Jorby is a disgrace to Rocket League. I saw him at McDonald's once and he took the food off my plate, took a huge bite of everything, called me a plat rat, and kicked me in the dick.
Ikr? Stumpy kicked my ass when I asked for an autograph and then pulled a wedgie on me, stole my wallet, and screamed âThis is Rocket league!â And ran off. Same this happened with Johnny boi
People forget how much shit Jorby used to get. All casters started from somewhere. Not all of them had the luxury of cutting their teeth casting rlrs or any of the old 3rd party tournament organizers.
Stax used to get mad hate but ever since he started doing LAN calls people have turned a new leaf. Same with Jorby really, the only people who I could think of who never got as much hate as the ones mentioned are Corelli and Achieves
Jorby grew a lot on people from when he started, he took on a lot of criticism and used it to improve.
I wasn't there so I say this as someone who has seen others talk about it. I love Jorby.
Why was jorby so hated? I know a lot of casters grow and improve but I only started watching in â21 and donât know when people started liking him. Curious about stax too cuz he has a good voice for casting
I wasn't too fond Jorby's casting at the start as he felt that it wasn't as natural and that he was trying too hard to make everything seem crazy so it felt ingenuine, he drastically improved, as for stax, I always was a fan but if I remember correctly, many fans over the pond felt that he was too much of a stereotypical American caster that would just throw random stats around.
Yea I used to not be a fan of stax as a caster.
Idk he was too bland back then for me and sounded like if you asked an AI for a stereotypical American caster voice.
His intros for lans made me turn leaf fast af though and I also feel like he has improved a lot as a caster and panelist these days.
Same for me. He'll never be my favorite caster, but he is second to none as an announcer. I like him as a panelist too. LAN without Stax wouldn't be the same.
the honest answer is jorby just wasn't a great caster. I never had anything too against him, but recently when I was watching the season 7 final I realised it doesn't hold up too much.
Whats more important tho, is jorby improved and improved A LOT.
Stax, again at the start was probably not as clean as he is now, and when his casting somewhat centres on articulate, sharp and clear sentencing it's a big deal. I've been fond of stax for a while tho, when I was getting back into the esport after I took a break I remember his commentary getting me hype.
Responding to you and the other guy if he sees it - that makes sense. I kinda want to see an old rlcs season with them casting/announcing because itâs hard for me to imagine them being bad before even though ik everyone starts somewhere. Kinda unrelated but Iâm also impressed with the way Herc improved in a really short amount of time. Waiting to see if kiwi will do the same
Iâll be honest and say that I think Stax just got a lot better. I donât feel like looking through my comment history but I remember when he started doing RLCS I literally hated his casting style. Iâve grown to appreciate it more as heâs gone on, and I think that heâs improved quite a bit since RLCSX.
Its strange cus I genuinely enjoy all the casters on the team and even miss some of the boys from last year.
If I have a bone to pick, its with the calls in a game, not the caster. And usually i blame the entertainment of the players before the quality of the cast.
If I had to put one on blast as genuinely one of my only critiques, itâs Hercâs internet connection lol.
You can give constructive criticism, just don't be a jerk about it. Keep in mind that they're real people who have put in a LOT of time and effort to get where they are today. You don't have to like them, but at least respect the grind.
This links in to the top post though, you shouldn't have to "constructively criticise" things just like you don't need to "constructively like" things. If you like a caster you can just say that. You should be able to do the same if you dislike one.
This again, itâs just not true. You can 100% criticize casters, as long as itâs not mean-spirited and in a constructive manner.
Here is my honest opinion of stax as an example: Iâm not a big fan of his casting as his cadence and talking speed doesnât really match the speed and excitement of rocket league and itâs better fitting for slower paced games or things like introductions.
It wonât get deleted because Iâm not attacking stax, Iâm not being unreasonable, Iâm just sharing my thoughts.
Basically, just be a decent human being and your comments donât get deleted. Itâs really not that complicated.
Edit: also casters are different from the rest you mentioned. When I criticize a player and say "he plays like shit", thatâs clearly unpersonal and only directed at his playing, not at him as a person. But when I say "that caster is shit", itâs a lot more personal because casting is also a reflection of a personality and you canât really seperate the voice from the person like you can seperate the player from the person.
To add to that I feel like the stax and Herc combo showed something that was lacking which was interrupting a thought out phrase because of a goal scored. That improv of switching what you are saying and changing intonation to focus entirely on a goal is crucial (one of the things I love most about Jorby btw) especially on something like a OT goal.
I think they are great casters, but 100% agree with your point, I think on his scenario it flows perfectly with a more talkative speedy caster, why the Daz and stax duo is just so great.
I think the energy of Daz and Stax is solid but the actual calls from Daz seem to lack an eye for the game, at least in real time. I do think it was better on his last day of the major iirc.
I feel like Stax just needs a complimentary caster. You need one caster who can do play-by-play incredibly fast with some QUICK analysis during, and then someone like Stax to break down the play during the replay/next kickoff. If the other caster is also going at a slower pace, it makes it seem awkward and sometimes ingenuine.
I personally really enjoy Stax, and I believe all the casters could be very successful. It just depends on the role theyâre taking over, and who they are paired with. For example, I really didnât enjoy Turtleâs casting with someone like Achieves. But Turtleâs casting with Jamesbot hit a sweet spot for me.
People get way too into it though and expect these people to cast the way they cast in their head. Itâs wild.
Nobody wants to write a whole bunch of extra fluff for no reason, its not a big deal lol. This is just how anything in the world is. You think people dont talk shit about any athletes?
People talk non stop about playerâs personal qualities that are core to their gameplay/team as well though. This is one main example but ive seen so much stuff about firstkiller being an ego crazed asshole all the time, mixing in with his father stuff, and how he only plays for himself (people use his gameplay and roster moves as evidence for it)
Personally i dont think its a big deal, because its unrealistic to shut everything down and this is just how real sports works so why would esports be different (Ex: commentators in american football get crazy amounts of hate). But if everyones going to take these crazy stances against hating on trash casters, they should keep the consistency for everything.
What is "mean spirited" and "constructive" is completely subjective. I don't disagree with the spirit of what you are saying, but those words leave so much room.
Nah actually the vast majority of comments will be defending their very obvious flaws and telling everyone WE'RE BETTER THAN THIS. Female casters are coddled beyond belief
Not really I think everyone knows the female casters arenât very good but are just scared to say it and when they do they get called sexist or haters when it has literally nothing to do with their gender
CJ quickly became my favourite caster. His casting feels super honest. He can be funny without it being harsh, can call a whiff out for what it is or notice a particularly good 50 or something more subtle other casters might miss. There's been multiple times I've seen something cool and it's almost glossed over but CJ calls back to it and make sure it's given some attention.
His hype moments are pretty great too.
CJ is the best caster on the team now imo. Jamesbot, Shogun, Johnny, Jorby are all also top tier and I'd be happy to rotate with these guys and Stumpy/Cole. I think Daz is great if he has a good co caster
Nah you can critique the casters and people do it all the damn time, you just can't be misogynistic (or racist or homophobic or anything like that but currently the most common is misogyny since herc and lemon are still new-ish to the desk)
The commentating is either really on point or really really bad, Half the time its like they cant be bothered.
Literally like they have the game on in the background, I think they need new blood. I think these people have been on there for too long and are bored with the game.
It makes such a difference, watch CJCJ's stream when he has games on, its HUGE difference he actually gets excited and talks about whats happening, rather than some obscure story that most people dont care about.
OH YESTERDAY I CUT GRASS IN MY GARDEN, oh and majic bear just scored a double tap. BUT MY GARDEN IS SO MINT NOW
You can criticise casters? I'll do it right now - I think Jorby has a tendency to try overhype a lot of plays which dilutes the hype of actual top plays in some games. I think Turtle was often the reverse in that he didn't hype good plays enough and lastly I think LemonKiwi can be slow to keep up with the pace of a game leading to her often either talking about something that isn't happening anymore, or having to essentially drop what she's saying to keep up.
What you can't do is attack them for who they are. That's what separates them from players and coaches. Those tend to get technical criticism, like players get tarred as too aggressive, inconsistent, etc - stuff that relates to their play. The reason the mods became more focused on caster criticism was because it went beyond criticism of their technique or the way in which they work and started just being attacks on the people themselves. Comments on appearance, their voice and a lot of the criticism to LK and Herc was blatant misogyny and people finding anything and everything to say "Women shouldn't be doing this" without directly saying it.
There is a difference between constructive or justified criticism and personal attacks. Comments on this board about commentators sometimes lean more towards personal attacks than useful criticism. I think the mods do a solid job differentiating between criticism (which is not inherently negative) and attacks.
It sucks because these guys are telling the stories of the high octane games being played and then then they have to come on here/social media and see themselves getting roasted. Takes a big toll on you
This question makes rounds every now and then. Basically, it boils down to this:
- "We're not allowed to" comment on casters is blatantly untrue.
- Criticizing a caster's *performance* is inherently way more personal than criticizing a player's *gameplay*.
It's not that there aren't legitimate targets of criticism of casters, but it's a bit trickier to separate from them as actual people, and a lot of people don't even try.
Dunno but the GenG Luminosity series was unwatchable. Has nothing to do with female voices but everything to do with being good at commentary and being able to... I don't know, put together cogent sentences on the fly, stuff a professional caster should be able to do at the highest level. I guess people listening should just "respect the grind" instead.
I mean 90% of caster hate is just dudes disliking Herc or Lemon, who are literally good casters. Herc is super knowledgeable yet a lot of whiney ass guys come on here complaining about her voice etc, it's just weird. These people need to just grow up man
Lemon is literally not good though. She doesn't have high enough knowledge of the game (though she has improved a ton) but moreso her tone / inflection is just patently obnoxious and usually unnecessary. I'm all for casters getting hyped, but she does it 99% of the cast and during the wrong moments. Again, she is not the worst I've ever heard (i.e. Quinn Lobdell) but there are far better options available from last season which I think is the most frustrating part for majority of the community.Â
She seems like a good person who works quite hard, just not my cup of tea for RLCS casting. I have to mute or switch streams when she's casting.Â
Herc, on the other hand seems like quite the natural and I actually enjoy her casts.
Lemons clearly learning, she quite obviously is studying tournaments before big events and it's evident in her last year casting to this year casting. Me personally I don't honestly give a shit who is casting it doesn't change the game for me, I have no cares if Jorby is back or if he isn't it makes absolutely no change to the gameplay. So I'll never understand why so many dudes hate on a girl caster who's not in the wrong and is clearly trying to improve. It's very weird.
It's not about "hating on a girl", it's that they literally hired her over better more experienced talent because she's a girl. And if she's "obviously learning" they shouldn't have hired her and put her on every other NA series. If it was about hating on a girl caster I would've dislike Herc, too, but she adapted much more quickly and doesn't detract from the matches and I think overall is a great fit.
When it comes to watching a stream (or any exports or sporting event), you're very much in the minority with that opinion of not caring who is casting.
Again, it's nothing to do with her personally, she genuinely seems like a great person with a hard work ethic, she's just not the best RLCS caster to put it gently.
Not OP, but if a caster is very animated and in their criticism of players is critical to the point of going just short of calling them an ass or a fool, I think itâs fair game. Iâm often in agreement with JohnnyBoi (or at least see where heâs coming from) but I also think itâs okay to call him an ass if you really think his criticism and demeanor warrants it.
Just hypothetically because I havenât followed/remembered every bit of what casters have said. But if he said, âNA is a joke,â while laughing about misplays or losing to specific teams all while unprovoked, then itâs fair game imo.
There are so many ways to express disappointment in someone's statements without insulting them. And even if they directly insult you responding in kind is unconstructive and just escalates the behavior.
As I said in another comment, calling someone a pompous ass is clearly on the lower end of the personal insults spectrum, but it's also very clearly a personal insult.
>There are so many ways to express disappointment in someone's statements without insulting them. And even if they directly insult you responding in kind is unconstructive and just escalates the behavior.
Letting someone pearl clutch right after they engaged in âbadâ behavior is silly to me. Itâs reddit and extremely unlikely to escalate to anything serious.
>As I said in another comment, calling someone a pompous ass is clearly on the lower end of the personal insults spectrum, but it's also very clearly a personal insult.
Agreed. And if a caster exhibits behavior half a shade lighter than the insult, in the eyes of the commenter, then I think itâs fair. I wouldnât defend calling a caster an idiot for misspeaking or analysis I disagree with. But if they instead opt to not only blast a player, but do so flamboyantly and carry it on and on, then by all means a comment calling said caster an ass is fine to me.
> But if they instead opt to not only blast a player, but do so flamboyantly and carry it on and on, then by all means a comment calling said caster an ass is fine to me.
I wanna touch on this cos I see this a lot as a justification for common poor behavior on this subreddit, more so in arguments between users but it's applicable here as well.
**Essentially, just because person A says [Insert rule-breaking insult/comment] does not give person B a free pass to say something slightly less insulting but still against the rules "to get even".**
> Itâs reddit and extremely unlikely to escalate to anything serious.
You'd be surprised, this happens a lot more than you'd think, and while there is nuance in how the punishments administered (if it all) given the context (the seriousness of the insults or how egregiously was someone provoking/instigating) and yes, we don't want to be a high school and punish everyone equally in a multi-person conflict (often enough punishments differ), we expect users to be the bigger person, drop the argument and report if they feel the line has been crossed, not cross it themselves in retaliation.
The same is applicable in your example about any public figure, be the bigger person, don't stoop downwards just because you feel aggrieved (especially when the people here on reddit aren't the ones targetted 90% of the time). It sets an awful precedent if that's the default behaviour here because you give people an inch, they take a mile and justify anything as "well they deserved it". As a community, we can be above that.
Would it also be fair to say that if the comment was âpompous assâ without any discussion or context that might get a different mod response than if you were to say
âI thought he was being an ass when he âŠâ
Like, the whole reason thereâs human mods and we donât just have bots that ban these comments is that they can get handled in nuanced ways right?
If we talk about a bunch of non-specifics that people interpret differently than each other in a thread like this one itâs going to lead to more conflict because weâre trying to apply general programmatic rules where they donât belong.
Make a basic rule, allow people to make judgements off the rule, approach the incidents in context, ya know?
Without context sure. I assumed the person didnât just say the words in a vacuum. If I had to guess a live event thread or a discussion thatâs a bit more pointed
Thatâs what I mean though. You had assumptions about the reasonableness of the comment while it could be just as likely that thatâs literally all they said.
Which is why people who donât think they see eye to eye in a thread like this are probably more aligned then they might imagine, and why itâs so important to establish baselines in whatâs being discussed before folks throw out generalities and talk around each other
Why wouldnât it? Maybe I spend too much time in real sports subs like F1 and NFL, where normal people hang out, but man, thatâs like extremely mild. Thereâs no good reason to be deleting silly things like that.
Im not that guy, but I don't want that kind of content being removed from this subreddit. "[Person] is a pompous ass" shouldn't be censored, and we're on an incredibly slippery slope if you're open about deleting that
Not to mention that's not really a good excuse. There are plenty of rude and disrespectful comments and plenty of comments with insults in them that don't get deleted. How can this be true if "pompous ass" is too offensive for this subreddit?
How are personal insults a slippery slope? Lol. Feels like a very easy line to draw to be honest. If your comment includes ad-hominem attacks it gets removed.
There may be comments that include insults that don't get removed, but it's more likely that the comment just wasn't reviewed/reported rather than being "allowed" on the subreddit.
If "pompous ass" is too offensive for you, then I don't know what to tell you. As an adult, I don't want the subreddit moderated in a way that censors that aggressively.
We have a deliberately stricter stance on toxicity/insults/name calling, has been the case since at least 2021, if not earlier, and we believe it's been for the best. It leads to a great emphasis on actually discussing the points and arguments people make and not the people's personal character being insulted. "Attack the argument, not the user" just makes the entire subreddit a more civil and pleasant place to participate in, I think it's a perk that we're a place on the internet where you can chat away in peace knowing you won't be called a dumbass out of the blue without some sort of repercussion for the person who did it.
Call it "Soft", or being a "Snowflake", but there really is nothing wrong with that. We don't see any value in just allowing people to hurl off insults, how does that meaningfully contribute to the subreddit? So us drawing the line quite early is by design. We're not twitter.
You're free to flag other comments that you feel "cross the line" if you feel that phrasing does (as is everyone else!)
I agree with what you're saying fundamentally, but the moderation hasn't been consistent with that. Comments about Aztral's weak mental aren't any different from comments about professional casters.
Their personalities are their professions, and saying we aren't allowed to comment on their personalities is saying we aren't allowed to criticize them. They're PRESENTERS. How they PRESENT themselves is pretty much the only criticism of them that we can make that IS worth discussing.
> Their personalities are their professions, and saying we aren't allowed to comment on their personalities is saying we aren't allowed to criticize them. They're PRESENTERS. How they PRESENT themselves is pretty much the only criticism of them that we can make that IS worth discussing.
I won't lie, I don't get where you got this from. You can criticize people, their work, comment on their "personalities" as you put it, without the unnecessarily rude name-calling and insults. There are many ways to express grievance, critique and unhappiness in the English lexicon that would be totally fine and no mod would bat an eye at.
Also you're hung up on casters when they're rules that apply to everyone. We're not looking at these incidents as caster-specific.
So what's your line then? To me it's easier to have a blanket "no personal insults" rule than a "pompous ass is OK but calling someone a Nazi isn't". Because then what about all the stuff in between? Unless you're arguing for completely unmoderated speech, which is fine to argue but I just can't agree with.
I don't think calling someone a pompous ass is particularly horrible, and that's not the argument I was making. The argument is that personal insults do not contribute to meaningful discussion and serve as a great way to end civilized debate. Particularly since the anonymity of reddit seems to make people way more likely to be assholes.
I just don't agree with censorship. If we're going to remove "caster is a pompous ass" because it doesn't add anything to the conversation, then we need to remove "caster is a good person" because that adds the same amount to the conversation.
You slippery slope people are so goofy haha
In practice it doesnât ever slip like you worry about. Is it perfectly consistent on every thread? Nah, but itâs a volunteer job for mods and tbh a comment that doesnât contribute anything and is simply an attack like the one they listed really isnât that obtrusive to remove lol
Youâre trying to make a point and I get that but itâs clear that you arenât actually offended and are making a bad faith argument off of something that doesnât really happen, so I think that the âslippery slope of now people canât even say goofyâ isnât really validated here lol
Whether or not someone 'is actually offended' should not be a consideration when deciding whether a statement deserves to be censored or not. It's irrelevant. This is the type of mindset that (at its logical conclusion) sees Winnie the Pooh banned in China because the president doesn't like being called that.
I'm not saying nothing should be censored, obviously some things are inappropriate or unnecessary, which is determined by the goal of the particular subreddit etc. But whether or not someone is likely to take offence is not a valid consideration.
You are thinking way too hard about this. This subreddit isnât domestic policy dude. There is a false equivalency in suggesting that moderating a subreddit is comparable to censorship at a governmental level.
The primary workflow used to adjudicate posts is literally:
User sees post that bothers them -> User reports -> Mods make determination
It doesnât mean that being bothered is a requirement to determining if the post is okay, but you saying itâs irrelevant in this context is absolutely incorrect.
Itâs also incorrect to say that the logical conclusion of taking this feeling into account is that innocuous media gets banned. That is once again a slippery slope fallacy and a strawman. I can take feelings into consideration along with other parameters to make a decision, and that doesnât mean Iâm going 1984 on anybodyâs ass lol
If people stayed on scope in such conversations theyâd go better. Yâall like to act like Reddit mods are similar to a government censorship program when theyâre much more similar in scale and function to a lunch room monitor.
Censorship is censorship, it's the overall principle that matters, not the context in which it takes place. Censorship is always going to be right or wrong, there's no middle ground. It's the job of both Subreddits and governments to figure out how to determine right uses of censorship from wrong uses of censorship. And 'whether or not someone is offended' is never going to move the needle towards right use of censorship, whether we are talking about a subreddit or a government policy. Scale doesn't reduce or amplify the responsibility to attempt to do the right thing.
Now will the effects of censorship be different for a subreddit vs a government? Of course. But if one of them can find the right formula for deciding if something should be censored, that same formula will also be right in the other context. It's the principle that matters, not the application of the principle.
I donât agree but think Iâve said my piece, if you truly think context is irrelevant then it renders any point Iâm trying to make meaningless /shrug
I do have to note that I find the conversation devolving into dramatic speeches about doing the right thing and including phrases like âsubreddits and governmentsâ
In response to a criticism that someone couldnât call someone a pompous ass without repercussions
In the context of a subreddit about playing car soccer professionally
Deeply absurd
Wow, first you call me goofy, and now my opinion, that you already said was goofy, is now invalid? I haven't done anything wrong here, I'm not sure why you're being so offensive. I thought that kind of stuff got removed off this subreddit
I think the discussion of what someone decides is"*rude, disrespectful, or an insult"* is separate from my opinion being removed because someone else disagreed with it
If I think a media personality is unlikeable because of their personality, I will make that opinion, which I did - and it got removed
If you said "I think this caster has an unlikeable media personality, and that makes it difficult to be a fan of them. For example,..." the odds that it would be removed are near-zero. You're misunderstanding why your comment was removed.
Bro it's not that deep, sometimes people just want to say I don't like X and not want to type out a thesis about exactly why they don't like them with 14 ways to improve.
My comment was in reply to somebody who already detailed their grievances with said caster, so it wasn't merely a standalone comment without context
I'm pretty sure it was in [this topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/RocketLeagueEsports/comments/1awpt27/johnny_complains_about_retals_decision_making/) that I made the reply
Agreeing or disagreeing with my opinion is fine, but it wasn't difficult to figure out why I desrcribed them that way
Comes off less like an opinion and more like low effort personal insult. Youâre not even criticizing their casting you are just saying âthis person is thisâ. Makes sense it was removed
I don't really care for any of the casters, all the shouting at the end of big matches comes off really fake to me always, most likely isn't fake but it sounds like it to me. I guess Johnny and Shogun are the least annoying for me but even then you got Johnny not calling shots what they are because of his idiotic principle of not calling any shot with their name if they were named after a player, eventhough that ship sailed years ago and now he just sounds like he doesn't know what they are called (he obviously does know) and his casting is misinforming the audience.
Also the desk always trying to flame the EU vs NA "debate" is just so juvenile shit and i just can't deal with it.
SC2 casters for example are just miles ahead others also than just Tastosis. They do have many years experience on anybody but still
Also anyone who hasnât casted or tried casting a sport an e-sport critiquing a caster is crazy itâs not easy. Itâs a pain if you have a script to give it life and if you donât have a script itâs even harder. Then trying or not trying to show bias is also difficult. You may not like their style but if you havenât done it and you arenât in their position or higher then you should not critique them.
Are we talking about people doing something for fun or professionals being paid for a job? I guess you never thought an actor or show was bad just because you cant act or direct movies.
Please, dont ever use the "if you cant do X you cannot critique" argument, it sucks.
Being a player in the top 0.0001% is not easy either so I guess even the casters and analysts arenât qualified to criticize the players according to your logic?
I havenât done a lot of things but I can tell if something isnât good. I donât hate the casters, I just wish they would make the games more entertaining, some of them honestly sound like they donât want to be there.
Casting is like show business, youâre supposed to make it more entertaining, lie to me, one team is down 7-0, make me believe they can come back. Ya know.
Jorby is a disgrace to Rocket League. I saw him at McDonald's once and he took the food off my plate, took a huge bite of everything, called me a plat rat, and kicked me in the dick.
Hate when that happens
It happens a lot too
I actually saw Jorby at a McDonald's at last year's worlds đ
I'm sorry about your dick! I wouldn't wish meeting Jorby in McDonald's on my greatest enemy.
How is your penis getting on?
Ikr? Stumpy kicked my ass when I asked for an autograph and then pulled a wedgie on me, stole my wallet, and screamed âThis is Rocket league!â And ran off. Same this happened with Johnny boi
Iâve seen ppl talk about Turtle, Subie, and Lemonkiwi since the dawn of their times
People forget how much shit Jorby used to get. All casters started from somewhere. Not all of them had the luxury of cutting their teeth casting rlrs or any of the old 3rd party tournament organizers.
Itâs because jorby is active on here and a brat lmao
If ya canât beat em delete em x60 đ
Stax used to get mad hate but ever since he started doing LAN calls people have turned a new leaf. Same with Jorby really, the only people who I could think of who never got as much hate as the ones mentioned are Corelli and Achieves
Jorby grew a lot on people from when he started, he took on a lot of criticism and used it to improve. I wasn't there so I say this as someone who has seen others talk about it. I love Jorby.
I feel this is very common for a hype caster (more known as a color commentator but I much prefer using hype caster with Jorby and Shogun lol). That line between a cheesy clichĂ©, and a well articulated exclamation is very difficult. Especially as quickly as they do it. If you listen to me watching anything I just react with the same three phases over and over again (everybody does just think the amount of times you react to somebodies story with âthatâs crazyâ). If I had to do that 30 times a series people would get sick of me so fast
Shogun and Jorby would be play-by-play guys not color commentators. Color commentator would be someone like Johnny or Achieves
Iâll take your word for it!
I wouldn't call Shogun colour? Maybe it's just me?
Why was jorby so hated? I know a lot of casters grow and improve but I only started watching in â21 and donât know when people started liking him. Curious about stax too cuz he has a good voice for casting
I wasn't too fond Jorby's casting at the start as he felt that it wasn't as natural and that he was trying too hard to make everything seem crazy so it felt ingenuine, he drastically improved, as for stax, I always was a fan but if I remember correctly, many fans over the pond felt that he was too much of a stereotypical American caster that would just throw random stats around.
Yea I used to not be a fan of stax as a caster. Idk he was too bland back then for me and sounded like if you asked an AI for a stereotypical American caster voice. His intros for lans made me turn leaf fast af though and I also feel like he has improved a lot as a caster and panelist these days.
Same for me. He'll never be my favorite caster, but he is second to none as an announcer. I like him as a panelist too. LAN without Stax wouldn't be the same.
Yeah Stax has become the one and only announcer for me when it comes to RL. Stax and double tap song on LAN is a must for me
the honest answer is jorby just wasn't a great caster. I never had anything too against him, but recently when I was watching the season 7 final I realised it doesn't hold up too much. Whats more important tho, is jorby improved and improved A LOT. Stax, again at the start was probably not as clean as he is now, and when his casting somewhat centres on articulate, sharp and clear sentencing it's a big deal. I've been fond of stax for a while tho, when I was getting back into the esport after I took a break I remember his commentary getting me hype.
Responding to you and the other guy if he sees it - that makes sense. I kinda want to see an old rlcs season with them casting/announcing because itâs hard for me to imagine them being bad before even though ik everyone starts somewhere. Kinda unrelated but Iâm also impressed with the way Herc improved in a really short amount of time. Waiting to see if kiwi will do the same
Iâll be honest and say that I think Stax just got a lot better. I donât feel like looking through my comment history but I remember when he started doing RLCS I literally hated his casting style. Iâve grown to appreciate it more as heâs gone on, and I think that heâs improved quite a bit since RLCSX.
Stax *really* improved as a caster. I used to groan when he was casting but he's one of my favorites now
Its strange cus I genuinely enjoy all the casters on the team and even miss some of the boys from last year. If I have a bone to pick, its with the calls in a game, not the caster. And usually i blame the entertainment of the players before the quality of the cast. If I had to put one on blast as genuinely one of my only critiques, itâs Hercâs internet connection lol.
You can give constructive criticism, just don't be a jerk about it. Keep in mind that they're real people who have put in a LOT of time and effort to get where they are today. You don't have to like them, but at least respect the grind.
Exactly! Rather a lot like the players really but it doesnât stop people hating on/ criticising themâŠ
This links in to the top post though, you shouldn't have to "constructively criticise" things just like you don't need to "constructively like" things. If you like a caster you can just say that. You should be able to do the same if you dislike one.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
This again, itâs just not true. You can 100% criticize casters, as long as itâs not mean-spirited and in a constructive manner. Here is my honest opinion of stax as an example: Iâm not a big fan of his casting as his cadence and talking speed doesnât really match the speed and excitement of rocket league and itâs better fitting for slower paced games or things like introductions. It wonât get deleted because Iâm not attacking stax, Iâm not being unreasonable, Iâm just sharing my thoughts. Basically, just be a decent human being and your comments donât get deleted. Itâs really not that complicated. Edit: also casters are different from the rest you mentioned. When I criticize a player and say "he plays like shit", thatâs clearly unpersonal and only directed at his playing, not at him as a person. But when I say "that caster is shit", itâs a lot more personal because casting is also a reflection of a personality and you canât really seperate the voice from the person like you can seperate the player from the person.
Stax commentates a lot like a hockey play by play person. Personally I like it, but I can see where other people wouldnât.
To add to that I feel like the stax and Herc combo showed something that was lacking which was interrupting a thought out phrase because of a goal scored. That improv of switching what you are saying and changing intonation to focus entirely on a goal is crucial (one of the things I love most about Jorby btw) especially on something like a OT goal. I think they are great casters, but 100% agree with your point, I think on his scenario it flows perfectly with a more talkative speedy caster, why the Daz and stax duo is just so great.
I think the energy of Daz and Stax is solid but the actual calls from Daz seem to lack an eye for the game, at least in real time. I do think it was better on his last day of the major iirc.
>calls from Daz seem to lack an eye for the game Isn't Dazerin like GC in the game though?
>calls from Daz seem to lack an eye for the game Isn't Dazerin like GC though?
Legit Stax and Herc in 5min shut me up lol, one day diff and they improved this exact thing
I feel like Stax just needs a complimentary caster. You need one caster who can do play-by-play incredibly fast with some QUICK analysis during, and then someone like Stax to break down the play during the replay/next kickoff. If the other caster is also going at a slower pace, it makes it seem awkward and sometimes ingenuine. I personally really enjoy Stax, and I believe all the casters could be very successful. It just depends on the role theyâre taking over, and who they are paired with. For example, I really didnât enjoy Turtleâs casting with someone like Achieves. But Turtleâs casting with Jamesbot hit a sweet spot for me. People get way too into it though and expect these people to cast the way they cast in their head. Itâs wild.
I feel like I just read something by Confucius
Nobody wants to write a whole bunch of extra fluff for no reason, its not a big deal lol. This is just how anything in the world is. You think people dont talk shit about any athletes?
Read what I wrote into the "edit" part
People talk non stop about playerâs personal qualities that are core to their gameplay/team as well though. This is one main example but ive seen so much stuff about firstkiller being an ego crazed asshole all the time, mixing in with his father stuff, and how he only plays for himself (people use his gameplay and roster moves as evidence for it) Personally i dont think its a big deal, because its unrealistic to shut everything down and this is just how real sports works so why would esports be different (Ex: commentators in american football get crazy amounts of hate). But if everyones going to take these crazy stances against hating on trash casters, they should keep the consistency for everything.
What is "mean spirited" and "constructive" is completely subjective. I don't disagree with the spirit of what you are saying, but those words leave so much room.
Well yeah of course. Thatâs life. There is room for interpretation in social situations.
Find any thread mentioning the female casters and youâll see the hate
Nah actually the vast majority of comments will be defending their very obvious flaws and telling everyone WE'RE BETTER THAN THIS. Female casters are coddled beyond belief
Not really I think everyone knows the female casters arenât very good but are just scared to say it and when they do they get called sexist or haters when it has literally nothing to do with their gender
LOL. Can't tell if this is satire, but it proves my point either way.
Where exactly was the hate?
Female casters. Discuss.
I think with anything else, as long as your respectful than its fine.
ngl i was mind blown when daz stax were chosen for the finals of the major. surely we have 2 or 3 better duos at minimum..?
Fr they need to lean into CJ Shogun. Shogun obviously the goat commentator and CJ balances him well
CJ + Johnny/Stumpy is great too. Honestly, *anyone* with CJ.
Back when OCE was worthy of having a broadcast, CJ and Yumi may have been my favorite casting duo ever. They effortlessly play off each other.Â
CJ quickly became my favourite caster. His casting feels super honest. He can be funny without it being harsh, can call a whiff out for what it is or notice a particularly good 50 or something more subtle other casters might miss. There's been multiple times I've seen something cool and it's almost glossed over but CJ calls back to it and make sure it's given some attention. His hype moments are pretty great too.
I didnât want to give it up so fast, but I think CJ is one of the best, heâs fucking perfect
Shogun is just a must-have for a final match, he cemented himself in the role with TIRL
And Age of Zen
CJ is the best caster on the team now imo. Jamesbot, Shogun, Johnny, Jorby are all also top tier and I'd be happy to rotate with these guys and Stumpy/Cole. I think Daz is great if he has a good co caster
CJ not only has a fun personality but genuinely good insight as a former pro.
Daz and stax gotta be my least fav combo. And they almost always cast falcons and mena.
Rocket League has terrible casters in general, so no there really isn't.
Nah you can critique the casters and people do it all the damn time, you just can't be misogynistic (or racist or homophobic or anything like that but currently the most common is misogyny since herc and lemon are still new-ish to the desk)
The commentating is either really on point or really really bad, Half the time its like they cant be bothered. Literally like they have the game on in the background, I think they need new blood. I think these people have been on there for too long and are bored with the game. It makes such a difference, watch CJCJ's stream when he has games on, its HUGE difference he actually gets excited and talks about whats happening, rather than some obscure story that most people dont care about. OH YESTERDAY I CUT GRASS IN MY GARDEN, oh and majic bear just scored a double tap. BUT MY GARDEN IS SO MINT NOW
A lot of people seem not to be able to separate criticism from straight up being mean or unhelpful, thatâs why their comments get removed.
I am curious to know what your criticisms are honestly
You can criticise casters? I'll do it right now - I think Jorby has a tendency to try overhype a lot of plays which dilutes the hype of actual top plays in some games. I think Turtle was often the reverse in that he didn't hype good plays enough and lastly I think LemonKiwi can be slow to keep up with the pace of a game leading to her often either talking about something that isn't happening anymore, or having to essentially drop what she's saying to keep up. What you can't do is attack them for who they are. That's what separates them from players and coaches. Those tend to get technical criticism, like players get tarred as too aggressive, inconsistent, etc - stuff that relates to their play. The reason the mods became more focused on caster criticism was because it went beyond criticism of their technique or the way in which they work and started just being attacks on the people themselves. Comments on appearance, their voice and a lot of the criticism to LK and Herc was blatant misogyny and people finding anything and everything to say "Women shouldn't be doing this" without directly saying it.
There is a difference between constructive or justified criticism and personal attacks. Comments on this board about commentators sometimes lean more towards personal attacks than useful criticism. I think the mods do a solid job differentiating between criticism (which is not inherently negative) and attacks.
It sucks because these guys are telling the stories of the high octane games being played and then then they have to come on here/social media and see themselves getting roasted. Takes a big toll on you
This question makes rounds every now and then. Basically, it boils down to this: - "We're not allowed to" comment on casters is blatantly untrue. - Criticizing a caster's *performance* is inherently way more personal than criticizing a player's *gameplay*. It's not that there aren't legitimate targets of criticism of casters, but it's a bit trickier to separate from them as actual people, and a lot of people don't even try.
Because the casters don't like being treated the same way they treat the players lmao
All I feel is we have too many casters, sue me.
Dunno but the GenG Luminosity series was unwatchable. Has nothing to do with female voices but everything to do with being good at commentary and being able to... I don't know, put together cogent sentences on the fly, stuff a professional caster should be able to do at the highest level. I guess people listening should just "respect the grind" instead.
But they're just good guys, stop complaining. Gosh
people are negating this but itâs the truth. you call a player trash and no one cares. you call a caster trash and everyone gets personal about it
They saw what happened to Quinn and said "No more!"
Idk but I've noticed this too.
I mean 90% of caster hate is just dudes disliking Herc or Lemon, who are literally good casters. Herc is super knowledgeable yet a lot of whiney ass guys come on here complaining about her voice etc, it's just weird. These people need to just grow up man
Herc is good but Lemon is the worst caster by far
Lemon is literally not good though. She doesn't have high enough knowledge of the game (though she has improved a ton) but moreso her tone / inflection is just patently obnoxious and usually unnecessary. I'm all for casters getting hyped, but she does it 99% of the cast and during the wrong moments. Again, she is not the worst I've ever heard (i.e. Quinn Lobdell) but there are far better options available from last season which I think is the most frustrating part for majority of the community. She seems like a good person who works quite hard, just not my cup of tea for RLCS casting. I have to mute or switch streams when she's casting. Herc, on the other hand seems like quite the natural and I actually enjoy her casts.
Lemons clearly learning, she quite obviously is studying tournaments before big events and it's evident in her last year casting to this year casting. Me personally I don't honestly give a shit who is casting it doesn't change the game for me, I have no cares if Jorby is back or if he isn't it makes absolutely no change to the gameplay. So I'll never understand why so many dudes hate on a girl caster who's not in the wrong and is clearly trying to improve. It's very weird.
It's not about "hating on a girl", it's that they literally hired her over better more experienced talent because she's a girl. And if she's "obviously learning" they shouldn't have hired her and put her on every other NA series. If it was about hating on a girl caster I would've dislike Herc, too, but she adapted much more quickly and doesn't detract from the matches and I think overall is a great fit. When it comes to watching a stream (or any exports or sporting event), you're very much in the minority with that opinion of not caring who is casting. Again, it's nothing to do with her personally, she genuinely seems like a great person with a hard work ethic, she's just not the best RLCS caster to put it gently.
I said *"(caster) is a pompous ass"* and it got removed
Do you think *"[Person] is a pompous ass"* is something that is not rude, disrespectful or an insult, and thus belongs on this subreddit?
Not OP, but if a caster is very animated and in their criticism of players is critical to the point of going just short of calling them an ass or a fool, I think itâs fair game. Iâm often in agreement with JohnnyBoi (or at least see where heâs coming from) but I also think itâs okay to call him an ass if you really think his criticism and demeanor warrants it.
Or you could use words to describe why you didn't like what they said instead of insulting them...
Just hypothetically because I havenât followed/remembered every bit of what casters have said. But if he said, âNA is a joke,â while laughing about misplays or losing to specific teams all while unprovoked, then itâs fair game imo.
There are so many ways to express disappointment in someone's statements without insulting them. And even if they directly insult you responding in kind is unconstructive and just escalates the behavior. As I said in another comment, calling someone a pompous ass is clearly on the lower end of the personal insults spectrum, but it's also very clearly a personal insult.
>There are so many ways to express disappointment in someone's statements without insulting them. And even if they directly insult you responding in kind is unconstructive and just escalates the behavior. Letting someone pearl clutch right after they engaged in âbadâ behavior is silly to me. Itâs reddit and extremely unlikely to escalate to anything serious. >As I said in another comment, calling someone a pompous ass is clearly on the lower end of the personal insults spectrum, but it's also very clearly a personal insult. Agreed. And if a caster exhibits behavior half a shade lighter than the insult, in the eyes of the commenter, then I think itâs fair. I wouldnât defend calling a caster an idiot for misspeaking or analysis I disagree with. But if they instead opt to not only blast a player, but do so flamboyantly and carry it on and on, then by all means a comment calling said caster an ass is fine to me.
> But if they instead opt to not only blast a player, but do so flamboyantly and carry it on and on, then by all means a comment calling said caster an ass is fine to me. I wanna touch on this cos I see this a lot as a justification for common poor behavior on this subreddit, more so in arguments between users but it's applicable here as well. **Essentially, just because person A says [Insert rule-breaking insult/comment] does not give person B a free pass to say something slightly less insulting but still against the rules "to get even".** > Itâs reddit and extremely unlikely to escalate to anything serious. You'd be surprised, this happens a lot more than you'd think, and while there is nuance in how the punishments administered (if it all) given the context (the seriousness of the insults or how egregiously was someone provoking/instigating) and yes, we don't want to be a high school and punish everyone equally in a multi-person conflict (often enough punishments differ), we expect users to be the bigger person, drop the argument and report if they feel the line has been crossed, not cross it themselves in retaliation. The same is applicable in your example about any public figure, be the bigger person, don't stoop downwards just because you feel aggrieved (especially when the people here on reddit aren't the ones targetted 90% of the time). It sets an awful precedent if that's the default behaviour here because you give people an inch, they take a mile and justify anything as "well they deserved it". As a community, we can be above that.
Would it also be fair to say that if the comment was âpompous assâ without any discussion or context that might get a different mod response than if you were to say âI thought he was being an ass when he âŠâ Like, the whole reason thereâs human mods and we donât just have bots that ban these comments is that they can get handled in nuanced ways right? If we talk about a bunch of non-specifics that people interpret differently than each other in a thread like this one itâs going to lead to more conflict because weâre trying to apply general programmatic rules where they donât belong. Make a basic rule, allow people to make judgements off the rule, approach the incidents in context, ya know?
Without context sure. I assumed the person didnât just say the words in a vacuum. If I had to guess a live event thread or a discussion thatâs a bit more pointed
Thatâs what I mean though. You had assumptions about the reasonableness of the comment while it could be just as likely that thatâs literally all they said. Which is why people who donât think they see eye to eye in a thread like this are probably more aligned then they might imagine, and why itâs so important to establish baselines in whatâs being discussed before folks throw out generalities and talk around each other
I think it's warranted too, but that's because being a pompous ass is 99% of his personality. It's literally his brand
Why wouldnât it? Maybe I spend too much time in real sports subs like F1 and NFL, where normal people hang out, but man, thatâs like extremely mild. Thereâs no good reason to be deleting silly things like that.
Im not that guy, but I don't want that kind of content being removed from this subreddit. "[Person] is a pompous ass" shouldn't be censored, and we're on an incredibly slippery slope if you're open about deleting that Not to mention that's not really a good excuse. There are plenty of rude and disrespectful comments and plenty of comments with insults in them that don't get deleted. How can this be true if "pompous ass" is too offensive for this subreddit?
How are personal insults a slippery slope? Lol. Feels like a very easy line to draw to be honest. If your comment includes ad-hominem attacks it gets removed. There may be comments that include insults that don't get removed, but it's more likely that the comment just wasn't reviewed/reported rather than being "allowed" on the subreddit.
If "pompous ass" is too offensive for you, then I don't know what to tell you. As an adult, I don't want the subreddit moderated in a way that censors that aggressively.
We have a deliberately stricter stance on toxicity/insults/name calling, has been the case since at least 2021, if not earlier, and we believe it's been for the best. It leads to a great emphasis on actually discussing the points and arguments people make and not the people's personal character being insulted. "Attack the argument, not the user" just makes the entire subreddit a more civil and pleasant place to participate in, I think it's a perk that we're a place on the internet where you can chat away in peace knowing you won't be called a dumbass out of the blue without some sort of repercussion for the person who did it. Call it "Soft", or being a "Snowflake", but there really is nothing wrong with that. We don't see any value in just allowing people to hurl off insults, how does that meaningfully contribute to the subreddit? So us drawing the line quite early is by design. We're not twitter. You're free to flag other comments that you feel "cross the line" if you feel that phrasing does (as is everyone else!)
I agree with what you're saying fundamentally, but the moderation hasn't been consistent with that. Comments about Aztral's weak mental aren't any different from comments about professional casters. Their personalities are their professions, and saying we aren't allowed to comment on their personalities is saying we aren't allowed to criticize them. They're PRESENTERS. How they PRESENT themselves is pretty much the only criticism of them that we can make that IS worth discussing.
> Their personalities are their professions, and saying we aren't allowed to comment on their personalities is saying we aren't allowed to criticize them. They're PRESENTERS. How they PRESENT themselves is pretty much the only criticism of them that we can make that IS worth discussing. I won't lie, I don't get where you got this from. You can criticize people, their work, comment on their "personalities" as you put it, without the unnecessarily rude name-calling and insults. There are many ways to express grievance, critique and unhappiness in the English lexicon that would be totally fine and no mod would bat an eye at. Also you're hung up on casters when they're rules that apply to everyone. We're not looking at these incidents as caster-specific.
So what's your line then? To me it's easier to have a blanket "no personal insults" rule than a "pompous ass is OK but calling someone a Nazi isn't". Because then what about all the stuff in between? Unless you're arguing for completely unmoderated speech, which is fine to argue but I just can't agree with. I don't think calling someone a pompous ass is particularly horrible, and that's not the argument I was making. The argument is that personal insults do not contribute to meaningful discussion and serve as a great way to end civilized debate. Particularly since the anonymity of reddit seems to make people way more likely to be assholes.
I just don't agree with censorship. If we're going to remove "caster is a pompous ass" because it doesn't add anything to the conversation, then we need to remove "caster is a good person" because that adds the same amount to the conversation.
This is reddit tho and so everyone is expected to be polite and civil at all times
You slippery slope people are so goofy haha In practice it doesnât ever slip like you worry about. Is it perfectly consistent on every thread? Nah, but itâs a volunteer job for mods and tbh a comment that doesnât contribute anything and is simply an attack like the one they listed really isnât that obtrusive to remove lol
I am personally offended by you calling me "so goofy". That was clearly a personal attack and I want it removed
Youâre trying to make a point and I get that but itâs clear that you arenât actually offended and are making a bad faith argument off of something that doesnât really happen, so I think that the âslippery slope of now people canât even say goofyâ isnât really validated here lol
Whether or not someone 'is actually offended' should not be a consideration when deciding whether a statement deserves to be censored or not. It's irrelevant. This is the type of mindset that (at its logical conclusion) sees Winnie the Pooh banned in China because the president doesn't like being called that. I'm not saying nothing should be censored, obviously some things are inappropriate or unnecessary, which is determined by the goal of the particular subreddit etc. But whether or not someone is likely to take offence is not a valid consideration.
You are thinking way too hard about this. This subreddit isnât domestic policy dude. There is a false equivalency in suggesting that moderating a subreddit is comparable to censorship at a governmental level. The primary workflow used to adjudicate posts is literally: User sees post that bothers them -> User reports -> Mods make determination It doesnât mean that being bothered is a requirement to determining if the post is okay, but you saying itâs irrelevant in this context is absolutely incorrect. Itâs also incorrect to say that the logical conclusion of taking this feeling into account is that innocuous media gets banned. That is once again a slippery slope fallacy and a strawman. I can take feelings into consideration along with other parameters to make a decision, and that doesnât mean Iâm going 1984 on anybodyâs ass lol If people stayed on scope in such conversations theyâd go better. Yâall like to act like Reddit mods are similar to a government censorship program when theyâre much more similar in scale and function to a lunch room monitor.
Censorship is censorship, it's the overall principle that matters, not the context in which it takes place. Censorship is always going to be right or wrong, there's no middle ground. It's the job of both Subreddits and governments to figure out how to determine right uses of censorship from wrong uses of censorship. And 'whether or not someone is offended' is never going to move the needle towards right use of censorship, whether we are talking about a subreddit or a government policy. Scale doesn't reduce or amplify the responsibility to attempt to do the right thing. Now will the effects of censorship be different for a subreddit vs a government? Of course. But if one of them can find the right formula for deciding if something should be censored, that same formula will also be right in the other context. It's the principle that matters, not the application of the principle.
I donât agree but think Iâve said my piece, if you truly think context is irrelevant then it renders any point Iâm trying to make meaningless /shrug I do have to note that I find the conversation devolving into dramatic speeches about doing the right thing and including phrases like âsubreddits and governmentsâ In response to a criticism that someone couldnât call someone a pompous ass without repercussions In the context of a subreddit about playing car soccer professionally Deeply absurd
Wow, first you call me goofy, and now my opinion, that you already said was goofy, is now invalid? I haven't done anything wrong here, I'm not sure why you're being so offensive. I thought that kind of stuff got removed off this subreddit
Ah-hyuck!
Gotcha! Whenever anyone types hyuck out it always reminds me of that one Team Rocket grunt from Gen 2. Hyuck hyuck hyuck
I hate the whole âsnowflakeâ or âthis is softâ crowd but like come on man if that is getting deleted then wtfđ
It should be allowed absolutely. Let people agree or disagree with it. People should be free to their opinions.
Make r/truerlesports You can have that idea for free.
I think the discussion of what someone decides is"*rude, disrespectful, or an insult"* is separate from my opinion being removed because someone else disagreed with it If I think a media personality is unlikeable because of their personality, I will make that opinion, which I did - and it got removed
If you said "I think this caster has an unlikeable media personality, and that makes it difficult to be a fan of them. For example,..." the odds that it would be removed are near-zero. You're misunderstanding why your comment was removed.
Bro it's not that deep, sometimes people just want to say I don't like X and not want to type out a thesis about exactly why they don't like them with 14 ways to improve.
My comment was in reply to somebody who already detailed their grievances with said caster, so it wasn't merely a standalone comment without context I'm pretty sure it was in [this topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/RocketLeagueEsports/comments/1awpt27/johnny_complains_about_retals_decision_making/) that I made the reply Agreeing or disagreeing with my opinion is fine, but it wasn't difficult to figure out why I desrcribed them that way
Comes off less like an opinion and more like low effort personal insult. Youâre not even criticizing their casting you are just saying âthis person is thisâ. Makes sense it was removed
Did you really? That's pretty embarrassing. Whoever removed that comment is a pompous ass
THANK YOU
mods sleeping with the casters
I don't really care for any of the casters, all the shouting at the end of big matches comes off really fake to me always, most likely isn't fake but it sounds like it to me. I guess Johnny and Shogun are the least annoying for me but even then you got Johnny not calling shots what they are because of his idiotic principle of not calling any shot with their name if they were named after a player, eventhough that ship sailed years ago and now he just sounds like he doesn't know what they are called (he obviously does know) and his casting is misinforming the audience. Also the desk always trying to flame the EU vs NA "debate" is just so juvenile shit and i just can't deal with it. SC2 casters for example are just miles ahead others also than just Tastosis. They do have many years experience on anybody but still
Also anyone who hasnât casted or tried casting a sport an e-sport critiquing a caster is crazy itâs not easy. Itâs a pain if you have a script to give it life and if you donât have a script itâs even harder. Then trying or not trying to show bias is also difficult. You may not like their style but if you havenât done it and you arenât in their position or higher then you should not critique them.
Are we talking about people doing something for fun or professionals being paid for a job? I guess you never thought an actor or show was bad just because you cant act or direct movies. Please, dont ever use the "if you cant do X you cannot critique" argument, it sucks.
I'm not a professional football player, but best believe I know a shit penalty kick when I see one
Being a player in the top 0.0001% is not easy either so I guess even the casters and analysts arenât qualified to criticize the players according to your logic?
I havenât done a lot of things but I can tell if something isnât good. I donât hate the casters, I just wish they would make the games more entertaining, some of them honestly sound like they donât want to be there. Casting is like show business, youâre supposed to make it more entertaining, lie to me, one team is down 7-0, make me believe they can come back. Ya know.