Podcasting

I'm the first to say that I think Podcasting is a great idea. It does for AM radio what the printing press did for newspapers - strengthen free speech while choking us on content. Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean that it's reasoned enough to broadcast. Rush Limbaugh is a prime example - most of his commentary is mudslinging. Disagreeing with Hillary Clinton is one thing, putting a chihuahua head on her body is childish and pathetic. I don't listen to Air America for the same reason, it seems that the only answer liberals had (once it was clear that reason loses to screaming every time) was to play the same game.

Now everyone, no matter how misinformed, can have their own talk show and niche audience. While it's a good thing in the sense that a hobby like boardgaming in the US has several podcasts from which to choose, but wouldn't it be nice to have a good podcast?

I've only listened to a few 'casts so far, but I'm having trouble finding one I like. The first one I heard was on the 'Geek, and I can't remember who did it. I distinctly remember them interviewing Jay Tummelson, who almost singlehandedly brought eurogaming to the US, and giving him a lot of crap for Fossil. To make things worse, they interrupted Jay repeatedly, who was giving his time freely (and did, to be fair, get to advertise his upcoming games, but most internet savvy gamers would be aware of what those are). While they weren't as bad as Rush, they were working on it.

Recently I tried out The Dice Tower, done by Tom Vasel [note: apologies to Tom for misspelling his name in the original post] and The Cranky Guy. I know, it's Joe Steadman, but boy is he cranky. Perhaps I could have done better than listen to the two episodes that featured the top ten most underrated/overrated games. I hate top 10 lists, as I feel that it is pretty much pointless to compare apples to oranges to kumquats, which is what any gaming list does (how can you really compare a wargame to a euro?)

The list of things I dislike about this particular podcast is pretty amazing. First, the humor is sophmoric, especially from Joe and whoever they let in the studio that day. It's like being trapped in a high school D&D session. Tom, to his credit, attempts to rise above the childishness, but it's a losing battle when you go up against the screamers. I'd listen to drive-time radio if I wanted this brand of humor. When you get people who do understand how to speak information clearly, like the guys who do the German and Boardgame news, their professionalism only demonstrates my point.

Second is the inability to pronounce game companies correctly. Dez Cartez is pronounced Dey-Cahrt, guys, just like the philosopher/mathemetician. That's the matter with Kansas, right there. I don't feel like you need to get the accent right, but at least get close. I certainly never get the impression that Joe is trying too hard.

But to be honest, I can live with these minor nits. What I do hate is the reviews and evaluations. Most reviews consist of describing the game's mechanisms, then saying they like it or don't. Very little qualitative information, just they don't like it. My favorite so far was Joe saying he didn't like Evo, and not just because of the theme. The politics of evolution aside (he must really hate anything to do with cavemen, as Evo doesn't even posit that people are the result of evolution), that was literally his only comment on the game. No "it's too slow," or "too chaotic" or "I don't like the neon colors", just "Ick". I know you guys are LDS, you certainly hit us over the head with it in pretty much every episode, but to dislike a game's theme simply because it doens't reinforce your worldview speaks volumes about one's insecurities. I'm not anti-LDS, although I do wonder how anyone gets involved in a religion found under a rock in upstate New York, but if I wanted to get a sermon on the evils of teaching evolution I'd find a different podcast. [Author's note: no one associated with The Dice tower is LDS. I made an assumption based on a couple of terms I'd heard used in the podcast to make an inaccurate guess. In fact, pretty much everything involving mentioning a specific faith should have been left out of the entry, but I am leaving it in place to avoid confusion and to avoid looking like I'm sweeping anything under the rug.]

Tom isn't much better, saying that he disliked Paths of Glory as it was too complex. It's a wargame, Tom. They are, by their very definition, complex, because they attempt to simulate, at some level, a historical event. Euros can simply use a historical theme and don't have that burden, so they require zero chrome. Yes, Tom claimed that the top ten list of overrated games was sort of a joke, but he might as well have included all wargames or none. Either way, saying something is "too complex" is like saying that since calculus is too hard we shouldn't teach it in schools. Not everyone will take it, but there are significant populations that should. If you don't get it, Tom, don't review it.

I can't even fall asleep listening to this stuff with all the snorting and chortling going on behind the scenes. It's like having lunch at a McDonald's close to a high school.

I understand that podcasting is a difficult and often thankless business (although there was a comment that Tom gets free games in return for his work on the Tower, followed by an awkward silence), and most people don't realize how much work goes into such an endeavor (I do, I've been a musician for decades and know my way around a mixing board). The basic truth still remains, however, that if you want to be a critic you should be good at it, and that includes having more of an opinion than "too hard" or "doesn't fit in with my religion".

It's really too bad, because I've enjoyed Tom's written reviews on the 'Geek, but listening to him talk has made me considerably less interested in his opinion regardless of the medium. And Joe? Yikes.

Yes, 'casting is a fledgling medium. Yes, 90% of anything is crap according to Sturgeon's Law. I'm just waiting for the 10% to start showing up in boardgaming 'casts. Perhaps audio is a poor choice for boardgaming, although if you think you don't want to hear boardgamers talking, you really don't want to see them. However, a well-done and well-produced 'cast, 30 minutes in duration, would take probably three-four hours to prep effectively, plus another hour of post-production. Perhaps this is what Tom and Joe should shoot for, doing 30 minutes instead of 60. Cutting out the top 10 list (is there any format more tired than this one?) would probably do the trick. And let's leave the snorty friends out of the taping session, hmm?

Guess I better do my own gaming podcast now or face the accusation of being an armchair podcaster.
[Author's Note: And, I better not be as cranky. This entry was too harsh in tone, although I stand by the issues I raise.]