Not complaining but..

[geetarguy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Pogo27

"There's just something magical about Tony Romo, ya'know?"

I was just thinking about that. They have something good to say about every quarterback. But its always the same. I mean honestly, who would say "Jamarcus Russel is such an accurate passer, so you know, when he misses something is wrong"

[Pogo27]

Quote: Originally Posted by geetarguy

I was just thinking about that. They have something good to say about every quarterback. But its always the same. I mean honestly, who would say "Jamarcus Russel is such an accurate passer, so you know, when he misses something is wrong"

LOL... glad I never heard that one.

[CM Hooe]

Pretty sure that Adam Thompson has already said that Nessler will be the play-by-play guy as long as he wants to do it, because apparently he's really easy to work with and has actual voice acting talent, something few broadcasters have (case and point: Tom Hammond).

I actually quite like Nessler's work in the NCAA series. Something's a bit off with the play-to-play flow of the commentary this year though, and I don't think that's Nessler's fault.

And please, no Brent Mushmouth in my NCAA Football game please.

[jacory12]

Besides all of the bias Brent Musberger might have, he can one helluva game. I always wait for those Saturday night football games hoping to hear Musberger call another game.

I still remember that Michael Crabtree catch as time expired to beat Texas. The call was remarkable and gets me excited every time I see (hear) it.

[osubeavs721]

I already turned off the announcing and just play music throught xbox media player

[BlastX21]

Really? He can have a couple cool calls here and there, but 95% of the time he's fairly boring and unexciting.

[Bwnarrow3]

It'd be hard to have "good" commentary in a football game. I mean baseball is easy because it plays at such a methodical pace, and they have licensing rights of the players.

But college football is hard to create a good broadcast commentary. There are very few lines that you could say for each game. And recording wouldn't be simple. In order to make the play-by-play stand out from years past would to have Brad record much much longer than he does today.

One of my major complaints is the copy and pasting of the names to the generic play-by-play calls. Example "McClain!"..."with the catch". McClain has an exclamation next to it due to the hype and excitement in Nessler's voice when he calls his name, however "with the catch" is a generic call to designate a WR catching a ball.

What EA would need to do to make it stand out is to have remove a lot of this copying and pasting. They would record "McClain comes down with it!", "McClain with the short catch" etc. for all of the possibilities of catches by the player. Not only would this take FOREVER to record with all the names and possibilities, but could there be a lawsuit against EA if the recorded so many names for players?

Anyway, the copying and pasting is what's tough about listening to games now, but to do away with that would take hours and hours. I suggest EA go for a play-by-play announcer less well known that can dedicate as many hours as it takes to record everything, but with the ESPN in the game, that is nearly impossible.

My point is that it's really hard to eliminate copying and pasting without forming a lawsuit against the generic player rule. And while they could record play-by-play by number "number 36 with the catch", it's not nearly as immersive. So it's a tough situation they're in with the commentary, and this is one aspect of the game that I let slide.

[Bwnarrow3]

Also, RudyJuly pointed out in the impressions thread that dynamic commentary would be nice. This is a great feature in 2K games (MLB/NBA Today). It would be nice to have the commentators go over what's being displayed on the stat overlays (that will also be included next year...right?)