Slingshot Readers,

We NEED your support. More specifically, the author of this article needs your support. If you've been enjoying our content, you know that a lot of work goes into our stories and although it may be a work of passion, writers gotta eat. If just half our readers gave 1 DOLLAR a month, one measly dollar, we could fund all the work from StuChiu, DeKay, Emily, Andrew (and even Vince). If you contribute 5 DOLLARS a month, we invite you to join our Discord and hang with the team. We wouldn't bother you like this if we didn't need your help and you can feel good knowing that 100% of your donation goes to the writers. We'd really appreciate your support. After all, you're what makes all this happen. Learn more


Go deep as possible in analysis

Chiu on This
A short and regular opinion blast from Stephen Chiu

‘Chiu on This’ is a short and regular opinion blast

When I was writing or arguing what makes a player great, I often brought in X factors as potential mitigating factors as to why something is balanced one way or another. It could be the competition they were playing in, the amount of pro players at the time, balance, etc.

Some of the strangest comments I got were that because these things could be weighted subjectively, that I should just completely ignore these factors and stick to “objective” factors like results only. Others took it farther saying that I should ignore actual players beaten in a run since it is too “subjective” to say a run is good or bad and that where you placed is how good you are.

I think that’s intellectual cowardice. You could do it that way, and you likely won’t get flamed by the community. But at the same time, you will not have said anything of deep value by doing it that way. If you decide to write something analytically, you need to go as deep as you are able. To find what makes you think differentiates one player or another, to make judgement calls on the balance, the scene, the patch, or whatever it is.

It’s more polarizing, it’s more subjective, and it’s infinitely more interesting.


Leave a Reply