Forged Alliance Forever

Re: Casting Styles

2015-07-03T21:57:36+02:00

well that's clearly comedy. reminds me of these series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_X5uR7 ... 9D57320E03

Statistics: Posted by pza — 03 Jul 2015, 21:57

Re: Casting Styles

2015-07-03T20:59:56+02:00

pza wrote:
The problem of casters casting themselves is, to an extend, that they gotta be humble when describing their own plays to not sound like an egocentric asshole. So basically "wow, that was a really good play, i didn't expect that!"-situations are impossible to happen.

Such biased casts therefore tend to sound less enthusiastic than other casts, and therefore could be less entertaining. Of course the value of entertainment depends on what acutally happened in a game, but to a degree the caster is in duty of emphasizing good plays.

agreed to disagree: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqAps2n6vJU

Statistics: Posted by SeraphimLeftNut — 03 Jul 2015, 20:59

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-30T20:28:29+02:00

I'm going to be casting my first game tomorrow and am currently planning to introduce a half-entertainment half-analytical approach as we don't appear to have that at the current moment.

With nearly 10 years playing Supreme Commander and over 1 year of being part of the FaF community it should be interesting...

Statistics: Posted by Morax — 30 Jun 2015, 20:28

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-30T17:11:47+02:00

From my own experience its better to avoid casting games with you, unless you want to specificly show what you did there and why, else its strange, since you know what happen and why you did what you did, etc...

Statistics: Posted by speed2 — 30 Jun 2015, 17:11

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-30T16:52:32+02:00

The problem of casters casting themselves is, to an extend, that they gotta be humble when describing their own plays to not sound like an egocentric asshole. So basically "wow, that was a really good play, i didn't expect that!"-situations are impossible to happen.

Such biased casts therefore tend to sound less enthusiastic than other casts, and therefore could be less entertaining. Of course the value of entertainment depends on what acutally happened in a game, but to a degree the caster is in duty of emphasizing good plays.

Statistics: Posted by pza — 30 Jun 2015, 16:52

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-30T13:44:30+02:00

You should cast in your own style. Don't try to change your personality to pander to the viewers, that never works anyway. Just cast games that you know a lot about (e.g. setons).

Statistics: Posted by Vee — 30 Jun 2015, 13:44

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-30T12:41:49+02:00

Do you prefer analytic or entertaining casts? - Analytic

Who is your favorite caster with an entertaining style? (don't know any is an option) - Gyle

Who is your favorite caster with an analytic style? (don't know any is an option) - TA4Life

Why do you prefer X type of casting and X caster? - As you get better you require more insight from a caster too

Do you prefer the caster to have viewed the game previously or no? (and why) - Yes, for maximum coverage of events

Do you think analytic casts have the potential to improve the play of viewers? - Hell yeah

Do you think entertaining casts have the potential to improve the play of viewers? - To a degree, yes

Do you like POV casts where the commentator can take you through their own decision making in depth? - Yes

Do you dislike when casters casts themselves? - No

Do you think casts (the specific replay itself) should only be uploaded on one channel (meaning also one style)? - No

Does it bother you when casters show lack of game knowledge during a cast? - Yes

Statistics: Posted by Col_Walter_Kurtz — 30 Jun 2015, 12:41

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-29T02:45:35+02:00

Do you prefer analytic or entertaining casts?
Analytic

Who is your favorite caster with an entertaining style? (don't know any is an option)T
Gyle

Who is your favorite caster with an analytic style? (don't know any is an option)
TA

Why do you prefer X type of casting and X caster?
I watch to learn not to have fun. TA is a good POV player to watch ... he's got a nice balance between entertainment and analysis, giving not too much of either.

Do you prefer the caster to have viewed the game previously or no? (and why)
No I think for both entertainment and analysis its better to do it naturally. Would give artificial results otherwise

Do you think analytic casts have the potential to improve the play of viewers?
Yes of course

Do you think entertaining casts have the potential to improve the play of viewers?
Yes definately for newer players. There was a point that I didn't know the role of a percival.

Do you like POV casts where the commentator can take you through their own decision making in depth?
Like what? I don't think I've seen a cast like that ... normally players are too busy. Maybe they might say some stuff here and there but I wouldn't call it in depth. Anyway yes I would love that.

Do you dislike when casters casts themselves?
Not sure, you could try it.

Do you think casts (the specific replay itself) should only be uploaded on one channel (meaning also one style)?
No. I think you can recast anything if you are going to give it a different spin.

Does it bother you when casters show lack of game knowledge during a cast?
No.

You know there is another type of cast no one does ... you could get someone elses point of view video and critique it.

Statistics: Posted by nine2 — 29 Jun 2015, 02:45

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-28T01:38:54+02:00

I don't fully understand zooming issue. I don't really like when people scroll screen by moveing mouse to corner or with arrow keys. When some one uses arrow keys for camera i often feel like something dies inside of me.
Tracking unit can be cool often times.
When Gyle makes his casts i often feel like he is almost afraid to zoom in and out to fast, so he zooms into things and stays there for longer than it is comfortable for me, and meanwhile there could be ton of other things happeninh around the map... Some times it even makes me curious so i have to go find replay and watch it, so i can know what actually happened in game while caster was zoomed into some land battles.

I understand that this might be only my personal preference and most of people are as blind as BRINK or Gyle when comes to viewing things from strategic zoon (fully zoomed out)

Also i wanna note that Brink might miss some things but they are tend to be on his screen so viewer can see them, while in Gyle casts you may miss things cause you are zoomed little bit to far

Statistics: Posted by ZLO_RD — 28 Jun 2015, 01:38

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-27T11:20:58+02:00

Do you prefer analytic or entertaining casts?

Analytic

Who is your favorite caster with an entertaining style?

Gyle. But I regularly look for a short cast to watch and miss BRNKoINSANITY's speedruns.

Who is your favorite caster with an analytic style?

TA4Life is my favorite caster. His balance between entertainment and showing the depth of the game kept me interested to keep playing.
At the moment the caster that makes me really happy when he has a new cast, is LuXun.
Also really nice analysis: Zock and Styrbjorn (Inside Seton)

Do you prefer the caster to have viewed the game previously or no? (and why)

Only with an entertaining style I think big events are bad to miss. Not such a big deal in a detailed analysis.

Do you think analytic casts have the potential to improve the play of viewers?

Yes

Do you think entertaining casts have the potential to improve the play of viewers?

If they showcase creative playing, yes.

Do you like POV casts where the commentator can take you through their own decision making in depth?

Yes, and it is OK if they are too busy to comment a lot. If the player is interesting, like ZLO.

Do you dislike when casters casts themselves?

Fine with me.

Do you think casts (the specific replay itself) should only be uploaded on one channel (meaning also one style)?

No. But I miss TA's "featured" selection. A FAF Youtube channel that links to new FA casts would be nice.

Does it bother you when casters show lack of game knowledge during a cast?

There would have to be something else to make up for that then, to still make it interesting.

Statistics: Posted by ax0lotl — 27 Jun 2015, 11:20

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-27T10:41:34+02:00

One more thing that I think should be mentioned: Pet peeves with casters.

One thing which is particularly bad is zooming. When you're playing supcom you're in charge of zooming and hence you can zoom about the map more or less with impunity. But when you're watching someone else cast a game you generally have absolutely no idea when or where the guy in charge of the camera is going to change the view. For scrolling this is less of an issue, but with zooming it's really different and quite difficult. Without being very familiar with the game you often end up looking at things which just flash offscreen or dance around, and it's really uncomfortable to watch.

Zooming in on things to highlight them is good, and if you make a mistake and have to readjust to catch an explosion that's fine, but the one thing you should avoid at all costs is scrolling around the map by zooming. Supcom automatically 'centres' the screen around your cursor when you're zooming in, and so you can use that to center the view by wiggling in and out. This is particularly horrible for the viewer. Instead, use middle click and drag the screen about. Dragging is so much more natural to watch and is amazing and you should use it.

Brink and I think Gyle went through a brief stage where they tried to slow down their zoom speed to get around the issue, but I think that just makes things lethargic and uncomfortable. I haven't had many problems with zooming in or out quickly, it's more about rapid changes of perspective messing with the viewer's automatic predictions of where things will be on the screen that gives headaches.

Statistics: Posted by ZenTractor — 27 Jun 2015, 10:41

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-27T10:13:36+02:00

If I may:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd6fXb ... IMA/videos

Statistics: Posted by --- — 27 Jun 2015, 10:13

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-27T09:44:46+02:00

What name do you post casts under? I can't find you anywhere.

Statistics: Posted by ZenTractor — 27 Jun 2015, 09:44

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-27T09:37:28+02:00

/me pushes button "quick reply" cause aint got much time...

i think i shared you my ideas via aeolus whisper couple of weeks/days ago. and most of all i appreciate your will to enhance, to receive feedback. this is the way to go.

zenTractor elaborated the questions very well, and i agree to him to a 90% extend, the missing 10% is about RuneNorse, which is a caster i didn't watch yet, so I can't say anthing.

In addition, tbh, the latest BRNKoINSANITY casts were more entertaining than earlier tutorials and such. IMO it's currently a good mix of both. If you get too analytic, Non-FAF players will lose patience. a little bit of analysis is good tho even for Non-FAFlers, just to show them that the game is pretty well balanced and there's an answer to everything.

Statistics: Posted by pza — 27 Jun 2015, 09:37

Re: Casting Styles

2015-06-27T04:09:26+02:00

I watch a fair amount of casts, and have been submitting a few to the subreddit for several months now. I don't think I've seen your stuff yet, so I'll have to get investigating.

Generally I think that you can be analytic or entertaining, but you should pick your style for each individual cast. The principle three casters that I watch are Gyle, BRNKoINSANITY and RuneNorse, and they span this spectrum rather well.

Gyle does great work giving an 'entertainment' cast. He updates people about the details and what's on in the community, he tells you about the people playing and their styles, he glorifies the UEF. His casting tends to be reactionary: he describes what's happening and clues you into things which might be on the cards without telling you what's a 'good play' or what 'should be done in this situation'. Gyle took a break a little while ago, and since he came back his casts haven't quite been the same. I assume part of this comes from his disconnect with the community.

BRNK, on the other hand, does a good analytic cast. He tells you why people are doing things and what is a good idea in that situation. He also tells you about the roles of positions people are in, and when to expect certain plays and how they might be countered. He offers advice to the players in his games, and hence to the viewers. To be honest, BRNK's casts didn't interest me much when I wasn't playing FAF, but they've become more useful now. To a non-player, they're full of jargon and time wasted talking about statistics which could be spent showing off explosions.

RuneNorse is a newer caster, and hasn't really found his voice/style. He obviously takes a fair amount of cues from Gyle, but likes to add his own advice, as well as chastise players. Sometimes he seems to get bored with casts and start rambling. This isn't explicitly bad, but I am more in the casts for the casts than the characters. That's just me, though. RuneNorse might turn out to be a great caster with some more practice, so I'm keeping an eye on him.

Do you prefer the caster to have viewed the game previously or no? (and why)

This is a tricky one. I think it would be best if a caster had watched a game before and knew when important things were happening (such as ACU or eco snipes), but given the length of supcom games I feel that asking a caster to do that is doubling his workload, and is hence a little unfair. It's probably worth watching things through on +6 and noting down times of important events when checking for descyncs. I don't have any casting experience, but from watching replays I think that it should be possible to get some critical information like that.

Do you think analytic casts have the potential to improve the play of viewers?
Do you think entertaining casts have the potential to improve the play of viewers?

I for sure think that analytic casts have the potential to improve the play of viewers. Especially for people like myself, who fall in the middle of the road in terms of skill. There's a lot of little things to improve on and even more things that just need constant reminders. What is the exact range of a t2 stationary arty? How many mass points does a TML need to hit to be cost effective? That sort of thing.

Entertaining casts... less so. You're more likely to get information such as; "Loyalists reflect TMLs" or "Harbringers can reclaim" from these casts, which I suspect players of at least average level to already know. They're more game facts than play improving tips. However entertainment casts serve another very useful purpose: they attract new players to the game. Watching giant experimentals walk forwards an destroy armies before getting nuked might not be good play or teach you anything, but it's damn fun and makes you want to participate.

Do you like POV casts where the commentator can take you through their own decision making in depth?
Do you dislike when casters casts themselves?

I like these casts conditionally. When the player is telling you -why- they're building tanks now and why they switch up to air then it's really insightful. However when they're just playing the game, then you often spend most of your time looking at factories and getting bored. When it's a team-game with people on chat it can be entertaining, but I think I'd get more fun from watching an 'entertainment' cast with full view of both sides of the battlefield.

Statistics: Posted by ZenTractor — 27 Jun 2015, 04:09