Monitors or game boards?

[TLEberle]

It seems that this question has generated more than a bit of discussion, and I thought it would be prudent to continue it in a new thread named as such.

Now with GSN, I've seen Password Plus played with the wallets, and the little TV set things.  I've seen Now You See It with that big board, and the chyroned grid in the desks.  Still haven't seen Son of Blockbusters, but I don't think I have to, in order to come to my conclusion:

The game's the thing.

Yeah, it's neat to see the passwords flash on the big wall, or the letters fill the grid to the opening bars of "Chump Change," but as long as the game is good, I don't care how it's displayed.  I agree that whatever element it is SHOULD be onstage, but as for one over the other, I have no preference.   It's just not that big a deal.

Something else to consider: how easy is it to fix a computer or monitor problem?  I would bet it's easier and faster than when a bulb pops on the game board, or if a word is loaded upside down.  Nifty set pieces look nifty, but there's a bigger chance of something going wrong.

[Chief-O]

In the case of "Password", I actually prefer the use of Chyron to display the words. Helps cut down on audience members inadvertantly screaming clues [or the word].

[Jimmy Owen]

I think I speak for everyone when I say we prefer big gigantic game boards on TV. It's nice to have at least one thing upon which we all can agree.

[The Ol' Guy]

I'll lean toward boards. Depends on the game, but about 90% of the time, if it's a remake that had a board of some sort earlier, it's a cheat to see it gone in the new version. Trebek doesn't have to go back to pull cards on J!, but watching Classic Concentendo suk'd! Blockbusters/Rafferty was right on the egde.

[Mike Tennant]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 02:15 PM\']I think I speak for everyone when I say we prefer big gigantic game boards on TV. It's nice to have at least one thing upon which we all can agree.

[snapback]80780[/snapback]

[/quote]
Considering that Travis opened this thread by saying that he really doesn't care how things are displayed, I'd say you don't speak for everyone.

My opinion is, well, what I said in that other thread:

Boards that are made up of monitors run by computers--and I fully understand the economics behind all this--always make me feel like it's something I could do on my PC at home, not something special that can only be done with a big budget and a TV studio. The big, spinning FF board, for example, looks impressive in a way that a monitor that I could pick up at Best Buy does not. There's just something about having tangible, rather than virtual, props on a game show that makes it a more pleasurable experience.

[CarShark]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 02:15 PM\']I think I speak for everyone when I say we prefer big gigantic game boards on TV. It's nice to have at least one thing upon which we all can agree.

[snapback]80780[/snapback]

[/quote]
You don't speak for me. I've always been for modernization. The sooner TPiR goes to TV screens instead of those antiquated display boards, the better. I have seen pictures of Bruce's Price is Right, and liked the look of its set. TPiR's "old for the sake of old" kick is really wearing thin with me. They should do it slowly, though. One huge downside to not knocking the dust off every once and a while is that you breed a fandom that is terribly averse to change, good or bad.

If Osmond's Pyramid had kept using trilons they probably would have been laughed out of syndication faster than it was. They're trying to get young people to watch. The e-mailing, I-podding, IM-ing crowd isn't going to go for a show that looks like it was made in the 70's

[Jimmy Owen]

Okay, okay, I think I speak for everyone when I say there should be either a gameboard or a monitor on set. There! Now we are all in agreement.  Doesn't that feel good.....

[zachhoran]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 02:01 PM\'].

Something else to consider: how easy is it to fix a computer or monitor problem? 

[snapback]80776[/snapback]

[/quote]

It was no picnic to fix computer problems on Rafferty Blockbusters apparently. The show had delays in taping due to problems with software that ran the boards, as per a post in ATGS by Dave Mackey. The first week of shows was taped two or three days before the series premiere. Taping sessions ran well into the night because of software glitches.

[Casey]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 03:39 PM\']If Osmond's Pyramid had kept using trilons they probably would have been laughed out of syndication faster than it was. They're trying to get young people to watch. The e-mailing, I-podding, IM-ing crowd isn't going to go for a show that looks like it was made in the 70's

[snapback]80793[/snapback]

[/quote]

Speaking as someone who IMs, e-mails, and owns an iPod, I'd like to think I have the cognitive ability to deal with art cards and an egg crate display rather than flashy computer graphics.  I'm all for technology if it adds something unique and interesting to a show.  I don't think the computerized board on Family Feud accomplishes that.  I don't think the "It's time for the final spin" graphics on Wheel does that.

I actually prefer the mechanical boards.  They are cheap to operate, they work well, and they are more interesting when they break down.  

[Game Show Man]

I for one like a cross between the two. That is, a physical, tangible game board, but that has a viewscreen or monitors.

For example, if you were to revive High Rollers, you could make a three column board that has an eggcrate, vane or 7-segment readout for the column value and a screen to display the prizes and old-school chasing light borders, but instead of slide projectors, have three long display screens displaying CGI-graphics for the numbers.

[The Ol' Guy]

and there's nothing wrong with both. PYRAMID's winner's circle was still a larger than life "game board", even if modernized. What would have been disappointing would have been to have the two players sitting in a bare area with a little lighting and having the subjects appear on an off stage monitor, and all anybody saw would be an edited box on the screen with one subject at a time. I saw those Bruce's PiR pictures, and they were nice. But still, some games...Card Sharks with video monitors or keyed graphics of cards instead of the real things? Some things, like the original Family Feud board, come off better tactile - if for no other reason than to prevent the paranoids from wondering if something computerized wasn't being manipulated in play to create a desired outcome. It's illegal, but convince a paranoid of that....

[geno57]

My opinion on this has changed in the last several years.

I really felt uncomfortable watching Classic (Trebek) Concentration because the full-set shot included no hint of the game board. The board is arguably the most important part of the set, the focal point of the game, and yet ... it wasn't there!

Additionally, I thought the board's graphics (not the puzzles -- they were done well) were chintzy -- the technology simply wasn't quite good enough yet.

And I have to admit, I loved the old, clunky, mechanical Concentration board.

Nowadays, however, I'd be satisfied with good, crisp, hi-def graphics displayed on a big screen on the stage. I even like what they've done with Family Feud, although given a choice between the two, I'd still pick the big trilon, the flippy boxes, and the Ferranti-Packard.

[Fedya]

I have a different question about the Rafferty Blockbusters gameboard: Why are they using the same configurations they used during the Cullen era?  

I can understand that with the projection, they probably had to create entire boards to be projected, and so couldn't move the letters around.  But with computerization, there's no such limitation.  Yet in the few Rafferty episodes I've taped this week, I've already seen the board with NULA down the left column, one with DRWF that I recognized from the Cullen days, and one that has most of the letters in EOTVGS in the top left corner.

[chris319]

If Osmond's Pyramid had kept using trilons they probably would have been laughed out of syndication faster than it was.

I don't know how you arrived at that conclusion, but in the 25+ years since I started working on game shows, one thing I've learned is that the only people this REALLY makes a difference to are the producers and a small number of savants who remember the date on which they changed the color of the carpet on the TPIR turntable.

We changed the technology of the P+ puzzle board in mid-run and the audience didn't give a tinker's damn. It made a difference to us because the rear projection system generated a lot of fan noise and the light bulbs kept burning out. We went to cut-out letters on art card. Nowadays you'd probably use a PC and an LCD projector.

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 03:39 PM\']If Osmond's Pyramid had kept using trilons they probably would have been laughed out of syndication faster than it was. They're trying to get young people to watch. The e-mailing, I-podding, IM-ing crowd isn't going to go for a show that looks like it was made in the 70's

[snapback]80793[/snapback]

[/quote]

Then how does TPiR fill their audience with college students every day?