The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: wdm1219inpenna on July 23, 2022, 11:07:03 AM
-
Do you prefer game shows where episodes straddle such as the original Card Sharks, High Rollers, The Joker's Wild (non Snoop Dogg version) and many others, or do you prefer game shows that are self contained such as Price is Right, Let's Make a Deal, Jeopardy, Wheel of Fortune, Family Feud?
On the one hand I do like self contained episodes as they are tidier and you know the outcome. On the other hand, if a game is interrupted and it is at a very pivotal moment, there is a certain charm and excitement to that also.
I suppose I am torn just about down the middle as to which I prefer. I know when I was hosting games online, I always tried to have self contained episodes. Was wondering if all of you had a preference one way or the other.
-
I've always preferred self-contained ones. I don't really like starting a show where I hadn't seen the start of a game and, having not seen the previous episode, I'm lost as to what had happened earlier.
-
No difference. I just want good content that doesn’t dally.
-
I prefer shows that straddle. I feel shows that insist on being self-contained can result in lazy game play to decide a winner…such as HS ‘86 or certain parts of Classic Concentration’s run.
-
Doesn’t matter as long as the pacing doesn’t drag. “Celebrity Bullseye” is a perfect example. Self-contained works, but there are also shows that would benefit more from a Best-of-3 rather than playing to the bell.
That said, I’m watching “Classic Concentration” on Buzzr and the Best-of-3 to play the Car Game is a bit of a slog to sit through.
-
That said, I’m watching “Classic Concentration” on Buzzr and the Best-of-3 to play the Car Game is a bit of a slog to sit through.
I disagree - I didn't like the perpetual speed-up rounds to jam in a second car game. Likewise with Scrabble - they overused Speedword when they moved to the self-contained eps.
-
Do you prefer game shows where episodes straddle such as the original Card Sharks, High Rollers, The Joker's Wild (non Snoop Dogg version) and many others, or do you prefer game shows that are self contained such as Price is Right, Let's Make a Deal, Jeopardy, Wheel of Fortune, Family Feud?
Two different answers, since we've gotten a little bit away from the original intent of the question.
1) I prefer self-contained programs. If I can't tune in tomorrow for whatever reason (I'm back at school or at work), I'm not left hanging.
2) That said, there are some programs that work considerably better if they straddle. Adam Nedeff said a while back (and I can't find the thread) that he thought daytime Squares worked much better than the '70s evening syndie version because there was time to let the jokes and the show breathe. In the evening version, the time constraint meant the stars (and sometimes Peter Marshall) had to rush through questions, in order to allow both players a fair chance at a win. A star may be getting big laughs with a joke and have a topper, but that couldn't happen if each player had won two games and there were two circles and two Xs on the board late in the game.
-
There are some great shows whose gameplay was designed to fill a 30 minute program seamlessly ($10-$100,000 Pyramid was a near perfect example), while there are other shows that suffer for keeping the show self-contained. I'd prefer shows whose natural flow does that.
That being said, if a show's gameplay is meant to straddle, let it straddle. If it's meant to fill a 30 or 60-minute timeslot, so be it. Just as long as you don't post-production the hell out of it to make it fit a set time frame or to stretch out pauses or tension-filled reveals to kill time.
-
In an ideal world (perhaps a streaming world), game shows would have a variable runtime so that you get the best of both worlds: a self-contained show AND gameplay that doesn't have to resort to kludges like a times-up bell.
Even TPiR would benefit immensely by not having to resort to 2 or 3 quickie games per show to shoehorn in everything to a 38 minute (without commercials) runtime.
-
What I don't like is when I can tell someone is not going to win the game just by looking at the clock.
-
Don't mind straddles at all. Favorite example is Blockbusters. I'm usually watching to beat the contestants to the answer and not to keep track of wins. I lose nothing if I miss a show or two. As TimK noted, shows that can handle a fill smoothly are fine. Add Every Second Counts to shows that are paced to have a complete game with no carryover. But shows like Joker, TTDough, Bullseye...no prob with straddles as long as the game pace stays good up to the "time's up" signal. Besides...whose world will end if they miss an episode? The problem with the question of "prefer" depends on the show and why you watch it.
-
I was introduced to self-contained "Scrabble" episodes until I found out later that they straddled. I preferred the straddling, since they kept playing until that "time's up" bell. Same with "High Rollers" and "Squares"
My preference of the two: as long as quality and pace of play [this isn't baseball] doesn't suffer, I don't mind either.
-
Another "depends on the show." The only strong preference I have is against self-containing two full games when they're variable enough in length that a long first game means that there isn't time to play a second in full (as in the Concentration and Scrabble examples.) That said, if they'd had as much time as it needed, I think I preferred the daily tournament standalone Scrabble format to the one that straddled.
On the other side, if the individual pieces of a game are short enough, I think it's fine to play until time runs out even when straddling is possible. I didn't mind the Davidson/Bergeron Hollywood Squares method of doing as many full games as possible and paying out per square if time ran out mid-game. I don't think Password Plus or Super Password would have suffered from playing as many puzzles as time allowed and then a single Alphabetics/endgame. Present-day Wheel of Fortune is kind of weird for always having a speed-up round even on the occasions when it seems fairly obvious that, in years gone by, the show would have ended after the last full puzzle, but it's worked for them for decades.
-
That said, I’m watching “Classic Concentration” on Buzzr and the Best-of-3 to play the Car Game is a bit of a slog to sit through.
I didn't mind the tie breaker puzzle, though I always wondered why they didn't open the doors at random.
At the time it seemed cheap to ditch one car game, but I think they upped the value of prizes in the front game.
-
Tic Tac Dough--as we saw in Bergeron's pilot--needs to straddle.
Joker's Wild does, too, because three jokers winning the game was far more exciting than Snoop's work around.
Chuck's Lingo would have been helped by straddling so they could have played it as first team with two Lingos wins, thus ditching points.
-
I concur about Scrabble having to rely far too much on Speedword during the self-contained episodes.
Certain shows that straddle lend to potentially great excitement. One example, when the klaxxon sound effect would go off during Millionaire and they were about to play for a huge sum.
Whew! could straddle but it was always rather tidy. By that I mean a front game round never stopped with like 37 seconds to play. Whew always started off either with a new front game round or with the bonus game.
I agree with what one poster wrote, about not liking certain games where the time's up bell determines the winner and you can tell by the clock if one player has no shot (Lingo and MG/HS Squares round leap readily to mind.)
Indeed, so long as the content of the show is good, and it doesn't slug along, either format is good (straddling vs self-contained).
By the way, I agree about the tie-breaking puzzle for Classic Concentration, I always wished the squares would have been randomized, rather than starting with #1. That was one good and fun element of Scrabble's Speedword, the letters popped in at random rather than in order from left to right.
-
I agree about the tie-breaking puzzle for Classic Concentration, I always wished the squares would have been randomized, rather than starting with #1. That was one good and fun element of Scrabble's Speedword, the letters popped in at random rather than in order from left to right.
With available computer capabilities in the mid-late 80s, was it even physically and/or economically possible to write a computer program that could randomly open up spaces on the tie-breaker puzzle?
I was in college at the time CC premiered (get off my lawn) and I remember how much a pain im the ass it was (compared to today) to type up papers in DOS that included special text, like italics, bold text and underlining.
-
With available computer capabilities in the mid-late 80s, was it even physically and/or economically possible to write a computer program that could randomly open up spaces on the tie-breaker puzzle?
Speaking as someone who was coding on a low-end computer (Commodore 64) at the time, I can state with certainty that having a computer generate a (pseudo)random number was quite easy and common even then.
-
Hell, I wrote a program in C64 BASIC that could reliably spit out (pseudo)random lists of numbers for patterns on the Press Your Luck board. It's a fairly simple modification of the code to select from 1-25 inclusive instead of 1-18.
-
How did you see the Begeron TTD pilot? Was it on youtube or something? I didn't see it on there.
Tic Tac Dough--as we saw in Bergeron's pilot--needs to straddle.
Chuck's Lingo would have been helped by straddling so they could have played it as first team with two Lingos wins, thus ditching points.
-
It was leaked late last year, then quickly taken offline.
-
I agree about the tie-breaking puzzle for Classic Concentration, I always wished the squares would have been randomized, rather than starting with #1. That was one good and fun element of Scrabble's Speedword, the letters popped in at random rather than in order from left to right.
With available computer capabilities in the mid-late 80s, was it even physically and/or economically possible to write a computer program that could randomly open up spaces on the tie-breaker puzzle?
I was in college at the time CC premiered (get off my lawn) and I remember how much a pain im the ass it was (compared to today) to type up papers in DOS that included special text, like italics, bold text and underlining.
I would say absolutely possible, especially considering the opening of the show when they revealed the first sample puzzle had the doors opening up not in 1 to 25 order.
-
That would indicate that it was a deliberate choice on the part of the show.
-
Bryce still has his copy of the Tic Tac Dough pilot in a google drive. Link’s on this page:
http://www.gameshowforum.org/index.php/topic,33560.15.html
-
I agree about the tie-breaking puzzle for Classic Concentration, I always wished the squares would have been randomized, rather than starting with #1. That was one good and fun element of Scrabble's Speedword, the letters popped in at random rather than in order from left to right.
With available computer capabilities in the mid-late 80s, was it even physically and/or economically possible to write a computer program that could randomly open up spaces on the tie-breaker puzzle?
Honestly, it wouldn't even need to be random, just programmed in a different order than 1-2-3-4-5-....
Nobody would care what the actual sequence is, just that it provides information from different places instead of straight through from beginning to end.
Of course, saying that out loud, it makes sense they'd want the contestants to start at the beginning, since that makes it easier and the whole point is that they're out of time and need someone to solve the damn thing as fast as possible.
-
the whole point is that they're out of time and need someone to solve the damn thing as fast as possible.
I love it when a plan comes together!
-
Even TPiR would benefit immensely by not having to resort to 2 or 3 quickie games per show to shoehorn in everything to a 38 minute (without commercials) runtime.
I finally got around to watching the TPIR 50th special this week, and agree completely. Just give everything a little more space to breathe, and it makes the show so much better.
I don't know if the economics are there yet, but seeing something like Days of Our Lives pushed onto Peacock, and so many departing daytime shows getting replaced with local news or pasteurized process local news-adjacent product, makes me wonder if it would be viable to move Price to Paramount+ and bump that 38-minute runtime back up to 42 or 45.
-
...seeing something like Days of Our Lives pushed onto Peacock...
Will Days not be on free TV anymore?
Not that I wouldn't like a longer air time, but TPIR had quicker games since the get-go, even back when Bob had time to chat with players. The pace might lag without them.
-
Will Days not be on free TV anymore?
Nope. Its last episode OTA on NBC will be Friday, September 9, replaced by "NBC News Daily" the following Monday.
-
That said, I’m watching “Classic Concentration” on Buzzr and the Best-of-3 to play the Car Game is a bit of a slog to sit through.
I disagree - I didn't like the perpetual speed-up rounds to jam in a second car game. Likewise with Scrabble - they overused Speedword when they moved to the self-contained eps.
I think, with both shows when they were contained, Game 1 of an episode was the show in its natural state, followed by a turn in form so drastic that we got whiplash. Could that inconsistency in pace have been fixed by including a timer for Game 1, too?
I don't know if the economics are there yet, but seeing something like Days of Our Lives pushed onto Peacock, and so many departing daytime shows getting replaced with local news or pasteurized process local news-adjacent product, makes me wonder if it would be viable to move Price to Paramount+ and bump that 38-minute runtime back up to 42 or 45.
It's still pulling in great ratings for daytime. It won't be moving to streaming anytime soon. That said, while removing two pricing games might be a bridge too far, I wouldn't mind seeing them remove one and have one SCSD at the end- top two spinners go to the Showcase.
-
Not that I wouldn't like a longer air time, but TPIR had quicker games since the get-go, even back when Bob had time to chat with players. The pace might lag without them.
Insofar as it counts for anything, this happens in fan-hosted games a lot. Free from the restrictions of a budget and timeslot, you often get a lot of the longer games together, and suddenly, I'm missing Most Expensive.
That said, I’m watching “Classic Concentration” on Buzzr and the Best-of-3 to play the Car Game is a bit of a slog to sit through.
I disagree - I didn't like the perpetual speed-up rounds to jam in a second car game. Likewise with Scrabble - they overused Speedword when they moved to the self-contained eps.
I think, with both shows when they were contained, Game 1 of an episode was the show in its natural state, followed by a turn in form so drastic that we got whiplash. Could that inconsistency in pace have been fixed by including a timer for Game 1, too?
Game 1 of Scrabble was played to its own timer. Most Crossword rounds in that era got to 3 words before the bell. I've long beat the drum that I prefer that to playing it out, since it puts more weight on solving the clues quickly over getting lucky draws with the tiles.
Classic Concentration's problem in the best-of-3 era, IMO, was the artificial stretching they always did in game 1, JUST in case either game was a quick solve, and/or the match was won in two-straight. When that resulted in the awkward combo of interrupting game 2 into the ring-in-only game 3, it felt like it was unfair to get there only by virtue of Alex conducting in-game interviews.
-Jason
-
I’m starting to come around to Jason’s POV. I look to the 70s and the prime access shows-if you have to put a bow on the game every day then sure, play to time. If the show is on every day and you can have rollover games without it being too off-putting, then let the game breathe.
Remembering to when Scrabble had their thirteen week tournament, the show ended with a sprint winner moving to Friday and I imagine the crossword round could have the time taken by the bonus that wasn’t there. Perhaps playing the sprint in one segment would have helped.
-
Remembering to when Scrabble had their thirteen week tournament, the show ended with a sprint winner moving to Friday and I imagine the crossword round could have the time taken by the bonus that wasn’t there. Perhaps playing the sprint in one segment would have helped.
Scrabble's bonus round was also very short, too short in my opinion. 10 seconds is a mighty short amount of time for your once-a-day big finale.
If they brought Scrabble back, seems like they'd play only one crossword round, winner meets returning champ in the Sprint. If besides commercials, that allowed slightly more time for the crossword game, jackpot round or both, that could be a nice move.
-
Remembering to when Scrabble had their thirteen week tournament, the show ended with a sprint winner moving to Friday and I imagine the crossword round could have the time taken by the bonus that wasn’t there. Perhaps playing the sprint in one segment would have helped.
Scrabble's bonus round was also very short, too short in my opinion. 10 seconds is a mighty short amount of time for your once-a-day big finale.
If they brought Scrabble back, seems like they'd play only one crossword round, winner meets returning champ in the Sprint. If besides commercials, that allowed slightly more time for the crossword game, jackpot round or both, that could be a nice move. Without returning champions, though, heaven only knows.