This has been something that's kinda been pushed under the bush as of late, but now it's been brought up again. What do you guys think? Should commentary be a part of entertainment? Or should it be optional?

My personal opinion is that it should have SOME relevance. Obviously, I won't ever cost anyone the match because they didn't write "good commentary" but I also think that some people work hard to come up with creative commentary and it should have SOME sort of importance.


Oh BTW, regardless of the poll, this doesn't mean we're going to change it. Just want to see what the general feel for this is. I'd rather you make a post than to just vote in the poll, as it doesn't make much of a difference, I just want to get opinions.

I thought it was already optional

It is, but now some people feel it should mean at least a bit of something.

Fuck those people

Fuck you. I agree with them.

It shouldn't be "mandatory", but having good commentary should affect how good the grader sees your match being.

Optional. Some people work creatively on it because it makes their match look better, it fits well under the circumstances, they can come up with some good lines, etc., but that doesn't mean it should affect the match. Commentary usually provides the reader with some extra entertainment, but it should always be kept as a choice.

Imagine if Undertaker vs Mankind in the Hell In A Cell match didn't have Jim Ross calling the match. It wouldn't have the same effect. Commentary adds so much to the matches that it should count towards the overall score.

You can't write a story with just the main characters, you got to have secondary characters to write a masterpiece.

^ Exactly my view. It's not so much that you NEED to have commentary, but without it, the match looks dull...

WHO the fuck is WHO? anyway? Caine?

Optional. I usually write commentary anyway, but I know I'm not gonna dock anyone for not writing it.

Like, good commentary should count positively to your match, but not having it shouldn't count negatively, if that makes sense.

So optional, but it gives you points if you do it right, like extra credit?

Also Snoopz, on a side note, I feel we need to stop grading on different scales. It confuses people, they don't know who's grading their match and they may write it differently, I don't like that.

That sounds stupid. So someone can win for having better commentary.

@Razor Yeah, sort of.

@Mack But that's really only if their matches are really even in quality.

That happens a lot with the main eventers TJ

@Mack Nope. In fact, I actually said earlier that it would have a very small affect on the match. In fact, in the second post I said, "Obviously, I won't ever cost anyone the match because they didn't write 'good commentary'"

If anything, it'll just have a positive overlook on it, helping entertainment a bit. Do you want that Kindergarten program I told you?

Didn't read the first post. Still sounds like it'll decide a match when the smallest mistake can cost someone a match. I don't give a shit about commentary, I just add it to space out the match better. When I'm reading someone's match these days just to read I skip the commentary. Just don't care for it, don't see it as a big deal. You don't need commentary to make a match great. If you were at a live show you wouldn't even hear the commentary. Yet you are still entertained with the match even with no commentary.

Exactly, I didn't say I would cost anyone the match. You said "If the match is very close then yeah", well yeah, but I've seen even retarded reasons for someone winning a match that's "close knit"
I've seen gradings where people win because "I just liked the realism a tiny bit more" so it's not so farfetched for an INSANELY close match to be won over the simplest things.

See the thing is, I'm not actually going to count it as part of the grading, I just hate the fact that I have to completely disregard it in every way possible. That just doesn't make sense to me.

In my opinion, optional.

Personally, I think that if I've already written it in my match for people to see, why should I have to have the commentators say what just happened? That's basically what commentators do, and it seems awkward to me. The way I write my matches now, I try to blend what commentators might already say into the match. Like, when I talked about the whole psychology thing in Kanimaniac vs Jerod Barnez. I just think it worked better for me personally, and it kind of flows better as well.

Some people do write really good commentary, but in my opinion, it should be optional at most. The idea that a match can be swayed in extremely close circumstances by commentary is kind of a cop out, I think. I really do not view commentary as a deciding factor in matches that are that close, and it could lead to kind of a cop out decision in those cases, where the grader is more inclined to give a win just because someone has better commentary. I just don't think matches should be decided like that. Commentary is like a garnish, and a chef wouldn't like someone saying "the meal was really nice, but the garnish was shit." Or something. I dunno, metaphors are hard. EDIT: Just to clarify here, I know that commentary wouldn't be a major thing, but what I'm saying is it could potentially be something that sways a match. While it should be acknowledged if it's good, I don't know if it should be a match winning thing in those circumstances.

It's useful for real life matches, of course. But when we explain pretty much everything we do, why do we need to have mandatory commentary if the information is already there? That's my opinion on the matter, anyway. I'd like commentary to be optional like entrances are, because in my mind, they're in the same kind of league.

"It's useful for real life matches, of course. But when we explain pretty much everything we do, why do we need to have mandatory commentary if the information is already there? " 


Nailed it. 

It should be both like TJ said.

Very great comment, Kani, thank you. That's what I'm looking for in these types of things. I am still inclined to agree with what TJ said though. Though you made some good points.

Personally, I think it should count towards it. For years the matches here have got chiselled down to the bare bones to where it's now just literally bell to bell. I get that what we were writing years ago had to stop because the quantities were just getting really stupid, but first promos were made an optional thing where some people here literally never post one, then entrances were removed altogether (I get that, though) and then commentary somehow became optional as well just because some people can't be bothered to think of lines.

For me when I write a match, I have always, since day one of doing this, made it read like the grader was watching it on TV. What do you hear when watching on TV? Commentary. It doesn't have to just be "Cedar: ...and he hit a DDT. Dennis: Yeah...that hurt...haha", it can be way more fun and creative than that. I always try to use commentary in order to sell moves in my match, especially when a big moment just happened and I have Cedar go bonkers for it. The commentators also can easily serve the purpose of talking about the current happenings of characters in storylines, helping the grader catch up on previous events without having the necessarily go back and read it all. Heck, it can often just be used for some comic relief so it lightens the match up from "he did this and then he did that". Bringing a chuckle to the grader is far from a bad thing. Plus it also helps break up the match portions so it isn't just constant text. It adds a whole lot to the match, but people see it as a chore because they don't want to write beyond the literal bare minimum and not have to think...

I agree with TJ. It shouldn't be a defining factor, but a person should be commended for it if they did some nice commentary and spent the time thinking of good dialogue. I ain't bitching about it not being forced upon everyone, because I'll be doing it even if I am specifically told not to include commentary, do it makes no difference to me in that regard lol. But I add a lot into the commentary and they are key parts of my matches.

Also, on a side note, it's slightly contradictive of the GM team to officially say that commentary is optional and then start booking people on commentary when cards are released. What happens if my match had say Kani on commentary and then I didn't write any? Would I be punished and my opponent then wins because he did have Kani on commentary? You can't have both...