Re: The commentary still needs work

[kaptainkarl76]

Re: The commentary still needs work

I'd sit the 3 of them in front of a monitor to watch a few real baseball games and have them do the commentary as if they were doing it live..

[strawberryshortcake]

Re: The commentary still needs work

I still think the problem is only having one commentary team. Imagine if every game you watched on TV was done by the same team. Instead of one 3 man team, I'd like a couple or three 2 man booths.
#pipedreams

Short Version: "Quality over quantity." It honestly doesn't matter how many commentary teams the Show implements, even if it's hypothetically all 30 broadcast teams, given that the same "blueprint" is used to script, record, piece together, and digitally trigger lines during the game, broadcast team 1 will sound just like broadcast team 2, team 3, and so forth if that original "blueprint" remains. It's a matter of getting the very first broadcast team to sound natural together before ever thinking about getting multiple booths.



Longer Version: I radio listen to more Oakland Athletics baseball games than I watch during the regular season, and I still love listening to the same Athletics announcer over and over again. If they were the only ones calling the playoffs and the world series, it would still be great because they sound magically great. The problem is not the number of people manning the booth, but the way the dialogue is spoken and strung together. Since MLB the Show sticks to the same "blueprint" on how to script, record, piece together, and digitally trigger lines during the game, that's the bigger concern on why commentary have sounded forever the way it does.

Even if it's hypothetically feasible for The Show to bring in all 30 broadcast teams (or simply more than one team), if The Show uses the current "blueprint" to capture, execute and implement commentary, commentary will still be the same and have the same recurring concerns.

Side remark: Example, the same goes with all their pitcher's pitching motion. They're using the same pitching "blueprint" from their first pitcher and most likely down to their last pitcher. Despite their best effort to "fix" their animation sequences this year, the same legacy concerns still arises because The Show is still using the same pitching "blueprint." I've been simply watching youtube footage of real life pitchers and MLB the Show pitchers and I finally noticed some major concerns on why the same pitching animation legacy concerns still exist (i.e. unnatural arm placements, missing the key "triangle" throwing motion, lack of tucking in the glove side arms resulting in a pterodactyl" effect, concurrent and unison torso and hip rotations, lack of independent hip rotation, missing anterior pelvic forward tilt, missing anterior angular front stretch and rear arm stretch, pitchers being too upright on follow through, etc.) I'll create a thread in the near future to address this concern with supporting graphics.

[Caulfield]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Short Version: "Quality over quantity." It honestly doesn't matter how many commentary teams the Show implements, even if it's hypothetically all 30 broadcast teams, given that the same "blueprint" is used to script, record, piece together, and digitally trigger lines during the game, broadcast team 1 will sound just like broadcast team 2, team 3, and so forth if that original "blueprint" remains. It's a matter of getting the very first broadcast team to sound natural together before ever thinking about getting multiple booths.



Longer Version: I radio listen to more Oakland Athletics baseball games than I watch during the regular season, and I still love listening to the same Athletics announcer over and over again. If they were the only ones calling the playoffs and the world series, it would still be great because they sound magically great. The problem is not the number of people manning the booth, but the way the dialogue is spoken and strung together. Since MLB the Show sticks to the same "blueprint" on how to script, record, piece together, and digitally trigger lines during the game, that's the bigger concern on why commentary have sounded forever the way it does.

Even if it's hypothetically feasible for The Show to bring in all 30 broadcast teams (or simply more than one team), if The Show uses the current "blueprint" to capture, execute and implement commentary, commentary will still be the same and have the same recurring concerns.

Side remark: Example, the same goes with all their pitcher's pitching motion. They're using the same pitching "blueprint" from their first pitcher and most likely down to their last pitcher. Despite their best effort to "fix" their animation sequences this year, the same legacy concerns still arises because The Show is still using the same pitching "blueprint." I've been simply watching youtube footage of real life pitchers and MLB the Show pitchers and I finally noticed some major concerns on why the same pitching animation legacy concerns still exist (i.e. unnatural arm placements, missing the key "triangle" throwing motion, lack of tucking in the glove side arms resulting in a pterodactyl" effect, concurrent and unison torso and hip rotations, lack of independent hip rotation, missing anterior pelvic forward tilt, missing anterior angular front stretch and rear arm stretch, pitchers being too upright on follow through, etc.) I'll create a thread in the near future to address this concern with supporting graphics.

Oh, I would for sure still want quality guys if there were more than one commentary team.
but if I were to eat steak every single day for 162 days, bologna would actually hold appeal for me lol

[dalger21]

Re: The commentary still needs work

There is still just a lot of dead air..Makes it kind of awkward..

That was one of the first things I thought when playing RttS. Still tons of dead air.

[Impetuous65]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Man, I swear some of you must not play NBA 2K past 1 game, because if you think that game is the best, you fooling yourselves. It is repetitive, has dead space as well and it has long drawn out stories in its commentary. Just face it, this will always and forever be a chink in the armor of sports games. The stuff is recorded. All those suggestions and you think they haven't been tried.

I feel they are on the right path, Harold and Dan brings great jargon and stories based on real world things that they have experienced and apply it to the game such as hitting, pitching even on blue.

[Impetuous65]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Another thing is Harold Reynolds repeats the same word like 2 or 3 times when he's talking. When describing a home plate ump, he says repect 3 times. Other times he will say he swung hard or great play 2 or 3 times etc. Very odd.

He's being his natural self and it comes off as personable and not scripted.

[Impetuous65]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Commentary from a video game perspective, main concern should be context and a variety of ways to explain the same information. Are you getting the correct information and is it in context? Does the delivery match the moment? Everything else is gravy i.e. Excitement, story telling act...

[dalger21]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Harold Reynolds has added a lot to "The Show". It comes across as natural and not scripted. "Hall of Fame pitch HR, hall of fame pitch" "...is this a plate or a picnic table? He of course got ejected..." HR is pretty insightful with his commentary.

[BillPeener]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Harold Reynolds has added a lot to "The Show". It comes across as natural and not scripted. "Hall of Fame pitch HR, hall of fame pitch" "...is this a plate or a picnic table? He of course got ejected..." HR is pretty insightful with his commentary.

My only issue with him is he sounds a little too tired or laid back. In real games, he sounds more engaged. Not that it's a big issue or anything.

[Speedy]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Harold Reynolds has added a lot to "The Show". It comes across as natural and not scripted. "Hall of Fame pitch HR, hall of fame pitch" "...is this a plate or a picnic table? He of course got ejected..." HR is pretty insightful with his commentary.

I agree, I think his addition has been a boost.

I was watching a CPU vs. CPU game (put the game on while I worked-from-home ) and the hitter got a ball up and in. Harold says:

"Relax people, it was a breaking ball. If he wanted to hit him, it'd be a fastball but not with a breaking ball. Everybody wants to get upset when a ball gets near the head but trust me, it's not intentional...it's ok."

I really liked that.

[Bunselpower32]

Re: The commentary still needs work

It's better than last year no doubt. But I don't really like HR in the game that much. I thought I did in real life, and maybe it's because there isn't a real game going on when he is talking, and that other poster said it well, he's so laid back and disengaged to the game it doesn't sound great. Plesac sounds better than he does.

But here again, I heard Plesac call into that stream and him in the game is NOTHING like him in that call. I didn't like him in the call, but do in the game. I think the commentators are good, they just aren't letting them bring anything other than their voices to the table.

Also, OP, you are spot on. They need shorter lines for all of them. I mean, they literally rewrote part of the game so the other guys weren't getting cut off so much. That doesn't tell me we should stop them from being cut off, it tells me that we have too many long lines!

[SoxFan01605]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Harold Reynolds has added a lot to "The Show". It comes across as natural and not scripted. "Hall of Fame pitch HR, hall of fame pitch" "...is this a plate or a picnic table? He of course got ejected..." HR is pretty insightful with his commentary.

Agreed. I Love HR in-game, though the one minor downside (for me, at least) is it makes the awkward disconnect of the booth a bit more jarring, especially when he directly engages Matt or Dan so fluidly and then...silence.

Unrelated to HR, another small pet peeve of mine is that while they've gotten better over the last few years of cutting off a story or line for a play call a) it doesn't always have to be so abrupt and b) the line should at least be referenced back long enough to close the thought, rather than just leaving it hanging.

[Caulfield]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Plesac is probably knowledgeable enough but I cant past his voice, it grates on my ears, like he's trying to eat hotdogs while he calls the game. At some point I will just cut the commentary off and play with music on.

[GisherJohn24]

Re: The commentary still needs work

The variety is lacking for sure. I wish they would tell mini stories about the legends (if you have them on your team) and maybe be a little more energy. Very repetitive . Not bad but not good either

[sirwoodz]

Re: The commentary still needs work

Man, I swear some of you must not play NBA 2K past 1 game, because if you think that game is the best, you fooling yourselves. It is repetitive, has dead space as well and it has long drawn out stories in its commentary. Just face it, this will always and forever be a chink in the armor of sports games. The stuff is recorded. All those suggestions and you think they haven't been tried.

I feel they are on the right path, Harold and Dan brings great jargon and stories based on real world things that they have experienced and apply it to the game such as hitting, pitching even on blue.

of course you can't get fresh commentary on a sports game every time out (madden tried this with the weekly updated commentary)

but with NBA 2k, it gets repetitive after playing it for extended hours or days on end...not in just 2 or 3 hours. especially when they have what, 3 or 4 different broadcast teams? it naturally doesn't get AS repetitive which makes it more engaging and realistic.