@Ztl2008chess #1
That sounds indeed like a fun way to enjoy chess and possibly improve at the same time.
However, master games can be hard to follow from time to time. Subtle moves with subtle deep ideas can occur, and since there's no commentary we might not learn much at all, and there's the risk that we, as copy cats, copy the ideas in a slightly different line, where seemingly unimportant looking differences might be very important.
In my opinion to really improve in chess it makes sense to hear or read a human voice explaining things.
For example, from reading annotated chess games (From Schaaksite website, usually IM Grooten and GM Reinderman) and with talking to a NM I worked with, I have learned that the Sicilian O'Kelly line, 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 a6 is basically an attempt to get an improved Sveshnikov position for black. Black hopes for 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 e5! and the white knight cannot really go to b5 here (focusing on d6 and c7).
White can improve by not playing 3.d4, and play 3.c2c3!
However, the O'Kelly line is not played very often, and you might see master games being played where white simply plays 3.c2c3 or 3.c2c4 (If I remember correctly GM Jorden van Foreest player 3.c4 against GM Reinderman in a Sicilian O'Kelly game) or maybe even 3.d2d4? and you would maybe not know what is going on.
So, watching chess games without commentary can probably help to improve and can be great fun to watch, but to really improve it is probably better to study chess books, magazines, websites (with master annotated chess games), watch chess videos and streams, and do training, analyse your own games and so on.
