http://learnbuildplay.com/Training/IndieGameDevBook

I've just released my game programming/XNA book for free. And now I'm working with a marketing agent and some other specialists on a rewrite of it, particularly into a series of smaller books. All will remain free.

What I'm hoping for, is some feed back on this book, the Good, the Bad and the Ugly. I want your real opinions on this. If you think something would be better done differently I want to know. If you think the art sucks, let me know. (By the way, I think the art sucks. I'm not an artist. I'm planning on hiring a real artist to redo this graphics, cover and comics. But I want to get your ideas on that as well)

Negative feedback is exactly what I need now. How do I improve this.

Thanks!

I did not like the setup of going back and forth between them(comic characters) talking

Thanks for this insight, you are not the first person to comment on that. I've had both positive and negative comments on the use of the comic characters. (which by they way, are fictional unless they have a real photo on them) I feel like it was good to have different perspectives chime in from time to time, but they also come across a bit childish. I'm debating between cutting them out entirely, and coming up with a different way to presuent them. From your description, less conversation between them might be a good start, but please feel feel to clarify your opinion further.

I did not like the setup of going back and forth between them talking and general reading. I would rather the whole book stay in one single format

I presume by general reading, you are referring to the conversational format between characters and also between me and the characters. If not, please let me know what else I should be looking at.

Thanks.

By general reading, I mean the standard book format. So anything that is not the characters and is just you writing, would be general reading.

Oh duh! After you explained that I reread the sentence, and can't see it any other way now. :)

I don't find the conversational aspect too strange, but I think you need to divide it more clearly (i.e. create a "Dan" comic character and have him join the conversation rather than replying to the characters in your normal paragraphs).

What bugs me about the book though is that it has far too many spelling and typographical errors, and poorly structured sentences. Very unprofessional. It's as though no one has proof-read the book at all. You're and your are confused often, as are Where and Were, emersion rather than immersion, and countless others. You also choose multiple spelling for certain words on occassion which makes searching awkward (semi-colon VS semicolon for example).

I also found that you ask questions in the question section without explaining anything in the preceeding section and expect people to be able to answer. An example is the question on where semi-colons are used when there isn't a mention of semicolons in the entire section.

Lastly the about the author section has no mention of the games you have brought to market, which to me would be important to someone deciding whether to buy your book, in case you decide to sell it later. Why should I spend money on a book teaching me how to develop and market games if the author can't provide me with successful examples of his own work?

I can provide more feedback later as I've only read up to the coding section and I'm not the best person to critique the game design sections' content.

That is quite a lot of valuable information. You make some very good points. Especially regarding the spelling choices.

Spelling/And using words the same way. - I did not have an editor involved in this, but I'm getting one.

Questions without answers. - The questions were supposed to be points that I felt the reader might be able to expand without the book to guide them. However I never made that clear. Some of the questions, there is no reasonable way to answer, because it has to do with the reader trying to rethink how to express things in their own words.

About the author, also a good section to have, is not expressed or at least expressed well. I'll work on this as well.

Thanks.