Commentary in Melee: Hype vs Insight

[Kully]

Just today I decided to make this thread concerning commentary in melee. As we all know, commentary can be great or terrible. It obviously depends on the commentators.

I have been formulating an idea in my head concerning commentary for a while, and it revolves around this scale I call the Hype - Insight scale. The way I see it is that every commentary can be viewed as some mix of two kinds of extreme commentaries:

Hype: Pure Hype is characterized by but not exclusive to constant screaming, overemphasizing little combos, moves, etc, and just amplifying excitement about different parts of a match.

Insight: Commentary that is purely insightful only deals with the knowledge aspects of the game. To give some concrete examples, commentators who fall into this category will mention the mechanics of the game when relevant, such as attributes of characters, ceilings of stages, rules of the tournament, etc. And also, such a commentator will also predict and comment on the players' thoughts, reading, spacing, mind games, etc.

I think that certain commentators are clear extremes of this scale. HMW (HomeMadeWaffles) and Drunk Mango ( ) fall into the Hype category while commentators like Prog, KK (KirbyKaze) and Wobbles fall into the Insight category.

In my opinion, the best commentary is an even mix in the middle; commentators like Lovage, Toph and Scar are good examples of this. (Watch KoC2 for reference)

What do you guys think makes the best commentary? Let me know.

 

[Kully]

Btw, this is excellent commentary. Plus a great 2 sets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccoTN-kszhU

 

[Ramo]

As long as the commentator isn't just yelling "KNEEEE KNEEEEEE!!!!"...

I think you're right, though. I've seen lots of sets where I learned a lot but wasn't really entertained. I think Dogysamich's commentary is the best because he is extremely knowledgable and still hypes

 

[Kully]

As long as the commentator isn't just yelling "KNEEEE KNEEEEEE!!!!"...

I think you're right, though. I've seen lots of sets where I learned a lot but wasn't really entertained. I think Dogysamich's commentary is the best because he is extremely knowledgable and still hypes

I think he is good too, but I prefer commentary duos. Prog and D1 is probably my favorite.

 

[prog]

I'll respond to this during my lunch break.

 

[oukd]

i prefer 100% hype commentary for hype occasions (ie scar ken bo7) and a balanced insight-to-hype ratio for tournament matches

its also important to note that insight and hype are not mutually exclusive regarding individual commentators. ie i think both scar & toph were each a decent mix of both (gasps aside lol). meanwhile, 2 random people who dont care about smash will have neither

 

[Kully]

i prefer 100% hype commentary for hype occasions (ie scar ken bo7) and a balanced insight-to-hype ratio for tournament matches

its also important to note that insight and hype are not mutually exclusive regarding individual commentators. ie i think both scar & toph were each a decent mix of both (gasps aside lol). meanwhile, 2 random people who dont care about smash will have neither

That's a really good point!

 

[The Irish Mafia]

There is most certainly a suitable middle ground. A lot of first time commentators get on the mic and try to do one or the other. "Hype" commentary usually ends with a whole lot of "Son"s and "Where r u at's", ala Rom1 commentary. While it did give the tournament a memorable feel, I'd also say that a lot of the footage from Rom1 reflects the times; aftershock from the wombo combo, and the widespread fear and hatred of jigglypuff. Personally, I'm happy that got captured. So even people who aren't so hype getting hype can work itself out.
Meanwhile, "insightful" commentary may seem like a safer route for the first time or casual commentator, but it does involve vocally imposing your knowledge of the game over the entire match. That may seem simple, but allow me to stress: your knowledge. The WHOLE MATCH. The fear quickly arises that if you cannot provide an explanation, you will lose your credibility as a commentator. Thus, this type of commentary can often come off as really pretentious, depending on the listener's opinion of the commentator. I can't produce universal examples, because, as I said, it does depend on the listener, and it would also be demonizing a recorded presence of which the commentator no longer has control over. For the sake of argument, and because my own ego is already on the line, I'll use this as an example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-AR0TCnYH4

The video is of my pools set vs scar from rom5. This is a set I was somewhat amped for, mostly because it was being streamed, but also because i'm a huge scar fanboy. I decided that though I was using a different and new controller (johns), I was gonna do my best if I had my moment in the spotlight. I texted friends and told them to watch me on the stream. I played my ass off and ended up taking a game, which felt like enough of an accomplishment for me to be proud of. A crowd had formed to watch the set by the end. I had done my thing, and people had watched.
When I watched this recording, I was horribly disappointed by the commentary (and jesus christ this is not a personal stab at wenbo or his commentary. Wenbo is the man, and I'm sure he's perfectly capable of commentating a match, but I couldn't help and feel that he didn't do it here). The commentary was centered around what he thought or how he felt, and when it did involve the actual events of the match, it was usually to the tune of "I don't think he meant to" or "I think he should've _____ instead of. . ." etc.
This qualifies as insight because he's showing the match in a broader perspective, by adding his own. He isn't really delving into the matches' cause and effect. It gives a shallow, though effective explanation of the events, and rarely mentions the nuances of the match itself in the explanations.
Does Wenbo have "insight" on the match? Well, he has insight on the character being played, as well as on the matchup, but it sounds like he's falling asleep on the mic. Clearly, prior knowledge can help one's commentary, but it is not enough to make for entertaining commentary on it's own. I can write a 3-page essay on tech chasing for an online message board, but not everyone's down to read it. Should I impose my knowledge over footage, then it quickly becomes more about me and my "insight" than the match itself. A match of melee is usually a series of very fast-paced, momentum-based events. It's exciting, even if nothing is happening. See: my reactions to Hax vs M2K from smashacre.

Waffles is the best commentator and I don't think he should be used as an archetype for a "hype" commentator. I've consistently found his commentary to be insightful and informative, as well as entertaining. This is because over the period of time in which he was commentating, he went from being a low, to mid, to mid-high level player in Norcal, one of the regions with the highest concentration of skill. My favorite commentary of his was during the period of time when him and Phil were making this transition. He brought something very relatable to the mic, which was the struggle to improve. He understands this game on several levels, and is able to identify which level it's being played on based on the match. This lets him avoid his own preconceptions about the matchup when commentating. When he does bring up his preconceptions, they're usually evidenced by results from credible smash play, and he makes a point of citing his sources and reasons.
Watch his commentary on the deep 3 from this last saturday. It was phenomenal, the ENTIRE TIME. He has something to say the entire time anything's happening, and he has something to say whenever something isn't happening. The line that stuck with me was "Rolling. . . Rolling will get you far in life." That's a complete truth of competitive smash. Yes, there are times when rolling is bad, and you should learn not to do it. There are also times when rolling is great and you should do it. He phrases it in a way that makes it a very good take-home message. Embroider that **** on a pillow or something.
But yeah, that's how I feel about it.

 

[Kully]

There is most certainly a suitable middle ground. A lot of first time commentators get on the mic and try to do one or the other. "Hype" commentary usually ends with a whole lot of "Son"s and "Where r u at's", ala Rom1 commentary. While it did give the tournament a memorable feel, I'd also say that a lot of the footage from Rom1 reflects the times; aftershock from the wombo combo, and the widespread fear and hatred of jigglypuff. Personally, I'm happy that got captured. So even people who aren't so hype getting hype can work itself out.
Meanwhile, "insightful" commentary may seem like a safer route for the first time or casual commentator, but it does involve vocally imposing your knowledge of the game over the entire match. That may seem simple, but allow me to stress: your knowledge. The WHOLE MATCH. The fear quickly arises that if you cannot provide an explanation, you will lose your credibility as a commentator. Thus, this type of commentary can often come off as really pretentious, depending on the listener's opinion of the commentator. I can't produce universal examples, because, as I said, it does depend on the listener, and it would also be demonizing a recorded presence of which the commentator no longer has control over. For the sake of argument, and because my own ego is already on the line, I'll use this as an example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-AR0TCnYH4

The video is of my pools set vs scar from rom5. This is a set I was somewhat amped for, mostly because it was being streamed, but also because i'm a huge scar fanboy. I decided that though I was using a different and new controller (johns), I was gonna do my best if I had my moment in the spotlight. I texted friends and told them to watch me on the stream. I played my *** off and ended up taking a game, which felt like enough of an accomplishment for me to be proud of. A crowd had formed to watch the set by the end. I had done my thing, and people had watched.
When I watched this recording, I was horribly disappointed by the commentary (and jesus christ this is not a personal stab at wenbo or his commentary. Wenbo is the man, and I'm sure he's perfectly capable of commentating a match, but I couldn't help and feel that he didn't do it here). The commentary was centered around what he thought or how he felt, and when it did involve the actual events of the match, it was usually to the tune of "I don't think he meant to" or "I think he should've _____ instead of. . ." etc.
This qualifies as insight because he's showing the match in a broader perspective, by adding his own. He isn't really delving into the matches' cause and effect. It gives a shallow, though effective explanation of the events, and rarely mentions the nuances of the match itself in the explanations.
Does Wenbo have "insight" on the match? Well, he has insight on the character being played, as well as on the matchup, but it sounds like he's falling asleep on the mic. Clearly, prior knowledge can help one's commentary, but it is not enough to make for entertaining commentary on it's own. I can write a 3-page essay on tech chasing for an online message board, but not everyone's down to read it. Should I impose my knowledge over footage, then it quickly becomes more about me and my "insight" than the match itself. A match of melee is usually a series of very fast-paced, momentum-based events. It's exciting, even if nothing is happening. See: my reactions to Hax vs M2K from smashacre.

Waffles is the best commentator and I don't think he should be used as an archetype for a "hype" commentator. I've consistently found his commentary to be insightful and informative, as well as entertaining. This is because over the period of time in which he was commentating, he went from being a low, to mid, to mid-high level player in Norcal, one of the regions with the highest concentration of skill. My favorite commentary of his was during the period of time when him and Phil were making this transition. He brought something very relatable to the mic, which was the struggle to improve. He understands this game on several levels, and is able to identify which level it's being played on based on the match. This lets him avoid his own preconceptions about the matchup when commentating. When he does bring up his preconceptions, they're usually evidenced by results from credible smash play, and he makes a point of citing his sources and reasons.
Watch his commentary on the deep 3 from this last saturday. It was phenomenal, the ENTIRE TIME. He has something to say the entire time anything's happening, and he has something to say whenever something isn't happening. The line that stuck with me was "Rolling. . . Rolling will get you far in life." That's a complete truth of competitive smash. Yes, there are times when rolling is bad, and you should learn not to do it. There are also times when rolling is great and you should do it. He phrases it in a way that makes it a very good take-home message. Embroider that **** on a pillow or something.
But yeah, that's how I feel about it.

Yeah, I agree. I think I may have mistakenly attributed HMW as, like you said, the archetypal hype guy. Even though I am not familiar with his commentary on sets as extensively as you seem to be, I do agree that in ROM, he was thoroughly entertaining and insightful at times too.

Waffles, if you are listening, your commentary is so great and wombo combo will always live in my heart! =)

 

[Bones0]

I think viewing a commentator as 10% hype, 90% knowledge or whatever combination is a horrible, one-dimensional way of viewing commentary. There are people who get hyped when it's appropriate and give out relevant knowledge in between those hype moments. Not only is the timing of the hype or knowledge important, but it can even go as far as depending on what characters or players are playing atm, the caliber of the players, the importance of the tournament win, what their history is (both in the big picture of previous tournaments as well as small picture of earlier in the tournament), and many other things. I don't want anyone commentating Hbox vs. Armada's sets trying to force hype into the commentary just to maintain a 50-50 ratio. I'd rather have them talk about the patterns and strategies of each player, and then get REALLY hyped the 2-3 times a match when something unique happens (Hbox winning by a single %, Armada dropping a bomb to aerial combo that could have KOed [#ScarGasp], etc). The matchup calls for much more knowledge-based insight than a Falcon vs. Ganon match where both players are just doing disgusting combos to each other the whole time. In that case, I want someone occasionally pointing out interesting strats that come into play, and then continuing to scream into the mic like they have been (#SadlyMistaken).

Basically, commentators need to be real. Wife is one of my favorite commentators because I never feel like he's faking interest or hype. It's always honest, and human beings are particularly good at detecting dishonesty in many forms without even trying. If someone is forcing a matchup tidbit or hype scream, everyone can pick up on that (subconsciously, if not consciously). I think the best way for commentators to find their sweetspot is to simply become practiced at watching videos and talking about what goes through their head. This is why high level players seem to be such great commentators. It's not because they have more knowledge, but rather their breadth of knowledge allows them to rarely miss a moment to comment on some intriguing interaction, and this is why commentators who are less knowledgeable tend to start doing radio commentary. They know on a surface level that some interesting interaction is occurring, but they can't articulate it until it's too late and the moment's passed.

 

[Armada]

I agree with Bones on many things here.
Having a 50-50 ratio or something like that is just to bad.

Different matches means that a different style is better. That is one important thing for the commentator to "feel" when it's time to hype something up or when it is time to have more insight knowledge about the match/players etc.

I do feel we have quite a few great commentators now and it seems like all of them is improving even more which is super good! =)

 

[Ramo]

Armada, why haven't you commentated any matches? Or have you already?

 

[BTmoney]

I consider Prog a color (lol-black-joke) commentator although he's pretty informative and always takes a good tone. He's just about perfect in all seriousness. Wobbles and Wife were/are some of my other favorites.

 

[Armada]

Armada, why haven't you commentated any matches? Or have you already?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0KIv7LBglE
Here is a set with me commentating. It was basically my first time ( did commentate GF for teams at the same tournament) and I had to remember to not be to loud since I was sitting kinda close to the players.

It was very hard since Im so new to it (even more since I was doing it by myself) but yeah I guess it wasn't completely horrible at least
Will try to commentate a bit more at the next tournament we do have with a stream!

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

Hype >>>> Everything

 

[Bad Cupboard]

Hype. I already know what's going on, I don't need someone telling me.
And I don't think insightful commentary is particularly helpful to new players because then everything they take from a match is filtered by the opinions and tendencies of whoever is commentating.

 

[prog]

So, I apologize for my tardiness but my lunch break was filled with other priorities. When I wrote this, the boards were down, so I’ll just be going off what I remember. Also, I’ll generally be referring to majors. Incoming train of thought.

Now, I remember the delineation between insight and hype, and personally, I’m not a fan of putting them under those terms. Commentators have their styles, some lean more towards what’s occuring, others toward crowd pleasing. So, personally, I break it up like this:

Match vs. Entertainment Value

Match: Focus on the players (whether its background information on them, habits, what they’re looking for, even what they’re doing in the middle of a match), characters (moveset knowledge, matchup, etc.), stages, the crowd, so on and so forth, etc.

Entertainment value: Keeping the viewers enthralled (because face it, I don’t think anyone would cherish listening to frame data for the duration of a set)

--

Again, just speaking for myself, in my effort to find “my voice,” there is a question of what people want to hear in their sets. I started on sets post Wombo Combo, and my earlier sets reflect that mantra of learning toward entertainment, inside jokes, etc. Revival of Melee 3 was when I started formulating my idea as to what I wanted to get across on the microphone, and I’d say Apex 2012 solidified it.

Everyone has preferences, some like more focus on the set, others prefer leaning toward the entertainment side of the spectrum. And even with those preferences, it breaks down more. Some of those focused people want to know the extreme intricacies of the game, others just want to see parallels to things they’re more familiar with, or the basics. Some who like entertainment prefer screaming into the mic, others want catchphrases and inside jokes, etc. Basically, no one will satisfy everyone.

I’m going to take a concept that TheCrimsonBlur used in a different topic, the commentary reflects the era. Early commentary was kind of apathetic, if the matches had commentary at all. However, the MLG era had both worlds, the match focused paragons as well as those who were putting on a show for the viewers. Then the Wombo Combo era, Smash was underground again, grassroots to the core, the commentary was energetic, from people who were invested in the game and the community. Now, it feels like everything is moving toward expansion, similar to the MLG era.

--

I’m going to be blunt. Every commentator has their own style, what they want to accomplish, what audience they’re talking to. My personal battle was (and still is) trying to not just to balance the match and entertainment value, but trying to balance the guy who has been in the community for years with the one who might be watching for the first time. However, recently, it was brought to my attention that I don’t commentate for a majority of the Melee community.

I don’t think I mind. I’m a veteran of the DC++ hub, where if people were there looking at videos, they had a pretty deep investment in the game to traverse to those depths to find them. They were going to watch them over and over to learn. Move to the Youtube era, a lot of the same, you subscribed to X channels and knew that the core audience were smashers. They will watch these videos over and over until they are second nature. Even the early streaming era, you knew what streams were hosting majors, and again, a strong majority of the viewers were smashers. Times have changed. Regionals are often on the front page of Twitch.TV. We get raids from former Smashers who are in the Speedrunning community, people who are looking for a change, etc. There’s potential for a greater audience now than ever.

That is who I try to appeal to when I commentate. This game is over a decade old. There is a history, a narrative before each match, whether its two players clashing again or reigniting coastal rivalries. We still have the “party game” moniker attached, but I want to bring up the rich history in this game. By the same token, I try and stay very basic with my insight, with references/explanations of advanced techniques, not delving too deep. That may disappoint some of our entrenched players, but again, I throw them an occasional bone. Those deep things generally get dedicated posts on Smashboards asking for breakdowns and theory craft about it. Those that are entrenched in the community will do that digging, I just want to give them a shovel and maybe loosen up a bit of dirt.

The community is at a very different place than it was even two years ago. Dedicated twitch streams with front page views. A live bi-weekly podcast that averages 150 viewers, hitting over 1000 viewers for a very special episode and featuring guests within the community and those on the outside who a lot of people wouldn’t expect to have any interest in us. A production group attempting to update our tutorials to where the game is now. The Smash Lab, where top tier players don’t JUST commentate past matches, but can pause, dissect, research ahead of time, highlight, annotate, etc.

--

Anyway, this is a slimmed down version of what I’ve mulled over the last 3 or 5 years.

 

[Kully]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0KIv7LBglE
Here is a set with me commentating. It was basically my first time ( did commentate GF for teams at the same tournament) and I had to remember to not be to loud since I was sitting kinda close to the players.

It was very hard since Im so new to it (even more since I was doing it by myself) but yeah I guess it wasn't completely horrible at least
Will try to commentate a bit more at the next tournament we do have with a stream!

I love your commentary! It's really great. Like you said, hype at the right times, like that sick Zelda recovery thing.

 

[Armada]

Thanks dude!
I will do my best to improve even more =)

It was actually more fun then I thought it would be. And then I didn't even had a commentary partner which I think would have made it even more fun.
At Beast 4 I will try to commentate many more sets then just GFs

 

[Engo]

I think commentators should just keep doing it and getting better at it while occasionally getting feedback until they really understand what they're doing and what they're style is. (ie. prog). If the style is good it'll be received well whether it's different from other popular commentators or not.It's practicing that will get you good at it not talking on forums about the perfect "hype" vs "educational" ratio. I really think this stuff will come naturally with lots of practice.

 

[oliman]

Hype is better.
Points of interest:
The two most viewed Melee videos are Wombo Combo and M2K vs. Shiz 4. Both of these feature great plays, yeah, but "hype" commentary as well.
Outside of this community, Justin Wong vs. Daigo had amazing plays, and also a loud ass crowd to fuel the hype.
Yipes, probably Marvel's commentary equivalent of HMW, is probably the most popular Marvel commentator
In sports, when a home run is hit or an awesome dunk is dunked, the "commentators" don't deduce and analyze what just happened while it is happening. THEY START YELLIN AND SCREAMING AND EVERYONE GOES CRAZY AND IT'S A LOT OF FUN!!!!!!!!!

IMO

 

[TreK]

Hmm, I showed this idea to my peeps but they already had a couple good points against it that made me hesitate. I'd like to know what you think of it.
Basically, from the very same observations, instead of seeing a way to tell if a commentator is good or bad, I saw a niche to produce a new kind of content we haven't been producing a lot of yet : post-match commentary.
My point is this : we tend to dislike educative commentary because it takes away from the hype, but we also need it because newer players don't have a clue as to what is happening. So what if we provided additional videos that would do exactly that and go all the way ? These post-match commentary videos would have an actual script (or at least, notes to help the commentator provide quality insight) that took work to produce by viewing the match/set several times and researching info about the matchup (kill %, stage specific strategies, etc...), post-match interviews of the players, etc... Why not even have the top players as guests to commentate their own matches if they want to ?
Yes, I am basically saying that this kind of video will be exempt of most of the hype. But the original video will be commentated live, just like we usually do. This would be an additional video, released a couple of weeks after the tournament.

As an example, here's a set analysis from the GF of an Injustice tournament :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Z-JzAFRhyQ&feature=player_embedded
Arturo Sanchez made a couple different decisions : he had no script, but paused a lot instead. But this is mostly because the game is still new and needs a lot of explaining. We don't have to make hour long videos for sets : the scripting part of the work would be used to make the need to pause lower, if not nonexistent, and we can link to already existing video guides through annotations and the video description in order to remove any unnecessary explanation and keep only the good stuff.


As for the original question, I find pairs of commentators to work best, especially if they have very different voices and attitudes.

 

[Massive]

I'd say the amount of educational talk should be proportional to how intense the match really is.

You'll notice that a lot of good commentators (in fighting games in general and not just in melee) will begin discussing metagame or explaining concepts/matchups in matches which are slower or have less skilled players. They do this to keep the viewer engaged in what could otherwise be a less interesting or confusing match.

When a match is incredibly intense and/or the skill level is very high, the general game info is best restrained a bit and the viewer should be allowed to say to themselves "holy crap that's amazing" when something happens.

Really, a good commentator should be both knowledgeable and able to GET ****ING HYPED when they have to.
A non-annoying, general accent, deepish speaking voice doesn't hurt either.

 

[♡ⓛⓞⓥⓔ♡]

I would LOVE to watch post-match commentaries because I've found them incredibly useful, interesting and entertaining also! Maybe it's just me but I miss like 90% of the stuff that is mentioned in those videos when I watch the original matches, maybe it's just a testament to my skill level but I think post-match analysis videos could be very useful for many

 

[Juushichi]

Art did that for the 25th Anniversary GF set between Daigo and Infiltration too. He's really good. I like that some communities are moving towards this, it's very good.

The MDZ breakdown of a part of KirbyKaze vs Mango was really, really good too.

 

[mas_torque]

Prog, Dogy, D1, and Wobbles are my favorites, especially Wobbles. Too much hype, while entertaining isn't really accomplishing anything. Too much insight puts me to sleep.

I really like when 'tators know about locals/underdogs so it's not all about Mango/PP/Armada/etc. Just acknowledging where lesser known players come from or who they play against/similar to really makes it feel like Melee has a community.