Guest Speech: Bibulus on Commentary

One of my biggest pet peeves is announcers not actually talking about what is happening in the match.

You don't need to call out every move when it happens, but tell us why they are doing what they are doing. Talk about momentum. Overall strategy. Player playstyle as it applies to the match. Even some player history is really useful. If you disagree with a choice point it out and move on without spending the rest of the set talking about what you would have done. Along those lines, talking about yourself more than the guys playing is really off-putting.

Side banter is cool, but keep it to a minimum during the action. It should be mostly reserved for breaks between matches and on-topic quips during the matches. If what you're seeing isn't interesting enough to keep your attention as a commentator, why should it be interesting enough for me to watch at all?

Finally, let hype come naturally instead of trying to inject it into nearly every single moment of every single match. That's essentially the same as creating anti-hype, because nothing feels special to the uninitiated.
 
Just as a point of clarity (I should have said as much) I see FG play-by-play as similar to boxing's and not baseballs. IMO, what S-kill and Ultra David do is play-by-play with analysis and they are hands down the best casting duo in FGs.
 
@Master_Thespian I agree to a point... To some degree you need to hype things up, but you can overdo it.

@Runis Give it time, you know where you need to level up so just work on it every time you get the chance.

@WCMaxi & taffertier Honestly I think if you prioritized play by play over color there would be no color at all. Play by play is everywhere and really isn't too different from color a lot of times, because you can segue into analysis from either point. I agree that informing people so they can enjoy the game without commentary in the future is paramount, but you have to have fun with it. If it boiled down to play by play and analysis the whole time, it could quickly be cut and dry once the matches weren't amazing.


@Marginal Probably... But when UFC or Boxing is going on I typically do my own color unless it's a crowded bar or some setting where it's too loud for people to hear it.

@CY No school except the one where you taught yourself. It's not hard to pick it up because there are guys like Day9 and djWHEAT who are all over the internet offering insights into how to do it. You just need to adapt their insights to your format and run with it.
 
I might agree, but I don't feel that at all when watching S-kill + Ultra David or any of the good casting combos in Starcraft2. I do want to rip my ears off at some of the "color" commentary that has floated around SCV.

Simple logic dictates SCV's audience is small, thus no matter what, laymen viewers will exceed knowledge viewers. This means overarching meta-game, overarching analysis, etc will be more critical than random jokes or just screaming random "hype" comments. Simple example, football game, announcer screams "Did you see that!! Did you see that!!", housewife looking on thinks, "I don't know but I'll nod and pretend I did." She's not feeling hype, entertained, nor informed; likely just awkward. If the announcer gave a little detail as to why he was blowing up, then she'd be more likely to feel as the announcer indented.

I think the issue is:
1. My audience wants me to be entertaining.
VERSUS
2. My audience wants me to present my (expert) view on this moment in an entertaining way.

Right now, most casting in SCV is 1. The 2nd prioritizes the (expert) view over being entertaining, but doesn't forget the value of entertainment.
 
I think my perception is skewed by simply doing play by play in a colorful manner and thinking of it as color. If you count color as simply hype comments, random nonsense and mind exploding reactions... I can see where you come from and agree with it. That should be filler for when my mind is busy being exploded
 
Back
Top