How much should I be concerned what the audience wants compared to what I want?

While trying to write, this is a chief concern of mine.  Should I be aiming for just the largest possible audience or focus on trying to attract the particular type that enjoy what I want to make.

I have this little issue on my Youtube Channel.  I have put up more of TF2 then anything else, but that’s cause I usually play TF2.  So some people have grown to expect the channel to be only TF2.  My plan has always been to just share my fun times, regardless of what game I am playing.

When I am focusing on my writing this worries me.  Mainly since I can’t produce nearly as many iterations of a novel as I do with the videos.

Am I doing all this purely for the goal of gaining fame?  No, but my audiences, however small they are now, are important.  That balance is rough.  Some times I just end up saying, “This is what I want, so it’s what I am going to do.”

Advertisements

Getting into an open and creative mode.

I just watched this lecture with John Cleese  and he formalized ideas I have been lightly touching at.

The lecture is about being creative.  How, do you get yourself to be creative?  Where does it come from?

If you’ve got the time, it would be great to watch the thole thing, if not here’s a short version.  No one knows how to be creative or how to make themselves be creative on a whim.  At best you can create a situation in which you are open to creativity.

Those ideas that spawn in opening a thought that you hadn’t had, are usually a product of a few conditions.  One, you have spent the time to lay a mental framework to an open mind around the situation.  Two, you allow yourself to be free to play and ponder, without bogging ideas down with pressure to be ‘right’ or ‘fast’.

He recommends setting a time, like an hour and a half, to practice getting and  holding this ‘Open mode’.  Then get used to moving to a ‘Closed mode’ when it comes to implementation.

This is extremely close to my view on training up those creative thought. Which isn’t an easy thing for me.

I would add a stipulation that it helps to first have a certain degree of understanding of a subject.  So, if you are trying to come up with a creative play in chess.  You’ll have to understand the game well enough to know that what you have come up with is something.

My Chivalry Review.

Thanks for checking out Fair game.  This is Mr Lion. I am going to be reviewing Chivalry and I don’t care that it’s a free for all map, don’t be a wuss and 1v1 me like a real man. [ Quick clips of the game and maybe shot of the title screen]

Number one on indiebd.com’s ‘indie of 2012’, first game by torn banner and example of a successful kickstarter.  Did any of this drive me to play Chivalry? Nope. It had a free weekend and knights’n swords are cool.

My first match started with the gates opening to a crowd’s applause and me, being the predictable nublit I am, went archer first. Between getting stabbed, dismembered and hearing my last breaths through a bloody esophagus. I recognized that certain frustration.

In my twisted world this frustration is what drives me.  That which makes me willing to poor hours into improving my skills in a given task.  In this case Chivalric task of liberating limbs or cheaply putting a spear in other unexpecting limb liberator.

This ffeeling and I say it with and extra ff, because of their rare and annoying… This ffeeling of Frustration meant I was having FFun.

What brought me to this eemotion?  Could it have been the weight of the weapons?  Maybe it was how after some time playing I still found occasions, where I feel a wince from an especially brutal blow.  No, it was the enjoyment of a deep mechanic, that I wasn’t good at.

Combine the fighting anticipation and positioning skills of ‘Jedi outcast’, the larger scales of savage, and a slower pacing then ‘pirates vikings and knights’ and what get’s spit out is Chivalry.  In Fact it reminded me of PVK so much I kept expecting the ‘Final Countdown’ to start up while the stage filled with lava.  The major differences between the two being, Chivalry is a more complete/polished game and everyones is pretty much made up of so many watermelons.

The arsenal contains a few classes and groups of class specific weapons that are all mechanically different enough for me to suck all over again when I try them.  My biggest gripe here was with the spearmen who only has 6 spears. In the game types with no way refill ammo, I’d be left with a dagger to convince people to death.

With goals like, “kill the villagers” or “protect the trebuchets” I want to praise Chivalry for what is offered in the modes department.  But, Most of the time I would freeze and the massage ‘Team blabla has won’. I would think, ‘is that my team?’  Then hold tab to bring up a spreadsheet of information that I read as ‘eh, whatever… positive kdr, YEYAAa’.

Many tables were also flung, trying to get a few friends in the same match.  The invite errored if it was full and it was impossible to tell if server had room or which one a friend was in.  I just kept switching back and forth from the steam overlay to the game trying to squeeze in.

Once I managed to get my crew in the devs were nice enough to let me see each name in green even through objects and walls.  We could actually group up and and charge hi fiving the whole way.

Watching the enemy team descended on my group and our group reacting to them reacting to us was something that happens only in games that focus on melee.  Once I reached an enemy the fighting was just slow enough to think and make calls and fast enough to get suprised by a pike through the chest.

Team Leader Steve Piggott gave an interview November 22, 2012 here’s the TLDR version.

Will there be customization?
yes

Will servers be allowed to cap classes, like archers?
yes

Controllers/game pads?
yup

Siege mode?
Bet your last spear on it.

Modable with sdk?
only a matter of time

DLC?
Gameplay stuff will be free, so tell your friends about the game already.

For one final note I’ll give a tip.  If you don’t want to get kicked when you’re going to team kill,  just before you go for the kill press f10.

Sacrificing respect for a chance to broaden the audience.

There is a debate I have in my head every time I’m describing or explaining something, “How much is, too much”.  I have to remind myself not to insult the audience and by that I mean describing things like they are a three year old.

New YouTubers use this as a crutch.  They’ll try to completely go over every possible angle they can consider and repeat their point over and over.  This method leaves the piece feeling stale and sometimes preachy.

Not everyone is going to understand or pick up every point a piece is trying to make.  That is just fine.

My reviews and videos are for and audience like myself.  I don’t have to explain every game I refer too or the meaning of the jargon I use. Sometimes I’ll catch myself spinning into the whole of expounding and examples.  Usually it’ll be doubt in my own explanations, rather then my audience’s information gap.  I’ll then go back and cut that crap off telling my self, “If I couldn’t explain it well enough the first time, why repeat that crap 3 more times?”

When I am writing a scene I’ll use this thought to stop describing everything or explaining exactly what every character is feeling.  Got to let their actions show that.

Talking about something that is inherently ambiguous.

The Idea Channel, on YouTube is one I happily subscribe too.  Lately the little man in my head that critically listens to everything that I pay attention to, has been making a fuss at their new videos.  This little man isn’t nice or mean he’s just a builder.  Looking at each idea like a new part to fit in a whole.

The builder touches and considers where this would fit in the structure of my thoughts. If needed, he’ll test it to see how to see if it can fix more then one hole.  So while listening to a lecture, like the amazing one by Brandon Sanderson, he’ll take each idea and see what I can it for and trashing the obvious or redundant.

During the video, “Are MP3s & Vinyl Better then Live?“, he yelled and screamed. These ideas are all caught on one major problem that is never brought up, leaving it lacking the structure to securely fit and cover any hole. The problem of Definitions.

‘Better’ is the real problem in the video and it’s why there is so much of a debate.  Mr. Mike Rugnetta, never even tries,and so just circles around and around, to define ‘better’.

In specific case, if we define better as ‘More accurate representation of the sound produced by the vocalist and/or instrument’ we can make some conclusions.   Vinyl would be out, since it adds sounds and looses quality. A very high bit rate MP3, one that might as well not even be compressed, could have better then a Vinyl. Both MP3’s and Vinyl are altered by sound engineers. So, under this definition live and unplugged would be better.

Problems like this happen all over: “What is better apple or pc?”, “Is it better to have a person play the piano or a robot who recorded a persons movements?”, “Which game is better?”

The ‘better’ isn’t the only ambiguous term: “Is it love or lust?”, “Small businesses are the big job creators.”

I particularly enjoy the last one. Is a small, the mom and pop store down the street worth around $500,000 or Walmart?

It’s not about being right.  Words mean what we want them to.  It’s about being clear.  So audience knows what YOU mean with the words you use.

 

Here’s the video: