I’m not sure where to put this feedback, since there doesn’t seem to be a mechanism for lecture-specific feedback. I’m sure a mod will move it appropriately or let me know where it should go if need be.
This is entirely my personal opinion - your mileage will vary.
I can understand why this lecture was added - most of us (myself definitely included!) want to run as soon as we can walk, if not before, and this is a relatively quick/shallow dip into the physical simulation/animation capabilities of Blender with a scene that lends itself to being animated.
However, it is a quick/shallow dip, and doesn’t really sit well in the overall flow of the course (unless I’m going to discover that animation has been added into the Chess section, which from Marc’s comments I doubt). For a course that’s aimed explicitly at beginners and 3D modelling, this is a bit like dunking someone who’s only seen other people swimming before into a pool they’ve just made, hauling them out, and then spending the next month or two pretending it never happened. Sure, some of us might already have been dipping our toes in the water, and others might be inspired to learn synchronised swimming as a result (there are some great animations posted from this lecture), but it makes me wonder whether the additional lecture wasn’t also intended for Marc to start getting us used to his voice and teaching style (I don’t know how much later lectures have been revamped/replaced or added to).
And on that note, I have some criticisms of the lecture itself. Mikey’s lectures are always framed around showing you the tools, demonstrating a concept (and perhaps offering a caution or two on common issues/errors), setting a challenge that utilises the tools/concepts introduced, and then showing you his take on a solution. Granted, this doesn’t always happen within a single lecture, but that’s the overall pattern. We’re some 60(ish) lectures in at this point, and suddenly we get a lecture that takes us step-by-step through a process that has to be followed pretty closely - without really giving any warnings about the chaos keyframes can cause if you go wrong and start trying to fix things (such as keying the locrotscale for the first pin and duplicating that along with its animated status).
What would I have done differently? Well, unless there’s been some big push in a thread somewhere for it to be added, I wouldn’t have put this lecture in - certainly not where it is. If there [i]have[i/] been a lot of requests for this, I would have added a heads-up that it would be revisited a couple of sections later and then added 2-3 lectures using the bowling scene to explore the physics simulation + animation combination in more depth in the animated lamp section (eager beavers could have jumped ahead). 2-3 additional videos would give more room to stick to the established, “here’s a thing and how/why it works (or not!), try putting it into practice, here’s how I did it”, pattern, and putting it together with the other animation coverage would keep the overall progression of the course feeling smooth and directed.
TLDR: Interesting but out of place. An overly ‘paint-by-numbers’ lecture covering tools that won’t be used again for over 40 lectures. Could easily have been signposted here and added into the animated lamp section with more depth. YMMV