Official Thimbleweed Park Forums

Text Version of Podcasts


I don’t know. Winnie and Dilbert sounds like another Disney franchise to me


Fixed and claimed! :money_mouth_face:


I thought you did that already?


Great work!

YouTube also has a captioning option to manually add captions to a video. One of those options, if your captions are in the same language as the video (as yours are), is to “auto-time” the captions, by matching the words in the transcript to the spoken works in the video. It works very well, I have discovered, by uploading your transcript “as is” into the Captions for Podcast #1. If you select subtitles for Podcast 1 now, you will see two options: English (Auto-Generated), which are the captions completely auto-generated by Google, and now a new just “English” option, which is the transcript of yours I just imported. Take a look!

Note: You change which captions captions to use (English-AutoGenerated, or English) to use from the “Settings” (Gear) Button, Subtitle Option.

By the way, on the manual captions, my preference (because I think it’s better for importing the captions) is that anything that isn’t “spoken” is put in square brackets [ ], and I think that should include speaker names. You have mostly already done this.

I think it would be also a bit more readable if the speaker name is the whole first name like [Ron], [Gary], [David]. But these are easy search-and-replace operations.


You should be proud as well, that was some incredible work! Very funny and very well done.


here is the second podcast transcription.
It is based on the auto-caption. I took me just short of one hour to edit the main text, another 10 minutes to figure out the “White Screen H” and 15 minutes to add some references and hindsight-annotations.

transcript of podcast #2

Thimbleweed Park Podcast #2
Transcribed by Sushi (based on auto-caption)

[Music: TWP intro]

R: Hi, I’m Ron Gilbert…

G: I’m Gary Winnick…

R: … and welcome to the second Stand-up Meeting Thimbleweed Park
Podcast! So I think last week Gary
started. Is that right, you started last week?

G: Yeah, I like to talk more than you, even
though you do a fine job.

R: All right, then I will go first today. So what I did last
week? I think last week, most of my time
was spent on the engine. David started
working, I think, week before last. So last
week he was doing a lot of stuff, so a
lot of it was just fixing bugs that he
was finding. So I fixed a lot of his
stuff. We had an issue with the height of the
rooms. The pixel height of the rooms was
inconsistent so I had to go through and
kind of do a bunch of math and figure
out a consistent pixel height, you know,
due to kind of the widescreen nature of the
rooms and stuff so… I got that done and
then David and I went through and fixed
all our rooms.
I added text objects to the engine, so
you can display text on top of the
screen now. And that’ll be important for
[uk] close-ups that have text: things
like when you’re leafing through the [uk] Thimbleweed Nickle newspapers,
being able to render text on
top of stuff completely under script
control. And I was supposed to get the
Windows version compiling, but I didn’t
actually get that done, so that has
slipped to next week. And that’s what I
did last week. This week is finishing up
the walk boxes[1], I’m almost done with that.
I hope to get the walk boxes in, probably
by the end of the day tomorrow. And we
had our big brainstorming meeting
yesterday, with David and we got all of
the Act 3 puzzles done and so most
of today I will be putting together the
puzzle dependency chart for Act 3.
And one thing I wanted to do is I want to take the Act 1, Act 2 and Act 3 puzzle dependency charts
and put them now into one big giant
puzzle dependency chart for the game, so
that’ll probably take me a while.

G: Yeah, because it’s not easy enough to
understand right now or hard enough to

R: Yeah, 'cause it’s the three
different acts and they’re not
completely separate, you know, there’s
some puzzles that you start in Act 1
and you actually finish in Act 3 and
right now there’s no real connection
between those things, so I just want to
get it into one big one big chart.
That’ll probably take me a while… that’ll
probably take me three or four hours of
just connecting everything together to
get that done.
And then next week I
really do want to get the Windows build
working, so…

G: [I mean,] I was watching you do
the puzzle dependency charts while we
were brainstorming and I was kind of
interested how dynamically you were
able to sort of pull things and move them around
and like [uk] change arrows and
stuff that’s even like… What’s the
program you’re using for that?

R: It’s called OmniGraffle. [2]

G: Yeah, it looks pretty cool. I’m gonna have to like you know try
to figure out how to use it or just not
use it [laughs]. I’m not sure, but it’s cool.

R: Yeah, the thing I like about OmniGraffle…
you know, there’s a lot of charting
programs out there but the thing OmniGraffle does is when you make two
connections it will redo the entire
graph automatically, so [uk] you
don’t spend a lot of time sorting your
boxes to get them in order. You just make
connections and it resorts and that’s
the thing I really like about
OmniGraffle for that. All right
that’s me so…

G: Yeah, what I’ve been up to
really is kind of more of the same. What I
did last week and what I did this week,
other than the fact that you and David
came down for brainstorming, which was
[uk] a nice diversion, but we also
managed to accomplish, I think, a lot.
It’s amazing to me how [uk]… when we
do things over Skype, it works, but when
you get everybody together in person, it
goes so much faster, you know? It’s just…

R: Yeah, there’s something about
being in person that really helps
with brainstorming.

G: Yeah, I mean you can
see the expression on people’s faces
when they’re getting pissed off -[Ron laughs]- stuff
like that. Whereas on skype it’s just like:
“Are you mad?”
[in a restrained angry voice:] “No, I’m not mad!”


G: But anyway, so I’ve just been working
primarily on wireframing rooms because
there’s just this long list of rooms. I
think there’s in the neighborhood of
about 70 total rooms in the game…

R: There’s 78.

G: Okay, well, give or take a few. And so I
would say we’re maybe… I’ll go out on a
limb and say we’re about halfway through
that or a little over halfway through
that right now.

R: Yeah, that that feels about right.

G: Yeah, and what we’re trying to do, is sort of
finish getting all of the wireframing
together by the end of this month, so we
can actually walk through the entire
game from start to finish.
You won’t be able to do everything but
you’ll be able to sort of have a
contiguous continuity
in terms of walking from place to place,
which lets us [uk] understand how
spatially the map works and whether or
not [uk] players can sort of
understand how they’re getting from
point A to point B. I think it’s working
out, I mean there’s a few things we’ll
have to modify but overall it feels like
it’s fairly solid.
The other thing is
that, in addition to doing that - which is
basically what I’m doing right now - this
week I’m kind of… Last week I worked on
the manor house stuff, the mansion stuff
that’s like related to the house that we
have in the game and then this week I’ve
been working on the hotel. And the hotel is
a little bit more complicated just
because of the expansiveness of the
scale of rooms inside of the hotel, at
least in terms of things like [uk]
the entryway or ballrooms where Thimblecon
takes place and stuff like that. So
that’s all coming together. I think it’s…
actually some of it is looking pretty
funny to me. I’m you know… I don’t know if
we’ll post any of that [uk] I want
to make sure, obviously, that everything
we do is spoiler-free and just to
anybody who is listening: everything we’re
telling you right now is 100% spoiler-free at this point in time.

R:Yeah, I got
the room - I guess the hotel floor -
I got that wired in and I wired in the
elevator, so you can actually push the
buttons [Gary: oh, cool] and the elevator doors open and
you can walk in the elevator and… You
can’t actually take the elevator
anywhere, yet, but the
elevator is actually functioning and
that was pretty cool. For some
reason I love elevators in adventure
games, I don’t know why.

G: Did you put up a
more recent build that has all that in
it yet or not?

R: No, the build… I think the
last build you had crashed…

[G: it did]

R: … so I
need to do a new build. I’ll do a new
build as soon as we’re done with the

G: OK, cool!
And then the other thing I’m
doing is: I’m looking at other resources
relative to both working inside of the
game but also we’re starting to look at
all the ancillary materials for the
games. So as we mentioned previously, Ken
Macklin[4] has been working on the cover*. We’re
been going back and forth with him. He
has a new round of layouts- we will
probably post some of those. I did have a
conversation with Ken and he’s willing
to write a couple blog posts on, so we’ll be able
to have something from Ken directly
about his process up there.
And then I’m going to be working with a couple of
graphic designers or mainly one graphic
designer I’m not gonna name names right now because I’m still
working that out**, but we’ll be working to
sort of develop the actual logos for the
[uk] printed materials for the box
and for the poster and things like that,
as well as coming up with a logo for
Terrible Toybox***, which is our company.
So that’s kind of what I’m doing right now.

R: OK, sounds good!

G: OK, all right, well I
guess I will talk to you and anybody
else who cares to listen next week!

R: All right, see you around!

G: OK, bye.

* In the end, Ken Macklin did not create the final box artwork as he had other contractual obligations that prevented him to complete the work on TWP.
** Who’s that graphic designer working on the game logo?
*** Did the logo of Terrible Toybox ever got used?


still, that is 4 to 5 times faster than starting from scratch


That’s a great job, guys! I’m really moved for how much effort you put into this!


Excellent. I added this as a caption option for Podcast #2 (auto-timings seemed to create properly).


I had a look at the English captions, and I think that works out pretty amazingly. Except for a few things, for which we should perhaps setup a small poll for the members of this forum to vote on?

  1. The speaker name. I just used the first initial since I am lazy like that. And of course a global substitute in vi will fix it right away. But what we do need to decide on is the format. Instead of Ron: blahblah and Gary:yada yada, I think putting the names in between parenthesis might be less distracting, especially if they are addressing each other as in:

(Ron:) Gary, what have you been up to?
(Gary:) Ron, how is the weather?

as opposed to

Ron: Gary, what have you been up to?
Gary: Ron, how is the weather?

Another option we might consider is to use both initials RG, GW, DF, RM, JS, MF, ON,… which allows to distinguish all team members and keep it short (= more time to read the caption while listening to the video)…

  1. Regarding the use of square brackets, I used it for different purposes
  • to indicate implied, non-spoken text (as in Maniac [Mansion]) when I thought it was needed to clarify. Like they do in newspaper interviews with “ed.” tagged onto it - but I did not want to burden the text too much.
  • to transcribe literal text that I think should be omitted from the pure text transcript, like all you knows, false starts of sentences,… whenever they make it harder to follow what is being said without the audio. Of course when using it as a caption to the Youtube video, keeping those in might be actually more useful (though I would still put them between brackets in the caption so you know you can skip reading this part). Personally I don’t have any issue with removing them in both caption and pure transcript versions
  • references to hyperlinks are a number put in square bracket. For the caption, they should be filtered out, which again is a simple scriptable substitute
  • indicating people laughing or being sarcastic, angry,… (when not annotating that is a loss in the pure text transcript). They could be kept in the captions, as in captions for the hearing-impaired, as I think it will be too much effort to maintain two caption versions?
  1. The yummy parts for a Best-of are marked between << and >> markers. Ideally, they should get a quote reference at the bottom citing the podcast and approximate timestamp in case you want to quickly listen to the fragment.

  2. The time markers for general purpose (as whatever I marked as yummy, might not be someone else’s - especially for the Friday questions, where we all just want to hear our own question answered) should be kept in the pure text transcript with an acceptable granularity of say 2 minutes? In the caption version, they should be grepped out.

  3. I don’t know what influences the final caption line width (the text editor has a number of columns; the original auto-caption has some other; this forum yet another…) but in the end some of the captions in the video are displaying only one or a few words on the first line and a lot on the second line, while something more balanced looks better and is easier to read a more constant speed. However, I do not want to spend too much time on that. It looks acceptable to me as it is now. But if anyone has a great idea, where I just need to make sure to not put more than X columns on a single line, that I can do. Or it could be scripted (knowing I always put a hard return between two speakers).
    Edit: I just watched the second video captions and it seems to me that Google is just retiming on certain anchor words, so probably we should only worry about the layout of the pure text transcript.


I vote for the speaker name in parentheses:
(Gary:) How’s the weather?
(Robert:) Good
I wouldn’t use only the initials, my brain has to put more effort in figuring out the right correspondence :sweat_smile:

I agree with the way you used so far

That’s fine, it’s clear.

Generally, time markers are enclosed in square brackets. Can you use curly brackets, instead? Or is it too time-consuming (It depends on your keyboard layout)?


Or something to that effect :slight_smile:


Ok, but according to the Oxford Style Manual, you should put punctuation outside the brackets. Then you can make confetti.


The SRT files have timestamps like:

00:00:08,400 --> 00:00:13,880

00:00:11,240 --> 00:00:16,070
welcome to the third Dumble we park

00:00:13,880 --> 00:00:16,670
stand up meeting podcast I am Ron

00:00:16,070 --> 00:00:19,340

(Yes, in the third podcast YouTube recognized Ron as Gilbert. But Garry is still Mr. Winnie…)

These steps are very small of course, but you can delete them and keep only important timestamps - for example if the speaker or the topic change.

btw: @Sushi: Do you want the next/other podcast text(s)?

/edit: Should I/we create a new thread where we (only!) collect all (finished) podcasts in their correct order?


Is there a way to create a locked thread?


Don’t know, but maybe @eviltrout can say something about it?


You mean, a thread accessible only to a restricted users group? Only an administrator can do that.


No, a thread where only one person is able to create new posts. An alternative would be to create a new thread with all podcasts and then close this thread for further edits.


We could start a thread in which only the initial post is officially relevant and gets refreshed by the author whenever it’s advisable. Below this post, people could post suggestions and corrections, which can be added in the initial post.


Or maybe a new section, so that every podcast can have its own thread. You know, one single transcription is long. And 67 is a big number.

Obviously in this section the ability of building new threads should be restricted, but maybe we can leave the single existing threads unlocked, you know, for comments