New article on Madden 17 commentary

[jpdavis82]

https://sports.vice.com/en_us/articl...esportstwitter


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JayhawkerStL]

The article may be fine, but that opening pretty exposed the author as clueless, and made me dubious about the rest of the article.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mauer4MVP]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jay D

The article may be fine, but that opening pretty exposed the author as clueless, and made me dubious about the rest of the article. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What exactly did you disagree with?

[ThaBayouChef]

Pretty good article. I'm definitely excited for the enhancement in this category of Madden. Definitely needed some major changing. I just hope it carries over to online play as well, and not just offline mode.

[JayhawkerStL]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mauer4MVP

What exactly did you disagree with?

For one, the author ignores the 2K games with great commentary, which is a red flag that this is going to be a puff piece.

Equating FIFA and Madden is ridiculous. I may prefer Madden, but it has always had historically bad commentary, while FIFA is at least solid.

They complain about the repetitiveness, which is still going to be there. What they are doing, which is what 2K had done for years, is add in more commentary that features both guys going back and forth.

No one gives a rip about the intro to a game at Lambeau.

Basically, because the writer showed a fairly shallow understanding of commentary, it tells me that the article is going to be EA telling us how great the new team because the writer won't be capable of asking relevant questions. And we can get a full EA take on the commentary by going to their blog.

I say all of this as someone excited about the new commentary, which I think is going to be great. What I don't like are shallow articles that are PR puff pieces that waste my time. This seems like the wrong place to link to that kind of stuff. We already post all of EA's info.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jay D

For one, the author ignores the 2K games with great commentary, which is a red flag that this is going to be a puff piece. Equating FIFA and Madden is ridiculous. I may prefer Madden, but it has always had historically bad commentary, while FIFA is at least solid. They complain about the repetitiveness, which is still going to be there. What they are doing, which is what 2K had done for years, is add in more commentary that features both guys going back and forth. No one gives a rip about the intro to a game at Lambeau. Basically, because the writer showed a fairly shallow understanding of commentary, it tells me that the article is going to be EA telling us how great the new team because the writer won't be capable of asking relevant questions. And we can get a full EA take on the commentary by going to their blog. I say all of this as someone excited about the new commentary, which I think is going to be great. What I don't like are shallow articles that are PR puff pieces that waste my time. This seems like the wrong place to link to that kind of stuff. We already post all of EA's info.

Did you read the whole article, just saying?

The gold standard for football game commentary, NFL 2K5, is more than a decade old, which says something about the industry's non-state-of-the-art. It's no surprise that McLeod feels there's still plenty of room for future improvement.

[T4VERTS]

I got to interview Christian McLeod on commentary. My take away is that there is what is known and what he could say, and what is still yet to be rolled out. We are going to see a huge upswing in commentary advancements soon, but like a lot of the game this year they had to build the foundation for it first.

[tha_show256]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jay D

For one, the author ignores the 2K games with great commentary, which is a red flag that this is going to be a puff piece. Equating FIFA and Madden is ridiculous. I may prefer Madden, but it has always had historically bad commentary, while FIFA is at least solid. They complain about the repetitiveness, which is still going to be there. What they are doing, which is what 2K had done for years, is add in more commentary that features both guys going back and forth. No one gives a rip about the intro to a game at Lambeau. Basically, because the writer showed a fairly shallow understanding of commentary, it tells me that the article is going to be EA telling us how great the new team because the writer won't be capable of asking relevant questions. And we can get a full EA take on the commentary by going to their blog. I say all of this as someone excited about the new commentary, which I think is going to be great. What I don't like are shallow articles that are PR puff pieces that waste my time. This seems like the wrong place to link to that kind of stuff. We already post all of EA's info.

You couldn't have read the entire article...he does give credit to 2k
Sports for their past commentary in 2k5...it's actually a pretty good article if you take the time to check it out...just my .02.