Difference between German and English commentary on MW recordings

[Enti]

Hey guys!

As you may have noticed there is a big German MW community out there (playing regularly on OCTGN) and therefore we have German commentary on some ADMW Winter Special matches.

While Schwenkgott has uploaded 7 videos from the latest tournament, Arcane Wonders has nearly twice as many with their 12 videos.

But coincidentally? until now there was not a single overlap. But now there is and I took the chance to analyse the difference in their commentary. Why? Because I always had the feeling that there are distinct differences and now we have the chance to discuss them. Cool!


Okay. Where do we start? At the beginning. I don't want to retell everything they said, so we stick with bullet points. These are the videos in question:
Arcane Wonders: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FzOirGq7t8&t=225s
Schwenkgott Thunderdome: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3VuV05dpPg

schwenkgott & aridigas
T1 + 2:
- asking why not using a spawnpoint?
- explaining the 2 different necro spawnpoints
- analyzing/commenting on red's strategy to apply pressure very early with these 2 deathfangs
- pointing out the inefficient mana usage
- pointing out the missing Eternal Servant
- comparing the mana channeling
- explaining the Banner


coshade
T1 + 2:
- As well saying that it is a highly unusual opening. (But telling us the advantages this opening might have [applying pressure so that the paladin might be forced to pop the Banner earlier])
- Telling us how great the Monk is in great detail
- comparing the mana channeling


Ah, well, it is too tedious to summarize it in such detail. Let me tell you my general observation:
The German commentary is much ... hmm...  harsher compared to coshade's observations. While coshade generally points out the positives aspects of a move the German commentary focuses far more on the negative side. Or "what the player could have made better".
For example Schwenkgott and aridigas both unanimously judged the fireblast to be a total waste of manapoints, actions and spellbookpoints while coshade's comment was "it's not bad" - probably referring to the actual roll (2 damage and burn) not to the strategy using the blast in the first place.
Another nice example is the discussion about the chant of rage (that red revealed it too early and asked if he can cover it again). While the German's even referred to it again, later, when parkdeck moved his Paladin and then decided to move his Sentry instead, the comment was "now red could also say 'moved is moved'".
Coshade reacted differently. When red made the mistake he talked about chant of rage being a new spell, player still figuring it out and getting used to it, not saying his opinion if parkdeck should allow red to cover it again.
 
And another very interesting example: When parkdeck played the Pillar of Righteous Flame.
Schwenkgott's and Aridigas reaction was clear. Huge mistake. Wasting precious dice and even questioning the move altogether (not only the target of the attack).
Coshade again, much more diplomatic: "Interesting move. I wonder why he attacked the necromancer [...]"
I think at that point coshade didn't realize that the cloak made the move even worse since attacking the necromancer with 2 dice instead of attacking the undead creature with 6 dice is such a huge difference. Additionally some damage (no matter if 2 or 5) on the Necromancer really doesn't matter at this point at the game so the only reasonable target was a ceature. Buuut as you can hear for yourself (minute 35) coshade is rather cautious not to voice direct criticism.

And we could go on like this, there are a lot more examples that are all pointing in the same direction.
While the English commentary is much more descriptive in nature (that applies to sharkbait and puddnhead as well) the Germans tend to assess/evaluate/judge the moves the players make.


The difference between red's marked of death play was also very telling. On the one hand "bringt doch gar nichts" and "unheimlich schlecht" (which translates to "it's useless" and "unbelievably bad") and in the other hand "he pays mana to reveal mfd, bad luck, unfortunate, bad rolls..".
Again, coshade being much more descriptive and less evaluating whether the move was good while from schwenkgott's and aridigas side the main concern seems to be if the move, the strategy, the plan was a good one.


I hope both sides feel accurately represented and I also hope that all three of you can agree with the observations.
Not sure if anyone here finds this interesting at all.. but since I wanted to compare the videos anyway (for myself because I am interested in the differences) I just wrote down my impressions.


And a quick reminder: I'm still waiting for something like this:
http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=17395.msg79966#msg79966

Have a nice day and I'm looking forward to many many more commented videos, both ways of commenting have their advantages, keep the good work up!

[SharkBait]

For what it's worth, I find this ridiculously interesting. I'm away from home for a month, but there is a plan for a future Mage Cast to do talking about the tournament. 

[Reddicediaries]

I find it very interesting as well. While Coshade, focusess less on the quality of the play and more on the end result, the germans focus more on the move itself and how "bad" or "good" it was.

[Puddnhead]

Ninja'd by that cursed dark mage who always has the most horrible moves!

I also find this very fascinating and it fits with my interactions across the pond as well.  I like to give the player the benefit of the doubt when it comes to questionable moves because I really don't know all there is to know about Mage Wars and I commentate to learn as much as inform.

There is a quote from US President Theodore Roosevelt that has really affected my casting style:
"It is not the critic who counts.  Not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the Arena."

It is sometimes very difficult to stay aware of all the options and the 'shoulds' and 'shouldn'ts' while you're in the heat of a high-stakes game.  My hope is that casting these games will give all players an insight into how to play better and how to learn from mistakes other's have made as well as from your own mistakes.

[RomeoXero]

For what it's worth i see merit in both styles. It's positive vs negative reinforcement. There could be a cultural bent as well, where an American might get offended or moody about commentary that points out what mistakes were made and when, or by phrases like "completely useless" as pertains to a particular play, our German friends may find no fault in a straightforward explanation, and are less likely to take that kind of phraseology personally. This is all conjecture by the way. Please tell me if im way of base!

[zot]

another thing is that the observers cannot know what the individual players are actually thinking at the time. unless one of the coomentators is one of those players. sometimes they can state what they were thinking at a specific point. otherwise those players are analyizing the game as it is happening to determine which spells in their book to choose and play. sure they sometimes misjudge what an ooponent will play and make a mistake in their own choice as a result. or they expect an opponent to make a move that does not transpire. both are limited by their book.

of course not all players are equal. inexperience or unfamiliarity with mages involved lead to suboptimal card selection or misplays. it happens. and it is easier for those on the sidelines to tear down or criticize because they do not know the limitations of the books involved or perhaps they themselves are more experienced and may have chosen different moves. even strong players make mistakes. even in book creation. the goal for everyone is to not make mistakes during tournament matches but it will happen.

this thread is an interesting contrast of styles though. it may sift out to be simply what is the goal of those doing the analysis. is it to entertain, or instruct or perhaps a mixture of both. i think the arcane duels folks want the mix. helpful for players generally. perhaps allowing players to think differently about how to play in the future. and entertaining too. they love the game and want others to catch that same enthusiasm. while helping the community increase their experience and understanding of the game. i think the arcane duel folks have done a great job spending much personal time to post these for the community. while i may not agree with some conclusions along the way, i have found their commentary insightful, and most likely helpful to players generally while being entertaining too.

it seems to me that the harsher the criticism the more likely viewers may get turned off to the negativitey and therfore the game itself.  just guessing. my intuition is that if those commentators stated option or choice for the situations presented  as if they were in the match, then the book the commentator is invisibly fielding for that match would have a lot more spell book points than 120.  this is a generalization, but i think the euro gamer community may tend towards strong objective criticism. objective comes off as harsh, but not likely intended so.

critiquing choices is innately biased but it really does not have to be negative. presenters pointing out options available is helpful to viewers to help them learn tactics, or perspective on how certain things interact in the game. note that the caster suggestions whomever they may be are just those. their suggestions. does not mean they are always right. and all players play differently and build books differently. play styles impact choices too. that is all good and why matches can be so interesting.

[aridigas]

People talk about me! I'm internet famous now!

Things I said in that video (or migh say in future videos) have been harsh, but nothing was meant as an insult to the player itself. Yo're not a bad player of a bad person for making plays I don't agree with or describe as wrong.
It's solely my opinion, you're free to disagree with it.

[Biblofilter]

Just want to say that i love both the german and english videos

Its nice that they are different.

"Wahnsinn" more or less = "Interesting play! I don´t know if I would have done that".

[Sailor Vulcan]

People talk about me! I'm internet famous now!

Things I said in that video (or migh say in future videos) have been harsh, but nothing was meant as an insult to the player itself. Yo're not a bad player of a bad person for making plays I don't agree with or describe as wrong.
It's solely my opinion, you're free to disagree with it.

Omg I should have been born in Germany lol. Hate how people here in the states take practically every strong disagreeing opinion as ad hominem unless you go out of your way to sugarcoat the fact that you disagree. I thought everyone in the whole world was like that unless they learn better rationality skills. I should have realized that people in different countries might have different failures of thinking then we do. But if you guys can straightforwardly express strong disagreeing opinions to each other without making each other mad, then at least you guys have an easier time *starting* conversations, regardless of whatever other weird biases and anti-epistemology might interfere with fair discourse later in a conversation. All the free speech in the world is useless if no one bothers to really listen to and process what you're saying in the first place. If you disagree with people too strongly here, it often just goes in one ear and out the other. People here are very attached to their opinions and criticizing their opinion is taken as criticizing the person. It's absolutely insane and it makes me feel rather stifled.

[Schwenkgott]

Hi, this is very interesting indeed. After one of the last commentaries with Schneeente, we faced some critics about our style and i realized for myself, that i might have been too harsh from time to time, although i always try to be polite and helpful to the players i'm watching, also and especially to new players, because I want them to continue playing. But at the same time I also want them to know that they could have done better and why some of their move are not the best and other options would have been better.
F.e. Enti quoted what i said when Marked for Death was revealed on Cassiel. I was saying "unglaublich schlecht" what is translated "unbelievable bad". But I also try to explain why i come to this conclusion. Spending 4 mana and an action to only gain 1 dice for one attack that will probably kill the target is not a very good choice. A single attack spell could have done the same with a higher chance of success. Of course I don't know what spells are in the Necromancers Deck. So my critic could also mean: For these situations, don't use Marked for Death and have more attack spells in your deck. So please don't get me wrong: With "unbelievably bad" or a phrase like that  I never mean the player, but only a certain move in a certain situation.
I know that the guys from Arcane Duels have a different approach to the commentaries and I hope both of our styles can offer something people like.

[bigfatchef]

I also think this is a very interesting topic. In fact I was one of those who critisized some german comments. And I am quite happy to see Enti writing this post as he was the one with hard words as co-commentary. That shows he is taking some effort to enhance his skills and that he takes criticism serious.

That brings me to the point that all those harsh german words are really meant in a analytic way and supposed to tell viewers what could have been done better and what is a "bad" choice. There is always a description why some decission is bad.

BUT
I honestly have more fun listening to positive vibration.
You can say all the things that have to be said in a nice and fluffy way.


An examples:
To reveal chant of rage the moment reddice did was obviously a wrong choice. He was
a) nervous since he had to win or since he knew the game was beeing recorded or whatever
b) somewhere else in his head thinking about the plan he had
c) maybe in a stressful surrounding. Maybe the neighbour had some loud sexytime. We all don't know
d) maybe unexperienced with the game mechanics
All reasons possible. All not dumb. I see no reason to pick on this. It is good and helpful to mention it as a wrong decission, but that shall be enough. From that point on nobody gets more value out of that information, it just hurts some feelings.

I think most of all mage wars players play for fun. Some get more nervous than others. It is very important to keep that in mind. To hear harsh comments make them fear spectators or even unknown players at octgn. They could all think and speak bad.

What if a shy and medium expirienced player takes in part in some tournament like that and is happy to do so. He prepares some decks and takes effort to play good. But he is no pro and makes some mistakes. Happy to get 5 damage on the enemy "pro" mage he wants to show his close friends the stream. In that his play is called "unbelievable bad" and "dumb".
Will he show this video of this great game that he loves to his friends? Will he compete again? I don't think so. And that is something like a worst case scenario for the game.


TLDR:
I like analytic reviews and proposals for better play but packed in a positive wording that doesn't hurt anyone.
Something between schwenk and coshade

[Reddicediaries]

I also think this is a very interesting topic. In fact I was one of those who critisized some german comments. And I am quite happy to see Enti writing this post as he was the one with hard words as co-commentary. That shows he is taking some effort to enhance his skills and that he takes criticism serious.

That brings me to the point that all those harsh german words are really meant in a analytic way and supposed to tell viewers what could have been done better and what is a "bad" choice. There is always a description why some decission is bad.

BUT
I honestly have more fun listening to positive vibration.
You can say all the things that have to be said in a nice and fluffy way.


An examples:
To reveal chant of rage the moment reddice did was obviously a wrong choice. He was
a) nervous since he had to win or since he knew the game was beeing recorded or whatever
b) somewhere else in his head thinking about the plan he had
c) maybe in a stressful surrounding. Maybe the neighbour had some loud sexytime. We all don't know
d) maybe unexperienced with the game mechanics
All reasons possible. All not dumb. I see no reason to pick on this. It is good and helpful to mention it as a wrong decission, but that shall be enough. From that point on nobody gets more value out of that information, it just hurts some feelings.

I think most of all mage wars players play for fun. Some get more nervous than others. It is very important to keep that in mind. To hear harsh comments make them fear spectators or even unknown players at octgn. They could all think and speak bad.

What if a shy and medium expirienced player takes in part in some tournament like that and is happy to do so. He prepares some decks and takes effort to play good. But he is no pro and makes some mistakes. Happy to get 5 damage on the enemy "pro" mage he wants to show his close friends the stream. In that his play is called "unbelievable bad" and "dumb".
Will he show this video of this great game that he loves to his friends? Will he compete again? I don't think so. And that is something like a worst case scenario for the game.


TLDR:
I like analytic reviews and proposals for better play but packed in a positive wording that doesn't hurt anyone.
Something between schwenk and coshade

Wow, so many good points chef!
I made a lot of mistakes in that game and while the german comentary is harsher than necessary, it came from a place of good intentions.
I will countine to play mw as long as I can, its my favorite game!

[zot]

   a good communicator knows his audience and how to convey his message accordingly. the eu folks may very well process input differently than us. like i had mentioned, i think they tend towards strong objective views. they are not being mean, but objective. they are not tearing down a person, but rather the specifics of a given play.

   i do think positive choices presented to counter the mistake may be more helpful generally regardless of audience. i also believe that the world population has an increasingly degrading ability to process criticism and understanding of objectivity. too many people are too easilly offended. and it is becoming high crimes and such to offend.

[Super Sorcerer]

ב"ה
I don't know German so I don't know what were the German comments, but generally comments about strategy are fine in my point of veiw.
I mean, one of the reasons to watch games is to learn from them and improve from them, and for that it is probably better to notice what mistakes happened in the game. I think that comments about strategy give me more ideas about how should I play when I am in a similar situation, so they might help me a little more in learning from games I watch.

[bigfatchef]

ב"ה
I don't know German so I don't know what were the German comments, but generally comments about strategy are fine in my point of veiw.
I mean, one of the reasons to watch games is to learn from them and improve from them, and for that it is probably better to notice what mistakes happened in the game. I think that comments about strategy give me more ideas about how should I play when I am in a similar situation, so they might help me a little more in learning from games I watch.

I completely agree.

But you would learn more from
a) "Card would have been a better choice because of reasons 1, 2 and 3. But this card could also work in that setuo or with that plan..."
or b) "that card was a dumb choice. how could he do that? Really i can't understand it. That is so stupid. I mean: come on!" (by the way: this is line is absolutely exaggerated to show you what I am talking about )

To get some relativity back in here: Schwenk and his helpers are doing a great job! The comments are most of the time very analytic and helpful and one can learn a lot. And I do appreciate that!
Just some words are a bit to harsh and negative (and offending) in my eyes.