The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => Game Show Channels & Networks => Topic started by: kelvint on June 30, 2003, 10:51:33 AM
-
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....01973800&EDATE= (http://\"http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/06-30-2003/0001973800&EDATE=\")
-
(goes to bathroom to throw up, comes back)
Ugh! Hey, GSN, ever heard of G4? You know, that little network where all they talk about is video games? And, even worse, once a week with new episodes? Maybe I'm misinterpreting the press release, but I think that's a little much, especially since it's only two shows.
Part of me should be happy that GSN is expanding its lineup to include other things, but isn't the network called \"Game Show Network,\" not the \"Games Network?\"
So, let me get this straight: they spend money to land video game magazine shows from the UK, but not \"Sale of the Century\" or \"Scrabble?\" I think, at this point, our chances of seeing new classics are dwinding to almost none!
This just reminds me of the time somebody suggested that GSN change its name to the \"Newlywed Network;\" heaven forbid these shows take off, we could be saying goodbye to a LOT more classics (it looks like Combs' Feud is getting the boot, but I could be wrong!).
Ugh! I need some Pepto-Bismol now!
Anthony
-
Good lord, I think I *AM* going to be sick.
-
I just reread the press release, and got one bit of good news.
At least it isn't 7-a-week (Thursdays, Saturdays, Sundays)
-
Good lord.
If they somehow worked out a deal for Starcade it wouldn't be as bad.....
-
(Picking jaw off the floor)
Oddly enough, G4 actually carries both Gamer.TV and Game Sauce on a regular basis. You gotta wonder why they didn't at least try to acquire Starcade and/or Hi Score (an actual game show based on video games produced by the same network as those other two shows). My only thought is that maybe they're moving forward with that \"Tag Team\" pilot they shot late last year.........
(Jaw falls to floor again)
Tyshaun
-
Part of me should be happy that GSN is expanding its lineup to include other things, but isn't the network called \"Game Show Network,\" not the \"Games Network?\"
How odd you should mention \"Games Network.\" I think this is what Fleming wanted to do to the network.
I wouldn't be surprised if GSN has as much to do with game shows in a few years as MTV has to do with music now. They're really stretching \"game show\" at this point...
-
That takes care of Combs Feud for Thursday.
I hope they leave this alone. It's been in that time slot for about 2 years.
If it didn't perform well, it would have been gone by now.
-
[quote name=\'ilb4ever2000\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 11:05 AM\'] I wouldn't be surprised if GSN has as much to do with game shows in a few years as MTV has to do with music now. They're really stretching "game show" at this point... [/quote]
My TiVo, until I sat it down and gave it a stern talking-to, was at one time recording all manner of G4 programming, because the guide referred to it as a \"game show\". And while it didn't fit the technical definition any better than Love Connection, I couldn't really argue, since it only knows what the guide tells it. Eventually it got sick of me scolding it whenever it grabbed something from there and stopped.
-
Well, this fulfills the self-fulfilling prophecy that GSN will soon change its name, or its meaning, to something else.
Game Station Network, anyone? Sony already owns the rights to something called The Station....
-
Yeah, well, I had a nice little rant on the GSN boards that got deleted. You dare to question them they delete you.
I said this at GSN: If Starcade, Video Power, or The Video Game, which are all true game shows, were included in this package, it would be a lot better.
-
Guys, Guys, Guys.....
Let us not forget that Bob Boden is at the helm and wouldn't do something this dumb. (Inquizition and Mall Masters runs through my mind)
But seriously, I can understand where they are coming from. They are trying to broaden their appeal. I can't blame they for trying that.
What I can blame them for is continuously trying new programming, finding that it's not working, then trying something else which also doesn't work.
They are throwing anything against the wall to see if it sticks.
-
[quote name=\'davemackey\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 05:57 PM\'] Well, this fulfills the self-fulfilling prophecy that GSN will soon change its name, or its meaning, to something else.
Game Station Network, anyone? Sony already owns the rights to something called The Station.... [/quote]
Well, this fulfills the self-fulfilling prophecy that GSN will soon change its name, or its meaning, to something else.
Ahem, they already changed their name from \"Game Show Network\" to \"GSN\".
Think there's more to it than they're willing to let on?
-
[quote name=\'cmjb13\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 06:18 PM\'] Guys, Guys, Guys.....
Let us not forget that Bob Boden is at the helm and wouldn't do something this dumb. (Inquizition and Mall Masters runs through my mind)
[/quote]
Well, aaaaaactuallllly, Rich Cronin (The Pres/CEO of GSN) has been the main figurehead behind all these non-standard moved (Games Across America, the VG block, etc)
Somehow, I doubt we'd be seeing this with Boden running the show. Yer right. Bob wouldn't do anything this stupid. But Cronin would have (The only good thing Rich Cronin has done in office at any network, IMO, is launching TV Land...and *IT* wasn't even that great until after he left it)
-
As already heralded by many of the above posts, when did GSN decide to become \"The Next G4?\"
I have the privilige of being one of the many selected markets to have the G4 network, so this move by GSN is a wasted effort. Never mind the fact that G4 airs both versions of Starcade without the usual \"GSN edits\" or what not.
I may recant this statement years from now - and I regret saying this - but GSN is slowly going the way of Cartoon Network (a lot of originals, with only TWO of them being watchable) and MTV (completely deviating from the purpose of the channel, with the current schedule being weak at best and horrid at worst).
To GSN: leave the VIDEO GAMES to G4, and focus on the GAME SHOWS.
The Inquisitive One
-
Well, maby this will be a good thing. A few years down the line, we'll have a 'Game Show Classics' Network that is seperate from GSN, wich will air Gameshows from the 50's, to the 80's, with no end credit interuptinos for new show promotion, or screen squashes for online adds.. One can only hope..
However, this statement is rather sad..
>> The video game block also presents the network with numerous product placement opportunities. Michael Sakin, GSN's Senior Vice President of Advertising Sales, is actively pursuing software developers, soft drink and fast food companies, wireless cell phone distributors and the automotive industry for product placement integration opportunities. >>.
It's all about the product placement isn't it? Is my posotive thinking that it was ever about the show and quality of shows just happy thinking?
-
I still say this: What the hell is Cronin/Boden/whoever SMOKING?!
This is bloody rediculous. I pretty much agree with 90% of what everyone said.
-
[quote name=\'Shredder\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 06:09 PM\'] It's all about the product placement isn't it? Is my posotive thinking that it was ever about the show and quality of shows just happy thinking? [/quote]
Yes. Yes, it was.
If GSN thinks it will get a plurality of people to watch their channel, they will air repeats of Small Wonder. And they should. The idea is to get the most eyes watching their channel. If the ratings bear out that people will watch video game shows on their channel, then that is what they should air.
These people aren't doing you any kind of \"service\". They're not interested in \"preservation of the genre\" or any happy warm crap like that. They want eyes to watch their commercials. You are fooling yourself if you think any different.
-
These people aren't doing you any kind of \"service\". They're not interested in \"preservation of the genre\" or any happy warm crap like that. They want eyes to watch their commercials. You are fooling yourself if you think any different.
If they (or any other network) could hook you into watching 21 hours of commercials a day, you're damn skippy they would.
They just haven't figured out how (yet)
-
I agree w/many of the others. Introducing video-game-related programming would alienate loyal viewers and draw very few of their target demos.
GSN, while gaining a large user base, should be \"truer to itself.\" I've observed that Joe Viewer gives his/her highest praises for the older programming of GSN. IMO, one of the advantages of cable/satellite is the variety of distinct niche channels. GSN broadening their programming choices too far rarely ever ends in success (my immediate example is Who Dares Wins).
Clarence
-
A few years down the line, we'll have a 'Game Show Classics' Network that is seperate from GSN, wich will air Gameshows from the 50's, to the 80's, with no end credit interuptinos for new show promotion, or screen squashes for online adds.. One can only hope..
I don't see that happening unless in the future, cable is abolished and people can subscribe directly to any network they wish. It has taken GSN a long time to get onto cable lineups and they still have a long way to go. Can you imagine how hard it'll be to convince them to add ANOTHER GSN...one that appeals to less people than the current one?
If they (or any other network) could hook you into watching 21 hours of commercials a day, you're damn skippy they would.
It's called PIN...Product Information Network. Well, it's infomercials, but basically the same.
-
[quote name=\'jalman\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 06:42 PM\'] GSN, while gaining a large user base, should be "truer to itself." I've observed that Joe Viewer gives his/her highest praises for the older programming of GSN. IMO, one of the advantages of cable/satellite is the variety of distinct niche channels. GSN broadening their programming choices too far rarely ever ends in success (my immediate example is Who Dares Wins).
[/quote]
And if the ratings bear that out, I will be pleased to march right behind you in the I Told You So parade :)
But until then, I have to think these people have information that I as a mere viewer am not privy to.
-
I have to say it's getting a little redundant to see the same dozen or so voices raised in protest any time GSN tries something different.
They're not going to \"alienate loyal viewers\" any more than ESPN alienates football fans when they air women's bowling, or NBC alienates fans of E/R when they air \"Friends\". GSN cannot survive by running a program schedule that constantly caters to the same small audience of devotees any more than MTV could have survived by remaining a 24-hour music video service. But you guys think GSN has some grand responsibility to preserve and rerun the same programming over and over and over.
You do realize that they're not going to make any new episode of Combs Feud, don't you?
If you don't want to watch the new shows, don't. If enough people don't, they'll drop those shows and try something else. My impression (based on a pretty consistant past history) is that the same people who complain about this awful programming move will somehow be able to tell us every detail about the shows, including the precise moment when reruns start. But of course you won't be watching.
-
You do realize that they're not going to make any new episode of Combs Feud, don't you?
Of course not! However, the only reason I complained is because GSN seems to be sacrificing a lot of its classics in order to make room for \"cutting-edge\" programming. While new programming can be worth a look, we know of some of the original shows that are faltering; why not give them a rest and try out these new shows?
If you don't want to watch the new shows, don't. If enough people don't, they'll drop those shows and try something else. My impression (based on a pretty consistant past history) is that the same people who complain about this awful programming move will somehow be able to tell us every detail about the shows, including the precise moment when reruns start. But of course you won't be watching.
Oh, you got that right, Matt. And, nope, I won't be watching them on GSN anymore than I watch them on G4 (which is NEVER!). Honestly, the only show I watch on G4 is \"Starcade\" (naturally); other than that, I couldn't care less about video games on TV. Oh, and, if you ever see me recall every detail about the shows and say they suck and why would I watch them, feel free to banish me to the STYD room (I liked TTD '90, honestly; STYD is more torture for me!)!
-
You gotta wonder why they didn't at least try to acquire Starcade and/or Hi Score
Well, I can't comment on \"Starcade,\" but I can for \"Hi Score:\" if you go to G4, you see that only six episodes exist to this date! I think that would kinda make for a very short-running series, wouldn't it?
However, I'd suffer through the reruns to get more looks at Julia Reed! :)
BTW, does anybody know if more episodes exist than G4 claims, or were only 6 made?
Anthony
-
I said it in the other thread and I will say it here. I think the news today stinks. I like to play video games but do I want to watch shows about them? No.
I can honestly see GSN becoming \"The Game Station Network\". The reality of it is, the only thing we can do is complain and not watch. I will do both when this \"Video Game\" garbage is on.
Tim
-
I have to say it's getting a little redundant to see the same dozen or so voices raised in protest any time GSN tries something different.
They're not going to \"alienate loyal viewers\" any more than ESPN alienates football fans when they air women's bowling, or NBC alienates fans of E/R when they air \"Friends\". GSN cannot survive by running a program schedule that constantly caters to the same small audience of devotees any more than MTV could have survived by remaining a 24-hour music video service. But you guys think GSN has some grand responsibility to preserve and rerun the same programming over and over and over.
ESPN focuses on sports (football and bowling are sports) and NBC airs programming w/o confining itself to one genre (ER isn't the flagship of some medical drama channel).
No, I don't want GSN to become the \"collectable old shows worth hoarding\" network, and I don't rip my hair after knowing of every announcement they make regarding programming changes. I appreciate their having non-classics and documentaries (even Naturally Stoned) about game shows in their efforts to expand farther than the \"we air old, old shows\"-type channel.
I worry that they are throwing crap on the wall just to be the \"it\" station. If their new shows end up doing great ratings, fine. No big deal.
You do realize that they're not going to make any new episode of Combs Feud, don't you?
You don't say? I thought that color episode of Andy Griffith on TV Land was brand new, too. I have no hatred of the GSN originals.
If you don't want to watch the new shows, don't. If enough people don't, they'll drop those shows and try something else. My impression (based on a pretty consistant past history) is that the same people who complain about this awful programming move will somehow be able to tell us every detail about the shows, including the precise moment when reruns start. But of course you won't be watching.
Good for me, then. I don't have GSN at the moment. I'm also not the type who'll moan, groan, and pronounce doomsday every time there's plans that a GSN original airs the dreaded all-celebrity episode.
Or complain that MTV no longer airs videos.
-
Here's a snippet of a moderators reply on the GSN boards in a reply to the overwhelmingly negative posts about the subject...
You think news on TV you think CNN.
You think music on TV you think MTV.
You think games on TV you think ?. Now wouldn't it be nice to say Game Show Network?
Huh? I don't know about you, but when I think of games on TV, I think of G4, when I think of GAME SHOWS I think of GAME SHOW NETWORK!
Personally, I'm crushed. I've never been so dissapointed and upset at GSN in my entire life.
I'll just say the same thing I said on the GSN boards...
I can stand the speed ups, I can stand the split screens, I can stand the blue bar, I can stand the current bad originals, I can stand the lack of TTD and TJW, and I could probably stand Games accross America, BUT I CAN'T STAND THIS!
-
[quote name=\'catnap1972\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 08:38 PM\']
These people aren't doing you any kind of "service". They're not interested in "preservation of the genre" or any happy warm crap like that. They want eyes to watch their commercials. You are fooling yourself if you think any different.
If they (or any other network) could hook you into watching 21 hours of commercials a day, you're damn skippy they would.
They just haven't figured out how (yet) [/quote]
Too Late. RNN already beat you too it :). Used to be a 24/7 informercial channel
-
If they (or any other network) could hook you into watching 21 hours of commercials a day, you're damn skippy they would.
They just haven't figured out how (yet)
Too Late. RNN already beat you too it :). Used to be a 24/7 informercial channel
Just curious, but what does RNN stand for? I don't get that channel.
-
>If you don't want to watch the new shows, don't.>>
I don't know about anyone else, but I don't mind the new shows. Half of them are good, half are bad. At least in my opinion, 'RR', 'Whammy', 'Win Tuition', are good. 'Cram', 'Friend or Foe' and 'Funny Money' I could do without. For some reason, I just find Cram to annoying, while the host is good. Friend or Foe is good for an occasional tune in but not much else, and same goes for Funny Money and Lingo..
If GSN wants to expand, than I wish they'd at least treat their classics better. Get rid of the squished credits, get rid of the blue bar and speedups. Maby air un-edited classics all throughout the morning hours instead of the infomercials? Say, 12 AM starting with MatchGame, till about 12PM. After that, it would be time for the newer stuff in 'prime time'.
-
If GSN wants to expand, than I wish they'd at least treat their classics better. Get rid of the squished credits, get rid of the blue bar and speedups. Maby air un-edited classics all throughout the morning hours instead of the infomercials? Say, 12 AM starting with MatchGame, till about 12PM. After that, it would be time for the newer stuff in 'prime time'.
I know that this particular topic has been discussed many times before, but I think I'll cover for a lot of people when I say that the infomercials aren't going anywhere. Just remember, though, at one point, there were six hours of infomercials on, and now there are only three. They obviously make money for GSN, so why get rid of them?
Also, why would you air the classics in the wee hours of the morning? Networks air things that they want their public to see; they won't air things to make tape hoarders and archivers happy! Honestly, I'm still surprised that they air B&W shows overnight; do many people other than tape hoarders watch them?
Let's face the facts (no pun intended): the classics are a dying breed. To GSN, airing those few hours of classics in the morning and the afternoon is enough to make us happy, even though those who have GSN that I know want more CLASSICS, not ORIGINALS. Also, when people ask me what's on GSN, they don't care about originals, they care about the classics.
It's quite a shame for GSN to move on like this, but people are in the business to make money. If something other than classics is making money, wouldn't you give it a whirl?
Anthony
-
I'm more or less intrigued. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out-it may be good, It may be bad. I'll try anything once.
-
Here's a link to the Hollywood Reporter's coverage of this.
GSN Acquires Video Game Programs (http://\"http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030701/tv_nm/television_gameshow_dc_1\")
-
Thad Dixon wrote:
Just curious, but what does RNN stand for? I don't get that channel.
\"Regional News Network\". It was originally WTZA, channel 62 in Kingston, NY. Around 1996, they became WRNN, with an allegedly all-news format but in reality mostly infomercials (something like 18-hrs a day on weekdays, and 24 hours on weekends). They now have a repeater station down in Nyack, for the purpose of serving the NYC market (this gets them on the NYC cable systems thanks to the must carry rules.
One of the local programs that got the shaft thanks to the change from WTZA to WRNN was \"Scholastic Match-Up\", a Quizbusters-like program with a simpler format (toss-ups only, 10 pts apiece, no penalty for incorrect answers). WTZA was in the middle of airing the quarterfinals (IIRC), and none of the rest of that year's matches were ever aired, as far as I know, nor was there a program in succeeding years.
Also, Brian Kenny, who can be seen on ESPNEWS, cut his teeth as a sports reporter at WTZA.
-
[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 10:21 AM\'] (goes to bathroom to throw up, comes back)
Part of me should be happy that GSN is expanding its lineup to include other things, but isn't the network called "Game Show Network," not the "Games Network?"
[/quote]
I share in your sentiment. I don't see where this line of programming fits in with GAME SHOWS. This is, IMHO, is the worst programming move they've made since the Fleming days. If they really want to attract younger viewers, they should do something similar to what they used to do with kids game shows on Saturday mornings only sans Wheel 2000, JEP!,and that God forsaken thing that used to pop up on the screen during the shows and make commments. They could always revert to Joker! Joker! Joker! and kids week episodes from Card Sharks (any version) or Storybook Squares.
-
It's not known for certain that they currently have more than the one XMas 1977 ep. of Storybook Squares. They could also add WOF and J! teen and kids' episodes in the mix if they wanted to, and I guess they still have the rights to Click and Peer Pressure, no? ANy of that would be better than video game review programs, I think.
-
Interesting to note, is that the main thread about this on the GSN forums (laughs)...has been entirely deleted....
Guess they didn't like the reaction to the announcement
-
They could also add WOF and J! teen and kids' episodes in the mix if they wanted to, and I guess they still have the rights to Click and Peer Pressure, no?
I think they lost the rights to Click, which is why it was replaced by Bergeron Squares.
-
[quote name=\'Seth Thrasher\' date=\'Jul 1 2003, 11:22 PM\'] Interesting to note, is that the main thread about this on the GSN forums (laughs)...has been entirely deleted....
Guess they didn't like the reaction to the announcement [/quote]
I just questioned their deletion of the thread. It is their site and they can do what they please. They obviously do not have a problem with censoring opinions of fans.
Tim
-
I'm not terribly sorry to hear they lost the rights to Click(for those that don't recall, Click was replaced for two weekends in 1999 by Now You See It '7x, and Click returned before even the whole premiere week of NYSI could be shown)
-
[quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 08:06 AM\'] [quote name=\'Seth Thrasher\' date=\'Jul 1 2003, 11:22 PM\'] Interesting to note, is that the main thread about this on the GSN forums (laughs)...has been entirely deleted....
Guess they didn't like the reaction to the announcement [/quote]
I just questioned their deletion of the thread. It is their site and they can do what they please. They obviously do not have a problem with censoring opinions of fans.
Tim [/quote]
They probably didn't expect the overwhelmingly negative reaction this press release caused. Frankly, I was braced for it and I'm STILL amazed at how riled up you guys have gotten. I guess they thought that *especially* among computer users, devoting a tiny portion of their schedule to something that might cater to a slightly different audience would have been considered a good thing.
They don't typically go around censoring negative remarks on their forum, so this must really have hit a nerve.
-
Did anyone actually read those posts about the shows? About 6 of the 8 pages were \"I'm right-You're wrong\" posts. I would have done the same thing.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 07:49 AM\'] They probably didn't expect the overwhelmingly negative reaction this press release caused. Frankly, I was braced for it and I'm STILL amazed at how riled up you guys have gotten. I guess they thought that *especially* among computer users, devoting a tiny portion of their schedule to something that might cater to a slightly different audience would have been considered a good thing.
They don't typically go around censoring negative remarks on their forum, so this must really have hit a nerve. [/quote]
I'm not amazed.
The online portion of game show fans tends to be more traditionalist and don't like change. When something new comes, they instantly dislike it, irregardless of the quality of the program or the positives linked to it.
The best thing that happened to this network are the new crop of originals. Hollywood Showdown and Inquizition were good programs in their own right, although obviously lower-budget than they could (or should) have been. After those originals, plus such stellar examples of early interactivity as Super Decades and Trivia Track, the online game show community (OGSC) was less than enthusiastic about hearing that the schedule was going to be half-originals. After hearing the changes to PYL that would become whammy, it's not surprising that many people (myself included) were braced for the worst. Ratings were high and quickly fell off, so the OGSC was hoping that this would fire a warning flare to Messrs. Cronin and Boden. No such luck -- Friend or Foe and Russian Roulette came on board two months later, but amazingly enough, now most people had at least one show out of the three to like. Then came Lingo. That's the show that, despite its small flaws in gameplay, was fairly universally liked.
At this point, the vast majority of the OGSC seemed enthusiastic about new originals and were optimistic about Cram and WinTuition, the former which was the quickest-renewed show out of this batch of originals and the latter which was the quickest-removed show. More enthusiasm came from hearing about new pilots and new shows coming to the lineup.
The moral of the story: This was a long process -- four months between whammy and Lingo. Many people didn't like it at first -- I remember being linked to threads by friends at the GSN board with similar messages about GSN as were just deleted. The difference is that this is a much smaller change than the half-originals/half-classics... it's just moving to a 48-48-4. If it doesn't work... at all... it will be replaced as quickly as WinTuition was. If it works, give it a few months and you might just like it.
P.S. The scope of about 225 fans at this board is nowhere near the eleventy billion at the GSN board. When people get in large groups... it's not surprising that the thread would have to be deleted.
-
Ratings were high and quickly fell off
Wonder why?
-
Here's my opinion:
My thoughts: I think the idea is in the right place...I understand that GSN is trying to become more Mainstream, and perpetually showing classics all the time wasn't getting them anywhere.
I do think that the execution is all wrong. Video games are a huge source of that wonderful demographic-but without any part of these new shows that even involve actual playing and winning, it kinda defeats the purpose of it being on GSN. Will I watch it? yes. I'll try anything once. Will I like it? Well, I'll have to see it first. Will I cuss and scream and say \"GSN doesn't show (insert classic here) so it's stupid now!\" No. Face it- out of 125+ hours of programming a week that GSN has, this only takes up 6 hours. Find something else to do if you don't like the show. If enough people don't like it, It will go away-and I have a feeling this isn't going to be around that long.
-
If you guys don't mind, I'm going to quote the moderator of the FlashGames board, who has had some recent dealings with GSN:
From what little that I've understood in the whole trip to L.A., Game Show Network is scaling themselves away from the \"GAME SHOW\" genre specifically, and aiming for GAMES in general.
In other words, don't count on new Lingo and RR. Read on....
Also, they are trying to get the younger demographic (Teens and College) to start watching, away from the older demographic that they began with years ago.
BZZZZ! Hang on a minute! Weren't Burt Luddin's Love Buffet, All New 3's A Crowd, and Extreme Gong meant to do the same thing? Uh huh...and how successful were those three again?
-
[quote name=\'PeterMarshallFan\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 02:38 PM\'] If you guys don't mind, I'm going to quote the moderator of the FlashGames board, who has had some recent dealings with GSN:
From what little that I've understood in the whole trip to L.A., Game Show Network is scaling themselves away from the "GAME SHOW" genre specifically, and aiming for GAMES in general.
In other words, don't count on new Lingo and RR. Read on....
Also, they are trying to get the younger demographic (Teens and College) to start watching, away from the older demographic that they began with years ago.
BZZZZ! Hang on a minute! Weren't Burt Luddin's Love Buffet, All New 3's A Crowd, and Extreme Gong meant to do the same thing? Uh huh...and how successful were those three again? [/quote]
If this is in fact true, then I for one think it sucks. I was afraid this was happening with \"Naturally Stoned\" but my fears did not extend to the point of them focusing on GAMES. If GSN is going to become a Video Gamer channel then I will be getting rid of my digital cable.
-
[quote name=\'urbanpreppie05\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 01:31 PM\'] Here's my opinion:
My thoughts: I think the idea is in the right place...I understand that GSN is trying to become more Mainstream, and perpetually showing classics all the time wasn't getting them anywhere.
I do think that the execution is all wrong. Video games are a huge source of that wonderful demographic-but without any part of these new shows that even involve actual playing and winning, it kinda defeats the purpose of it being on GSN. Will I watch it? yes. I'll try anything once. Will I like it? Well, I'll have to see it first. Will I cuss and scream and say "GSN doesn't show (insert classic here) so it's stupid now!" No. Face it- out of 125+ hours of programming a week that GSN has, this only takes up 6 hours. Find something else to do if you don't like the show. If enough people don't like it, It will go away-and I have a feeling this isn't going to be around that long. [/quote]
To be honest, this only takes up 6 hours RIGHT NOW. What happens when they add another video game show, then another? Things that start off small grow to be big problems sometimes.
-
[quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 02:58 PM\'] [quote name=\'urbanpreppie05\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 01:31 PM\'] Here's my opinion:
My thoughts: I think the idea is in the right place...I understand that GSN is trying to become more Mainstream, and perpetually showing classics all the time wasn't getting them anywhere.
I do think that the execution is all wrong. Video games are a huge source of that wonderful demographic-but without any part of these new shows that even involve actual playing and winning, it kinda defeats the purpose of it being on GSN. Will I watch it? yes. I'll try anything once. Will I like it? Well, I'll have to see it first. Will I cuss and scream and say "GSN doesn't show (insert classic here) so it's stupid now!" No. Face it- out of 125+ hours of programming a week that GSN has, this only takes up 6 hours. Find something else to do if you don't like the show. If enough people don't like it, It will go away-and I have a feeling this isn't going to be around that long. [/quote]
To be honest, this only takes up 6 hours RIGHT NOW. What happens when they add another video game show, then another? Things that start off small grow to be big problems sometimes. [/quote]
Exactly.
FYI, it's useless going to GSN and complaining. They censor people who disagree with them.
-
For those \"classics\" lovers (myself included), I think the best we can hope for a few years down the line is a \"GSN2\", where the vault/library product would have an outlet. Even \"thericker\" on the GSN boards didn't rule it out.
It just seems that the GSN that was in 1994, is no longer.
-
[quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 02:56 PM\'] [quote name=\'PeterMarshallFan\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 02:38 PM\'] If you guys don't mind, I'm going to quote the moderator of the FlashGames board, who has had some recent dealings with GSN:
From what little that I've understood in the whole trip to L.A., Game Show Network is scaling themselves away from the "GAME SHOW" genre specifically, and aiming for GAMES in general.
In other words, don't count on new Lingo and RR. Read on....
Also, they are trying to get the younger demographic (Teens and College) to start watching, away from the older demographic that they began with years ago.
BZZZZ! Hang on a minute! Weren't Burt Luddin's Love Buffet, All New 3's A Crowd, and Extreme Gong meant to do the same thing? Uh huh...and how successful were those three again? [/quote]
If this is in fact true, then I for one think it sucks. I was afraid this was happening with "Naturally Stoned" but my fears did not extend to the point of them focusing on GAMES. If GSN is going to become a Video Gamer channel then I will be getting rid of my digital cable. [/quote]
I get GSN on basic cable. I'm thinking of upgrading to digital just to get ESPN Classic and maybe G4 because pretty soon, Sports Challenge, Superbowl of Sports Trivia, and Starcade will be the only classic game shows on TV.
-
If GSN is going to become a Video Gamer channel then I will be getting rid of my digital cable.
I don't think this will EVER happen. G4 isn't that powerful of a network, and if GSn tried to do that, they'd get creamed, so I don't think that will ever happen.
I'm thinking of upgrading to digital just to get ESPN Classic and maybe G4 because pretty soon, Sports Challenge, Superbowl of Sports Trivia, and Starcade will be the only classic game shows on TV.
Geez. Would you lighten up?
-
[quote name=\'urbanpreppie05\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 03:39 PM\'] Geez. Would you lighten up? [/quote]
And what if I don't? :D
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 03:22 PM\'] For those "classics" lovers (myself included), I think the best we can hope for a few years down the line is a "GSN2", where the vault/library product would have an outlet. Even "thericker" on the GSN boards didn't rule it out.
It just seems that the GSN that was in 1994, is no longer. [/quote]
thericker only said that to get us to shut up. GSN2 can't happen. It was hard enough making one GSN successful.
-
[quote name=\'PeterMarshallFan\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 03:20 PM\'] FYI, it's useless going to GSN and complaining. They censor people who disagree with them. [/quote]
Firstly, it's their boards, their bandwidth, their expenditure. Why not?
Secondly, it's not people disagreeing with them, it's people disagreeing with a concept that they haven't seen in action. How are people supposed to give accurate feedback (positive and negative, natch) unless they've seen what they're going to do?
Going back in the thread...
Weren't Burt Luddin's Love Buffet, All New 3's A Crowd, and Extreme Gong meant to [gain a younger demographic]? Uh huh...and how successful were those three again?
Try whammy, Cram, and Lingo, and see how your analogy works then.
-
[quote name=\'Dan Sadro\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 08:18 PM\']
Weren't Burt Luddin's Love Buffet, All New 3's A Crowd, and Extreme Gong meant to [gain a younger demographic]? Uh huh...and how successful were those three again?
Try whammy, Cram, and Lingo, and see how your analogy works then. [/quote]
What I meant was, BLLB, AN3aC, and EG shot for a really young demographic similar to this video game crap. Whammy, Cram, and Lingo aim for a slightly older audience, IMO.
-
Whammy, Cram, and Lingo aim for a slightly older audience, IMO.
Lingo, maybe. But not Whammy! or Cram.
-
[quote name=\'PeterMarshallFan\' date=\'Jul 3 2003, 03:40 PM\'] [quote name=\'Dan Sadro\' date=\'Jul 2 2003, 08:18 PM\']
What I meant was, BLLB, AN3aC, and EG shot for a really young demographic similar to this video game crap. Whammy, Cram, and Lingo aim for a slightly older audience, IMO.
Whammy, Cram, and Lingo shoot for the same 18-49s that BLLB, AN3aC, and EG did. BLLB and AN3aC don't seem to have any appeal for anyone younger than, say, 16 or 17. Whammy and Cram could easily appeal to people as young as 9 or 10, and Lingo could appeal to 12 and 13 year olds.
Video games have most similar appeal to Whammy, I imagine.
-
[quote name=\'Dan Sadro\' date=\'Jul 4 2003, 12:39 PM\'] Video games have most similar appeal to Whammy, I imagine. [/quote]
Ya know (and I'm only half-joking about this), if GSN wants to throw the video game thing at the wall, without alienating the game shown fans, why not pick up Hit Man? :)
-
the intresting thing about video games is that it IMHO goes below their current aim and more toward the 10-24 year olds, something more akin to GAS (which intrestingly enough has done the same thing with the PUTRID game farm and the suprisingly good Play to Z not to mention the 5000 or so video game promos they air) the odd thing about this move that the closest thing that GSN has in terms of competition is G4 and GAS, however GSN is MUCH more mainstream in terms of homes reached than either G4 or GAS, so i would find it incongrous for it to steer back toward the deep niche of gamers, I suspected a massive shift but not like this, instead i expected GSN to go more into comedy (with funny money and all) and interactive enterainment than just game shows. I was expecting perhaps them picking up shows like Change of Heart and more shows along the lines of LC and games that can be played interactivly easily along with more documentaries and profile shows (similar to what VH1 and Food network did). I thought maybe even something like a Paranoia revival for lower stakes to promote cutting edge creativity. This actually seems like a step back by my standards because it seems that video game shows are more of a niche market than game shows, everyone may play them but who really watches shows about them (look at g4's scope not to mention the ratings of most of the old gamer shows) i dunno its a risk but not something i would have done (and note that i wasnt exactly panderring for classics)
i think the return of vertivision is their coup to the classic fans and the rest of GSN will go the way of cartoon network.
-
Whammy, Cram, and Lingo shoot for the same 18-49s that BLLB, AN3aC, and EG did. BLLB and AN3aC don't seem to have any appeal for anyone younger than, say, 16 or 17. Whammy and Cram could easily appeal to people as young as 9 or 10, and Lingo could appeal to 12 and 13 year olds.
And Chuck's 6-year-old Costco buddy Ashley. \"That's not a worrrrrd!...\"
-
Still new at this, so I don't know if I can change subject titles. If I could, I'd probably write something like, \"GSN is dead?\" Not business-wise, obviously, but yes, I mean as far as what it used to mean to so many of us. Which I agree is a shame. Yeah, yeah, I know, \"They need to make money,\" and \"It's just TV, get over it.\" Still, as a person who is disappointed with the utter lack of entertainment in \"entertainment\" nowadays, it sucks to be more limited to my choices in means of \"escape\" back to the stuff I grew up with, or things from earlier decades (which I consider now to be \"back when people cared about making good TV, music, etc\") It's happening with GSN like it did with the AMC before it, and with Cartoon Network (though the weekends are great, what with He-Man when it's new, the DC related shows, Popeye, and Adult Swim. And they DO have Boomerang, another hint hint! ;-)) To a lesser extent, and if I remember some of you from ATGS correctly, you'll flame me for this, there's wrestling as well. WWE is abyssmal now, and I don't even watch it regularly anymore, opting instead for my old tapes and the occasional indy.
I guess what I'm saying in so many words is that I guess my disillusionment with the media today aggravates what GSN is now and what it might become. Call me a prude, but seems to me that people make TV shows for trend hoppers, 6 year olds, and perverts. Same with music. You can see how I feel left out in my little world of TV Land, GSN (when it's good), and British TV on PBS.
J.