Posted 02 May 2012 - 11:15 AM
So I approached this one with only really an interest in the freemium discussion, however the audio plugin you're using doesn't let me skip content until it has buffered, so I ended up listening to more than I'd planned. Here's my opinion on it.
The intro was much better this time, heading straight into the content. That was great. I don't know if you guys introduced yourselves again but if you did I missed it - mid way through I was thinking it would be nice to put a name to each voice by now.
The first story started off poorly, but I was interested in Desura as a distribution platform. The audio in the introduction of Terraform was poor and just made me feel like the recording was not prepared for very well. The interview was when I started paying attention again; "Zak" (is it?) did a pretty decent job there, though overall it was stretched out just a bit too long and you could tell the discussion was getting a bit dry towards the end. I also would have liked to hear more about Desura, and I felt like that was a missed opportunity.
The entire process of getting a game on Desura would have been far more interesting to me than the lengthy discussion of the game, given that there are less than 10 GameMaker games on that platform. I personally don't think radio or podcasts can do games justice; watching 30 seconds of Terraform's trailer gave me better insight into the game than the 15 minutes you spent describing it.
I really think you dedicated far too much time to that story, and in particular as the introductory story I don't think that was a good decision. That first 10 minutes is the easiest time to lose me as a listener. I only stayed to see how you'd approach freemium games.
After skipping the part about Windows, I got there. I was disappointed with the freemium segment but not surprised; you guys looked at it very much from a player's perspective, or in other words, a common perspective. You did mention that developers of course benefit from the model, but you didn't have enough experience or knowledge of the field to go into more depth as to why it's a better (or worse) decision to go F2P or ad-supported. In the end, the discussion led to all the typical complaints you hear about F2P. There are tons of stats about ad revenue from mobile platforms (I have at least 20 pages of them in my bookmarks alone) and the increasing preference of developers to go F2P over a subscription or out-right model. There were some games you could have referenced including ones from AAA developers such as Turbine, and it would have been interesting to hear why F2P is more valuable to an indie developer than a AAA one (in terms of initial audience and lack of marketing power). I'm glad you at least mentioned the difference between online games and SP games, but overall this story lacked real depth.
Carrying on from my comments for your first podcast, I again didn't feel like this catered to my interests in enough depth for me to be engaged. That is as big a problem as you want it to be; if a less experienced audience that is easier to appease is your target than that's fine, but if you were looking for more general appeal you need to not only pick your content more carefully, but also design the pacing of the show better, and do substantially more research on your chosen fields.
I skipped the section on Spriter as it was of no interest to me and I had not heard of it previously, however by skimming it this seemed to be another long interview.
I've presented a lot of criticism again, but again I also could tell there was some quality here.