Something that I think is left out of the discussion is that perhaps more hype is needed in SC2 because the observing interface gives us so much detail. It's been mentioned before, but the suspense in BW and the narratives within individual games are at a completely different level than in SC2 because of how little information you have while watching. This might only be a minor factor but I believe it actually makes the caster's job harder in SC2 because the interface does a lot of the work for them. The second half of the article concerning oversimplification might be the answer to this issue though. It might be even more important to paint a broader narrative of the player's skills and their previous results if you have less tools to build a narrative in each series.
The finer details of what makes them fun to listen to is that unless the game is super standard, they are actually very scientific about their casting. Despite Brood War being around so long, the slightest variations get your mind going, "wait a second, I don't see a spire. What is the players motive now?" And then the two of the pull each other deeper into trying to discover why this nuance is so impactful. To me, I personally love that they sound like youth on a search to discover something new. That's why I love casting Brood War too. By the fifth game in a best of five, I've learned so much about each player and how they define their matchup by the end of the series and I'm left thinking about it for days afterward. (You can see my understanding grow so much over these five games ) . I think tastosis get drawn in this way too.
On July 27 2018 22:22 The_Red_Viper wrote: I like how people are defending it as "hype", well yes ofc it is used to hype things up but there would be a lot of possible techniques between "this game is shit" and "this is the best game ever" to generate excitement. Is it really too much to ask to get it a little more nuanced?
i think you're missing the finer point here, which is that HYPE is designed to attract non-hardcore viewers. people who love starcraft are very likely to watch games for the players and the tournaments whether the caster is an incredible analyst or not. i would be really shocked, though, if every single major SC2 caster who has worked major tournaments hadn't been heavily coached to introduce elements of "hype" and making games seem close when they're over as a specific measure to draw interest from people who aren't normally into starcraft. it's kind of like how blizzard has to make the game playable for lower league people while simultaneously balancing it at the top levels. a hardcore base can keep a game alive for a long time, but you never stop trying to expand that base, because with no growth anything will die.
i'm not making a personal commentary on what style of casting i like or think is "correct," but like i said in my earlier post, everything is driven by money and sponsors, and sponsors don't want to sponsor a game with a hardcore userbase that doesn't get bigger or draw young fans (this is another major point, guys - most of us, i think, are at minimum in our 20s, and younger demographics are highly prized. younger people are more likely to respond to loud and outrageous personalities. just look at youtube!)
also, casters are human. it's probably just more fun to hype games up, i'm sure tastosis for example get bored just reciting memorized facts about strategies. to have done the job for so long they must enjoy on some level being entertainers, getting a little loud, using catchphrases, etc. i don't get what people expect casters to do? are they supposed to be stopping and stuttering during games to catch themselves before saying something "hypey," and instead try to come up with another comment on the fly, leaving dead air? again, this is why i don't think people who haven't been on camera as LIVE PRESENTERS should criticize. you don't know what it's actually like until you stand up there with the pressure of keeping the show going
On July 27 2018 22:22 The_Red_Viper wrote: I like how people are defending it as "hype", well yes ofc it is used to hype things up but there would be a lot of possible techniques between "this game is shit" and "this is the best game ever" to generate excitement. Is it really too much to ask to get it a little more nuanced?
i think you're missing the finer point here, which is that HYPE is designed to attract non-hardcore viewers. people who love starcraft are very likely to watch games for the players and the tournaments whether the caster is an incredible analyst or not. i would be really shocked, though, if every single major SC2 caster who has worked major tournaments hadn't been heavily coached to introduce elements of "hype" and making games seem close when they're over as a specific measure to draw interest from people who aren't normally into starcraft. it's kind of like how blizzard has to make the game playable for lower league people while simultaneously balancing it at the top levels. a hardcore base can keep a game alive for a long time, but you never stop trying to expand that base, because with no growth anything will die.
i'm not making a personal commentary on what style of casting i like or think is "correct," but like i said in my earlier post, everything is driven by money and sponsors, and sponsors don't want to sponsor a game with a hardcore userbase that doesn't get bigger or draw young fans (this is another major point, guys - most of us, i think, are at minimum in our 20s, and younger demographics are highly prized. younger people are more likely to respond to loud and outrageous personalities. just look at youtube!)
also, casters are human. it's probably just more fun to hype games up, i'm sure tastosis for example get bored just reciting memorized facts about strategies. to have done the job for so long they must enjoy on some level being entertainers, getting a little loud, using catchphrases, etc. i don't get what people expect casters to do? are they supposed to be stopping and stuttering during games to catch themselves before saying something "hypey," and instead try to come up with another comment on the fly, leaving dead air? again, this is why i don't think people who haven't been on camera as LIVE PRESENTERS should criticize. you don't know what it's actually like until you stand up there with the pressure of keeping the show going
The argument is not as black and white as 'hype is bad'. CSGO casters are crazy hype. Melee casters are incredibly hype. Hell, even League casters can get excited pretty well at times. The issue is that, in sc2 in particular, the hype feels undeserved, and it makes me roll my eyes incredibly often to hear some of the stuff I end up hearing. It's just not fun to watch sc2 when every few minutes something flat-out incorrect gets said.
On July 27 2018 22:22 The_Red_Viper wrote: I like how people are defending it as "hype", well yes ofc it is used to hype things up but there would be a lot of possible techniques between "this game is shit" and "this is the best game ever" to generate excitement. Is it really too much to ask to get it a little more nuanced?
i think you're missing the finer point here, which is that HYPE is designed to attract non-hardcore viewers. people who love starcraft are very likely to watch games for the players and the tournaments whether the caster is an incredible analyst or not. i would be really shocked, though, if every single major SC2 caster who has worked major tournaments hadn't been heavily coached to introduce elements of "hype" and making games seem close when they're over as a specific measure to draw interest from people who aren't normally into starcraft. it's kind of like how blizzard has to make the game playable for lower league people while simultaneously balancing it at the top levels. a hardcore base can keep a game alive for a long time, but you never stop trying to expand that base, because with no growth anything will die.
i'm not making a personal commentary on what style of casting i like or think is "correct," but like i said in my earlier post, everything is driven by money and sponsors, and sponsors don't want to sponsor a game with a hardcore userbase that doesn't get bigger or draw young fans (this is another major point, guys - most of us, i think, are at minimum in our 20s, and younger demographics are highly prized. younger people are more likely to respond to loud and outrageous personalities. just look at youtube!)
also, casters are human. it's probably just more fun to hype games up, i'm sure tastosis for example get bored just reciting memorized facts about strategies. to have done the job for so long they must enjoy on some level being entertainers, getting a little loud, using catchphrases, etc. i don't get what people expect casters to do? are they supposed to be stopping and stuttering during games to catch themselves before saying something "hypey," and instead try to come up with another comment on the fly, leaving dead air? again, this is why i don't think people who haven't been on camera as LIVE PRESENTERS should criticize. you don't know what it's actually like until you stand up there with the pressure of keeping the show going
The argument is not as black and white as 'hype is bad'. CSGO casters are crazy hype. Melee casters are incredibly hype. Hell, even League casters can get excited pretty well at times. The issue is that, in sc2 in particular, the hype feels undeserved, and it makes me roll my eyes incredibly often to hear some of the stuff I end up hearing. It's just not fun to watch sc2 when every few minutes something flat-out incorrect gets said.
Yeah exactly that was the point i was trying to make. This isn't about hype being bad in every case, it is about lazy hype and using the same "the game was never better than now" , "this is the best lategame control we have ever seen", "this might be the best tournament ever", etc for basically every game ever played. For someone who has no idea and only watches this particular game it might work, but if you watch it just a little bit more it gets old extremely fast. There are so many other ways to create excitement and i think it is perfectly fine to call professional casters out for this lazy, uninspired casting.
On July 27 2018 22:22 The_Red_Viper wrote: I like how people are defending it as "hype", well yes ofc it is used to hype things up but there would be a lot of possible techniques between "this game is shit" and "this is the best game ever" to generate excitement. Is it really too much to ask to get it a little more nuanced?
i think you're missing the finer point here, which is that HYPE is designed to attract non-hardcore viewers. people who love starcraft are very likely to watch games for the players and the tournaments whether the caster is an incredible analyst or not. i would be really shocked, though, if every single major SC2 caster who has worked major tournaments hadn't been heavily coached to introduce elements of "hype" and making games seem close when they're over as a specific measure to draw interest from people who aren't normally into starcraft. it's kind of like how blizzard has to make the game playable for lower league people while simultaneously balancing it at the top levels. a hardcore base can keep a game alive for a long time, but you never stop trying to expand that base, because with no growth anything will die.
i'm not making a personal commentary on what style of casting i like or think is "correct," but like i said in my earlier post, everything is driven by money and sponsors, and sponsors don't want to sponsor a game with a hardcore userbase that doesn't get bigger or draw young fans (this is another major point, guys - most of us, i think, are at minimum in our 20s, and younger demographics are highly prized. younger people are more likely to respond to loud and outrageous personalities. just look at youtube!)
also, casters are human. it's probably just more fun to hype games up, i'm sure tastosis for example get bored just reciting memorized facts about strategies. to have done the job for so long they must enjoy on some level being entertainers, getting a little loud, using catchphrases, etc. i don't get what people expect casters to do? are they supposed to be stopping and stuttering during games to catch themselves before saying something "hypey," and instead try to come up with another comment on the fly, leaving dead air? again, this is why i don't think people who haven't been on camera as LIVE PRESENTERS should criticize. you don't know what it's actually like until you stand up there with the pressure of keeping the show going
The argument is not as black and white as 'hype is bad'. CSGO casters are crazy hype. Melee casters are incredibly hype. Hell, even League casters can get excited pretty well at times. The issue is that, in sc2 in particular, the hype feels undeserved, and it makes me roll my eyes incredibly often to hear some of the stuff I end up hearing. It's just not fun to watch sc2 when every few minutes something flat-out incorrect gets said.
I don't know you well at all so I might be way off base, but is it possible that you are a very high level SC2 player and not quite as high level at CSGO or Melee? I'm a very average skill level for SC2 and I don't notice too many incorrect assumptions made, which of course could just be that I don't identify them.
On July 27 2018 22:22 The_Red_Viper wrote: I like how people are defending it as "hype", well yes ofc it is used to hype things up but there would be a lot of possible techniques between "this game is shit" and "this is the best game ever" to generate excitement. Is it really too much to ask to get it a little more nuanced?
i think you're missing the finer point here, which is that HYPE is designed to attract non-hardcore viewers. people who love starcraft are very likely to watch games for the players and the tournaments whether the caster is an incredible analyst or not. i would be really shocked, though, if every single major SC2 caster who has worked major tournaments hadn't been heavily coached to introduce elements of "hype" and making games seem close when they're over as a specific measure to draw interest from people who aren't normally into starcraft. it's kind of like how blizzard has to make the game playable for lower league people while simultaneously balancing it at the top levels. a hardcore base can keep a game alive for a long time, but you never stop trying to expand that base, because with no growth anything will die.
i'm not making a personal commentary on what style of casting i like or think is "correct," but like i said in my earlier post, everything is driven by money and sponsors, and sponsors don't want to sponsor a game with a hardcore userbase that doesn't get bigger or draw young fans (this is another major point, guys - most of us, i think, are at minimum in our 20s, and younger demographics are highly prized. younger people are more likely to respond to loud and outrageous personalities. just look at youtube!)
also, casters are human. it's probably just more fun to hype games up, i'm sure tastosis for example get bored just reciting memorized facts about strategies. to have done the job for so long they must enjoy on some level being entertainers, getting a little loud, using catchphrases, etc. i don't get what people expect casters to do? are they supposed to be stopping and stuttering during games to catch themselves before saying something "hypey," and instead try to come up with another comment on the fly, leaving dead air? again, this is why i don't think people who haven't been on camera as LIVE PRESENTERS should criticize. you don't know what it's actually like until you stand up there with the pressure of keeping the show going
The argument is not as black and white as 'hype is bad'. CSGO casters are crazy hype. Melee casters are incredibly hype. Hell, even League casters can get excited pretty well at times. The issue is that, in sc2 in particular, the hype feels undeserved, and it makes me roll my eyes incredibly often to hear some of the stuff I end up hearing. It's just not fun to watch sc2 when every few minutes something flat-out incorrect gets said.
nothing you said addresses anything i said though? my point is that the push for more "hype casting" comes from people who are not directly involved in the scene but want to grow it so they can make more money off of it. meaning that leveling critiques at individual casters who are simply expressing their personalities and doing as they're advised has no merit and will have no effect. do you honestly believe in a world where SC2 casters read this article and think "hmm, yeah, perhaps i'm casting wrong. maybe i should listen to this brand new argument about fake hype which has never been brought up before. i'll cast with less fake hype now"? even if it turned out to be false that fake hype is coming from higher-ups at events, i still don't even think that changes anything, and i still don't think a caster who intentionally "fakes hype" would ever stop doing it because an article was written criticizing the practice.
like, i'm being sarcastic, but i'm also being serious. i don't see the point of this fake hype hypothesis (hype-othesis?). i wrote a post where i listed and criticized casters once, but it was just my personal opinions, and i didn't have any expectation that those opinions would change the "casting meta" or make some kind of impact on how professional casters do their jobs. i decided to put that post in the blog section because it was ultimately just me talking out my ass about how i feel, and i didn't think a public debate about it would really serve much purpose other than giving people a platform to be haters and nitpickers. i felt the same way about the "caster feedback thread." casters get feedback nonstop every single time they do their jobs. writing it up in paragraphs serious-discourse-style probably just annoys the shit out of them. for that reason i ultimately felt silly about my own caster post and abandoned it
viewers like to imagine that because they're the audience therefore it's somehow useful for them to throw hundreds of little opinions at the screen about how presenters talk, how they act, what they look like, etc. but by and large that presenter is going to act however they act when their natural personality is put on camera. needling them about word choices and the volume of their voice is the height of navel-gazing. and this isn't American Idol where if the presenter doesn't poll well he'll be fired and replaced with someone else. the people who cast SC2 are people who have been involved in the scene, are able to carry a show on camera, and are willing to do it
On July 27 2018 22:22 The_Red_Viper wrote: I like how people are defending it as "hype", well yes ofc it is used to hype things up but there would be a lot of possible techniques between "this game is shit" and "this is the best game ever" to generate excitement. Is it really too much to ask to get it a little more nuanced?
i think you're missing the finer point here, which is that HYPE is designed to attract non-hardcore viewers. people who love starcraft are very likely to watch games for the players and the tournaments whether the caster is an incredible analyst or not. i would be really shocked, though, if every single major SC2 caster who has worked major tournaments hadn't been heavily coached to introduce elements of "hype" and making games seem close when they're over as a specific measure to draw interest from people who aren't normally into starcraft. it's kind of like how blizzard has to make the game playable for lower league people while simultaneously balancing it at the top levels. a hardcore base can keep a game alive for a long time, but you never stop trying to expand that base, because with no growth anything will die.
i'm not making a personal commentary on what style of casting i like or think is "correct," but like i said in my earlier post, everything is driven by money and sponsors, and sponsors don't want to sponsor a game with a hardcore userbase that doesn't get bigger or draw young fans (this is another major point, guys - most of us, i think, are at minimum in our 20s, and younger demographics are highly prized. younger people are more likely to respond to loud and outrageous personalities. just look at youtube!)
also, casters are human. it's probably just more fun to hype games up, i'm sure tastosis for example get bored just reciting memorized facts about strategies. to have done the job for so long they must enjoy on some level being entertainers, getting a little loud, using catchphrases, etc. i don't get what people expect casters to do? are they supposed to be stopping and stuttering during games to catch themselves before saying something "hypey," and instead try to come up with another comment on the fly, leaving dead air? again, this is why i don't think people who haven't been on camera as LIVE PRESENTERS should criticize. you don't know what it's actually like until you stand up there with the pressure of keeping the show going
The argument is not as black and white as 'hype is bad'. CSGO casters are crazy hype. Melee casters are incredibly hype. Hell, even League casters can get excited pretty well at times. The issue is that, in sc2 in particular, the hype feels undeserved, and it makes me roll my eyes incredibly often to hear some of the stuff I end up hearing. It's just not fun to watch sc2 when every few minutes something flat-out incorrect gets said.
I don't know you well at all so I might be way off base, but is it possible that you are a very high level SC2 player and not quite as high level at CSGO or Melee? I'm a very average skill level for SC2 and I don't notice too many incorrect assumptions made, which of course could just be that I don't identify them.
CSGO casters just don't make ridiculous statements like "X is the best EVER" or "this is the best Y ever". They might refer to someone as "one of the greatest of all time", or sometimes as specific player as "the best in the world", but only when it's an entirely justifiable statement.
Casters can get hype, it's their job at the end of the day. No one hates hype, or even overhype if the matches being played aren't that great. But I don't see the need for them to make outragous (and simply untrue) statements purely for the sake of it.
On July 27 2018 22:22 The_Red_Viper wrote: I like how people are defending it as "hype", well yes ofc it is used to hype things up but there would be a lot of possible techniques between "this game is shit" and "this is the best game ever" to generate excitement. Is it really too much to ask to get it a little more nuanced?
i think you're missing the finer point here, which is that HYPE is designed to attract non-hardcore viewers. people who love starcraft are very likely to watch games for the players and the tournaments whether the caster is an incredible analyst or not. i would be really shocked, though, if every single major SC2 caster who has worked major tournaments hadn't been heavily coached to introduce elements of "hype" and making games seem close when they're over as a specific measure to draw interest from people who aren't normally into starcraft. it's kind of like how blizzard has to make the game playable for lower league people while simultaneously balancing it at the top levels. a hardcore base can keep a game alive for a long time, but you never stop trying to expand that base, because with no growth anything will die.
i'm not making a personal commentary on what style of casting i like or think is "correct," but like i said in my earlier post, everything is driven by money and sponsors, and sponsors don't want to sponsor a game with a hardcore userbase that doesn't get bigger or draw young fans (this is another major point, guys - most of us, i think, are at minimum in our 20s, and younger demographics are highly prized. younger people are more likely to respond to loud and outrageous personalities. just look at youtube!)
also, casters are human. it's probably just more fun to hype games up, i'm sure tastosis for example get bored just reciting memorized facts about strategies. to have done the job for so long they must enjoy on some level being entertainers, getting a little loud, using catchphrases, etc. i don't get what people expect casters to do? are they supposed to be stopping and stuttering during games to catch themselves before saying something "hypey," and instead try to come up with another comment on the fly, leaving dead air? again, this is why i don't think people who haven't been on camera as LIVE PRESENTERS should criticize. you don't know what it's actually like until you stand up there with the pressure of keeping the show going
The argument is not as black and white as 'hype is bad'. CSGO casters are crazy hype. Melee casters are incredibly hype. Hell, even League casters can get excited pretty well at times. The issue is that, in sc2 in particular, the hype feels undeserved, and it makes me roll my eyes incredibly often to hear some of the stuff I end up hearing. It's just not fun to watch sc2 when every few minutes something flat-out incorrect gets said.
I don't know you well at all so I might be way off base, but is it possible that you are a very high level SC2 player and not quite as high level at CSGO or Melee? I'm a very average skill level for SC2 and I don't notice too many incorrect assumptions made, which of course could just be that I don't identify them.
I'm honestly a fucking horrible SC2 player, I just pay attention to the scene and can generally tell that, no, this isn't the best tournament ever, no, ByuN doesn't have the best micro ever, etc.
CSGO/Melee and even most traditional sports I've watched a lot of don't make assumptions unless they're blatantly obvious and easy to agree with.
On July 28 2018 02:34 Fango wrote:ridiculous statements like "X is the best EVER" or "this is the best Y ever". They might refer to someone as "one of the greatest of all time", or sometimes as specific player as "the best in the world", but only when it's an entirely justifiable statement.
To be fair, while this might have been the case with GSLs 1 year ago, I believe the tendency is clear towards the latter versions you mentioned as well. WCS Valencia e.g., had (from memory) many "one of the greatest..." SC2 moments. With the entire tournament being extremely hype, there were clear descriptives along the lines of "standout play" or something being his or her "strong suit", rather than total hyperbole.
I agree in spirit with OP though, a lot even. To go back to TotalBiscuit's criticism of award shows for example: If there's just an award without a laudatio, that is, without some arguments towards the reason to honour something/someone with a prize, you might as well scratch the entire thing. Same applies here to some extent: If it's difficult to make a case for "best x evaaah" (or sample size is 1, by way of the casted game), better tune it down a notch or two.
+1 and *clap* for the linked clips in the OP post by the way.
I think part of the reason we don't get a lot of high level analysis in casts is most casters aren't capable of providing it. It is easier to just hype, spout platitudes, and tired story lines.
It doesn't help that casting is pretty much only a full time job for Tastosis. Everyone else is either a streamer or a tournament organizer which take time away from sitting down and really analyzing what is going on so that they can talk about a build they might never see again.
To be perfectly honest, I love them for their humor and the casual banter more than for ingame knowledge and analysis, and I totally agree with you :D
Agreed, however, I'd add that their analysis is quite good, especially when covering original Starcraft. Also, Tastosis is by far and away my favorite duo. Then again, I'm an older guy at almost 45 years of age and have played or followed since the beginning in 1998. Wow, I think this is my first post in 3,4, maybe 5 years? Edit: Says 2 post??? Must have been reset from joining from Twitch? Either way
Anyways, the above is my humble opinion for better or for worse. I'm also inclined to feel this article is more of the same, an opinion piece.
I only watch games muted - does not say much about anything but i dont like the casting style - does not matter which game and is not exclusive to sc2. is not even related to gaming only - in football i find it even more tedious
To be perfectly honest, I love them for their humor and the casual banter more than for ingame knowledge and analysis, and I totally agree with you :D
Agreed, however, I'd add that their analysis is quite good, especially when covering original Starcraft. Also, Tastosis is by far and away my favorite duo. Then again, I'm an older guy at almost 45 years of age and have played or followed since the beginning in 1998. Wow, I think this is my first post in 3,4, maybe 5 years? Edit: Says 2 post??? Must have been reset from joining from Twitch? Either way
Anyways, the above is my humble opinion for better or for worse. I'm also inclined to feel this article is more of the same, an opinion piece.
Honestly, I like hearing the casual talk from casters. This frees up my mind to do the tough analysis myself. It's strangely fun and rewarding. The only thing I think needs improvement is higher APM from observers. The game is far faster-paced than HOTS but the number of seconds per pan area hasn't really been reduced accordingly. For the last year or so every single time I watch a cast there are literally matches where I'm screaming at my computer to MOVE THE SCREEN TO THAT FLASHING AREA! or GO BACK BEFORE THAT BATTLE IS OVER!. In other words, I wish observers would move around more actively on the map, just like we who play the game in LOTV have to constantly move around on the map far more. Congrats to those who do put in the hard work, though. It's not easy.
Edit: Sometimes I'm literallly clicking on the minimap on Twitch, trying to move the screen. Lol.
On July 27 2018 11:21 BisuDagger wrote: The best part about the hype is that my wife actually tires of hearing it and all the hyperbole when I've got the games on the TV. She definitely has her preference in SC2 casters for the very reasons in this article lol. Although some of her caster bias may come from her attraction to Germans (quarter German myself ) So maybe it is good for new comers, but it can have negative impact on those who hang out with us as we watch.
Anecdotally on the opposite end, my wife only enjoys watching Starcraft with me when we watch Artosis because she finds him funny and his love for the game comes off as genuine.
I agree with the points made in the article but I do think they paint a bleaker portrait of that casting style than the reality is. I also think that very high level players are always more upset at the lack of super in depth analysis. I think this article could serve as a guideline for casters to use for improving their craft because nothing that has been noted is flat out wrong, but I don't think that certain casters are unwatchable because of the hype and hyperbole as some people have suggested.
This is a great write-up and useful just for the discussion it provokes in the community. Thanks for the content!
Since you mentioned Artosis(Tastosis) specifically, I actually enjoy their Brood War casting very much despite being a 20 year veteran of the game. I do not require their in depth analysis because I think they are having a lot of fun when casting the game. They are enjoyable as SC2 casters too, but I think they do fall in the hype trap or the focus on specific skill type casting just a bit more.
I was actually curious what some of the Brood War veterans thought about their casting style. As someone who was introduced to esports with SC2 they have made me fall in love with competitive BW. I can't play at all, I don't understand the intricacies beyond what they share with me, but the game is so beautiful and the skills of the players are so amazing that the ASL and KSL now have become my favorite esports broadcasts to watch. I don't know if in depth analysis would be something I would appreciate more or if it would have pushed me away.
Something that I think is left out of the discussion is that perhaps more hype is needed in SC2 because the observing interface gives us so much detail. It's been mentioned before, but the suspense in BW and the narratives within individual games are at a completely different level than in SC2 because of how little information you have while watching. This might only be a minor factor but I believe it actually makes the caster's job harder in SC2 because the interface does a lot of the work for them. The second half of the article concerning oversimplification might be the answer to this issue though. It might be even more important to paint a broader narrative of the player's skills and their previous results if you have less tools to build a narrative in each series.
There are so so so so many beautiful things going on in a game of Brood War that normally get glossed over by Tastetosis. If you fully understood how difficult muta-scourge micro is or how an early 4th for Zerg indicates how the late game is going to go, you'd be on the edge of your seat constantly even without the hype.
On July 28 2018 18:51 {ToT}ColmA wrote: I only watch games muted - does not say much about anything but i dont like the casting style - does not matter which game and is not exclusive to sc2. is not even related to gaming only - in football i find it even more tedious
Maybe you can try listening to Duck and Leffen's commentary in Super Smash Brothers Melee.
On July 26 2018 22:36 Olli wrote: Every time I criticize hyperbole and simplified casting, I hear the counter-argument that it's done to cater to casual or new audiences.
That's an odd one to me. After being disappointed with Legacy of the Void's single player campaign, I somewhat dropped off of StarCraft for a while. When I cam back a year later, I had a lot of difficulty figuring out what players were doing in the early game from watching games because casters just never talk about it, it's often a time they waste on complete filler. And keep in mind, I'd just missed the Heart of the Swarm to Legacy of the Void transition, I'd actually been playing StarCraft since 1998. I don't know what an actual new player would make of it.
I don't find a problem with the lazy hype. I find Tastosis as enjoyable to watch as Rotti + ToD, despite the latter definitely being on the other end of the hype spectrum.
I don't understand why you had to go and imply that DotA 2 casting is better than SC2 casting. That is patently false! DotA 2 casters are the worst in esports, they are unprofessional, they mumble, they can't raise their voices (they sound like my friends in teamspeak when I was in high school!), and are monotone. And then after not hyping anything up for 40 minutes they meekly tell us "...i mean.... there's nothing dire can do to win this game...". Really nothing? Then why are people who are actually good at the game (unlike the casters) still playing, when they can gg out?
A lot of great posts as well from Soularion, shame they seem to have fallen on deaf ears. As someone who has followed other esports even before SC2, I must agree that you rarely ever hear so many comments from the casters about something being the "best ever", and when you do it's usually a less contested, more unanimously agreed upon thing than in SC2.
On July 29 2018 22:21 Rodya wrote: I don't understand why you had to go and imply that DotA 2 casting is better than SC2 casting. That is patently false! DotA 2 casters are the worst in esports, they are unprofessional, they mumble, they can't raise their voices (they sound like my friends in teamspeak when I was in high school!), and are monotone. And then after not hyping anything up for 40 minutes they meekly tell us "...i mean.... there's nothing dire can do to win this game...". Really nothing? Then why are people who are actually good at the game (unlike the casters) still playing, when they can gg out?
Other than that, great post.
I have to 100% disagree with that opinion on Dota casting. They're absolutely brilliant over there.
I feel like this response downplays, or probably just doesn't realise, how much Tastosis hype things as the greatest ever. Pre and post match analysis amounts to probably 10-20% of the time a caster spends talking to the audience.
Just in my experience as a viewer, I've found it outright annoying how often I've heard that X is the greatest ever. Sometimes it may be justifiable, but often it just blatently isn't, and that's what ruins the immersion.
Also you shouldn't need to make stuff up in order to hype a player or a storyline. Take ByuN for example, he had a great storyline of being teamless and barely qualifying for blizzcon. He also played super aggressive style and had iconic reaper micro. There's no need to constantly (and I mean constantly) repeat nonsense about him having the best control ever in starcraft.
Or even just do it as casters in other esports do. Claim that X is "one of/some of the greatest we've ever seen", or "we've seen such incredible moves from X in the past" etc.
Very good article, you managed to put in words what I've been feeling for quite a while.
I also agree with some other of the previous posts:
- overhype is annoying
- some casters do it a lot more than others
- I wish there was more in depth analysis (which I feel has been decreasing more and more over the years, for example there used to be an analysis section after games with ToD who would point out on a screen a couple of crucial moments, explaining them in depth by drawing arrows and stuff)
- casters should be a bit more "honest" when talking about someone who played bad. Someone can play like crap for many reasons and it happens to everyone, but since they are professionals, you should point it out. In cs:go or even in football, when someone is underperforming they say it clearly and without sweetening the pill
- I don't mind casual talking during "dead-time" in the game
- that said I understand that casting is live, and sometimes they do it for hours. I do (and probably always will) enjoy a lot watching live, commentated professional sc2 games
I think that the sc2 community is very passionate and I am sure that all these "critics" are done without malice, so that we can all enjoy our favourite esport even more.
Bravo and well done. Imo this is a Masterfully Championed article providing unbiased and straight forward analysis. Need more like it.
Undeniably the best rebuttal article I've ever seen in my history of reading StarCraft articles. No one has ever provided counter arguments like this. Ever.
The more I think about this article and the topic the more I've come to realize that people that like these "hype casters" probably don't take each instance of hyperbole as being incredibly important. In my mind I don't remember all of the hype. A lot of time I write off "best ever" comments to mean "the best right now in the caster's opinion".
In the same way I write these comments off, I think those that have issues can't get over these instances that really aren't taking up that much air-time. If someone can post a few examples of a lengthy monologue about how such and such player is the best ever I would understand more, but I have a feeling we're talking about a few sentences uttered in excitement that some viewers obsess over. And even if a few examples can be brought up (Artosis harping on Rogue's late game and his recent love affair with Leenock comes to mind) we are talking about something that is mostly an opinion.
I still think the article brings up great points though. These are areas that casters could improve on, especially the second topic which has largely been ignored by this thread, but I think so much of the debate back and forth is stemming from the fact that some people claim that these "best ever" statements make a caster annoying or even unwatchable (which i don't think is the opinion of the author to be clear). I think it says more about their own personalities than the ability or style of the casters.
I've seen many tournaments in CS:GO, where "Fallen is the greatest awper of all time only he could land that shot!" or "He's the greatest IGL of all time, no one would of known to make that call" (Other players lead their teams to more wins in CS history including CSS and 1.6) "Guardian is the greatest awper ever! No one could flick like that" When.. if you go back, there's been times where multiple awpers were the best.. If Kinney S heard that what would he say? Or in league, "He's the greatest mid laner ever no one could ultimate that guy like Faker could" when in reality anyone can land a lux (random char name, not specific) ult even in gold or lower. These things are said because it's in the moment, i disagree with a lot of what's mentioned in this article, but the fact that you seem to begrudgingly going after specifically Artosis in the one comment is what bothers me the most. He's been around forever and i can't say he's immune to criticism because obviously everyone is, but a lot of what he states is true or true in the moment. To say it's Sc2 where this happens the most is just not true at all, you didn't do enough research into other games.. Just watch any finals with SK in CS or SKT1 In League( I watch a VAST amount of SC1/2, League, and CSGO), it's going to be said all the little minute things their stars do are remarked as "the only players that could do it". Well that sums up my thoughts.. You made an article.
The thing with Tastosis is(and that would be bold statement):
Artosis- puts long hours preparing for his casting, also playing the game a ton, you can see the work hes putting in
on the other hand
Tasteless: i feel like hes not playing the game at all anymore and treating casting purely as a job, not always having fun from it(and thats completly fine). Its just so weird that community belives blindly in those guys never questioning them. I love them too, dont get me wrong, i would just like a bit of honesty
This article is doing quite the opposite than what is needed for this community. While we can all bitch and moan at certain things in this game and certainly industry, there is so much more support that is needed. While I think analysis and criticism is needed for some improvement, high level and valued analysis and criticism is followed by suggestion and supporting evidence and solutions. This article is just a rantfest where none is needed. I don't think what our game needs improvement is in this article AT ALL. not only is it not valuable, it destroys any goodwill we need for our game to succeed in the long run.
How about using insights to help in: - long term business models for BW/SC2 for increased viewership / money making - player support systems and career management - content partnerships and tiered content ... to name a few.
disappointed in this article and even having this on this great site.
On August 02 2018 19:45 Hok wrote: This article is doing quite the opposite than what is needed for this community. While we can all bitch and moan at certain things in this game and certainly industry, there is so much more support that is needed. While I think analysis and criticism is needed for some improvement, high level and valued analysis and criticism is followed by suggestion and supporting evidence and solutions. This article is just a rantfest where none is needed. I don't think what our game needs improvement is in this article AT ALL. not only is it not valuable, it destroys any goodwill we need for our game to succeed in the long run.
How about using insights to help in: - long term business models for BW/SC2 for increased viewership / money making - player support systems and career management - content partnerships and tiered content ... to name a few.
disappointed in this article and even having this on this great site.
Blind fanboyism and dickriding is certainly not the path to growth or greatness.
On August 02 2018 19:45 Hok wrote: This article is doing quite the opposite than what is needed for this community. While we can all bitch and moan at certain things in this game and certainly industry, there is so much more support that is needed. While I think analysis and criticism is needed for some improvement, high level and valued analysis and criticism is followed by suggestion and supporting evidence and solutions. This article is just a rantfest where none is needed. I don't think what our game needs improvement is in this article AT ALL. not only is it not valuable, it destroys any goodwill we need for our game to succeed in the long run.
How about using insights to help in: - long term business models for BW/SC2 for increased viewership / money making - player support systems and career management - content partnerships and tiered content ... to name a few.
disappointed in this article and even having this on this great site.
Blind fanboyism and dickriding is certainly not the path to growth or greatness.
I would agree with you... who is fanboying and dickriding? ... Do you see any pressing issues in that article... please do expand on your insight.
The casting in our game is not Top tier Worldclass. so what... do you know how much these people get paid? I work in a well paying job and would love to get involved in this scene, but I can't give up the money. This is why I am so grateful for not only the casters but also players, organizers, companies and sponsors. Though its not NFL, NASCAR level production, casting, blah blah... think about what this stupid article and your post says to people trying their best with the limited resources (not just money, but time, training, mentors, consultants, etc) are doing to help this scene. people come and go... but most of our casters have been there hanging in there ... yea punk if you call that dick riding, I do it all day... to have the scene we have today...
On August 02 2018 19:45 Hok wrote: This article is doing quite the opposite than what is needed for this community. While we can all bitch and moan at certain things in this game and certainly industry, there is so much more support that is needed. While I think analysis and criticism is needed for some improvement, high level and valued analysis and criticism is followed by suggestion and supporting evidence and solutions. This article is just a rantfest where none is needed. I don't think what our game needs improvement is in this article AT ALL. not only is it not valuable, it destroys any goodwill we need for our game to succeed in the long run.
How about using insights to help in: - long term business models for BW/SC2 for increased viewership / money making - player support systems and career management - content partnerships and tiered content ... to name a few.
disappointed in this article and even having this on this great site.
Blind fanboyism and dickriding is certainly not the path to growth or greatness.
I would agree with you... who is fanboying and dickriding? ... Do you see any pressing issues in that article... please do expand on your insight.
The casting in our game is not Top tier Worldclass. so what... do you know how much these people get paid? I work in a well paying job and would love to get involved in this scene, but I can't give up the money. This is why I am so grateful for not only the casters but also players, organizers, companies and sponsors. Though its not NFL, NASCAR level production, casting, blah blah... think about what this stupid article and your post says to people trying their best with the limited resources (not just money, but time, training, mentors, consultants, etc) are doing to help this scene. people come and go... but most of our casters have been there hanging in there ... yea punk if you call that dick riding, I do it all day... to have the scene we have today...
This article has little to nothing to do with production value, business models etc. I don't think that you are getting the point here. Esports casting across the board falls into some of the traps that the article spells out, and the article is just pointing out some of these flaws in hopes of influencing improvements. It's less a cry for a solution and ways of fixing it and more just identifying an issue that some viewers see in hopes of bringing it to light. You're taking it too seriously.
On August 02 2018 21:02 Kavax wrote: Artosis revealed on the Pylon that Olli had personal beef with him in the past. I'm not sure if Olli is aware of what motivates his mind.
I've never had personal beef with Artosis, and he doesn't say that either.
game>players>fans>casters>writers .. this article tries it's best (dare I say it's very best) in trying to swap casters and writers.. but comes off as jealousy imo
On August 03 2018 03:10 Ignorant prodigy wrote: game>players>fans>casters>writers .. this article tries it's best (dare I say it's very best) in trying to swap casters and writers.. but comes off as jealousy imo
On August 02 2018 21:02 Kavax wrote: Artosis revealed on the Pylon that Olli had personal beef with him in the past. I'm not sure if Olli is aware of what motivates his mind.
I've never had personal beef with Artosis, and he doesn't say that either.
He did say that he doesn't read your articles because of some previous drama. To some that might count as minor, low quality beef
On August 02 2018 21:02 Kavax wrote: Artosis revealed on the Pylon that Olli had personal beef with him in the past. I'm not sure if Olli is aware of what motivates his mind.
I've never had personal beef with Artosis, and he doesn't say that either.
He did say that he doesn't read your articles because of some previous drama. To some that might count as minor, low quality beef
Bit of a difference to say he doesn't read my articles because of that Reddit thread thing, and me having personal beef with him.
Really dislike this article. Feels counter-productive in it's intent, and the criticisms directed at Tastosis are blown way out of proportion. Brownbear's article was amazing.
The problem with the article is the author only uses an extremely small target sample, and within that target sample, only cast which perfectly align with the point he's trying to promote. So at first glance it appears the content provided is spot on. The problem? We are only being allowed to see a tiny, tiny,tiny portion of the painting, not the entire canvas.
It's almost like someone in a debate using false dichotomies and straw mans. It seems rather disingenuous to set up a Test which can Only provide a predetermined result. Imo, if you take every cast from Tastosis/Artosis in their totality and in the sum of all the parts you'll come to a drastically different conclusion.
+1 for the response article by Brownbear. In depth (and the instances he counted could even be more detailed), could almost count as a scientific debate.
Didn't get to listen to the comments on the pylon yet though.
OMG Thanks for the spoiler for Mvp vs Squirtle! asdasdasd all that.
Joke aside, that was a good read. Typically, I actually disliked the whole Dark VS Byun final partly because of all the hyped that was built on meaningless moments. Many times they emphasised actions Dark lost to that are the same than the I would lose to in D1 ladder at the time. So if the viewer is not much into the bigger picture as of why it came down to this action for those players in those conditions, then such commentaries would mean that Byun is probably better than D1, and Dark quite close to my level. Not the best description of the two blizzcon final players.
I had another point in mind, but I forgot it and work is calling, so act as if there were a second points (and you can randomly chose whether you agree or not).
While I agree and this irritates me I must partially agree with Artosis on the Pylon show(BTW is it just me or was he really salty? Was listening to it today at work and got that impression) that he's not doing it that much and that he's trying to do it in the context. While I don't agree with him on some occassiions it's his opinion so I don't care that much(I dare to say that we had better RO32 with KeSPA teams)
Anyway, I wanted to give it my support as I don't have the login information at work
Edit> Actually got kinda funny on TPS and their defensive posture and not admitting what they're doing, but I wasn't expecting any different reaction from casters
They did make some good points on the Pylon Show. Most casual fans don't care for a deep analysis and tournaments as a show benefit from a lot of the bold statements casters make.
The only part I still disagree with (they didn't really touch on this on the show) is giving forced or incorrect tags and storylines to players. Artosis says they put in effort to make the players interesting and good for viewers to follow, but it's unnecessary to make claims that untrue.
Are there any casual fans left in SC2? Seriously though what with the beef Aretosis has with Olli, Arrtosis just comes across as a drama queen. Casters have long ago occupied the top position of importance in the game anyways.
On August 04 2018 02:12 Fango wrote: They did make some good points on the Pylon Show. Most casual fans don't care for a deep analysis and tournaments as a show benefit from a lot of the bold statements casters make.
The only part I still disagree with (they didn't really touch on this on the show) is giving forced or incorrect tags and storylines to players. Artosis says they put in effort to make the players interesting and good for viewers to follow, but it's unnecessary to make claims that untrue.
But they actually didn't touch it properly. The same way they moved around the topic of foreigners taking Korean money but ignored it via "they are not taking that much money, so it's good" while we are not geting new Korean blood into SC2 and the ro32 is year to year worse. But Artosis will say(and I don't buy he's serious) that that's the best ro32 ever. While in the history we had 20 players who were ro16 caliber, now we say GSL starts with ro16...
I'm not sure if Blizzard don't want these talks(and I guess it's partially that, because negative topics are not good for the SC2 scene), but unless we address some issues we may find out that there's no Korean scene at all. And the army call is nigh for MANY players.
So, instead of bashing either side, we could do what brownbear tried and actually analyze casts of high profile matches.
Obviously it can be bad to make hyperboles - but the question is, if this really is a common thing that happens very often - we'd rather need some data to decide that than just ride on a uncertain feeling. At the same time casters could easily try to marginalize such phrases so that they'd become even more seldom.
On August 04 2018 02:12 Fango wrote: They did make some good points on the Pylon Show. Most casual fans don't care for a deep analysis and tournaments as a show benefit from a lot of the bold statements casters make.
The only part I still disagree with (they didn't really touch on this on the show) is giving forced or incorrect tags and storylines to players. Artosis says they put in effort to make the players interesting and good for viewers to follow, but it's unnecessary to make claims that untrue.
But they actually didn't touch it properly. The same way they moved around the topic of foreigners taking Korean money but ignored it via "they are not taking that much money, so it's good" while we are not geting new Korean blood into SC2 and the ro32 is year to year worse. But Artosis will say(and I don't buy he's serious) that that's the best ro32 ever. While in the history we had 20 players who were ro16 caliber, now we say GSL starts with ro16...
I'm not sure if Blizzard don't want these talks(and I guess it's partially that, because negative topics are not good for the SC2 scene), but unless we address some issues we may find out that there's no Korean scene at all. And the army call is nigh for MANY players.
While it's understandable that Blizzard (and indeed almost any company, especially the large corporate ones) will always bury its head in the sand when it comes to such issues, what's always been the most concerning to me is that there are still absolute goons around here downplaying said issues or even defending them, and advocating that everyone should just shut up and "not be so negative" because otherwise it's just hurting the game. Because things surely can and will improve without criticism, lol.
That's what boggles my mind. TeamLiquid isn't perfect, but the more time passes the more it feels like one of the few remaining good internet forums, at least of such a large size. We're not GameFAQs, we're not NeoGaffe, we're not Leddit. And yet there are still people of dubious intentions or dubious intellect always claiming that things are good, and things are on the up and up, and Blizzard knows best, and if you want what's good for the game stop complaining etc. Quite a shame honestly, they try to silence criticism and more and more people flock to playing or watching other games instead.
On August 04 2018 05:35 fronkschnonk wrote: So, instead of bashing either side, we could do what brownbear tried and actually analyze casts of high profile matches.
Obviously it can be bad to make hyperboles - but the question is, if this really is a common thing that happens very often - we'd rather need some data to decide that than just ride on a uncertain feeling. At the same time casters could easily try to marginalize such phrases so that they'd become even more seldom.
Well it happens often enough that a part of the community is annoyed by it. You can do statistics all you want, what % of how often they say it is okay but when it actually turns people off from watching then I say there's no need for doing exact statistics how often something is said because it's clearly a problem.
And Olli is by far not the only one who is annoyed by this, I've heard many complaints about those hyperboles for a long time now.
On August 04 2018 05:35 fronkschnonk wrote: So, instead of bashing either side, we could do what brownbear tried and actually analyze casts of high profile matches.
Obviously it can be bad to make hyperboles - but the question is, if this really is a common thing that happens very often - we'd rather need some data to decide that than just ride on a uncertain feeling. At the same time casters could easily try to marginalize such phrases so that they'd become even more seldom.
I could guarantee that the vast majority of the time Tastosis have casted ByuN or Rogue since their big runs they've mentioned them being the greatest ever at something. Hell they'll say it when casting other players even if the games have nothing to do with those players.
Not just ByuN and Rogue either, guys like INno, sOs, Stats etc have been refered to as the greatest at various aspects of the game, but if I'm being honest those are typically more justifiable and deserving statements.
It would take a while to actually do what Brownbear didn't do, and go through the games themselves. Which make up 80-90% of the time casters actually talk. But if people want statistics then it could be done.
I'm going to comment only on the "hyperbole" aspect, not the less interesting to me "lazy narrative" aspect.
Since about a year or two, my good friend, who watches, and with whom I've watched multiple GSLs and other premier tournaments since 2010 has been, half in jest, calling Artosis and Tasteless by the nickname "The Best Game I've Ever Seen" and has often gotten jokingly angry when I tell him how much I like their commentary. (I sometimes watch 6+ year old Artosis and Tasteless highlight vids from GSL and often listen during downtime in GSL just to the banter/jokes)
Now, I also have to say, that since a couple of months this "best I've ever seen" business has gotten so out of hand in the Artosis and Tasteless commentary that its started to amuse me personally too. When I saw the article I immediately sent it to my friend, and we had a major laugh as its something he's been pointing out forever. Thanks to Olli for reading our minds tbh.
I'm half way through The Pylon, where I feel like this is just concluded to be 'not the case' by Artosis. Well, my friend and I would disagree! Its nothing bad per se, but we've noticed it too, for years now, and it amuses us whenever it happens.
Also, I wouldn't really call it hyperbole, I think, but just a weird shtick/gimmick that stuck on in times of less interest and game knowledge by Tasteless and a change of Artosis' approach from a less of a calm/analytic style, to a more lively one. The reasons or facts are unknown to me, these are just my feelings.
Edit: maybe someone knows this, something that has been in my mind for a while - there's this text under the GSL logo during the broadcasts - "the most competitive 1vs1 game" - whenever I see it, I feel like its very possible that Artosis told the production guys to add it? :D (again, nothing bad, just amusing! just proves the passion tbh)
This whole article is an absolute shrine of hypocrisy, love it.
"criminally overlooked IEM Cologne" - hyperbole.
Arguing other players can distract >Stats< Mothership Core and time as well as TY, as well as all the other points that were included in "that" stuff he was refering to, but incompetent journalism leads to misleading the reader who doesn't follow the link to understand this. TY kills 6 probes, first counter-link is 5 probes kills and the 2nd literally has the mothership in the position for the drop, just fails to use overcharge.
As for less is more. Reducing players to a handful of traits.... I believe you mean emphasizing and highlighting players greatest strengths, so that anyone not obsessively following the scene can at least have a basic grasp of what defines a player.
I'm sure there's more to further dissect from this drivel, but hey better to spend time on something worthwhile.
On August 10 2018 23:41 Meatbrawl wrote: This whole article is an absolute shrine of hypocrisy, love it.
"criminally overlooked IEM Cologne" - hyperbole.
Arguing other players can distract >Stats< Mothership Core and time as well as TY, as well as all the other points that were included in "that" stuff he was refering to, but incompetent journalism leads to misleading the reader who doesn't follow the link to understand this. TY kills 6 probes, first counter-link is 5 probes kills and the 2nd literally has the mothership in the position for the drop, just fails to use overcharge.
As for less is more. Reducing players to a handful of traits.... I believe you mean emphasizing and highlighting players greatest strengths, so that anyone not obsessively following the scene can at least have a basic grasp of what defines a player.
I'm sure there's more to further dissect from this drivel, but hey better to spend time on something worthwhile.
1) Study the term "Retard magnet" and how it was born, who is the parent and how old is it. Maybe then you would understand why this got picked and why it was stupid thing to say.
2) Reducing players to a handful of traits isn't bad per se. The problem is that this leads to lazy casting. I can see why casters try to still uphold the drama in the game, but when they say ByuN is god amongst living in micro after he did a stupid micro mistake, it's stupid. Then it's the time to stop saying it. And that's the problem. The ByuN problem is IMO the biggest to strike as he fell really down but he was still praised for something he wasn't good at (at that time at least). So while I can forgive Tastosis to say "ByuN has worse army but he has micro to win the fights", because any other alternative is similar "ByuN lost, he's trying for impossible"(BTW I don't see anythign wrong on this either, but I believe this is not their style), but they say it after he did several micro mistakes, which is the problem of laziness.
^ I will never forget that TvZ game on frost where byun was multi prong dropping and the zerg was on top of it and ready for it but artosis was clearly blinded by fanboyism and screamed 'OH MY GOD BYUN IS EVERYWHERE' while the observer is showing byuns drops getting killed by queens and spores.
Or how artosis to this day will still insist that byun was the sole reason for reapers being nerfed and that no one else could pull it off despite basic facts like uthermal having won an iem by going proxy 3 rax every single game.
I love artosis but he needs to keep his inner fanboy in check and be more objective sometimes.
Also: while watching serral in gsl vs world recently I was reminded of this thread. I feel like his performance had much less of an impact because of the trend of casting hyperbole recently. Like I didn't feel that serral winning was all that impressive until I thought about it and watched it again. The casters just can't hype something like that when they've desensitized me to their hyperbole in every other cast.
I love artosis but he needs to keep his inner fanboy in check and be more objective sometimes.
Yea I think that's the most off putting thing about Artosis. It's not necessarily the fanboyish nature of some of his casts (I like that he has strong opinions on players), but the way he arrogantly sticks to his guns about it even when the games don't fit the narrative he's trying to spin.
It is a small thing, but writing "Imagine being Maru—who spent years winning impossible matches through his superb unit control and ability to take immaculate fights—hearing that ByuN was better at it than you ever were." and criticizing someone else for hyperbole does not fit.
No-one won an impossible match. It might have been an improbable match to win. But not an impossible one. It might have been seemingly or almost impossible, but not quite impossible.
I overall like the Tastosis cast, as it is entertaining, keeps the tension high and tells me about the storylines. It also provides analysis. The three things I don't like when Tastosis cast:
- Calling current strategies metagame or meta. It is now so common hardly anyone thinks about what meta or metagame actually means.
- Calling the smallest area unit a hex. Both SC1 and SC2 use squares. Not hexagons.
- Shouting "HE DID THE IMPOSSIBLE" or something similar when something rather improbable happened.
On August 02 2018 19:45 Hok wrote: This article is doing quite the opposite than what is needed for this community. While we can all bitch and moan at certain things in this game and certainly industry, there is so much more support that is needed. While I think analysis and criticism is needed for some improvement, high level and valued analysis and criticism is followed by suggestion and supporting evidence and solutions. This article is just a rantfest where none is needed. I don't think what our game needs improvement is in this article AT ALL. not only is it not valuable, it destroys any goodwill we need for our game to succeed in the long run.
How about using insights to help in: - long term business models for BW/SC2 for increased viewership / money making - player support systems and career management - content partnerships and tiered content ... to name a few.
disappointed in this article and even having this on this great site.
Blind fanboyism and dickriding is certainly not the path to growth or greatness.
I would agree with you... who is fanboying and dickriding? ... Do you see any pressing issues in that article... please do expand on your insight.
The casting in our game is not Top tier Worldclass. so what... do you know how much these people get paid? I work in a well paying job and would love to get involved in this scene, but I can't give up the money. This is why I am so grateful for not only the casters but also players, organizers, companies and sponsors. Though its not NFL, NASCAR level production, casting, blah blah... think about what this stupid article and your post says to people trying their best with the limited resources (not just money, but time, training, mentors, consultants, etc) are doing to help this scene. people come and go... but most of our casters have been there hanging in there ... yea punk if you call that dick riding, I do it all day... to have the scene we have today...
This article has little to nothing to do with production value, business models etc. I don't think that you are getting the point here. Esports casting across the board falls into some of the traps that the article spells out, and the article is just pointing out some of these flaws in hopes of influencing improvements. It's less a cry for a solution and ways of fixing it and more just identifying an issue that some viewers see in hopes of bringing it to light. You're taking it too seriously.
You missed my point entirely. This article is complaining about something that is irrelevant where we should be writing and reading about things more meaningful and pressing like biz models, prod value, etc. not click bait.... look at the title of the article....
Hyperbole is especially egregious when it focuses on things average spectators understand. Like target firing banelings off creep or if the blink micro would be exaggerated in the Hyun vs herO game. I agree that the spectators can see themselves it was good micro but sometimes when there are things average specatators don't understand how incredible it is then explaining that is fine.
I don't remember which game it was or who he played but one match Maru played he microed an army of ghosts, liberators, marine, marauders and medivacs offensively. He sieged the liberators, stimmed the bio and microed ghosts on the offense basically flawlessly. My jaw was literally dropped, what he did I would barely believe possible with how incredibly well everything was microed bloody simultaneously. In those moments in fine to explain how awesome and incredible his play is, because unless you have tried to micro an army like that in those situations its hard to know just how hard that is.
I want the casts more focused on the overall gameplan of the players, possible mindgames or diversions that are hard to follow. Marine micro going on on screen we can understand ourselves mostly.
On July 29 2018 22:21 Rodya wrote: I don't understand why you had to go and imply that DotA 2 casting is better than SC2 casting. That is patently false! DotA 2 casters are the worst in esports, they are unprofessional, they mumble, they can't raise their voices (they sound like my friends in teamspeak when I was in high school!), and are monotone. And then after not hyping anything up for 40 minutes they meekly tell us "...i mean.... there's nothing dire can do to win this game...". Really nothing? Then why are people who are actually good at the game (unlike the casters) still playing, when they can gg out?
Other than that, great post.
SC2 is not even close to most of the casters in dota2. Unless we count humor, I really like the humor of some SC2 casters.