A Defense of “Edgy” Commentators

Reddit and twitter have been getting their panties in a bunch recently because of the “Smithzz gets abused and commentators are toxic” bullshit. Guess what, you’re all idiots.

If you are going to talk about commentator toxicity you have to present exactly what the commentator said and why they should not say it. If you don’t do so, we’re chasing ghosts here. Talking about a ghostly problem does nothing to help anyone .There isn’t a single quote, in the Reddit thread, of someone actually “roasting” Smithzz. Yes, people are obviously roasting him, but you’re criticizing commentators in a shittier manner than the commentators are criticizing Smithzz.

If they see a terrible play made in front of them, it is literally their job to use it to be entertaining and humorous. Smithzz’s job is to be a professional counterstrike player and if he is literally one of the worst professional players in the world (on a top team), commentators absolutely should be calling him out. If they just say something like “That wasn’t a very good play”, or “Smithzz misses another aim duel”, or even “Smithzz should have hit that easy shot” the viewer is missing so much context that it is a disservice to whoever is listening. Roasting Smithzz is a literary tool to show how incredibly bad he is on the pro level. If we just call him “not good” or “under performing” or “slumping” or a “support player”, we’re attacking language itself. Doing so is to not separate him from a player like xyp9x is who is a support player, or Kjaerbye who actually is under performing. We must be honest with language. And if we are going to silence people or neuter their literary options, there had better be a damn good reason.

Do not let Counterstrike commentators get neutered the way Riot’s employees have been. LoL desks are dry and shitty because they have to present a neatly packaged and politically correct product. LoL desks try to sprinkle humor into their broadcasts but it’s incredibly cringy in comparison to other games. Their commentators can’t be “edgy” or “roast” players, which is why they have to resort to shit puns for humor. That’s how you get someone like Phreak (A man with the comedy skills of an 8 year old) reigning as the “funniest” personality of an entire game. We don’t want or need that in Counterstrike. Don’t sanitize our game from humorous critiques. New players watching Riot’s LCS broadcast literally don’t know who is good or bad because LoL commentators are too afraid to say someone is shit. Instead, they will say things like, “Fallen is maybe a better fragger but Smithzz could beat him on any given Sunday!” Obviously, there is a chance that Smithzz could beat Fallen but presenting information in this manner goes against how reasonable people speak. I would rather receive brutally honest context than be fed this Riot bleached and sanitized bullshit. “Fallen is going to completely have his way with Smithzz and send him home soaked in tears”, is not only more interesting and engaging, but literally more accurate than how Riot would present the match up. Neutering our commentators would lead to this scenario. Counterstrike is better than this.

Don’t cut your own balls off, Counterstrike community. You won’t know how good you’ve got it until its gone.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.