We've been discussing this for a while and are looking for an answer. If we reduced the length of the live podcast by somewhere between 30 mins-1hr, how would you feel about it?
This is primarily because of my health but please dont let that factor into your decision.
This is primarily because of my health but please dont let that factor into your decision.
Since we also got some feedback lemme answer the more common posts.
"kill the release section" - I dont agree I think its in a pretty good spot right now where outside of occasional running joke picks, we're mostly highlighting some good stuff and I think thats important.
"kill the release section" - I dont agree I think its in a pretty good spot right now where outside of occasional running joke picks, we're mostly highlighting some good stuff and I think thats important.
I think its far more important to maybe dig up something interesting that people didnt know about and put it on radars than avoid the occasional dud. We are heavily curating that list. A typical list is 150 or so games long. We talk about 20 or so at most.
"do more news" - News is my least favorite part of the show not least because of how unreliable it is. We've had a lot of dry weeks where we're scraping for something to talk about and its obvious its not interesting to the hosts but its all we could find.
Topics we can get our teeth into are great but lets call it as it is, the vast majority of gaming news is just marketing, its just game announcements or promotions along with pretty irrelevant things like release delays or port announcements that generate no discussion
I want the meat of the show to be about things we've played. I am concerned about the length of time given to some games that only 1 person has played and that might be something we all as hosts needs to keep in mind when we present a title.
Arbitrarily limiting the game discussion as a whole though I dont think is a good idea. Its got the best viewer retention stats and there's usually a big release we can really sink our teeth into and get interesting discussion out of. GoW today was one I think.
My only issue is that I think we agree on things too much when it comes to those bigger games. They're not that divisive, to the point where I almost think we need a designated devils advocate. I liked GoW today cos I could focus on asking questions inbetween the gushing over it
It might be that we just stop doing News as a dedicated weekly segment and instead have 30 mins put aside to talk a topic, whether it be current or if its a dry week, something more evergreen. I like the idea of bringing Guest Topic back, let the guest choose what we discuss
Only problem is we had some massive duds then, but if I prescreened and worked with them earlier in the week that wouldnt be an issue.
Might also make sense to take the game talk and split it, one into a big meaty chunk, like an hour for games several of us have played (the big releases usually) and the other for more rapid fire presentations, few minutes each, for small or really niche games.
So rather than this 2 hour block where you've got a mix of big and small stuff, you've got the appetizers at the start with the small games and short presentations with less discussion, then the big main course about whatever big game(s) most of us have played.
Good feedback so far which we'll take into consideration. If the show is gonna get shorter, I want it to be accompanied by format improvements that make it better as well. The cobwebs need shaking off, Ive felt we've been going through the motions too much lately,
that said an awful lot of that can be attributed to real life stuff, both good and bad. Cant avoid that but we can avoid becoming a stale show.
