brownbear

Fantastic response from @brownbear_47 on the recent TeamLiquid article on casting. https://illiteracyhasdownsides.com/2018/07/31/on-starcraft-casting/ …

Is it? I appreciate the use of data, but it skips a few very important parts of my piece that rebuff some arguments he makes, and ultimately ends with "don't take feedback from this" despite recognizing that there are a lot of people agreeing with my piece.

It also largely argues against the straw man argument that I'm against creating and driving narratives, which I specifically state that I don't. I say it's overdone and distracts from other aspects of the game/players. Big difference there.

Arguing that a lot of people agree with your piece doesn't address anything I wrote. Please point me to where you rebuff my arguments. I responded to your piece section-by-section. I quote the vast majority of it directly. Please point me to where I make a straw man argument.

You never address the part that argues about casters from other games pulling off perfectly fine commentary without hyperbole. The straw man you make is in arguing that narratives are interesting. Yes, they are and I never denied that in the first place. Way overdone, though.

And yes, a lot of people agreeing with me doesn't make me correct - but again that's not what I said, was it? I'm saying it's silly to advise against taking feedback that a lot of people apparently agree with.

1/ What casters in other games do is a non-sequitor. I went out of my way to repeatedly agree with you that hyperbole is a problem. What I take issue with is the rest of what you wrote. Read my piece.

2/ My point about narratives is that even the narratives you take issue with provide value. I make numerous other points about your narratives section that you've chosen to ignore, instead branding all of them as a "straw man".