It’s not so much about whether there is humor or not in the narration of a course, but more about if the right type of course is offered to a new user at the appropriate stage of the onboarding process.
For example, the very first course I watched was Webflow 101 (as was suggested by the welcome email I got when I registered.) For someone with no web design experience and knowledge, it was an absolutely awful onboarding experience. I was clueless as to what was happening and felt utterly frustrated.
I was about to quit Webflow for good but I’ve noticed that there was a course with assets so I’ve decided to give Webflow one last chance. That course was the Lawyer Firm website course, which was not only advanced in its difficulty, but there was humor in its narration as well and I had no problem following it, completing it and enjoying the jokes in it.
So, it’s not about whether there’s humor in the narration or not, but how well guided a new user feels while taking that course.
Judging from my experience, the mistake happens with suggesting a new user to passively watch the Webflow 101 videos. That doesn’t work for users without web design experience. None of what’s shown will make sense to them.
But if the very first course has the user building something, no matter how simple that may be, it honestly won’t matter if there is humor in its narration or not.
In fact, I wouldn’t lose the humorous approach or try to hide it. I would simply offer courses in which new users actually build something, getting acquainted with Webflow and feeling that they are indeed making progress. A gamification approach instead of passively watching introductory videos.
Then users will most certainly enjoy the humor the way I did after rewatching the Webflow 101 courses today (because I was able to make sense of what was happening because I finished the two building courses yesterday.)
Long rant. Do I make sense?