Brilliant Gameologists Forum

Show Stuff => The Meta Show => : Meg June 03, 2008, 04:38:13 PM

: Hmm... Should we...?
: Meg June 03, 2008, 04:38:13 PM
Ok, I have a specific question now, but I want to make this thread general enough that when other questions come up I have a place to go.

I struggle sometimes with decisions about the show and would love to get feedback while I can still change it instead of after the fact.

For example-- a couple of folks pointed out that there was no sort of break in the show so now we do "commercial breaks" to split up sections and try to make it so no one section is longer than 20 minutes. 

We're definitely going to watch our Burning Wheel/ Savage Worlds idolization. 

We levelate the shows now.

But there are other choices and decisions that I need help with, so please check here and offer advice! 
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Meg June 03, 2008, 04:46:03 PM
Question 1)  How explicit should the content be?

I ask you to answer this not just from your personal point of view (though let us know that too) but in a general advice sense too. 

Where is the line?  How far should we go?  I'm tempted to take it whereever, but I don't want to loose credibility and quality either.

I ask specifically because I'm debating whether or not to edit a section in our upcoming Episode 15 where there is a brief, yet fairly graphic sexual advice conversation that came up. 

It's funny.  But has nothing to do with gaming at all and may overpower the topic.

Thoughts?
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Straw_Man June 03, 2008, 04:57:32 PM

MAaking the content as M for mature should cover it credibility and quality wise. I doubt the podcasts are would ever hit a point that your average adult would be uncomfortable with frank sexuality.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: olothfaern June 03, 2008, 05:28:08 PM
I suppose you need to ask yourself whether the conversation would cause folks to lose rationality.  Then again, I don't really hold to the seven words theory.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: clarkcd June 03, 2008, 05:41:33 PM
I'm probably not the best person to ask but there is very little you could say to make me uncomfortable and just random tangents, IMO, wouldn't make you lose credibility.  Saying things like "SWSE is the worst game ever!" would make you lose credibility. :P
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: logan9a June 03, 2008, 07:33:42 PM
IMO, you're over thinking it Meg.  I think it is fine as it is.  Don't fix what isn't broke and all that.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: SixthDeclension June 03, 2008, 08:04:32 PM
I would be fine with it personally, and I think in general, as long as you put an "M for mature" as straw man said, it would be perfectly ok.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Dragon Snack June 03, 2008, 08:32:54 PM
While I am fine with the "lewditity" of the show, there are definitely people I do not promote the show to.

In some cases, I know it would offend them.  In other cases, it could adversly effect my professional standing with them (I could have used your "stoplight speach" idea as a jumping off point for discussion, but by it's very nature it wasn't business appropriate).

That said, you have already established yourself as NSFW, so I think that the people you have drawn to the podcast probably won't have a problem if you took it to the next level...

Yes, I'm hedging my bets here, in case you bust out with some baby raping scenario or a scatological horror scene. :o :scared
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: yellerSumner June 03, 2008, 08:51:48 PM
By mentioning it, I think you are obligated to release it whether you leave it in or move it to a bonus clips 'sode.

That said, you have already established yourself as NSFW, so I think that the people you have drawn to the podcast probably won't have a problem if you took it to the next level...
+1

If it eats up too much time, take it out and release it separately, but if it's like a minute long, leave it in.  Don't cut anything because it's "explicit."
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: AfterCrescent June 03, 2008, 09:33:10 PM
When it comes to credibility, I think you should focus more on the "Does it negatively impact our image as Brilliant Gameologists?" If it's a sexual advice column, how could that negatively impact your image? It can't, honestly. Well at least not in connection to gameology. The random tangents, both the suitable and NSFW, are wonderful aspects of the show, and I enjoy them. In reality, though, it's the quality of information and opinions given that keep me listening, and as long as that quality and credibility stays up, I don't think an inappropriate joke is going to have a negative affect on yoru credibility.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: logan9a June 03, 2008, 11:10:18 PM
I would be fine with it personally, and I think in general, as long as you put an "M for mature" as straw man said, it would be perfectly ok.

I concur.  In my podcasts, I rate all of the episodes as 'explicit' (even though I've found out some people play them outloud at work, others are using them to learn English, etc - all of which frighten me) because then nobody will ever say "Oh, you said a dirty word' or 'Oh, that is a bit of a graphic description of the autopsy' or 'Oh, that guy just french kissed a goat' - it is all covered.  Yes, I think all of those examples have happened at some point within the campaign.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Josh June 03, 2008, 11:14:19 PM
In my personal preference I want it to be funny.  I just spent today a work flipping through dozens of podcasts and most of them are as boring as hell.  Clean funny is ten times as hard for one tenth the funny. 

Also as a political statement, I don't like having to watch my language and not say funny or interesting things because some shithead might hear it.  We already went down the “political correctness” path as a society.

I don't care that a midwest farmers wife or some hardcore utah mormon doesn't like the show, they are not my audience.  They will never be my audience.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: logan9a June 04, 2008, 01:38:49 AM
In my personal preference I want it to be funny.  I just spent today a work flipping through dozens of podcasts and most of them are as boring as hell. 

I have the same play when I look for 'actual play' podcasts. 
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Rebel7284 June 04, 2008, 07:37:53 AM
Question 1)  How explicit should the content be?

I ask you to answer this not just from your personal point of view (though let us know that too) but in a general advice sense too. 

Where is the line?  How far should we go?  I'm tempted to take it whereever, but I don't want to loose credibility and quality either.

I ask specifically because I'm debating whether or not to edit a section in our upcoming Episode 15 where there is a brief, yet fairly graphic sexual advice conversation that came up. 

It's funny.  But has nothing to do with gaming at all and may overpower the topic.

Thoughts?

Personal point of view: Sex is as natural as breathing, this society makes way too much of a deal out of it.  Why not talk about it?  I blame the puritan legacy >.< 

Overall perspective: Frankly, I think your comic will have the same number of listeners anyway.  Yes by keeping it M, you might make some 10 year old not be able to listen (without getting headphones.)  On the other hand, you will retain mature listeners like me for far longer since we greatly enjoy the occasional sexual overtone. 

Overall, considering overall perspective is neutral, i have to go with my gut instinct and advice you to keep all the sex in.  As an added bonus, you'll probably enjoy making podcasts more and thus deliver better content if you don't have to think about censoring yourself all the time.

On a related note,
You're sexy. :)
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: EjoThims June 04, 2008, 09:36:44 AM
I haven't actually had time to sit down and listen to the casts yet ( :wall ), but in my opinion, treat it in the editing process just like you would any non-explicit material.

If you're still a bit unsure, offer an explicit and an edited version of that episode (though this may set a precedent that people expect to continue) or just offer a warning off the original link that this time around gets a lil raunchier than others.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Straw_Man June 04, 2008, 06:14:54 PM

Go for it Meg. We'd appreciate if you speak the way you want to.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Meg June 04, 2008, 06:45:19 PM
Alright, I'm leaving it in.  The episode will be released on our normal schedule- Sunday. 

I think my main concern was that it was so non-sequitor and crossed the line from being funny sexual to a bit graphic sexual.  It's absolutely though the type of thing I'd just say when hanging out (and definitely not the type of thing I'd ever say at work), so it's me and natural.  But I don't want to have comments that will blur the rest of the episode.  It's like Serenity-- my main concern with Wash's death is that at the time, that was all anyone could talk about with the movie.  After I came out of mourning, I realized that yes, the death did its job in terms of setting the stage for what a clusterfuck the situation was, but it overwhelmed the rest of the movie to a point too. 

I think that's where I'd want to draw a line from a director/producer point of view.  No one thing should be so extreme that the whole hour could be summed into "OMG, When Josh compared Indianapolis with Vagina, that was so funny!"  I want moments of shock to be interspersed with information- so it could be "The description of Aces and Eights was great, and I loved the description of a Stoplight Speech and omg, when Josh compared Indy with vag, that was hilarious!"

And on that...

Question 2)
When we have a cool idea, what do you think about us having a WS mini-description in the midst of our (usually) NSFW full out description?  I ask this because of DragonSnack's comment about the Stoplight speech-- the idea of a stoplight speech is a really good one and essential for proper marketing, and it is traditionally called an "Elevator Speech" but we gave it a dirty twist.  I think if we had been more clear about "You could also call it an Elevator Speech if you were in mixed company" then the issue DS had may not have come up. 

I don't want to be seen as pandering, but I think the highlight of our show is #1 Good advice and #2 funnies.  I don't want the #2 to detract from the #1 either.

Thoughts?
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Zeke June 04, 2008, 08:09:18 PM
It's like Serenity-- my main concern with Wash's death is that at the time, that was all anyone could talk about with the movie.  After I came out of mourning, I realized that yes, the death did its job in terms of setting the stage for what a clusterfuck the situation was, but it overwhelmed the rest of the movie to a point too. 



What, Wash died?
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Dragon Snack June 05, 2008, 01:37:25 AM
NOOOOOOOooooooooo!!!!!! :weep

Question 2) When we have a cool idea, what do you think about us having a WS mini-description in the midst of our (usually) NSFW full out description?  I ask this because of DragonSnack's comment about the Stoplight speech-- the idea of a stoplight speech is a really good one and essential for proper marketing, and it is traditionally called an "Elevator Speech" but we gave it a dirty twist.  I think if we had been more clear about "You could also call it an Elevator Speech if you were in mixed company" then the issue DS had may not have come up.
It's been some time since I listened to the episode, but IIRC, you did say it's normally called an "elevator speech".  The thing is, it's easier to link to something and say "Hey, I just heard this and thought that we should discuss it and collaborate on our own...blah, blah, blah".  It was the other comments as to why it was important, not just the idea.

Of course, it helps that I would have been bringing it up to a gaming company and I could have linked to it without it being overly nerdy, which probably isn't a concern in most cases.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Josh June 05, 2008, 03:32:15 AM
I started working at my company in 98.  Due to its circumstances it had a 80's 90's mentality quite a bit longer than other companies having just barely covered its old ways up.  This PC sterile hum-drum workplace is a facade.  Just like the Leave it to Beaver perception of the 1950s. 

: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Meg June 18, 2008, 01:48:03 AM
Question #3) Should we pre-apologize for stuff or wait to see if someone brings it up?

For example, the production values of our Origins' reviews are not up to our standard mostly because of it being summer (yes, that makes sense somewhere).  In the thread about the episode, should I say that, knowing that full honesty is good, but it might mean people listen for it?  Or wait to see if someone points it out and then sound like I'm just covering my ass?(

(Also, I'd still like commentary on #2)
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Dragon Snack June 18, 2008, 03:54:16 AM
Unless it's REALLY bad (in which case you should probably redo the show, barring hilarious spontaneity), I wouldn't bother saying anything.  Most people won't even notice a problem...

According to my Program Director, you should never apologize for technical difficulties or making a mistake unless someone calls you on it.  He says it's unprofessional (but there are plenty of national radio hosts who do say something).

Of course, sometimes I do anyways (if it was really blatant).  And when I don't I'm usually laughing about it anyway...
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Slate June 18, 2008, 04:00:46 AM
Never apologize for something unless you're sure you're at fault of something.

I can't count the number of times I've bumped into someone accidentally and said "Oh pardon me." to which they reply "I'm sorry."

As if you're the one that bumped into me?

Equally offensive is when you tell someone something like "I feel terrible because I had something bad happen to me today(that you were not involved in at all)."   They reply "I'm sorry."

No, you're not "Sorry."  You cannot apologize for something you had nothing to do with.

So just don't do it, it's lame and your podcasts have been anything but so far (although you do stray pretty far from your topics occasionally).
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Irthos Levethix June 18, 2008, 04:11:20 AM
In answer to #2, I gotta say no.  Your 'casts have been great, half the reason I like them is because its just people being, well, people.  I can see why you'd like to put something WS in there, but since most of the show is NSFW, then.... wtf?  It would detract from the show to have a segment in the "midst" of it that just totally changed tact.  I say, if something ain't broke, don't fix it.  (I would probably get shot for that on the Min/Max board)

On the other hand, if you felt you really had something, and wanted to make a mini-segment that was playable by itself, then I guess that would be okay.  Seems like a lot of work, though.  Thats my $2.  Yes, two dollars.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: EjoThims June 18, 2008, 10:22:57 AM
No, you're not "Sorry."

Actually I am.

I'm sorry I didn't have any advice to give. I'm sorry I didn't have any comfort to give. I'm sorry that there's nothing I can do for you.

I'm sorry I didn't realize you weren't going to be able to avoid bumping into me on your own until it was too late for me to get out of the way myself.

I'm sorry I didn't hear what you said, I will now wait for you to repeat it.

I'm sorry that so many think an apology automatically means something was done wrong.

I'm sorry [that so many can't see the bracketed ideas that should be so obvious given the context of the discussion and the tone in which I speak].

If you're commenting on it anyway during the thread and you feel something should be should be explained, then explain it. If you feel something apologized for, then apologize for it.

But not everything that might warrant explaining needs to be apologized for.  ;)

As for #2, if you want think an idea is good enough to be pulled out of the flow of the talk, then go back afterwards and extract a summary with a link (and warning) back to the original.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Slate June 18, 2008, 01:48:53 PM
Ejothims you're the sorriest bastard I know  :lol
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Straw_Man June 18, 2008, 05:10:54 PM
...

Question 2)
When we have a cool idea, what do you think about us having a WS mini-description in the midst of our (usually) NSFW full out description?  I ask this because of DragonSnack's comment about the Stoplight speech-- the idea of a stoplight speech is a really good one and essential for proper marketing, and it is traditionally called an "Elevator Speech" but we gave it a dirty twist.  I think if we had been more clear about "You could also call it an Elevator Speech if you were in mixed company" then the issue DS had may not have come up. 

I don't want to be seen as pandering, but I think the highlight of our show is #1 Good advice and #2 funnies.  I don't want the #2 to detract from the #1 either.

Thoughts?

I object to the idea you have to be WS to be funny, but yeah, I know what you mean. The only answer I have, why not try it. We'll tell you if it detracts from the show. Right now I can't think of any huge negatives if its a short quick bit.

Question #3) Should we pre-apologize for stuff or wait to see if someone brings it up?

For example, the production values of our Origins' reviews are not up to our standard mostly because of it being summer (yes, that makes sense somewhere).  In the thread about the episode, should I say that, knowing that full honesty is good, but it might mean people listen for it?  Or wait to see if someone points it out and then sound like I'm just covering my ass?(

(Also, I'd still like commentary on #2)

Don't apologise for lack of quality for practical/real reasons, it is what it is. If you put out a redone ver., great, say you weren't satisfied with the previous version.

Of course, this is different from making a mistake and hoping no one notices *wry grin*.

Hope thats of assistance Meg.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: EjoThims June 18, 2008, 09:26:17 PM
Ejothims you're the sorriest bastard I know  :lol

Only a half bastard... My parents were wed by the time I was born, just not by the time I was conceived.

 :lol
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Dan2 July 10, 2008, 12:56:16 PM
Regarding #2: More likely than not, that would mean more work for you guys, which would mean potentially less enthusiasm/energy on the actual podcast and less frequent podcasts.

If that is at all correct, I'm going to vote no.  Nobody seems to be in a terrible place where they can only listen on loud speakers in the middle of a half-dozen cubicles.  NSFW is fine (for me at least).

Regarding #3: Again, I'm going to vote for no.  It may seem like it'd be polite to apologize for whatever might happen, but it also makes you sound like you're pandering to the audience (which I'm not a fan of).

Besides, you guys are the ones producing the 'cast.  If it meets your standards, then good.  If it doesn't, redo it.  Don't try to guess whether people will be happy with the quality or something.  Who are they to complain?
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Meg July 11, 2008, 03:05:12 PM
If it meets your standards, then good.  If it doesn't, redo it. 

Actually, this brings up a great point.  A lot of times redoing it isn't an option.  Maybe the quality isn't great and I don't realize until 5 days after we've recorded when I actually edit.  Or when we know the quality isn't up to our normal standard, but there are reasons for that.  So we put it out anyway, knowing that our standard isn't completely satisfied.  I think those are the times I struggle with a pre-apology or not.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Dan2 July 14, 2008, 04:49:01 PM
I think that boils down to a question of quality versus consistency.

Maybe I'm way off, but it seems to me that redoing the episode is an option, but it might cause the episode (or other episodes) to be late.
On the other hand, you can put out the episode of questionable quality, and keep your consistency up.
If you choose the latter...  I can see your problem.


If it means anything, in the latter situation (choosing consistency), I'd put out a warning; not an apology.
Something to let the viewer be aware beforehand that the quality isn't great.
That way the viewer isn't let down, you keep consistency, and you don't look like you're pandering to the audience.

Does this help you?
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: jimmersault October 09, 2008, 07:10:15 PM
As for apologies...I was offended and off-put by the last episode as I'm a devout Catholic, but while I think one thing, I think that apologies in general are pointless if you are simply trying to cut off someone's misinterpretation of your real point. I'm sick of that...we all need to listen for context. The listener is downloading, they are responsible. I could stop listening if I were so offended that you have to just "go". But until then, how can I be 'completely offended' twice? I would be, by definition, complicit. If you say something for which you think you are right, allow us to bash you here (which you do and encourage, I might add) but don't falsely apologize for anything.

Also, why aren't you using the hot "Meg" pic?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:AE.jpg

I know Meg is uberhot already, but I found that and figured it to work out for the style of the no-pic agreement.

James

p.s. I know I'm late to the question.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Talen Lee October 15, 2008, 08:31:02 PM
Question #3) Should we pre-apologize for stuff or wait to see if someone brings it up?
Honestly, I don't think so. I also don't think you should do anything for which you feel the need to apologize. If you find, post-fact, that you disagree with what you did in the light of new information, sure, apologize for it, but if you look at what you're doing and think: "Hm, we should apologize for this," I'd suggest not doing it. If you have to, provide a reason and let it be at that.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Fox Lee October 16, 2008, 12:06:11 AM
Don't censor yourselves. OTOH, don't include obscenity just for the sake of obscenity (well... don't do it too much) because that's just attention-seeky. For example, I liked the first episode I heard, but I did get awfully sick of the word "buggery".

Don't apologise for anything you're not ashamed of, don't do anything you'd be ashamed of. Or in other words: if you make a mistake, apologise. If you're told you should apologise, screw that noise.

*forgets what the second question was* *goes back and checks* ...Hmm. I really have no idea ^^;
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Meg October 16, 2008, 12:51:35 AM
p.s. I know I'm late to the question.

Not at all- this is meant to be an ongoing discussion!

As for the apologies- I think I may have mentioned already, but I'm mostly looking for technology apologies.  For example, we may record and then when editing I find out the dog snoring is audible.  Going back and re-recording a week after the fact isn't an option so I usually just have to make it work.  Do we apologize and say "sorry the dog is loud" or wait to see if anyone says something?

For the swearing-- we've never used naughty language just to use it-- we've cut back from the way we normally talk quite a few times.  We swear a lot.  For the most part, we're fans of a range of vocabulary- we try not to just swear because we're lazy.  I believe a lot of words like shit and fuck convey a lot of message in a little space and honestly convey the message better than another word.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Talen Lee October 16, 2008, 12:52:13 AM
"Dog snoring" is a metaphor, right?
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Meg October 16, 2008, 12:53:36 AM
 :P  No-- I have 2 dogs and they snore.  Loudly.  Under our recording table.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Talen Lee October 16, 2008, 12:54:51 AM
Why couldn't you lie to me?

Anyway, yeah, technological apologies are okay? But honestly, most people won't notice technological failings until they're drawn to their attention. A constant whine in the background? They'll notice that. Little snuffles until you guys get your ducks in a row? Probably not so noticeable.

To clarify why that's a deal - if you open by apologising for something, most people will then look for the thing you apologise for.
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Meg October 16, 2008, 01:00:52 AM
Why couldn't you lie to me?
Tired?  I could've said that Dog Snoring actually means the excessive amount of gas we pass while recording, but I'm sleepy and uncreative.

To clarify why that's a deal - if you open by apologising for something, most people will then look for the thing you apologise for.
Totally agree.  Hence why I ask.  So far I haven't apologized in advance except for things like admitted there was little gaming content in the drunk cast. 
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Talen Lee October 16, 2008, 01:24:19 AM
Which was a good move. I've not listened to the drunk cast (I find that drunken humour appeals only to those people who have been drunk.)
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: jimmersault October 16, 2008, 02:42:14 PM
As for the apologies- I think I may have mentioned already, but I'm mostly looking for technology apologies.  For example, we may record and then when editing I find out the dog snoring is audible.  Going back and re-recording a week after the fact isn't an option so I usually just have to make it work.  Do we apologize and say "sorry the dog is loud" or wait to see if anyone says something?

Nah, if the audio is terrible, then you may want to just clip it and place it in another episode. If it's very understandable, we have no basis for complaint, given the price.


For the swearing-- we've never used naughty language just to use it-- we've cut back from the way we normally talk quite a few times.  We swear a lot.  For the most part, we're fans of a range of vocabulary- we try not to just swear because we're lazy.  I believe a lot of words like shit and fuck convey a lot of message in a little space and honestly convey the message better than another word.

While with Meg's voice, the swearing is very cute, it was a bit labored with the 'pumpkin' stuff and it would have saved time to just have everyone swear, I can understand cutting down on purpose as it can be quite distracting at times. It connotes 'feeling' (which is many times a good part of the show and reviews) instead of 'thinking' (vis mechanics of games which is the hosts' strengths) and too much of either is possibly tiresome. That being said, I'm not asking for you to change for me, just to think about what you are saying and that, if you are on a tear swearing, make sure it is because you feel vehemently about a thing instead of having a lack of pre-show analysis about that thing. Now, this is, at times, unavoidable as you often discuss games you don't own or haven't had a chance to play or think about. In order to remain current, hearsay may be the only info available. Or you may segue into Ed Greenwood, whatever.

I'm rambling here...
: Re: Hmm... Should we...?
: Justice March 17, 2009, 06:33:05 PM
I don't look at it as pre-apologizing, but a disclaimer so people know what to expect.

We've done it before and I think its just being polite. "Warning, what you're about to listen to might sound like ass. There are reasons for this such as using an omni-directional microphone and having eight people in the room. If its hard to listen to, just skip it. Now, on with the show."

I just try to make sure the disclaimer is short and quick, a heads-up that doesn't take too long to get through.