High school commentary better than Davis & Gaudin?

[roadman]

At least we aren't hearing "at cops speed" wr's that keep catching those type of passes will have long careeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeers.

Every three or four years there is a request for a new announcing team because the present one's we have the lines memorized per vatim.

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

At least we aren't hearing "at cops speed" or wr's that keep catching those type of passes will have long careeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeers.

We simply replaced old annoying lines with new ones.

My complaining likely won't lead to any changes, but EA unique =/= good for commentary in video games.

"He's got get away from the cops speed"

And, "Chestnuts? Chestnuts?"

Are good the first time they're said and that's it. That's the issue with trying to be funny with your writing in a video game.

If they want a commentator say something unique so that they feel like they have their own personality, then give them something similar to "Onions!" that isn't a repetitive story and can be applied to multiple situations and feel organic when used.

A hard hit with "Onions!", or a 57 yard FG made and "Onions!" is a lot better method of having some personality and being able to be repeated in an organic manner.

Onions is just a reactionary word that Rafferty used. Get away from the cop speed was something used in a moment in real life and EA killed it by having it be said on every breakaway play which hurt the organic feel of the commentary.

I think it's just a writing choice because the HS commentator clearly displayed that if EA has someone remain organically generic that it can sound real and believable.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[oneamongthefence]

The High School Commentary team seem really good but only because we spend only a few games with them. After 20 games they would be repetitious as any other team.

I will say when they brought in Gaudin and Davis they talked about building a foundation. And any time EA mentions building a foundation they usually stop at the floors without adding much to the house. The biggest problem EA has is lack of iteration. They add something but don't make any more meaningful improvements to it. Or they remove it a few years later. Franchise is a testament to this. And it's super noticeable in the commentary. They were supposed to add context and story to games and it hasn't changed much since it was introduced in Madden 17.

Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by oneamongthefence

The High School Commentary team seem really good but only because we spend only a few games with them. After 20 games they would be repetitious as any other team. I will say when they brought in Gaudin and Davis they talked about building a foundation. And any time EA mentions building a foundation they usually stop at the floors without adding much to the house. The biggest problem EA has is lack of iteration. They add something but don't make any more meaningful improvements to it. Or they remove it a few years later. Franchise is a testament to this. And it's super noticeable in the commentary. They were supposed to add context and story to games and it hasn't changed much since it was introduced in Madden 17. Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

There's not really a commentary team in HS, it's one guy. The thing with commentary is it will always be repetitive to an extent because commentary by nature is repetitive. That's true in real life as well.

There are only so many ways to call a play in real football. A 4 yard run up the middle only has so many ways it can be called by the play by play guy.

"Ramsey gives it to Portis who goes up the middle and goes down after about a 4 yard gain."

"The snap, Portis gets the handoff, powers through before getting taken down after a gain of around 4."

"The snap, the give, and Portis gets tackled after picking up 4 yards on the play."

You probably get the point. These are all generic ways of calling a play, but ware what we hear 99% of the time on real broadcasts at any level of football. Again, there are only so many ways to call a play, so commentators are simply repetitive by nature.

There are essentially two ways of being repetitive. The right way and the wrong way. The above is the right way of being repetitive. You're describing the play in a real life manner and not doing anything extraordinary that would stick out.

Here's another way to show how to describe a player and play in a manner that balances being generic and specific enough to where when it does get repetitive, it doesn't stick out and still sounds natural 5 years into a franchise.

"Ramsey takes the snap, hands it off to Portis... Portis heads to his right, cuts upfield, breaks one tackle, and is taken down after a gain of 6."

"That was a nice run by Portis who now has 7 carries for 46 yards on the day."

"It's 2nd and 4, Ramsey is making some adjustments at the line, he takes the snap, fakes it to Portis, throws it down the middle towards Cooley and it goes just past his hands... incomplete."

"Cooley had a step on his man there, but the pressure forced Ramsey to just miss him on that one."

"That incompletion brings Ramsey's stats on the day to 7 of 12 of 88 yards and 1 TD back in the 1st."

"That was the 4th time they've targeted Cooley today, he has 2 catches for 26 yards including an 8 yard TD reception."

These are all lines that are generic enough to where they sound real, they do not bring any extra attention to themselves because they don't try to stick out and be creative. They paint a picture of the play and then bring some stats into the picture so that the game feels like an actual event taking place over some time.

You could tackle a 4 yard run to the right multiple ways that are generic, would repeat, but not get annoyingly repetitive because they are simply how it is called in real life.

"The snap, the give, Portis goes right, and he's taken down at the 28 after a 6 yard pickup."

"Ramsey takes the snap, he hands it to Portis going right, Portis turns upfield and is tackled by Brookes after gaining about 6."

"They give it to Portis again, he heads right, Brookes wraps him up, but he shows some strength falling forward for a gain of 6 on the play."

"Ramsey with the snap, he hands it off to Portis once more, Portis runs into Brookes, but not before picking up 6."

"The snap, Portis has it going right, he heads upfield, he picks up 6 before he is taken down by Brookes."

That's a handful of generic calls that you can just replace the QB, RB, and defender names and the calls would sound natural and not repetitive in the wrong, annoying way.

This is all play by play stuff for the most part, which isn't the weakest part of Madden's commentary, but it demonstrates how keeping it generic actually benefits the experience for the user because it is dynamic enough to sound natural while still remaining repetitive.

Between plays, you bring up stats, standings, the weather, scenarios, happenings around the league. Here are some good things EA can do between plays.

"That carry puts Portis at 48 yards on 6 carries. He's not at 952 yards on the year, looking to hit the 1,000 yard mark."

That can then branch into many different lines....

"He has hit the 1,000 yard mark each of the last 3 years and has been the backbone of this offense once again this year as Washington ranks 4th in the league in rushing yards." *queue stat banners*

"Those 952 yards have Portis as the leading rusher in the league *bqueue banner showing top 3-5 rushers in NFL coming into the week*. He really has been impressive today and this entire year."

Or you can go other routes,

"The sun is starting to settle, but the weather is still nice as it is in the 70's here in Landover with little to no wind on the day."

"While we have a second, let's take a look at the standings in the NFC East"

"Let's take a quick look at the early playoff picture"

"Washington is starting to get that running game going which has been the strength of their team all year *again, stat banner time*... as you can see, they rank 4th in the league coming into this week. That OL has been doing solid work all year."

Again, those are all generic, yet good and if they repeat, they don't stick out because of being generic enough.

Now here is what EA does right now with Davis and Gaudin... these are examples of the bad repetitiveness.

"Portis takes the handoff and picks up 5. That sets up a 2nd and 5."

"That was a good run by a very talented back. When he lowers that shoulder, he means business. He reminds me of being in a play in high school."

"High school???"

"Yes, I was the character in ___ play and we had a scene where...."

and before the story is over, we are kicking the XP 5 plays later. We're kicking off and the story just now ends and nothing over the last 2 minutes was commentated on. That story about high school theate is not generic, it gets old after two or three times of hearing it. It's simply not the proper way of being repetitive. It's EA being cute for no reason.

EA simply tries too hard to bring about some banter that stands out to show that these guys have chemistry. They do it the wrong way. Unique stories are the worst way to go about this. Again, the play by play isn't a huge issue, it can be cleaned up and made a bit more generic so it sounds less repetitive in the wrong away, but the color commentary and the banter between the two is awful.

1) It should not be unique stories that get old after two hearings.
2) It should not spill over multiple plays and allow the action on field to be ignored.
3) There are better ways to have banter that relate to the specific instances happening in that game/franchise that are generic at heart, but mention specifics so that they are lines that feel dynamic and actually bring life to the franchise mode.

EA essentially has the commentary team ramble on like I do with my posts here. Instead of limiting the commentary to a line or two for each situation, they allow the guys to read off 22 line soliloquies that hurt the experience. In short, the commentary needs to be less like a canes21 post. Less rambling on, be generic at heart, but blend in specific statements that show awareness to what is going on in the game/division/conference/league.

Good

"He gives it to Portis, he goes right, he lowers the shoulder and falls forward for 6.

That run gives him 48 yards on the day, he's now 48 yards away from hitting 1,000 yards on the year.

This Washington rushing attack has been strong all year *banners*."

Bad

"Portis gets the handoff, gets tackled by Brookes after a gain of 6.

When Portis lowers that shoulder, you better watch out as a DB.

You would know, wouldn't you, being a DB. You were never afraid of tackling were you?

You bet I was. If my big defensive linemen or linebackers weren't making tackles and were letting backs get to me in the secondary, they weren't getting a nice steak dinner of stocking stuffers at the end of the year.

Oh, so you like to just go out there and get interceptions and call it a day?

What DB doesn't dream of only having to worry about one aspect of the game?"

and then we're at half time and the play that triggered that banter was in the 1st quarter and we got zero commentary the other 21 plays of the half because of DB stories.

[ForUntoOblivionSoar∞]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

There's not really a commentary team in HS, it's one guy. The thing with commentary is it will always be repetitive to an extent because commentary by nature is repetitive. That's true in real life as well. There are only so many ways to call a play in real football. A 4 yard run up the middle only has so many ways it can be called by the play by play guy. "Ramsey gives it to Portis who goes up the middle and goes down after about a 4 yard gain." "The snap, Portis gets the handoff, powers through before getting taken down after a gain of around 4." "The snap, the give, and Portis gets tackled after picking up 4 yards on the play." You probably get the point. These are all generic ways of calling a play, but ware what we hear 99% of the time on real broadcasts at any level of football. Again, there are only so many ways to call a play, so commentators are simply repetitive by nature. There are essentially two ways of being repetitive. The right way and the wrong way. The above is the right way of being repetitive. You're describing the play in a real life manner and not doing anything extraordinary that would stick out. Here's another way to show how to describe a player and play in a manner that balances being generic and specific enough to where when it does get repetitive, it doesn't stick out and still sounds natural 5 years into a franchise. "Ramsey takes the snap, hands it off to Portis... Portis heads to his right, cuts upfield, breaks one tackle, and is taken down after a gain of 6." "That was a nice run by Portis who now has 7 carries for 46 yards on the day." "It's 2nd and 4, Ramsey is making some adjustments at the line, he takes the snap, fakes it to Portis, throws it down the middle towards Cooley and it goes just past his hands... incomplete." "Cooley had a step on his man there, but the pressure forced Ramsey to just miss him on that one." "That incompletion brings Ramsey's stats on the day to 7 of 12 of 88 yards and 1 TD back in the 1st." "That was the 4th time they've targeted Cooley today, he has 2 catches for 26 yards including an 8 yard TD reception." These are all lines that are generic enough to where they sound real, they do not bring any extra attention to themselves because they don't try to stick out and be creative. They paint a picture of the play and then bring some stats into the picture so that the game feels like an actual event taking place over some time. You could tackle a 4 yard run to the right multiple ways that are generic, would repeat, but not get annoyingly repetitive because they are simply how it is called in real life. "The snap, the give, Portis goes right, and he's taken down at the 28 after a 6 yard pickup." "Ramsey takes the snap, he hands it to Portis going right, Portis turns upfield and is tackled by Brookes after gaining about 6." "They give it to Portis again, he heads right, Brookes wraps him up, but he shows some strength falling forward for a gain of 6 on the play." "Ramsey with the snap, he hands it off to Portis once more, Portis runs into Brookes, but not before picking up 6." "The snap, Portis has it going right, he heads upfield, he picks up 6 before he is taken down by Brookes." That's a handful of generic calls that you can just replace the QB, RB, and defender names and the calls would sound natural and not repetitive in the wrong, annoying way. This is all play by play stuff for the most part, which isn't the weakest part of Madden's commentary, but it demonstrates how keeping it generic actually benefits the experience for the user because it is dynamic enough to sound natural while still remaining repetitive. Between plays, you bring up stats, standings, the weather, scenarios, happenings around the league. Here are some good things EA can do between plays. "That carry puts Portis at 48 yards on 6 carries. He's not at 952 yards on the year, looking to hit the 1,000 yard mark." That can then branch into many different lines.... "He has hit the 1,000 yard mark each of the last 3 years and has been the backbone of this offense once again this year as Washington ranks 4th in the league in rushing yards." *queue stat banners* "Those 952 yards have Portis as the leading rusher in the league *bqueue banner showing top 3-5 rushers in NFL coming into the week*. He really has been impressive today and this entire year." Or you can go other routes, "The sun is starting to settle, but the weather is still nice as it is in the 70's here in Landover with little to no wind on the day." "While we have a second, let's take a look at the standings in the NFC East" "Let's take a quick look at the early playoff picture" "Washington is starting to get that running game going which has been the strength of their team all year *again, stat banner time*... as you can see, they rank 4th in the league coming into this week. That OL has been doing solid work all year." Again, those are all generic, yet good and if they repeat, they don't stick out because of being generic enough. Now here is what EA does right now with Davis and Gaudin... these are examples of the bad repetitiveness. "Portis takes the handoff and picks up 5. That sets up a 2nd and 5." "That was a good run by a very talented back. When he lowers that shoulder, he means business. He reminds me of being in a play in high school." "High school???" "Yes, I was the character in ___ play and we had a scene where...." and before the story is over, we are kicking the XP 5 plays later. We're kicking off and the story just now ends and nothing over the last 2 minutes was commentated on. That story about high school theate is not generic, it gets old after two or three times of hearing it. It's simply not the proper way of being repetitive. It's EA being cute for no reason. EA simply tries too hard to bring about some banter that stands out to show that these guys have chemistry. They do it the wrong way. Unique stories are the worst way to go about this. Again, the play by play isn't a huge issue, it can be cleaned up and made a bit more generic so it sounds less repetitive in the wrong away, but the color commentary and the banter between the two is awful. 1) It should not be unique stories that get old after two hearings. 2) It should not spill over multiple plays and allow the action on field to be ignored. 3) There are better ways to have banter that relate to the specific instances happening in that game/franchise that are generic at heart, but mention specifics so that they are lines that feel dynamic and actually bring life to the franchise mode. EA essentially has the commentary team ramble on like I do with my posts here. Instead of limiting the commentary to a line or two for each situation, they allow the guys to read off 22 line soliloquies that hurt the experience. In short, the commentary needs to be less like a canes21 post. Less rambling on, be generic at heart, but blend in specific statements that show awareness to what is going on in the game/division/conference/league. Good "He gives it to Portis, he goes right, he lowers the shoulder and falls forward for 6. That run gives him 48 yards on the day, he's now 48 yards away from hitting 1,000 yards on the year. This Washington rushing attack has been strong all year *banners*." Bad "Portis gets the handoff, gets tackled by Brookes after a gain of 6. When Portis lowers that shoulder, you better watch out as a DB. You would know, wouldn't you, being a DB. You were never afraid of tackling were you? You bet I was. If my big defensive linemen or linebackers weren't making tackles and were letting backs get to me in the secondary, they weren't getting a nice steak dinner of stocking stuffers at the end of the year. Oh, so you like to just go out there and get interceptions and call it a day? What DB doesn't dream of only having to worry about one aspect of the game?" and then we're at half time and the play that triggered that banter was in the 1st quarter and we got zero commentary the other 21 plays of the half because of DB stories.

Spot on.

Another example of good repetition (and seriously needed) that actually drags on in a way you don’t like: “If he continues at this rate, he’s likely to win his second MVP.”

Next season: “If he continues at this rate, he’s likely to win back to back MVPs.” “And that would be his third overall, right?” “Right. One more and he’s going to Canton.”

Repetitive IF you win a third MVP for the player, but it’s only specific to the particular franchise and the history of that player in your franchise. It ought to be pretty rare to hear, and if you have two or three ways of saying it, and it’s only said late in the year, it shouldn’t be too bad.

And even if it’s repeated in the same season, it would be tolerable because it would be highlighting the CURRENT season in your franchise, rather than the current REAL NFL season.

[oneamongthefence]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

There's not really a commentary team in HS, it's one guy. The thing with commentary is it will always be repetitive to an extent because commentary by nature is repetitive. That's true in real life as well. There are only so many ways to call a play in real football. A 4 yard run up the middle only has so many ways it can be called by the play by play guy. "Ramsey gives it to Portis who goes up the middle and goes down after about a 4 yard gain." "The snap, Portis gets the handoff, powers through before getting taken down after a gain of around 4." "The snap, the give, and Portis gets tackled after picking up 4 yards on the play." You probably get the point. These are all generic ways of calling a play, but ware what we hear 99% of the time on real broadcasts at any level of football. Again, there are only so many ways to call a play, so commentators are simply repetitive by nature. There are essentially two ways of being repetitive. The right way and the wrong way. The above is the right way of being repetitive. You're describing the play in a real life manner and not doing anything extraordinary that would stick out. Here's another way to show how to describe a player and play in a manner that balances being generic and specific enough to where when it does get repetitive, it doesn't stick out and still sounds natural 5 years into a franchise. "Ramsey takes the snap, hands it off to Portis... Portis heads to his right, cuts upfield, breaks one tackle, and is taken down after a gain of 6." "That was a nice run by Portis who now has 7 carries for 46 yards on the day." "It's 2nd and 4, Ramsey is making some adjustments at the line, he takes the snap, fakes it to Portis, throws it down the middle towards Cooley and it goes just past his hands... incomplete." "Cooley had a step on his man there, but the pressure forced Ramsey to just miss him on that one." "That incompletion brings Ramsey's stats on the day to 7 of 12 of 88 yards and 1 TD back in the 1st." "That was the 4th time they've targeted Cooley today, he has 2 catches for 26 yards including an 8 yard TD reception." These are all lines that are generic enough to where they sound real, they do not bring any extra attention to themselves because they don't try to stick out and be creative. They paint a picture of the play and then bring some stats into the picture so that the game feels like an actual event taking place over some time. You could tackle a 4 yard run to the right multiple ways that are generic, would repeat, but not get annoyingly repetitive because they are simply how it is called in real life. "The snap, the give, Portis goes right, and he's taken down at the 28 after a 6 yard pickup." "Ramsey takes the snap, he hands it to Portis going right, Portis turns upfield and is tackled by Brookes after gaining about 6." "They give it to Portis again, he heads right, Brookes wraps him up, but he shows some strength falling forward for a gain of 6 on the play." "Ramsey with the snap, he hands it off to Portis once more, Portis runs into Brookes, but not before picking up 6." "The snap, Portis has it going right, he heads upfield, he picks up 6 before he is taken down by Brookes." That's a handful of generic calls that you can just replace the QB, RB, and defender names and the calls would sound natural and not repetitive in the wrong, annoying way. This is all play by play stuff for the most part, which isn't the weakest part of Madden's commentary, but it demonstrates how keeping it generic actually benefits the experience for the user because it is dynamic enough to sound natural while still remaining repetitive. Between plays, you bring up stats, standings, the weather, scenarios, happenings around the league. Here are some good things EA can do between plays. "That carry puts Portis at 48 yards on 6 carries. He's not at 952 yards on the year, looking to hit the 1,000 yard mark." That can then branch into many different lines.... "He has hit the 1,000 yard mark each of the last 3 years and has been the backbone of this offense once again this year as Washington ranks 4th in the league in rushing yards." *queue stat banners* "Those 952 yards have Portis as the leading rusher in the league *bqueue banner showing top 3-5 rushers in NFL coming into the week*. He really has been impressive today and this entire year." Or you can go other routes, "The sun is starting to settle, but the weather is still nice as it is in the 70's here in Landover with little to no wind on the day." "While we have a second, let's take a look at the standings in the NFC East" "Let's take a quick look at the early playoff picture" "Washington is starting to get that running game going which has been the strength of their team all year *again, stat banner time*... as you can see, they rank 4th in the league coming into this week. That OL has been doing solid work all year." Again, those are all generic, yet good and if they repeat, they don't stick out because of being generic enough. Now here is what EA does right now with Davis and Gaudin... these are examples of the bad repetitiveness. "Portis takes the handoff and picks up 5. That sets up a 2nd and 5." "That was a good run by a very talented back. When he lowers that shoulder, he means business. He reminds me of being in a play in high school." "High school???" "Yes, I was the character in ___ play and we had a scene where...." and before the story is over, we are kicking the XP 5 plays later. We're kicking off and the story just now ends and nothing over the last 2 minutes was commentated on. That story about high school theate is not generic, it gets old after two or three times of hearing it. It's simply not the proper way of being repetitive. It's EA being cute for no reason. EA simply tries too hard to bring about some banter that stands out to show that these guys have chemistry. They do it the wrong way. Unique stories are the worst way to go about this. Again, the play by play isn't a huge issue, it can be cleaned up and made a bit more generic so it sounds less repetitive in the wrong away, but the color commentary and the banter between the two is awful. 1) It should not be unique stories that get old after two hearings. 2) It should not spill over multiple plays and allow the action on field to be ignored. 3) There are better ways to have banter that relate to the specific instances happening in that game/franchise that are generic at heart, but mention specifics so that they are lines that feel dynamic and actually bring life to the franchise mode. EA essentially has the commentary team ramble on like I do with my posts here. Instead of limiting the commentary to a line or two for each situation, they allow the guys to read off 22 line soliloquies that hurt the experience. In short, the commentary needs to be less like a canes21 post. Less rambling on, be generic at heart, but blend in specific statements that show awareness to what is going on in the game/division/conference/league. Good "He gives it to Portis, he goes right, he lowers the shoulder and falls forward for 6. That run gives him 48 yards on the day, he's now 48 yards away from hitting 1,000 yards on the year. This Washington rushing attack has been strong all year *banners*." Bad "Portis gets the handoff, gets tackled by Brookes after a gain of 6. When Portis lowers that shoulder, you better watch out as a DB. You would know, wouldn't you, being a DB. You were never afraid of tackling were you? You bet I was. If my big defensive linemen or linebackers weren't making tackles and were letting backs get to me in the secondary, they weren't getting a nice steak dinner of stocking stuffers at the end of the year. Oh, so you like to just go out there and get interceptions and call it a day? What DB doesn't dream of only having to worry about one aspect of the game?" and then we're at half time and the play that triggered that banter was in the 1st quarter and we got zero commentary the other 21 plays of the half because of DB stories.

A lot of the issues you mentioned are also exacerbated by the lack of a huddle break where it leads to a lot more lines bleeding into other plays. But it usually does cut off when a big play happens but that sounds pretty unnatural.

One thing I wish commentary was is more specific. It was done in Madden 09 with Collinsworth breaking down plays and telling the player where they should have gone on passing plays. Commentary should be a teaching tool as well as it is in real life. It's educational and informative.

100% agree on it needing to have more context in plays. A lot of times stats pop up and I expect the team to have a say about it but it doesn't. Very rarely does info presented on screen match up what the commentary is talking about.

Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by oneamongthefence

A lot of the issues you mentioned are also exacerbated by the lack of a huddle break where it leads to a lot more lines bleeding into other plays. But it usually does cut off when a big play happens but that sounds pretty unnatural. One thing I wish commentary was is more specific. It was done in Madden 09 with Collinsworth breaking down plays and telling the player where they should have gone on passing plays. Commentary should be a teaching tool as well as it is in real life. It's educational and informative. 100% agree on it needing to have more context in plays. A lot of times stats pop up and I expect the team to have a say about it but it doesn't. Very rarely does info presented on screen match up what the commentary is talking about. Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk

No doubt the lack of huddle break and the general speedup has had an impact, but that honestly gives them even more of an incentive to keep it generic and to move away from "storytime". However, we clearly see that their commentary approach does not necessarily match their presentation approach, and like you also mentioned, the banners and commentary don't seem connected for whatever reason.

Their aim is to speed the game up, eliminate a lot of the in between stuff the casual gamer isn't interested in, yet their commentary lines are written as if we actually have wait between plays the amount of time we do in real life. In real football, personnel changes, adjustments, etc. will lead to a few plays happening over minutes. In Madden, the changes they've made have made it to where you can get off 4 or 5 plays in a real life minute, but the commentary doesn't behave like those changes were ever made, that's why I can have a 9 play drive and they're still talking about play 3 when I'm kicking the XP. And what they're talking about is so cringey and annoying that it is amplified.

If I'm going to deal with commentary spilling over plays, at least make it relevant and interesting. I'd much rather the playoff discussion of my franchise be what I hear for 3 plays, not a story about chestnuts.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[oneamongthefence]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

No doubt the lack of huddle break and the general speedup has had an impact, but that honestly gives them even more of an incentive to keep it generic and to move away from "storytime". However, we clearly see that their commentary approach does not necessarily match their presentation approach, and like you also mentioned, the banners and commentary don't seem connected for whatever reason. Their aim is to speed the game up, eliminate a lot of the in between stuff the casual gamer isn't interested in, yet their commentary lines are written as if we actually have wait between plays the amount of time we do in real life. In real football, personnel changes, adjustments, etc. will lead to a few plays happening over minutes. In Madden, the changes they've made have made it to where you can get off 4 or 5 plays in a real life minute, but the commentary doesn't behave like those changes were ever made, that's why I can have a 9 play drive and they're still talking about play 3 when I'm kicking the XP. And what they're talking about is so cringey and annoying that it is amplified. If I'm going to deal with commentary spilling over plays, at least make it relevant and interesting. I'd much rather the playoff discussion of my franchise be what I hear for 3 plays, not a story about chestnuts. Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I think Madden should look into having a single person on commentary. A more refined version of the radio broadcast guy from Madden 08. More in-depth but but more to the point. Or give the game a more broadcast feel where there's a huddle again. More time in between plays with replays and cutaways to the sideline. Some more filler. But that filler has to have context as well.

Sent from my LM-G820 using Tapatalk