Sponsor Me!

Currently, I'm publishing sporadically (as in, there has been a span of 10 months between the last post and the current post). I'd like to write and publish more. Unfortunately, I'm a super busy person, especially since I work a 9 to 5 job five days a week. If you want to help me free up more time, so I can write and publish more, please buy me a coffee or sponsor me through recurring Patreon payments (so you don't forget!).

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com


Become a Patron!


Sunday, July 28, 2013

Dungeon World: Simple Tabletop RPG with a lot of Potential


One of my table top RPG groups played it's third session of Dungeon World the other night. We had a blast!

The local thieves guild, The Velvet Sash, forced us to enter a dungeon to get them a legendary ruby. If we didn't do it, the Guild would kill us. Kind of a fair deal when "there is no honor among thieves. . .."

The session satisfied my nostalgia for playing as a teenager with peers when I first played tabletop role playing games. Back then, we didn't know the rules and didn't have the sophistication to fully comprehend them. We tried learning "on the job."

We had our imaginations! With the toll that adult life takes on our emotional life and brains, imagination has become a scarce commodity.

I remember the first time I ever played this way. My character's village had been raided by orcs who kidnapped my family. I went on an epic cross country journey, seeking out the orc tribe and my family.

Playing by the rules, I wouldn't have made it past the first encounter. I don't remember details, but I recall enjoying the newness, discovering a strange new world and overcoming challenges I've never had any exposure to. I hadn't watched that many fantasy movies, but I'm sure people who had probably have a fun time emulating them with tabletop role playing.

I know I did with Dungeon World. The game satisfied the urge for adventure from The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. I have a hard time giving that movie a rave review, but it was a fun, romp of misadventures. It made me want to go home, invite one of my gaming groups over and get our game on.


This past game session captured that feeling. It also captured the essence of an Indiana Jones movie or Star Wars: A New Hope. Our party often found ourselves in over our heads, using our wits to solve a problem or running to survive.

I don't think we even won any combat. The enemies ended up being an obstacle in the middle of the room or chasing us because they were hungry.

Encounter one had us overwhelmed by fire beetles emerging from the cave floor. We jumped into a stream down a hole that we had no idea where it went. It ended up dropping us quite a height into an underground lake.

My halfling druid shape shifted into an otter to save an unconscious companion from drowning. A Cthulu-esque tentacle beast emerged, so we had to swim fast as we could to shore. I had to shape shift into a barracuda, so I could chew off one of the beast's tentacles to free another companion.

We entered an underground tower. The front entrance blended the features of a huge banquet hall and library. We set up camp for a good night's rest since half the party had come near to death.

Of course, someone on first watch fell for a classic trap. He pulled a book from a shelf, triggering a trapdoor opening from under his feet. We chased after him into a goblin lair. They had put him over a fire to roast. We saved his ass then escaped by going up an elevator on the other side of the room.

Somehow everyone survived the first part of the adventure and the rest of it. I won't get so much into those parts because they had more to do with problem solving than straight up hack & slash misadventure. If our game master (GM), Jeff Smith, ever wants to run another group through this adventure, I don't want to provide game breaking spoilers.

These type of events make great stories to tell. I also think they show what Dungeon World can do that Dungeon's & Dragons-based games can't do.

I used to think that a good GM could adapt any game to make it into the style of gameplay they want. They can, but why do so if they can purchase another game that already does. The only reason I can see a GM going to all that trouble is to release their own game system commercially.

Dungeon World has a simplicity to it that both provides an excellent intro to role playing games for beginners and encourages high adventure game play like many fantasy and science fiction movies many of us love.

I didn't much care for Dungeon World the first time we played. It felt too rules lite and generic.

Arguing over complicated rules, as this group has done a fair amount with Dungeon's & Dragons doesn't make for a fun night of gaming (I can often times be the main culprit). The cognitive load of remembering all the tricks and features for even just your character can take away from the game, too.

Nonetheless, characterization of characters, creatures and items doesn't affect game play much in Dungeon World. Even situational factors don't feel like they affect game play. Dice rolls needed to fail, succeed or get a mixed result on two six-sided dice doesn't change. Switching weapons doesn't change your character's range of damage.

Choices of equipment, tactics or anything like that not affecting game play make these types of choices feel pointless. These choices feel like they only change the description of how things occur, not the effectiveness of how they occur. Characters still have a lot of choice, but their agency feels stripped away to benefit the narrative.

This feeling lingers. After the last couple of sessions, though, seeing this feature as a vice has been tempered. Albeit, my halfling druid has used his shape shifting skills to avoid danger better than other characters and to change the flow of narrative. I had a good dose of agency.

Also, I think the GM had also adjusted the narrative. In the first session, we had engaged in a combat that had a more Dungeon's & Dragons feeling to it. Some monsters attacked a farm. We set our goal to defeat the monsters at all costs. Some cool features of the environment helped make game play more interesting, but Dungeon's & Dragons could accomplish the same thing.

The big feature that I think changes game play: the accumulation of experience points that can be used to improve your character's skills and abilities. Characters in Dungeon's & Dragons-based games get experience fastest by defeating enemies and monsters, mostly through combat. We often joke about awaking or resurrecting enemies just to kill them again for the experience points.

Back in the days of Advanced Dungeon's & Dragons, accumulating gold and magic items awarded experience points well. Selling magic items before returning to home base could generate even more experience through gold. That could make an interesting cost-benefit analysis for a character. These alternatives gave players options for how to approach the game rather than just resorting to hack and slash for most efficient level gaining.

Dungeon World flips the reward structure on its head, though. Characters most efficiently get experience by failing at dice rolls to accomplish things. Such things can include hitting a monster, finding a trap and avoiding danger. You make a mistake, you learn from it.

Experience can be gained in other ways. I don't have the most clarity on those approaches, though. I think they involve development of character and relationships with other characters.

The gaming group has discussed the positives and negatives of this approach. We've come up with supplementary ideas to address what are seen as demerits. Such as: a certain number of successes will provide as much experience as one failure.

Overall, though, I think the reward structure provides a satisfying balance. Yes, failure provides the most efficient way for min-maxing your character (which seems contradictary). Enough failure, however, will lead to character death or prevent the story from moving forward. Easy enough to make a new character but how to weave them into the game?

Story delay gets annoying and frustrating. That argument stands by itself.

Dungeon World has so much balance in character, enemy and monster combat statistics that it's deadly. All our characters have around twenty hit points. We all had come close to dying at least once during the night, though. Monsters, traps and tricks all took their toll on us.

The balance falls on EVERYONE having the same general chance for success, failure and mixed results on two six-sided dice. Some character attributes modify those rolls but not by much. 10+ is a success, 7-9 mixed result & 1-6 is a failure, I think it goes.

It doesn't help that armor acts only as damage reduction, not influencing a hit or miss. Most of our characters have a max armor of just 1. It helps, but when we get hit, we get hit.

Unlike in Dungeon's & Dragons-based games where characters and creatures can get power scaled to never getting damaged or always hitting weaker creatures. Enemies and obstacles have to constantly get scaled up to provide a challenge. It makes sense in a high fantasy/movie type of thing. We love to see the hero mowing down minions in epic fashion until they reach the big boss that provides a challenge.

At the same time, that power differentiation feels unsatisfying at times. Watching it on a movie screen can provide excitement and establish the power of characters. Playing through it, though, can feel like a lengthy churning slog that lacks some degree of realism and challenge.

Even by the end of that slog, the movie hero has gotten all smudged up, cut, bruised and those trevails play a large part in weakening them against the big bad. Why else would the huge, powerful big bad need those minions, anyway? If they're so powerful and invincible, why risk an army that could revolt and oust their leader. . .except that he's so powerful and invincible that he doesn't need them, so he can put down such a revolt.

Dungeon World returns that sense of danger while maintaining a high level of fantasy. Sure, the players can still face an underwhelming challenge that they defeat easy like a small patrol. On one hand, though, the game master has control of that and on the other, it's easy enough to get failure die rolls that could turn the tide along with the ingenuity of the enemies.

The players can turn the tide through their wit, too. If this last session indicates anything, they often have to.

Changing the reward structure and power balance this way changes the play dynamic. Having enemy and monster killing providing most efficient rewards gives the game tunnel vision (interesting moral philosophy discussion could be had here, too).

Dungeon World, on the other hand, elevates other goals. More often than not in the last session, the party tried to evade monsters or sneak through enemy ground. We wanted to accomplish our goal, but we didn't want to die foolishly. These slapdash efforts often ended up more exciting and fun than head on, rules laden combat to get more power.

Advancing the story proves more fun. I also like the idea that if we get frustrated with a problem, we don't fall back on entering combat to attain our goal. As Isaac Asimov has characters say in his Foundation series: "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."

Combat as the most useful resort also primes us players to not bother thinking of better solutions. We're just going to be entering combat, anyway, so why not just do it right away?

I see myself playing Dungeon's & Dragons-based games in the future. Pathfinder has become a favorite of mine. I feel like it blends the above gameplay elements better than the latest iterations of Dungeon's & Dragons. It also allows for characterization features that change the game and provides a little more agency. The power trip has its fun, too.

You won't find my arguing against playing Dungeon World based on the game system, though. It's fun. It makes a good gateway game to beginners. It allows for a more cognitively light game to provide the brain some rest.

I find myself wondering, though, if it's possible to find some other game sysem that blends the best of both systems I've mentioned. Can we have a system that doesn't use combat/domination as the primary reward system but also allows for more agency for characters by item, weapon, armor, feature, skill choices and the such?

Plenty of games out there. I think the answer to this question comes more down to me making the time and effort to finding them. Until then, these games have their fun sides and make for some fun game sessions.

LINKS OF NOTE:

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Geek Bar Chicago's Kickstarter Campaign Launch Party, a Grand Success


Last night I went to the Geek Bar Chicago Kickstarter campaign launch party at Mad River Chicago. I could care less for Mad River (beer selection didn't impress me and the trivia and music got loud), but you have to give them credit for hosting last night's party and the Chicago Game Lovers Meetup for past events.

The links above do a fairly good job of explaining Geek Bar Chicago. I don't link to their main page, though. I don't have the best luck loading it.

To sum it up, the guys of Geek Bar Chicago/Cantina Forward, David Zoltan an Matt Wolf, see a demand for a social place for geeks to hang out to do geeky things. Sure, there are game shops with game rooms, cafes to hang out, conference rooms/theaters to rent out. Those avenues focus too much on one activity, don't necessarily encourage larger social crowds or require complicated planning and organizing money logistics for a couple hours of a movie screening.

Sports fans have sports bars. Other bars cater towards more general audiences by showing reality TV or pop culture TV. Beercades have arcade games, but that doesn't necessarily mean geek. The bars here in Boystown have their drag shows.


Why shouldn't geeks have their own bar to have showings for Doctor Who, play table top games (board or RPGs are fine, I figure), have a quieter atmosphere to discuss the finer points of Lord of the Rings or The Avengers, work together to come up with theories for the next piece of technology or heck, have a cosplay fashion show.

Zoltan and Wolf have worked successfully to get seed money over the last few months from qualified investors through their social networks, larger networks like The Chicago Nerd Social Club, contests, civic organizations and entrepreneurial events.

Last night they reached their next stage: the Kickstarter campaign. Time to let the crowd funding bug in and let more everyday folks have their chance to contribute finances to the venture. Crazy as it may sound, just a little more than 24 hours later, they've already exceeded their goal of $10,000. This accomplishment doesn't surprise me. By the third or forth hour of the party, they had already exceeded the $4,000 mark.

Zoltan and Wolf have the right idea about demand being out there for Geek Bar. Just look at how much they raised in about 24 hours and still continue to raise!

Suffice to say, if they progress like they have so far, we can expect them to get established by the end of 2013 and have a place for geeks to go where they can be social and do what geeks do. Fifteen, twenty years ago, can you imagine even think of the possibility?

If the Geek Bar Chicago take over of Mad River for the launch party indicates anything, it shows that Geek Bar Chicago will provide a fun place to hang out. I made great conversation with friends, new and old, and didn't do much else. That's just me, though.

The Geek Bar Chicago people took over one wing of the bar and good deal of the main area. Most of these areas had board games set up with full rosters of players intense on competition. In the front of the wing taken over by the Geek Bar Chicago crowd, they had set up laptops for people to make Kickstarter pledges. Why encourage people to go home and contribute when you can offer them the opportunity at the bar?

Mad River had their trivia night going on the same night, so they couldn't accommodate full on Geek Bar. If last night was just a 25% to 50% sampling of how Geek Bar Chicago will run, though, I can't wait to see it running at 100% with its own space. I know I'd rather see Doctor Who or Lord of the Rings on the big screens, yells of triumphs of games won rather than loud music, and other fun geek themed activities.

How about you? You know what to do to make it happen.

LINKS OF INTEREST

Monday, July 08, 2013

C2E2: "Hanging Out" with Peter Davison and An Auditorium Full of People


Peter Davison came out to the cheering crowd in the auditorium at McCormick Place. We all had gathered together on that April Saturday afternoon to spend some time with Mr. Davison at C2E2.

He sounded quite youthful, much like he did during his earlier years. I shouldn't expect any less. When I've only seen a youthful version of him on television, though, it feels a little unsettling to see him having aged so. Felt that way even after having seen the "Time Crash" short.

Maybe more apt to say that he broadcast a youthful spirit rather than simply sounded youthful. Somewhat uncanny.

His charming demeanor, both at the lectern and when he played the Fifth Doctor, still makes it hard to believe that he was something of a trouble maker in his youth. How could he have trouble with academics during his secondary school years (or whatever they call it England). An interesting story to hear that he ended up in acting very much because it captured his passion unlike any other activity or field.

Entertaining to hear that his role in All Creatures Great and Small, which made him a household name in England, consisted a lot of sticking his arm up the asses of cows. He played the role of a veterinarian and that job apparently consists of putting your arm up cows' asses a lot. Who knew. . .that someone could get famous doing that?

C2E2 is a nerdy geek convention, though, and most everyone there knew him as the Fifth Doctor, as the father of the actress, Georgia Moffett, who played the cloned daughter of the Tenth Doctor and then, as the actress, married the actor who played the Tenth Doctor, David Tennant.

Suffice to say, that's just the tip of the iceberg in the relationship and acquaintence of Peter Davison and David Tennant. You, fine reader, can attend a con and see Peter Davison to hear these stories. The thought of sharing those stories as my stories feels a little wrong. I'll let those fine Doctors breach their own privacy.

Also, I don't want to take the man's "market share." I have a hard time seeing more people visiting my blog in a month than going to see Davison just once. Nonetheless, they're his stories to tell, not mine.

Davison had some fun stories about the interaction of his family and Doctor Who before Tennant became part of the family. One story involves one of Davison's sons preferring other Doctors before him. Another fun story made for interesting one upmanship in traumatizing the exit of two of the Doctor's companions: Adric and Rose Tyler * * * SPOILERS: Don't read these links if you don't want to get spoiled * * *

One question and answer interaction really has stuck with me, though: an aspiring actor or actress (OK, maybe the question doesn't stick with me so much) asked Davison either about tips on how to make it in the business or what kept him going. Davison had a pretty frank answer: Don't act or really do anything creative unless you have the love or compulsion for it. If you can stand doing something else, do that. If you can only act or something like that, then go for it.

There's generally not enough money in the creative world to make it worth it. Too much crap and dependence on luck to get to that point.

Something I heard on a podcast the other day made me think of that answer. For the life of me, I can't remember where I heard it, sadly. The interviewee said something to the effect that to them not to create and not to work on their craft caused pain to them.

I think for most of my life, I had felt this way. Whenever I took time away from my academic project, I felt like I would keep going back like some kind of battered spouse (not to make light of such a situation, but the combination of distraughtness and compulsion made me feel that way).

Davison's statement about doing something creative only if you have the love for it really hit me in the heart. For a good while now, I've been going though a lull in that love. Life has gotten in the way too much. I've started doing a lot of manual effort to save time. I've been working long hours to just keep up at work. I've focused on investments and trying to make them grow. I spend more time with my wife and have more of a social life. I watch more TV and play more role playing games (like D&D, Pathfinder, etc). . .but read less.

I've largely relegated my writing to mornings, this blog and Tuesday nights with the Just Write Chicago Meetup group at Dollop Coffee. I started going to Just Write Chicago after "hanging out" with Peter Davison at C2E2, even though he has no idea who I am. I need to put myself into situations that will surround me with the energy to create.

At that point, I had reached a low point with my writing. I had grown tired and my love had grown weak. It had reached that duty stage, suffice to say. Davison articulated the need to feel that love at the perfect time for me.

I've had to go through a couple more interactions with other creatives and do a bunch of my own thinking to start pulling myself out of my rut. I can't say that I've pulled myself all the way out of the hole yet, but I've reached a good point.

I've realized that I had gotten so focused on legitimizing myself to the world. I had become so focused on doing the academic stuff. I wanted a degree to qualify for a job that I would like to do everyday. That's all well and good, but then. . .what?

In this day and age of financial ruin, I have a hard time seeing my liberal arts degree having a direct impact on my job prospects or getting me more respect than I have from people. Not to speak poorly of liberal arts degrees. I just don't see it providing me with a practical benefit.

I went to college to write creatively. The academic side of things got tacked on to legitimize the writing. Someday, I would like to complete that project, but not for legitimacy. The project has grown on me. I feel like once I can finish it and figure out what there is to figure out, I might help make a difference in the world with it.

But with all my other activities, I don't have the time or energy for it. I can hardly keep all the facts straight in my head. That difficulty may come from having too many drafts of the same essay. More of it comes from not having a concentrated amount of time to think about it. My time has become way too broken up and fragmented.

I've settled on the goal of trying to do what I can to free up more blocks of time. I can't do it freqently enough in the short term. Too much life in the way. It comes down to needing enough money that I can live off the yield and interest. That's far in the future if I go at the pace I'm following now. Maybe I can figure out how to invest smart and speed things up, but that route will still take some time and free up time the short term.

What if I can write a best seller, though? Maybe I won't, though. Even if I don't, though, I'll be engaging in the love that started this journey: writing stories.

Going at things this way will even fulfill my dream of being a working class writer. I won't really do the working class part, but I'll do the creative writing schlub thing on top of all that life stuff. Even if I don't find success, at least I'll be doing what I love, not looking for legitimacy from the world around me. Maybe I'll find time to do all that other stuff someday, too.

Thank you, Mr. Peter Davison, for inspiring me both as a child and as an adult.

LINKS OF NOTE:

Thursday, June 20, 2013

C2E2: The Not So Epic Waiting in Line for Peter Davison's Panel


I know, I know, it's been awhile since C2E2 and even my last entry about the convention. It has come and gone. It's old news. Ah well, hopefully I can provide a perspective that no one else has had or put out into the world.

Besides, I've been in something of a bad head space for the last couple weeks.

I guess this whole C2E2 review thing has become something of a serial. Today's entry will focus on waiting in a lne.

I didn't get to do too much after the Futuristic Fright panel with John Scalzi and Alex Hughes before having to go save spots in the line for the Peter Davison panel. Even at that time I thought that maybe I had gotten a little paranoid about not making into a panel, but it was Peter Davison, the Fifth Doctor, after all. Not an opportunity to miss.

My worries had merit. I had gotten near the front of the line. Finding the front made for a trial of wits, in itself. Outside of the panel rooms, in the hallway, I found a small group of people who thought they made the front of the line. Like me, though, they worried that we had the wrong idea. All of us had already dealt with enough line messes in the last day or so. We knew we couldn't make any assumptions about where lines started and ended.

Good thing we kept our eyes and ears open. Asking questions of C2E2 assistants and staff helped. We ended up getting herded into one of the panel rooms and told to form a line on one side of the room. The other side of the room already had a formidable line formed for some other panel. I counted myself lucky that I had gotten into the first layer of line.

I plopped myself onto the ground and pulled out my mobile devices. The panel wouldn't start for another hour or so. I hadn't the patience to just sit around with my own thoughts or try to make friends.

Rumor spread or I overheard that the people in the panel before us wouldn't have to leave. Anyone who wanted to stay, could stay and keep their chair. That didn't and still doesn't strike me as entirely fair. People like me who sacrificed time to be in line could get screwed if everyone already in the room wanted to stay. Heck, couldn't someone in their group have stayed outside to save space in the line, like I did for wife and friends?

Didn't turn out half bad, though. Wife and friends arrived as the line had started getting long and excited. I breath a sigh of relief that no one got rowdy or worked up about me saving a spot in line for wife and friends. Elementary school lunch line politics could have come into play easy with just a little spark. Someone could have easily yelled "No cutting" or started some fisticuffs.

After both fortune and internalized drama, we all got into the panel room. Our little group didn't get the best seats. We sat off to the right side with middling distance but closer to the back. Having gotten close to the front of the line proved disappointing after getting suboptimum seats. Still, happy to have gotten in considering people who attended the panel beforehand didn't have to leave if they didn't want.

LINKS OF NOTE:

Saturday, June 15, 2013

DMs and GMs, Keep Your Eye on Quest Kick App


Hey RPGers, a DM techie of mine is making an app for running campaigns. It looks great. He showed it to me the other night and told me some of the concepts he's putting into it. Mind you, the Website doesn't necessarily have functionality yet. If reality matches his vision, though, it looks pretty kick ass.

The Website: http://www.questkick.com
His Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/questkick1
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/questkick1

Sunday, June 09, 2013

Brief Review of The Timey Wimey Fantastic Brilliant Extravaganza (Geronimo!)


I've just gotten home from seeing The Timey Wimey Fantastic Brilliant Extravaganza (Geronimo!) by McKenzie Gerber and Justin Gerber (they have bios on the page). The Right Brain Project produced the show. It has musical elements.

I had no idea what to expect. The Chicago Nerd Social Club had a post for it on their event calendar, which showed up on my RSS feed. Most things Doctor Who related tend to have an element of fun, so I said to Michi, "Let's go!" She said sure, so we did.


The play gets produced in a very small, 30-seat theater on the fourth floor of a loft space at 4001 N Ravenswood. You can practically hop, skip and jump from the Irving Park Brown Line stop.

We made reservations to take advantage of the $15 per person ticket (NOTE: first five patrons that come in costume get in for free). On a Sunday afternoon show at 3 PM, reservations may not prove necessary to guarantee you a seat. Then again, who knows? With enough buzz, a seat might be harder to get. The show has run four weeks so far and only has a couple more.

We had fun at the hour-long show. Michi called it cute and charming, which I think is apt.

Such a small theater group obviously doesn't have a huge budget, but the special effects were probably on par with Classic Who. They portrayed the Doctor much like a Classic Doctor, too, with much more arrogance and know-it-allism than we have become familiar with through the Tenth and Eleventh Doctors. Both Michi and I wondered if the actor had channeled Sylvester McCoy as the Seventh Doctor a little.

It didn't present anything groundbreaking. However, some of the plot twists and tricks could prove worthy of the show. Using the word canon in relation to the play doesn't do justice to anything (does it ever in the fifty year history of Doctor Who?).

Someone with the barest familiarity with Doctor Who will do fine watching the play and have fun. On the other hand, the loyalist fan with a sense of humor will enjoy the in jokes. Anyone who takes themselves too seriously really has no business going.

The program probably says it best: "THE TIMEY WIMEY FANTASTIC BRILLIANT EXTRAVANGANZA (GERONIMO!) is a parody and does not seek to profit from the creators and producers of DOCTOR WHO." It's a parody, not a satire, not a tragedy, not an epic, not a drama. They execute the parody well.

I would be remiss not mention that the performers did a good job performing, from acting to singing. The stage crew also did a great job of making themselves visible without disrupting the drama and taking you out of the show.

At times I thought the actor playing the Doctor and the actress playing the most capable bystander would have done good in an actual episode on BBC or PBS. The production had its fill of romping and ridiculous stakes, much like the fun parts in the show. These two, though, manifested the occasional welling of palpable emotion that comes through during the best parts of the show.

I have a hard time rating the show as an absolutely can't miss. Life will continue as is, either which way. I'll always encourage people to support local business and arts, but I feel like bringing that up in a review is a little patronizing.

The play makes for a fun time and worth the price of the ticket (especially if you e-mail ahead and make your reservation for lower cost). If you're looking for a dose of The Doctor and/or some comedy, it stands up pretty good against the actual show and other comedy you'll find around Chicago. If you go, you'll have a fun time.

LINKS OF NOTE:

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

Healing & the Thoughts Inspired by CNSC Writers' Panel and Networking Event


I usually post a blog entry after getting inspired after work, sitting down, tapping away an entry then putting it up. I followed that process a couple weeks ago after my bike accident. Not since then have I really had much inspiration to get down and write. Plenty of chores got in the way, but I think wrist pain had a lot to do with it. My wrist feels a bit better now so hopefully I'll get back on the horse to write more often.

To get on topic, though, I went to the Chicago Nerd Social Club Writers' Panel and Networking Event at Open Books Ltd. Authors on the panel included:

I showed up late and stayed a little longer than a hour. Other commitments made me leave early. The premises of all the works sound like worthwhile reads. When I find some time, I'll have to give them shots.

Prompted by moderator, Jeff Smith, the panelists provided thoughts on

  • Creative process
  • World building
  • Creating and filling out characters
  • Plotting
  • Where to get inspiration
  • Importance of themese
  • Seeking and taking criticism
I even got to provide some input on a couple topics. I also tried to inspire a fellow audience member to balance the entertainment of others and the expression of ideas they think are cool.

Suffice to say, I didn't get much new for the panel. Not the panelists or the moderator's fault. I'm deep in the middle of my own process and have much of my own work figured out. I've gotten lots of criticism on what I've written and have plenty of ideas of refashioning what I've already written.

If it came down to it and money wasn't a worry, I could probably sit down and write for days on end. I've got the characters, much of the world and the plotting figured out.

I even got on my own case in my head while at the panel. I've got the ideas, I should just sit down and belt it out. My big hang up: I want to understand the psychological phenomena involved in utopianism before I get really into writing the fiction.

I've got my head all wrapped up around my project, and I want to get that done. It fascinates me more now. And when I finish my novel, I want to know what I'm talking about if I get published, do panels like this or do interviews somewhere else.

Even after saying all that, part of me says I should just sit down and get it written. Sigh. . .fear of missing out on life and plenty of excuses, I guess. I also like the security of paying expenses (don't feel confident that I'd deliver if I got funds from Kickstarter). Bad time management and bad life balance, I guess.

LINKS OF INTEREST:

Tuesday, May 07, 2013

I Love Johnny Sprockets


I got into a bike-on-bike collision this morning.

Should have been prepared for it five minutes earlier. I had tempted fate. Thought about how riding my bike everyday to work would make me sooooo healthy and all that. I stopped congratulating myself when I remembered that riding a bike could be risky: a crazy, fatal uncontrollable accident could happen at any moment.

Of course, I had an accident five minutes later.

Below is a map of the intersection where the accident occurred:


View Larger Map

Imagine me coming from the southwest corner heading north on the Lakefront Trail. I'm having a grand old time, taking in the nice weather, feeling the wind in my face, finally waking up from the morning slog. All the usual, pleasant, quiet before the storm stuff.

I notice some guy on a street bike speeding down from the northwest on W Belmont Harbor Drive. He takes as sharp a right turn as he can to head southwest down the Lakefront Trail. The guy probably can't turn that sharp, though, or he'll flip the bike or something.

Looking back I can rationalize the course of events that way.

At the time, my sense of causality both slowed down and skipped a couple frames at the same time. My mind saw what unfolded in front of me and refused to accept it. What idiot would be crossing into my lane and head straight toward me? It failed to make sense, so I put my trust into this guy. He must know what he's doing and must be going fast enough to avoid collision. Why else would he try to cross the path if he didn't know he could do it?

He was an idiot. He had no idea what he was doing. He took the right onto the path too fast and had completely lost control.

I didn't make all those connections until the very last moment. I entered avoid the idiot mode. I tried turning left as best I could. It wasn't enough. Of course, my instincts didn't let me turn that sharp. If I did, I would flip or wipe out on the pavement.

Through all the slo-mo frame skipping, I realized the futility of avoidance. I entered the next stage: loss control. Keeping injury to a minimum, that is. I had just ran my front wheel into this guy's back wheel then had jumped off my bike, after all. It's funny how we have thoughts about consequences before being conscious of the cause sometimes. I think a part of my mind had chuckled at this observation while my repitilian mind had focused on preventing major wounds by crashing into the grass.

No major wounds that I know of. I have my left wrist wrapped up in a bandage right now, but I had anger surging through me, the fear of being late to work, worry about hospital bills and possible bike repairs. Money's tight right now. . .and what?! My handlebars were in a super weird angle!

I became determined to get the guy's number. After cursing him out a little, I told him he would give me his name and number. . .after I turned on my phone. I assume I gave him a steely glare and curled my lip (the lip thing is what I do when I'm angry, apparently).

My phone always takes a little time to boot up. The guy asked me if I had a pen and paper. I told him no. He would just have to wait and wait he did.

All that settled, I made my way to work. The handlebars at their odd angle took a little getting used to, but I got it down. Amazing how our minds and bodies can compensate for distortions in reality that don't cause injury.

The adrenaline started wearing out. I popped a couple Ibuprofen at work. Wrist hasn't swollen at all. Pain isn't all that bad. Keeping it wrapped and elevated should probably do the trick in a couple weeks.

This accident makes for my third bike accident in Chicago (Michi didn't appreciate me smacking into a car a couple days before we got married. . .again, just got banged up is all). If I'm not in the emergency room by now, I just need some R&R.

I worried more about the cost of fixing the handlebars than dealing with my wrist. Even if I have to get x-rays and stuff, health insurance will handle it well enough until I get the dumb ass other guy to pay for stuff. I would have to pay 100% out of pocket to repair my bike until I get reimbursed. . .and reimbursement isn't guaranteed. Along with being an idiot, the guy could be a jerk, too.

Imagine how relieved I felt when one of the register people up front at Johnny Sprockets diagnosed the problem, fixed it in five minutes then didn't charge me a cent. I even asked if it cost anything. The guy just said nope.

I don't know if it has anything to do with being a regular for repairs there. Could just be that they're awesome for things that take minimal effort.

Doesn't matter. They're awesome. I love Johnny Sprockets and don't hesitate to tell anyone to go there for their bike needs. If you have bike needs, go. They just might help you feel like there's still good in the world after a crappy day of worry and pain from a dumb bike accident that you had little chance of avoiding.

And oh yeah, don't be an idiot when you making tight turns on your bike. Slow down and take your time.

LINKS OF NOTE:

Sunday, May 05, 2013

C2E2: Part 1 of My Response, including a John Scalzi panel and the changing forms science fiction media


My response has turned out longer than expected. I’ve broken it up into a couple entries. More will come after this one.

C2E2 ranks up there as one of the most strenuous activities I do in the year. Sounds sad, but really, stumbling around for 24+ hours in a weekend, trying to avoid people and trampling them, gets taxing for mind and body.

Didn't help that allergies muddled my mind, either. Social and cognitive activity didn't work well. This response won't have much for concrete events. I will focus more on my reactions and thoughts that bubbled up in the process.

This attendance makes for my third trip to the Chicago Comics & Entertainment Expo (C2E2). It has occurred four times in the last four years. We skipped the second one when I vacationed in Costa Rica. A tough decision, seriously, but glad I went to Costa Rica.


C2E2 has provided a great experience every year. Any general complaints I may have come from me not falling into the primary demographic. I don't get into merchandise much, don't read too many comics and don't connect so much with visual art. By nature, I don't get into permanent, materialistic things or visual mediums. Comics, I admit some prejudice in my youth and haven't found time since to explore them.

The stands had A LOT of Doctor Who merch, though. I mean, A LOT, as in about a football field’s worth of stands. Talk about oversaturation of a market. I wonder how much individual stands sold. Many other stands had a lot of similar stuff. Does the market really have that level of demand?

This remark comes from half of a couple that purchased sandblasted steins with a Dalek and a Cyberman on them. They came from a stand that had a wide variety of geek graphicked steins and mugs, though. I’m also the type of guy who spend hours at a time researching Doctor Who canon for no good reason.


My interest lies more in tabletop board and role playing gaming, TV, cultural production and literature. I find myself lacking in the latter category, even. I have more familiarity with the "golden age" of science fiction than any other. These other categories have their own cons. I should go to one of those.

I could have also partook in the gaming room run by the Chicago Game Lovers. With so much to do and people to see at C2E2, though, breaking from the familiar didn't feel appealing. Getting involved in a game then having to run off to get in a line for a panel didn't strike me as fun.

C2E2 organizers did a great job with the floor this year. They got the most gigantic room yet. A lot more stands could squeeze in. Having the dungeon bathrooms in the middle proved a godsend (especially since no one else found them, no line!). Artist alley didn't get squeezed all the way in the back, even though I didn't find it until the next day (again, gigantic!).

The floor felt well organized. Stands settled into themed neighborhoods (e.g. merchandise, comics, Artist Alley, celebrities, etc.). If managed my time better, it would have been perfect.

I only found one game stand: Chicagoland Games/The Dice Dojo. If there were more, I blame myself. I didn't have the clarity of mind to take in everything and manage my time better. Like with the gaming room, though, getting in line for the panels proved a pesky detriment.

Organization of the panels makes for the biggest shortcoming this year. Michi cited a statistic that the panel audience this year equaled the people roaming the floor. (Michi - formerly, The_Wife. . .now won't hesitate to use her name since her name has become something of brand.) Panels have elevated C2E2 above other fan/comic/pop culture conventions I've attended. This statistic goes to show that other fans have a similar opinion, if not the same.

I made the misfounded complaint that few of the panels looked interesting. Looking at the schedule now, it overwhelmed me while at the convention. This year I didn't prep by studying the schedule beforehand or use my computer to schedule and decide between conflicts. Fault on me there.

At worst, few of the panel titles jumped out at me and the schedule grid just had so much on it. I don't know how much of that has to do with me failing to prep before going. Having so many panels shows their success.

Titles failing to grab attention could contribute to making things look a little bland. At the same time, I'm not the prime demographic for these cons (even though past years had panel names that stood out). Maybe their titles attracted the attention of other people attending.

Long lines and small rooms for panels made for big disruption. I already mentioned that I didn’t partake in some activities because I didn’t want them disrupted by having to run for a panel.

The first year of C2E2, nothing to worry about rooms filling up or long lines. I had faced more trouble finding panel rooms in the labyrinth of McCormick Place. Getting in and finding a good seat had proven little difficulty.

Michi and some others tried to get into the Fierce Females of Television panel without luck. They got in line too late. Apparently the organizers had divided rooms in half for most panels. Doing so helps provide many panels and a variety of topics. Having to turn people away at the door or disrupting other activities sucks, though. Talk about huge opportunity cost to sit in on a panel.

Of course, C2E2 is still young and learning. I have to give them credit for trying to increase the variety of panel topics. I also think the increased industry and celebrity presence caused disruption. Typically those panels should get prime attention since they draw people to the con.

Panels with less assumed drawing power in the past have done a lot to build the C2E2’s reputation for great panels and contributed much to this year’s equal attendance for panels and floor. A difficult balance to strike, but I think giving more credence to topic-oriented and less-assumed audience drawing can go a long way.

Less panels with bigger rooms also might help. After all, anything that doesn’t make the schedule can get scheduled for the following year.

Has it become obvious that I didn't attend too many panels. I only went to three:
I had some personal connection or interest in them all:
  • FUTURISTIC FRIGHT, I read John Scalzi's blog on a regular basis
  • Peter Davison portrays my Classic Doctor Who
  • Exorcising the Spectre of the Fake Geek Girl, Michi put it together
FUTURISTIC FRIGHT PANEL

For FUTURISTIC FRIGHT, John Scalzi and Alex Hughes had a fairly free form discussion about
  • Imagining the future
  • Their own imaginings and story ideas
  • Navigating the publishing industry to market their imaginations
  • Some of the parodies we all make about
    • Red Shirts of a landing crew
    • Reversing polarities to save the day
    • Varied reactions to Tolkien’s writing (or dramatizing his world building)

A moderator helped to start the conversations by asking some questions. Scalzi, Hughes and the moderator all had good presence. They had a pretty good rapport with audience. I don't have the best recall of topics other than ideas and the development of technology make for an interesting interaction.

I regret that I don’t remember much about Alex Hughes. She made a great remark, though, about how to deal with an author having an idea that scientists and engineers are developing. Make your story better than reality, she said.

Michi bought Hughes’s first book, Clean. Michi liked it a lot and plans on reading the sequels. I plan on giving it a shot, too. Being the first time I heard of Hughes, my brain hadn’t calibrated that much for emotional investment at the panel.


Scalzi provided a lecture on the evolution of the form taken by science fiction media. In the beginning, science fiction came as small pulp magazines in the supermarket.

The industry somewhere along the line decided to consolidate the wholesale distribution channel from a lot down to two or three. Book stores came into the picture, especially big stores like Barnes & Noble. They asked for science fiction to come in the form of a book with page counts between 120 to 300 or so as we have become used to.

Now we find ourselves in the electronic Internet age. Many other medias have gone through chaos: music, movie and TV. The story of Internet music distribution has all but been finished by the acceptance of iTunes and other means. We see the stories of movie and TV unfolding in the news every day with Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, Youtube and Bit Torrent.

The evolution of electronic distributing stories, fiction and poetry doesn't make it into the news that much, though. Scalzi has jumped to the front of experimenting with this realm. He wrote The Human Division. It’s a series of related but not directly connected episodes all released separately, about a week apart from each other. TOR will collect it into an individual volume and release it soon.


Episodic short-form fiction makes or an expensive undertaking in the time of paper. Especially if the industry pushes to have it in book form of 120 to 300 pages. Episodic short-form issued electronically makes for a less expensive of an undertaking.

I bet this approach has other advantages, too. I can't think of it all. Releasing something new on a regular, shorter basis keeps a brand on the mind of consumers. Infrequent releases of something longer form may not stay in the public’s mind as long. In this day and age when there's so much going on, publishing something often like The Human Division will keep Scalzi on peoples' radars.

I have no illusions that one paradigm is better than another, just better suited for a situation. History and anthropology show us that humanity organizes technology to adapt to their environments, whether that be natural or socially human created. Human adaptation creates feedback loops that have gotten us where we are now and will get us to where we go in the future.

I respect Scalzi and everyone else who can keep up with all this change. Albeit they have more of an immediate necessity than I do at the moment. They get their everyday livelihood by keeping abreast of these things and staying ahead of everyone else.

My fear comes from feeling behind. Right now, I'm just working on developing material to market and distribute. Whereas Scalzi and others have an interesting interplay of how their ideas interact with distribution. . .I'm somewhat stuck in an old paradigm, the novel. I'm hoping to make enough of a splash with a novel that I can write another one because people want another one.

It's great to see people thriving in this environment and willing to share their knowledge about it. Despite all that, it's kinda scary and intimidating to a beginner. I just hope to figure out how to navigate all this someday. . ..

More forthcoming. . ..

LINKS OF INTEREST:

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

PRIMER: A Mystery Why So Many People Like It

I finally watched Primer the other night on Netflix. I had been inspired to watch it after reading a lot about time travel. I read about time travel because other shows & movies disappointed me with their time travel. Primer was held up as a pinnacle of logical time travel.

I haven't gotten all the timelines of the movie down. Frankly, I don't care to do so. The characters weren't compelling enough to make me care for most of the movie. A lot of reviewers phrase that the movie doesn't dumb itself down and explain itself. Being bored was one reaction.



Now I can say that I didn't get beyond understanding the characters other than they are engineers trying to make an invention that would make them millions. They accidently invent a time machine. They then experiment with it to see what happens. It takes four days (roughly double that for them just sitting around in a hotel room doing not much of anything).

I didn't get any sense of personality from the characters. They don't want include their other two partners. One of them wants to punch some guy in the face (who was that other guy, anyway). At first they don't want to run risk of paradox or anything. An event arises that causes them to operate their failsafe machine. . .and it somehow involves a girlfriend that one of them instantly develops. Huh?

How does the main character have a wife and a child, anyway? At least not have one that doesn't argue with him all the time about spending all his time in the garage and no time with the family? No tension after so many attempts at experiments to make money fail? Attempts at secondary characters fail because none of the secondary characters were developed enough to make the audience care or understand why they should be there.

The "science" of the time travel makes enough sense, like how the "science" of Inception makes sense. Whereas the rules of Inception make the narrative boring for me (even as I appreciate the consistency), the rules of Primer without "dumbing down" make it too convoluted for me.

Doubles, triples and quadruples dabbling in the timeline doesn't get explained until the end. . .and it took an explanation online for me to connect obscure events to a plot point. The sound quality sucking could have done something with the obscurity.

To me, it's a mystery why so many people like Primer. Maybe so they can feel challenged by a plot not being spelled out for them, requiring multiple re-watchings? I would be into multiple re-watchings if the characters and the world built proved compelling. . .but they don't.

I found the movie too boring to re-watch. Reading the summary multiple times and peoples' theories about it held my attention better. I'm just not motivated to watch it again in the attempt to make connections and gain comprehension.

Can anyone else explain why so many people like it?

LINKS OF INTEREST:


Sunday, April 07, 2013

Doctor Who: More World Building & Strong Secondary Characters Plz


WARNING: Spoilers Ahoy!.

Lately I feel like I've been in a minority when it comes to the last couple episodes of Doctor Who: "The Bells of Saint John" and "The Rings of Akhaten". They have vastly underwhelmed and disappointed me.

The worst part: I expected disappointment for "Bells." Jenna-Louise Coleman shined as different iterations of Clara Oswin Oswald in "Asylum of the Daleks" and "The Snowmen". She did so as one-time characters in different historical and futuristic periods.

How could Clara Oswin Oswald top herself extended over the minimum of a half season? We also have a track record of companions disappointing me during the Steven Moffat era of Doctor Who. They shine in the beginning then fizzle into just a companion. They have their occasional bursting into light again, then they go back to bleh for the sake of plot.

Clara Oswin Oswald has mostly shined. The character and Jenna-Louise Coleman have done a great job with the material they're given. They have great chemistry with Matt Smith and The Eleventh Doctor. He has done great work with his material, too.

I heard or read an interest interpretation that I unfortunately forget the source. Somewhere on the Internets, someone said this pair work so well because Jenna Louise-Coleman talks as fast as Matt Smith. Clara is something of a companion version of the Doctor. She acts as a female mirror of him rather than a foil or even the everyperson to act as the audience stand in. I really wish I remember where I read that.

My disappointment doesn't lie with Clara, even if she acts as a vehicle for the things I'm disappointed in.

The blame doesn't fall on where I thought it would: the characters or actors.

Well, maybe I'm disappointed in the Doctor lately. Really? Having him stalk Clara as a child and as she grows up? Those flashbacks would have worked just fine without The Doctor in them. As a way to insert some tension at the end and for Clara to stand up for herself as an individual? No. That could've been done more organically as the two get to know each other. Is Clara a Ganger being used to spy on the Doctor? Sorry, that was just badly executed.

Ever since "The Angels Take Manahattan", we've been seeing an immature off balance in a dangerous type of way Doctor.

The Tenth Doctor claiming himself "Timelord Victorious" seemed wrong and terrible. Nonetheless, as audience members, we rooted for him at the same time. He had witnessed horrible injustices throughout his 800 or so year life throughout the universe. Who wouldn't want to fix the universe after all that? It was wrong but understandable and coming from a sympathetic character.

But, anyway, I think the characters and actors do the best that they can with the script they're given. I have no problem with the character development, either. I don't know where the season/series arc is going. I can only criticize the pacing of the development of both the characters and arc.

What does this character arc/development have to do with the larger arc Moffat has created with The Silence, River Song, the War against the Doctor, and the Great Intelligence. Series 5 had great progress. Series 6 slowed down but there was progress halfway through. First half of Series 7 was about the departure of the Ponds. Now we want to get back to the series arc and find out who the real Big Bad is, what is their motivation and how the hell have they been able to pull off everything they've done!

The funny part, though, which is my major issue: I could probably handle all these deficiencies if we had better world building and Good secondary episode-length characters. We had the child-queen in "The Rings of Akhaten." She really didn't do much other than motivate main characters and bounce themes off them. That's not what makes a great secondary character fit for world building.

I compared this episode a lot to "The Beast Below" a lot last night. I won't get too deep into my comparison because the parallels should be pretty obvious. In "The Beast Below," though, we had great Secondary characters: Liz 10, the voting booths, Smilers, Winders, Hawthorne and even the Star Whale. If it weren't for the novelty and interesting aspects of all these characters, that episode wouldn't have held my interest for very long. It also helped how interrelated they ended up.

I've finally come to accept the hypothesis that "The Angels Take Manahattan" is mostly an episode about stories (thank you, Laura Koroski and io9 for highlighting this hypothesis). I appreciate the decisions that Amy and Rory make in the episode.

Nonetheless, we hardly had a world around the Doctor, Amy, Rory and River Song. The two secondary characters in the beginning really just establish the story or play out as plot device. Modern day New York City hardly felt like anywhere special. No one other than the main characters showed their faces. Did we even have extras in the background? NYC of the past was empty except for cherub Weeping Angels, adult Weeping Angels and Statue of Liberty Weeping Angel. . .did the episode get set in NYC just so we can have a Statue of Liberty Weeping Angel?

If "The Angels Took Manahatten" was a one up on a show like Twilight Zone or The Outer Limits, it would have been a strong episode. The episode had interesting enough ideas and plotting to carry an anthology show. We wouldn't need to care TOO much about the characters.

Doctor Who has those episodes, too. "Blink" does great there. It's a one-up Doctor-lite episode. Most every fan loves that episode, and the Doctor really ends up playing a secondary role. His character has the weight of his history behind him.

Nonetheless, since "Blink" is just a one-up Doctor-lite episode, we don't need to have a ton of character development. We just need quick characterization and an interesting, novel situation. But if the Doctor has anything more than his secondary character status, the characters in this story would need more development for it to resonate with the audience. Looking back, I could see myself feeling disappointed if the Doctor came to the fore front of the episode as a primary character. We'd either get all the answers right away or get annoyed that the Doctor hides vital information from us.

"Blink" stands on its own because it is a standalone episode and doesn't need the depths of world building character development that many Doctor Who episodes need. The plot and ideas prove strong enough for one episode that we don't have to get pulled into the quality of characters developed.

Of the four episodes from "The Angels Take Manhattan" to the episode last night, "The Rings of Akhaten," only "The Snowmen" felt like it had strong secondary characters. We had: Vastra, Jenny, Strax, the previous governess/Ice Governess, the family of Captain Latimer and, off-screen, the memory of the Amy and Rory going away.

Albeit, this episode needed strong secondary characters. The Doctor became reclusive and didn't want to get involved with people. Clara needed some way to learn about the Doctor and get closer to him. The secondary characters gave her that opportunity.

My hypothesis makes the great secondary characters in "The Snowmen" kind of sad. They only rose to their height because the plot needed them. Writing stories DO require an economy of elements, especially TV and movie writing. Those media only afford a certain amount of time to tell a story. Everything needs cramming into that small space.

Even a novel has to balance these elements. A novel allows for more freedom. The audience, however, can take away that freedom. Fail to properly balance all the elements in the story, you run the risk of alienating your editor and audience. The novel doesn't get published or doesn't meet enough success for an author to have easy time publishing again, if at all once.

Doctor Who has fallen out of balance. Over the last couple weeks, I've caught myself asking why I continue to watch. I did that even with the first half of the seventh series. The sixth series disappointed me, but the plot had enough compelling elements to it and River Song still had her charm. Nothing like an origin story to make a character more pedestrian and less exciting.

I think my continued watching has to do with hope for the future. Maybe the plot arc will pick up again, and we'll have the answers we've been looking for. Maybe the mystery of Clara Oswin Oswald will become more compelling again. The loss of balance tipping away from world building has come to disappoint me, though. We need more strong secondary characters and settings.

Last night's "The Rings of Akhaten" was pretty with the special effects and the variety of alien creatures. It didn't do much for me, though, because I didn't connect with the setting and the aliens. There's something to be said about literature and art getting us to experience what characters experience (alienation for the Doctor, feeling lost - that theme seems to be a big one for Clara and trying to get a hold back onto optimism and wonder at the world).

We've lost the feeling that generally pulls us into Doctor Who, though, the sense of wonder and excitement that the Doctor and the TARDIS bring to us on our TV all too infrequently. The wonder at seeing new worlds being built and injustice in them getting righted. Even when the Third Doctor was stranded on Earth, we could get a sense of world building and wonder (just look at the technological gadgets he got fascinated in!).

It's the feeling that most of the Star Trek franchise, Star Wars and a lot of science fiction has brought to us. On the one hand, if Doctor Who wants to go down the hole of existential alienation, let's go all the way and really feel it in an innovative way.

I rather dislike skirting this middle ground, though. It focuses all on story and primary characters at the neglect of world building. Let's go somewhere new, meet someone new and encounter new problems that we don't face here on Earth. But let's really feel it and really get absorbed into these new worlds and societies. Let's wonder how that 45 minutes or 60 minutes went by so fast and how come it can't last longer. Let's wonder how we got so absorbed into this fictional world or these crazy, unrealistic problems. Let's build a world and experience it together.

LINKS OF INTEREST:

Saturday, March 30, 2013

Pandora Radio, It's Been a Great Relationship, but I Think We Make Better Friends


I understand Pandora's recent restriction on how much time mobile users can listen for "free" per month. A business needs revenue. Pandora isn't a charity. I get it.

I still think they made a bad decision from a market penetration standpoint. $.99 per month isn't that much to pay for 40+ more hours of music on a mobile device if you use it a lot. I do. With other options out there, like Spotify, iTunes radio stations, though, I think Pandora might end up losing listeners rather than gaining them.

I, for one, have re-discovered Spotify and found more merits to it. A year or so ago, a friend of mine argued that Spotify did a better job of relating songs to each other on a station.

I disagreed at the time. I think my disagreement came more from finding virtues in Pandora's broader swath in relating songs to each other. At that time, I had been getting back into finding new music via music broadcasters like Pandora and Spotify. I wanted to discover more music, so Pandora's broad swath made sense at the time.

I probably would have paid the $.99 this month, too, if I wasn't taking a long weekend trip to the Carribean. Last time I went out of the country, I couldn't use Pandora. Why spend even $.99 this time when I wouldn't have access for almost a week. I'm on a budget, and every dollar counts.

It hasn't help Pandora's case, when it came to me, that BBC America will broadcast the premiere Doctor Who Series 7 Part 2 tonight, either. I always like listening to Doctor Who music around premiere time. I'm excited, so I want to get into it.

Listening to Doctor Who music on iTunes gets a little boring, though. I don't want to listen to the music as arranged on albums anymore. I also would love to hear something new and related. Heck, listening to Spotify, I learned that there was a score released for the Doctor Who A Christmas Carol special. It's been 2 or 3 years since it was broadcast, and I hadn't known.

The Pandora selection of Doctor Who music has always sucked. They pretty much only played songs from the David Tennant specials and from the combined Series 1 & 2 album. Not horrible selections, but not enough of actual Doctor Who music. I've gone to the station because I want to hear Doctor Who music!

So Pandora taking away my privelege of listening to them after awhile has become a win for me. I've found other avenues to listen to music in ways that benefit me. Spotify's Murray Gold station practically plays only Doctor Who music (with some Sherlock and The Avengers music thrown in). I can't object to that.

I have no problem observing that I think this decision may end up hurting Pandora more than it helps. Sure, getting a little influx of revenue will make a nice boost and looks good in the short run. It feels more like a work around patch to the problem than a solution to revenue issues, though.

If I have found other avenues to listen to music that meets my needs better at different times, I'm sure other people have, too. I don't actively look for different products and don't like being the first to adopt things. If this action of Pandora's has led a passive consumer to switch products for even just selected uses, imagine what a more active and opinionated consumer will do.

Combine that with the revenue Pandora gets from advertisers. Consumers can pay $3.99 to listen without ads. A lot of people, like me, have no problem suffering ads for free music. Now Pandora has lost an ad listener for not only the post-40 hours per month period, but for periods before that when something like Spotify better fits my needs.

So, on one hand, thank you Pandora for depriving me of your service. I've been able to find another product that can provide for my demand better at times. You've helped me see that I have got some other great options out there.

While helping me, though, you may have hurt yourself. By depriving me, you have lost the market share of my own and probably many other ears for a period of the month. And not just after the 40 "free" hours, but other times before that point.

I hope you don't regret your decision. Heck, maybe it will even help you come up with a better product. Maybe you can win me and others back 100% of the time. I'm not leaving you, but I don't have any other problems "dating" other online music programs. Thank you for showing me the other opportunities out there. You're a good friend.

Yet, you might want to work on your product and marketing strategy. The underdogs might get you in this dog-eat-dog world.

LINKS OF NOTE:

Saturday, March 09, 2013

The_Wife's 2013 C2E2 Panel: Exorcising the Spectre of the Fake Geek Girl


I've slacked enough through the dreary February. The last couple of weeks I've been too sick and worn down to much of anything.

It has come time to announce my wife's, Michi Trota, panel at the Chicago Comic & Entertainment Expo (C2E2) this year. Last year, it was the Geek Girl and the Artist. It gave us all a pleasant surprise. A bunch of people came in to give their attention and take in some interesting observations. Who knew that young girls and women loved Captain Kirk so much because he went out and DID STUFF (and I don't mean had sex with things, he made things happen). I know I didn't.

For the last panel of the first night of the con, we expected most people to have left the convention for some partying or get some sleep. They had two more whole days to hit the convention floor and sit in on other panels. But no, enough people showed up and stayed to keep the panel going for a half hour past the scheduled end time. The conversation got so organic and fun that, unfortunately, the girls didn't have enough time to field questions from the audience. Oh well, the audience had a good time.

I'm proud to say that Michi will be doing another this year at C2E2. Unfortunately, it occurs on the other end of the convention schedule. The other end, as in, the middle of the last day, on Sunday. Not necessarily the most ideal time. The three times I've gone to C2E2, I haven't gone on a Sunday. Friday day or evening then all day Saturday had just pooped me out too out. Nothing on Sunday really caught my eye, though.

You'll see me at C2E2 on Sunday this year. At least you'll see me at Michi's panel. The first sentence of the panel's description:

This moderated panel will demystify the spectre of the "fake geek girl" that's been haunting geek culture.
You can read the rest of the description and get time/location at the C2E2 Website.

As they did last year, The Chicago Nerd Social Club has provided sponsorship for her panel. You should check them out if you live in Chicago. It's a good crowd, and they have plenty of ideas for things to do. They welcome ideas for other things to do, too!

If you're up on the whole podcasting thing (I've gotten big into listening to them a lot lately these days, myself): a reliable source told me that the guys from Loot the Room will record an interview with her soon. Keep your eyes for it!

And I'm hoping to get into the groove of posting regularly again, like back in January. I'll try not to let work, ironing, laundry and getting sick get in the way. I'll try my best!


LINKS OF INTEREST:



Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com