Let's discuss Tanki Online Commentator Contest

[Lankbouv 6,347]

I think your entry was very good, don't get me wrong. However, would you speak how you did in an actual stream?

 

 

^how do you know any of them would speak like they do in an actual screen.

 

Look, the third place entry DIDN'T EVEN MENTION DROP BOXES!  

Edited February 5, 2015 by Lankbouv

[zaynbad7 12]

Regardless of whether I had won or not as what seemed to be popular opinion, there were many clear, passionate, and articulated entries that failed to win.

 

There was next to no tactical insight in the top three videos and a lack of drive, and for your experience and time spent, I would have thought you would choose better.

 

If you would like to not cause dissent next time, I would suggest making more clear what you want or providing a more in depth competition.  Apparently something like my humor and slight informality was trodden upon, which I understand.  But the fact that I was informal  in an 11 minute entry doesn't make me a worse commentator than 1 2 or 3, especially when I gave you two videos and sought your advice and help in the style I should go for, and was turned down because "it's unfair to help before deadline".

 

This is not appropriate if you truly choose to pick the best commentator.

 

This is especially true when you say that you have had experience, but so have had many of us, especially myself, which was completely neglected.

i agree with you my friend and to be honest you were the only one that i was scared that he might win over me and not seeing you win is really dissapointing because i reaalllyyyy would have so much fun hearing you talk live and i just want to clear something ,... the problem is not that i didnt win the problem is that the people who won didnt do what i did or what arabiannoble did because both of us are much more better and seriouslllllllllyyyyyyyyy   HOW CAN A PLAYER THAT THOUGHT THAT THE GAME HAS STARTED SINCE THE FIRST SEC WIN AND HOW CAN A PLAYER THAT DIDNT EVEN KNOW THAT THEY WERE USING WASP WON AND HOOWWW DID A PLAYER THAT TALKED TOO MUCH THAT WE DIDNT KNOW WHAT HE WAS SAYING WON ..... the problem is not that i didnt win its that there are people that deserve to win and honestly arabiannoble you deserved it 

[GoldRock 6,165]

Regardless of whether I had won or not as what seemed to be popular opinion, there were many clear, passionate, and articulated entries that failed to win.

As I've explained a few times now, the judging process for this contest was particularly stringent, and we considered the pros and cons of each and every entry... And we're not here to deal with popular opinion; rather, we judged in a way which was not biased by upvote numbers or popularity.

 

There was next to no tactical insight in the top three videos and a lack of drive, and for your experience and time spent, I would have thought you would choose better.

This comment, in fact, is a sign of sheer desperation. The second-placed entry in particular showed a great amount of tactical insight. It's one thing to disagree with one or two of the choices made based on your own reasoned opinion, but it's another thing altogether to say all of the winners were rubbish without any justification at all... I don't want to say it, but here's the perfect sign of a sore loser. There, I said it. 

 

If you would like to not cause dissent next time, I would suggest making more clear what you want or providing a more in depth competition.  Apparently something like my humor and slight informality was trodden upon, which I understand.  But the fact that I was informal  in an 11 minute entry doesn't make me a worse commentator than 1 2 or 3.

As I said, not all of the judges agreed with each other on all the winners, and I frankly didn't (and don't) agree with the third place choice AND have my reasons/justifications for that. BUT I appreciate the views of the judging panel as a whole (again, as I said earlier). You don't know that it was your humour or informality that meant you didn't win - and actually, that's not true. We appreciated and thought highly of quite a few 'less formal' entries, so it's best not to jump to conclusions.

 

This is especially true when you say that you have had experience, but so have had many of us, especially myself, which was completely neglected.

Experience was neglected, definitely. We judged on the quality and standard of the entries in front of us, not on how much past achievement or how much popularity an entry received. We looked at the entry itself, not at the entrant. Good to find something we agree on :)

[zaynbad7 12]

^how do you know any of them would speak like they do in an actual screen.

 

Look, the third place entry DIDN'T EVEN MENTION DROP BOXES!  

he even thought that the mach started from the first sec

[r_Arabiannoble0 1,756]

i agree with you my friend and to be honest you were the only one that i was scared that he might win over me and not seeing you win is really dissapointing because i reaalllyyyy would have so much fun hearing you talk live and i just want to clear something ,... the problem is not that i didnt win the problem is that the people who won didnt do what i did or what arabiannoble did because both of us are much more better and seriouslllllllllyyyyyyyyy   HOW CAN A PLAYER THAT THOUGHT THAT THE GAME HAS STARTED SINCE THE FIRST SEC WIN AND HOW CAN A PLAYER THAT DIDNT EVEN KNOW THAT THEY WERE USING WASP WON AND HOOWWW DID A PLAYER THAT TALKED TOO MUCH THAT WE DIDNT KNOW WHAT HE WAS SAYING WON ..... the problem is not that i didnt win its that there are people that deserve to win and honestly arabiannoble you deserved it 

 

 

I appreciate your support.  But like I said, I'm not here to talk about myself.  I'm just mentioning that I do have experience, and that the judges shouldn't be hasty to discount popular opinion, especially when it comes to the paucity of information from the first two entries.

Edited February 5, 2015 by r_Arabiannoble0

[Lankbouv 6,347]

I think anyone with a brain can agree that 3rd place was awful

 

1) Didn't mention drop boxes

2) thought they'd started before 10:00 minutes

[mcmonkey25 717]

I really don't think that the judging for this was well done. I fail to see how my entry is beaten by some of the runner-up entries. I have a much better voice quality, and a lot of my content is better. Third place has a very limited knowledge of the game and is only saying it as it is. This shows a lack of insight which is what is needed to be a commentator. If a judge can outright prove that my entry is undeserving of at least I consolation prize, I will be gracious in defeat, but currently I see know appropriate reason. I'm pretty sure that the categories used for judging were incorrect and knowledge of the game and quality of voice weren't properly taken into account, something which is vital for a commentator.

[r_Arabiannoble0 1,756]

As I've explained a few times now, the judging process for this contest was particularly stringent, and we considered the pros and cons of each and every entry... And we're not here to deal with popular opinion; rather, we judged in a way which was not biased by upvote numbers or popularity.

 

This comment, in fact, is a sign of sheer desperation. The second-placed entry in particular showed a great amount of tactical insight. It's one thing to disagree with one or two of the choices made based on your own reasoned opinion, but it's another thing altogether to say all of the winners were rubbish without any justification at all... I don't want to say it, but here's the perfect sign of a sore loser. There, I said it. 

 

As I said, not all of the judges agreed with each other on all the winners, and I frankly didn't (and don't) agree with the third place choice AND have my reasons/justifications for that. BUT I appreciate the views of the judging panel as a whole (again, as I said earlier). You don't know that it was your humour or informality that meant you didn't win - and actually, that's not true. We appreciated and thought highly of quite a few 'less formal' entries, so it's best not to jump to conclusions.

 

Experience was neglected, definitely. We judged on the quality and standard of the entries in front of us, not on how much past achievement or how much popularity an entry received. We looked at the entry itself, not at the entrant. Good to find something we agree on :)

Call somebody else a sore loser, I don't have time for personal transgressions.  Keep it civil please.

I'm explaining that you're going to have a fantastic time with two warrant officers who know next to nothing about starladder.  As everyone else is also trying to explain to the judges here.  Advisable to format the competition and judging better next time to prepare so you don't have a bunch of pissed of participants.

:)

Edited February 5, 2015 by r_Arabiannoble0

[r_Arabiannoble0 1,756]

Yes your broadcasts are really good but none of them count towards this contest. The entry you posted counts.

Yes, but you asked if I could maintain my entry energy in the actual live stream.

I showed you yes I can.  That's the only way to judge maintaining of a certain style, isn't it?  Through multiple examples.

Even so, that is no way whatsoever to judge an entry... by whether I can replicate it.  I don't see that standard being placed upon the other competitors.

 

Guys please calm down, maybe all 3 of the top entries may not be able to commentate. Notice it says "chance" to join the commentator team.

Don't think I even got a mention, so that's out the window XD

Edited February 5, 2015 by r_Arabiannoble0

[zaynbad7 12]

Call somebody else a sore loser, I don't have time for personal transgressions.  

I'm explaining that you're going to have a fantastic time with two warrant officers who know next to nothing about starladder.  As everyone else is also trying to explain to the judges here.

:)

i know i did better then the winners but i have to say that you did much better then me .. you are a fun person dont let anyone say something other then that ... and now we know how contests are and we will never put hours and hours and even money to get a mic for this kind of events ... we are dissapointed and we were at less expecting a better explination ...but we got nothing 

[cornierauto 9]

araibian had a very cool video , plz tell thae merit of the selection and why they weer chosen o arguement stops

[GoldRock 6,165]

Call somebody else a sore loser, I don't have time for personal transgressions.  

That, sir, is not a personal transgression. It's the impression you gave from what you said... You can't expect to say "there was next to no tactical insight in the top three videos and a lack of drive" (which is hardly true or justified) without giving that impression. I wonder if you've watched those three entries entirely - half an hour worth of footage in total. Because the discussion would be much more appropriate if you could actually give examples or evidence to back up your claim that ALL of the winners were bad. 

 

I'm explaining that you're going to have a fantastic time with two warrant officers who know next to nothing about starladder.  As everyone else is also trying to explain to the judges here.

:)

Well, you're the first person to have said that here - don't worry about us, the eSports team is not only looking for recruitment from the top 3, you know (in fact, we're looking for one entrant whose joint entry with another player did not win any prize at all). Interesting how you consider rank, experience and popularity as more important than ability, quality and technique.

 

Sorry, but we didn't use criteria which involved awarding prizes just to staff members, Generalissimos or people with channels/lots of upvotes.

Edited February 5, 2015 by GoldRock

[mcmonkey25 717]

Also, DuckHonk was praised for his commentary, which is ok, it was good. But he was given a consolation prize for instant replays This is CLEARLY against the rule of not editing the video. Yet he is being praised for this... Hello???

[r_Arabiannoble0 1,756]

That, sir, is not a personal transgression. It's the impression you gave from what you said... You can't expect to say "there was next to no tactical insight in the top three videos and a lack of drive" (which is hardly true or justified) without giving that impression. I wonder if you've watched those three entries entirely - half an hour worth of footage in total. Because the discussion would be much more appropriate if you could actually give examples or evidence to back up your claim that ALL of the winners were bad. 

 

Well, you're the first person to have said that here - don't worry about us, the eSports team is not only looking for recruitment from the top 3, you know (in fact, we're looking for one entrant whose entry was not worthy of any prize at all). Interesting how you consider rank, experience and popularity as more important than ability, quality and technique. Sorry, but we didn't use criteria which involved awarding prizes just to staff members, Generalissimos or people with channels/lots of upvotes.

 

I did give examples of what they did wrong.  Go back to my previous posts and read them clearly again before you say that.

Furthermore, in each and every post I said, I am not complaining about myself, I am complaining about the choices made.

You continue to deliberately misinterpret me.  I'm sorry that you feel that way that I am trying to pull leverage with my own support, believe me, I don't want to give that impression.

 

Let us agree to disagree, I don't think we can get farther than what we are at this point.

Edited February 5, 2015 by r_Arabiannoble0

[GG_reg 1,521]

I will have a word with Damn_Slow.

[mcmonkey25 717]

Well, you're the first person to have said that here - don't worry about us, the eSports team is not only looking for recruitment from the top 3, you know (in fact, we're looking for one entrant whose entry was not worthy of any prize at all). Interesting how you consider rank, experience and popularity as more important than ability, quality and technique. Sorry, but we didn't use criteria which involved awarding prizes just to staff members, Generalissimos or people with channels/lots of upvotes.

Experience should be considered, VERY highly. If 3rd place didn't even realise that the battle started at 10 minutes then how will he fair doing a stream. His experience was so low that it evidently hindered the quality of his entry. His lack of technical terms i.e. 'they've scored' (it's not a football match???) and 'SemGrand is battling jan007' (Which is ridiculously vague) I fail to see how he has been rewarded for a highly flawed entry that obviously almost every tanker (bar the judges it seems) thinks shouldn't have won.

[GoldRock 6,165]

Advisable to format the competition and judging better next time to prepare so you don't have a bunch of pissed of participants.

:)

All the appropriate details for the competition were provided. It is indeed true that a more detailed list of the judging criteria itself might have helped, but the topic wasn't created by the eSports team, and that doesn't change the standard of the entries posted. There are always a bunch of annoyed participants (who coincidentally didn't win) after every contest, so there's no need to worry about us not being used to it, or not expecting it :)

[zaynbad7 12]

can anyone explan how this happened i mean the winners did this things 

1. one of them didnt even know when the battle has started 

2. he didnt even mantion drop boxes and how important they can be 

3. the winner said the players were using hornet so doesnt he know what a wasp look like 

4. how can we ever know what a person is saying while he talk tooooo faassttt

now this is not fair this is not fair ... again i want to say that i am only mad because there are players that didnt make those mustakes and that has an amazing voice that deserve to win rather then them .

[hogree 4,179]

Experience should be considered, VERY highly. If 3rd place didn't even realise that the battle started at 10 minutes then how will he fair doing a stream. His experience was so low that it evidently hindered the quality of his entry. His lack of technical terms i.e. 'they've scored' (it's not a football match???) and 'SemGrand is battling jan007' (Which is ridiculously vague) I fail to see how he has been rewarded for a highly flawed entry that obviously almost every tanker (bar the judges it seems) thinks shouldn't have won.

Have to agree.

[Lankbouv 6,347]

Experience should be considered, VERY highly. If 3rd place didn't even realise that the battle started at 10 minutes then how will he fair doing a stream. His experience was so low that it evidently hindered the quality of his entry. His lack of technical terms i.e. 'they've scored' (it's not a football match???) and 'SemGrand is battling jan007' (Which is ridiculously vague) I fail to see how he has been rewarded for a highly flawed entry that obviously almost every tanker (bar the judges it seems) thinks shouldn't have won.

Agreed totally

[GoldRock 6,165]

Experience should be considered, VERY highly. If 3rd place didn't even realise that the battle started at 10 minutes then how will he fair doing a stream. His experience was so low that it evidently hindered the quality of his entry. His lack of technical terms i.e. 'they've scored' (it's not a football match???) and 'SemGrand is battling jan007' (Which is ridiculously vague) I fail to see how he has been rewarded for a highly flawed entry that obviously almost every tanker (bar the judges it seems) thinks shouldn't have won.

Well, you say EXPERIENCE should be considered, and then the rest of your post details why KNOWLEDGE about things such as eSports should be considered. I agreed with your observations myself and I've already said I didn't agree with my fellow judges on the 3rd place entry, but apparent KNOWLEDGE was taken into account when judging ALL entries. There is a difference between the two. What I am saying is that we do not care if an entrant says "I have done this for months before" - we do care about the quality of the entry itself, and the examples you've provided are certainly valid.

 

That's actually a well-phrased and reasoned critical post, and I agree with all of the points made there apart from your confusion of experience and knowledge as the same factor. I meant experience in the way Arabiannoble meant it i.e. "I've done this sort of thing loads of times before, check out my channel, look at my amazing history"... And I'm sure we can agree that sort of experience should not be taken into account when judging in a fair and objective way.

Edited February 5, 2015 by GoldRock

[r_Arabiannoble0 1,756]

All the appropriate details for the competition were provided. It is indeed true that a more detailed list of the judging criteria itself might have helped, but the topic wasn't created by the eSports team, and that doesn't change the standard of the entries posted. There are always a bunch of annoyed participants (who coincidentally didn't win) after every contest, so there's no need to worry about us not being used to it, or not expecting it :)

Well, you say EXPERIENCE should be considered, and then the rest of your post details why KNOWLEDGE about things such as eSports should be considered. I agreed with your observations myself and I've already said I didn't agree with my fellow judges on the 3rd place entry, but apparent KNOWLEDGE was taken into account when judging ALL entries. There is a difference between the two. What I am saying is that we do not care if an entrant says "I have done this for months before" - we do care about the quality of the entry itself, and the examples you've provided are certainly valid.

 

That's actually a well-phrased and reasoned critical post, and I agree with all of the points made there apart from your confusion of experience and knowledge as the same factor. I meant experience in the way Arabiannoble meant it i.e. "I've done this sort of thing loads of times before, check out my channel, look at this history"...

 

 

I keep saying it and I'll say it again.  I don't give a damn about my history, I didn't use it to justify my entry, I don't want to use it to justify my entry.  I used it to justify my opinion on the winners versus the judges' opinion, and how they say "popular opinion" is inferior.

 

Well.  If your intent was to give away a bunch of crystals and promote community participations, then good job!  I think my post count has gone up from 150 to 200 just from this topic and how invested I was.

 

If your intent was to recruit new, engaging, and committed commentators who know what is happening on the battlefield and can provide dynamic and informative commentary on what is happening before them, then you're completely screwed!

Edited February 5, 2015 by r_Arabiannoble0

[mcmonkey25 717]

Well, you say EXPERIENCE should be considered, and then the rest of your post details why KNOWLEDGE about things such as eSports should be considered. I agreed with your observations myself and I've already said I didn't agree with my fellow judges on the 3rd place entry, but apparent KNOWLEDGE was taken into account when judging ALL entries. There is a difference between the two. What I am saying is that we do not care if an entrant says "I have done this for months before" - we do care about the quality of the entry itself, and the examples you've provided are certainly valid. That's actually a well-phrased and reasoned critical post!

Thank you. I am saying that in most cases, experience lead to knowledge, especially in such a game as Tanki. Therefore, it should be taken into account, and the third entry most certainly lacked basic knowledge about the game which enabled them to provide a strong commentary...

[zaynbad7 12]

Well.  If your intent was to give away a bunch of crystals and promote community participations, then good job!  I think my post count has gone up from 150 to 200 just from this topic and how invested I was.

 

If your intent was to recruit new, engaging, and committed commentators who know what is happening on the battlefield and can provide dynamic and informative commentary on what is happening before them, then you're completely screwed!

i totally agree .

[GoldRock 6,165]

Thank you. I am saying that in most cases, experience lead to knowledge, especially in such a game as Tanki. Therefore, it should be taken into account, and the third entry most certainly lacked basic knowledge about the game which enabled them to provide a strong commentary...

What I meant is that experience ITSELF shouldn't be taken into account, the effects of experience such as knowledge should. For example, if someone goes on a talent show, says he's sang for 20 years and has a mediocre voice, he shouldn't be rated more highly than someone who may never have sang in public before but has a very good voice. Of course, if the first singer's experience showed through great manipulation of the music, tonality etc. then his voice wouldn't be considered mediocre in the first place. Judge the entry and not the entrant. I agree with you on this one.

Edited February 5, 2015 by GoldRock