I will admit upfront that I am not a podcaster, but I absolutely love the medium.  So while this may come off as a “those that can’t do, teach” rant, but podcasts are trying to reach audiences, and I am an enthusiastic member of that particular demographic.  My intent with these comments is to offer constructive criticism about common issues that bug listeners in the hopes that podcasters will stop falling into these traps and therefore, get bigger audiences and make better podcasts.  The more good podcasts, the better. I won’t delve into the whole technical aspects of the medium – not everyone has a pro audio studio and not needing such is one of the things that makes the medium great.  Mostly I want to address issues of content and structure that can make a podcast listenable (or not) from a listener’s point of view.  Some podcasts are done by pros, and some are done by amateurs with a friend over Skype.  I think that the points addressed here are applicable to the wide gamut of shows.

- For God’s sake, have a format:

We outline papers and presentations before we write them, and a format is the outline for your show.  The main argument for a format is that if you can not “outline” your show into bits or segments, then you don’t know what your show is about.  If that is the case, then you should not be doing a show.  Full stop.  It is a very rare podcast can come off well using a free-form format.  The best example I can think of is the No Agenda podcast done by John C. Dvorak and Adam Curry.  The only reason they can pull it off is because both of them have decades of professional broadcasting experience and additionally, because they are wickedly smart blowhards in love with the sounds of their own voices.  Some of the Simply Syndicated shows like The Definitive Word can pull this off (to differing degrees of success from show to show), but again, I think they are in the minority.

The other compelling reason for a format is it gives your listener a roadmap to the show.  It adds pacing and gives the listener cues to listen closer to certain parts.  For example, I frequently listen to Mac Break Weekly podcast in the background while I’m working, but when Leo does the bumper before the “picks” segment, I know to start actually paying attention to that.  Also see: the “things of the day” segment on Geek Nights.  Both of these bits make me want to listen since they are timely and targeted and the format lets me know when to care.  Formats add structure for both the podcaster and the listener, and that is nothing but a good thing.  Bonus points for some sort for perceptible transition between bits (music, etc).  Succinct one-topic shows like The Greatest Movie Ever are exempt from this format rule since he/his guests only talk about one thing, get on with it, and then STFU.

- Ensemble casts fail more than they succeed:

Casts with more than two hosts tend to fall apart pretty quickly.  Geek Nights (two hosts), The Word Nerds (two hosts from a rotating pool) and Anime World Order (with three) seem to operate pretty well.  It gets much harder with more than that and even three can become troublesome.  Human interplay between the hosts is something that can certainly make a podcast great.  On the other hand, a bunch of people talking over the top of each other is a recipe for a piping hot cup of fail.  The only shows with ensemble casts that consistently work seem to use one of the following methods:  First off, the “benevolent dictator” gambit.  Many of the podcasts from the Twit.tv network (This Week In Tech, et al) are shepherded over by Leo Laporte (see also: decades of broadcast experience).  He can keep multiple guests on topic by nipping at their heels and steering the topic.  So, in that case, we get the benefit of the “human interplay between a group of people” factor without things spiraling into chaos.  The other way I’ve seen work with more than two hosts is when one of the hosts “controls” a segment of the show.  Anime World Order employs this tactic.  If a particular host is driving a part of the show (with a review for example) then that person remains nominally “in control” for that part.  Shows that have too many hosts and no moderating structure often break down into talk over each other free for alls that are simply awful.  Avoid this.

- If you are going to make a podcast, then please make a podcast:

If you are recording a show for people to listen to, please keep this in mind while you are recording it.  Your listeners may very well care about a quick and interesting anecdote involving something in your life.  But I can assure you, unless you happen to be broadcasting from some controversial location that is at this very moment being frequented by powerful world leaders, no one cares about what is happening around you at the moment you are recording.  An example:  I’m a geek and so was shopping around for a new “general interest geek” podcast a few weeks ago.  In my searching, I found a podcast that seemed to be pretty well spoken of (name redacted so as to not be a dick).  So I grabbed one of their shows and in the first few minutes of the episode, one of the hosts decided that some personal text messages/chat was more important than doing the show.  This left the other host to fill the dead air with “hey kitty kitty…” at what was presumably, her cat.  Don’t make this mistake.  Even some well-listened-to shows like Diggnation can fall into this trap from time to time.  I think that they can get away with it due to star power, and a large/forgiving listenership.  If you do not have this star power, people may just stop listening to your show since this sort of thing is boring.  By all means, bring your life to your podcast, but do not podcast in the middle of your life.

- Knock it off with the fake ass self-deprecation:

Too many podcasters like to toss in “humorous asides” about they “don’t really know what they are doing” and/or are “just winging it”.  Stop this and stop it now.  If this is really true, then listen to some other podcasts, take some notes, devise a format, learn how to use the compressor and EQ in GarageBand and come back later.  If this is not true, then such statements are merely disingenuous crap that are neither true nor amusing.  No one wants to listen to a creative work of content that constantly tries to convince the listener how half-assed it is.

- Consider that you and your friends may not be as amusing as you think:

I’ve had hilarious, epic even, group conversations with my friends that were full of nuance, humanity, insight and even wacky hi-jinx.  On the other hand, I’ve never thought that the rest of world would care to hear any of these conversations.  If you are making a podcast thinking that the rest of the world just must experience what you and your chums talk about when you have a few drinks/puffs/energy drinks in you, stop now.  We don’t.  Very few podcasts can survive on the personality of their hosts alone, and unless you have professional broadcast experience (TWIT, No Agenda, Diggnation, et al), are some person of note in a given field field (see last point), or have unique personal chemistry (Geek Nights, their recent content slippage notwithstanding), a show can not survive on wacky hi-jinx alone.  Corollary to above, no one will flock to your hastily set up PHPBB forums either to bask in the glow of your and your friends.

So, that is a humble rant about the recurring problems that often make podcasts that could be cool, unlistenable.  A “not-to-do” list.  Podcasts come in all shapes, sizes, topics, durations, experience generating content, and levels of technical production gloss (do discover a compressor preset in GarageBand/Audacity at least) – and that is exactly what makes the medium beautiful.  I think that there is room – and audiences! – for every podcast from twenty minute long amateur “one-host and a headset” offerings to the longer, slicker shows done by long-time broadcasters like Leo, John and Adam.  I’m not looking to snub all podcasts that I find to be substandard here.  These thoughts are offered by someone who listens to a lot of podcasts and who has been turned off many that I want to listen to because of these common problems, and who wants more podcasts to rule rather than fade/fail.

Spore has had a bit of a bumpy launch.  Of course there was the massive shitstorm about the DRM that is deployed with the game (which upon a closer look, may not be as bad as initially thought).  The gameplay has gotten mixed reviews as well – for the people that were expecting “Will Wright’s Civilization 10″, it is a letdown.  As someone who generally agrees with the newly presented “Gamers Bill of Rights“, I do think that they misstepped somewhat with the DRM.  I am also finding that you can progress through the first 4 stages of the game pretty rapidly once you grasp the basic mechanics.  So, I can sort of understand why it got the mixed reviews that it has (I guess I am just adding another one to the mix here).  All that said, I must say:

Spore is a fun game.  Full Stop.

About the DRM: my first taste of non-console games was games distributed via Steam.  Then when I later learned about the long-standing “disc in the drive” model of game authentication I was aghast.  I game on an Intel based Mac laptop and the idea of shuttling around a bunch of media just to play a game on my lapper was unacceptable.  Especially since laptops are, you know, portable devices.  So, the authentication that Spore is using (that is, online registration) seemed somewhat more palatable to me.  I have no idea why they limited your installation to 3 machines, and this is where they screwed up – at least from a public relations standpoint.  The game already has online hooks so why don’t they just use the same “as many machines as you like just not at the same time” model that Steam uses?  Granted, I won’t be needing to install the game on more than 3 machines (current count: 1 – eventual count when I upgrade my desktop to Intel Mac: 2), but the restriction still seems somewhat artificial since we how have the Steam model to lead us to a new era of non-console gaming with sane piracy controls.  So yes, some criticism is warranted, but I suspect that Spore caught an extra heaping helping of blowback just because it happens to be a muchly anticipated/hyped game.  So my verdict on that is not glowing, however, not as evil as evil as presented by the angry masses – especially in the light of the Ars Technica experiment.

About the gameplay: No, this is not the biggest baddest strategy game on the market.  But it is charming as hell.  I’ve never played a Sims game (nor did I ever have a desire to), but the whole business with tweeking your race, and designing your buildings or your vehicles is just fun.  Jamie and I both hit the Tribal phase at the same time and were both sitting there giggling and having a grand old time outfitting our new tribesmen.  I read an astute comment somewhere online to the effect of “the Will Wright games are half game, half toy”, so I fail to see why people are surprised that this is not some hardcore RTS game.  Yes, you can move through the Cell to Civilization phases pretty quickly, but it is sort of the “ride” that’s fun.

I have moved into (but have not yet completed) the final Space phase.  The game sort of hits a blip at that point and turns into more of a proper strategy game.  Since this is my first run-through, I’m playing on easy mode to get used to the game mechanics (and am greatly looking forward to further run-throughs on higher skill levels on different planets).  Even on easy mode, the game hits a perceptible bump in complexity when you progress to Space.  At first blush, it reminded me of an old-school pen-and-paper RPG called Traveller I played when I was a youngling.  Hauling cargo, terraforming, spacecraft combat, colonization, obtaining items, managing planetary resources, etc.  Real time events start hauling you away from whatever you’re in the middle of.  Coming off of a little love affair with Civ IV, I’m totally liking the Space phase.

The game, as predicted, is beautiful, charming, has great music and an amazing amount of polish.  The controls are very intuitive – I love how you move from planet surface to deep space just by scrolling your mouse wheel.  I’ve needed to look at the manual rarely if ever.  Having a single save file per planet keeps you honest, but is not too punishing since you can restart a certain phase without having to backtrack too much.  Is it sort of awkward from the standpoint of some parts being too easy for seasoned players and perhaps too hard for casual/Sims-style gamers?  Probably, but you can just tweek your difficulty to taste.  Moreover, once you’ve unlocked a certain phase, you can just jump that when you want to.  Don’t like creature building?  Grab a pre-made from the Sporepedia and play with that instead of rolling your own.

As a personal aside: one unintended place I think that Spore shines is that it is excellent training fodder for someone (like myself) starting to dip their toes into the world of real-time strategy games.  I’ve played lots of turn-based games (JRPGs, SRPGs, Civ IV) but have been trying to evolve to titles like W40K: Dawn of War and the impending Starcraft II.  Spore is a great starter RTSG.  For me, it is worth it for that alone.  Suck at Warcraft?  Play Spore and come back later.

So, is Spore the game of the century?  No.  Did it introduce a new mature game distribution model the way Valve did with Steam?  Not at all.  Is it the ultimate strategy game?  Nope.  Most consistent in its pacing?  Nay on that mark as well.  Is it a unique game that is fun to play, worth playing if you like video games, and might offer different things to different gamers?  An unqualified Yes.

Oh and they give you this cute and useless little flash deal to show off your goods in your blog.  So why not?

It was time for the boys to see the vet. It had been a little while and Daisuke had been itching a lot. We used to go to a place called Animal Health Network (now renamed Animal Hospital of Diamond Heights) up in Diamond Heights and we thought about going there but I understand that there had been a lot of turnover (not a great sign) and the two vets we really liked were gone. So I hit their review page on Yelp and was more than a little underwhelmed about the apparent current state of affairs. If that one review is right (you’ll know it when you see it) that place is no longer getting my business.

So one of the reviews mentioned one of the former tenured vets there that we used to like, a Dr. Calvin Lum. So I figured, why not search a bit and see if I can find where he is now. And lo and behold, it woudl seem that he’s currently running his own housecall-only practice called San Francisco Veterinary Housecalls. So I figured since this was not an emergency (we use Pets Unlimited for that), why not give it a spin. And to put my reviewer hat on for a moment, I will say I’m pleased with the results. He was as nice, attentive and good with the animals as I remembered and when I got the final bill, I can’t say that it was significantly more expensive than a normal vet visit (caveat: for multiple animals). There was a little extra hit since this was our first time and so we needed to do the new patient consultation. But after a checkup and a round of two shots for three cats and some over the counter drugs, the final result fell in line with a regular vet visit other than the $70 housecall charge. That charge was for the whole deal, not per-cat. I’ll easily pay that for not having to haul their three ungrateful carcasses around. And he was with us for two whole hours. Nice.

The only downside – which I certainly can’t blame him for – is that it’s just him and you, rather than him, you and a trained vet tech. Fred is getting old enough that it was time for him to get a blood panel so we attempted to get a little blood from him. He came prepared with specialized gear and said that 95% of the time, it’s not a problem. So we attempted to soldier on. Step one was getting Fred into the Cat Bag. This happened with mostly minimal hassle.

Fred (and his anger) in the Cat Bag.

The Cat Bag, as you see, is a nylon bag with a zipper and velcro collar that you somehow wrestle the cat into and then seal it up. This will demilitarize four out of five of their pointy parts. I foolishly thought that this would be the hard part but we were able to bait and switch him and get him in the bag. Step two was putting on the little kitty Hannibal Lector mask to seal off the fifth pointy part and to help control their head (they take blood from the jugular as it turns out).

As it turns out, that part was just not going to happen even with the rest of him in the bag and the two of us not. It was astounding. I am no stranger to handling the cats, but I am also not a vet tech. So we needed to bail on that. Dr. Lum said that his 95% batting average just went down this afternoon.

So, obviously anything involving medical machinery or the need of a vet tech aint happening in the home setting. But for everything else, this seems like a great service run by a cool vet, and I look forward to being a repeat customer. If anyone out there in the SF zone might be interested in such a service, he is worth trying.

Since the old website design tool that I used to use was too much of a pain in the butt to update regularly and blog, I’m turning everything over to Wordpress now.  Rapidweaver was pretty good for what it was actually, but I think that this will work much better since the intent is to actually, you know, write stuff now. I re-purposed and back-dated some stuff I had written before, dusted off my resume and jammed it all into WP.

So this content-free little post is my version of the default hellow world page that Wordpress so nicely gives you.