Well, for starters, it’s easier to show you.
As of this writing, this is my most recent livestream:
Generally, it is exactly what you said - I do some development on camera with a live studio audience*.
There is some necessary preparation, though, as this is a presentation to my stakeholders:
-
I select a generally-convenient time for my stream, because I want as many people in on this as possible.
-
I always lead into my stream by talking about what I’ve done during the week, not unlike a Scrum.
-
I try to walk into the dev session with 1:30 of material, spanning two subjects. (So, 0:45 each. I try to avoid going over 0:50 of material, because that’s the point at which the adult mind stops optimally absorbing information.)
-
I try to select subjects that help people write their own games. There are many reasons people watch stuff, but the two big ones are that either something is inherently interesting, or something helps you do something you want to do.
-
I try to select subjects that are interesting. More about my experiments on this exists below.
-
I try to select subjects that I have two competing ideas about what to do with, that I can give to my audience.
People find the stream, because I tell them about it. I already have a few YouTube followers, but I also post in the Anook Community as there’s some interest in game design from the ‘core’ gamers.
With selecting subjects, I’ve been doing some experiments on my streamers. Generally, easily-exposable things are better subjects than mentally-intensive things. I’ve noticed significantly improved audience retention in episodes where I do visual art and music composition, compared to story-writing (control subject, as it’s intentionally boring), level design (this one struck me as odd), and programming (though people want to see programming on-screen, it’s not really riveting viewing.)
There is minimal processing that goes into these streams. Some of that is my own hardware limitations. More of it, is because the point is for clear, honest, and unfiltered communication with the stakeholder; sure a second screen that I use to throw up things like background music or effects could help, but anything additional would (correctly) come off as making it seem more like an out-and-out marketing ploy than a development session (it’s both.)
Also the rules are to be broken. In the linked stream, I go through about four topics, because the two I had selected were too short. While I personally felt this devalued my presentation, it actually seemed to be good for my audience because I was able to ask them, ‘OK…what do you all want to see?’ I was able to build some investment, which has its own overall value.
The ethics of this sort of dev stream are simply, “to communicate.” I am not selling my game. I am not selling ‘the game developer lifestyle.’ I am showing a nascent game, and the processes going into it. Even though the point is to encourage interest (thus…‘selling my game’), this is never a focal point of a broadcast, ever. If I broadcast right, this is a natural, and happily-received outcome.
Gigiwoo, does this answer some of your questions?
*: Just replace ‘studio’ with ‘remote’, and it’s accurate.
