The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: sotcfan2004 on December 18, 2007, 12:57:55 PM
-
...meh.
READ HERE (http://\"http://www.zap2it.com/tv/ratings/zap-ratings121707,0,1729161.story?coll=zap-tv-ratings-headlines\")
-
[quote name=\'sotcfan2004\' post=\'172374\' date=\'Dec 18 2007, 12:57 PM\']
...meh.
READ HERE (http://\"http://www.zap2it.com/tv/ratings/zap-ratings121707,0,1729161.story?coll=zap-tv-ratings-headlines\")
[/quote]
It was consistant at least-about 7 million viewers- and the 18-49's went up as the show went on apparently from PI feedback (http://\"http://www.pifeedback.com\"). Tonight's ratings will be more of a barometer I think (although they are throwing a new NCIS up on CBS I believe). They're also expanding tonights ep to 90 minutes as well...
Edit: CBS pulled the new NCIS episode tonight it appears- so that helps a little.
-
Way too close to call, considering that it was a virtual tie at 8 p.m.
There may be more sampling tonight, as people who watched "Clash" last night may watch "Duel" and vice versa. We may not get a hint of how either show is going to do until Wednesday.
-
It seems to me that Millionaire was expected to have so-so ratings throughout. It started out OK but not smashing, but we all know where it was when the two weeks was up. That being said, I'll work a review in here to justify why I don't think this one's going to last long.
I'm not sure at all that this is going to be another "Millionaire." In 1999, the prime time game show was a thing of the past, and "Millionaire" was the first major attempt at it in years (not counting WoF or J!). It was a simple game with just enough drama and certainly enough play-along factor to keep it very interesting.
Duel's host didn't exactly impress me. In fact, he reminded me of a toned-down version of (gag) Patrick Wayne with his repetitiveness. At least I didn't hear any "YOUUUUUUU WINNNNNN" from him. He was also painfully slow. If he would keep the game moving at a faster pace, it might do a better job of keeping my attention. Fortunately, the music cues have enough bass to keep my sound system rattling the floors -- and me awake.
The game itself does have some neat ideas, particularly the gambling and competitive aspect. The pressure tactic is an interesting twist, IMO, but beyond that, this game really doesn't introduce anything really novel. Everyone's doing the idea of going to commercial before revealing answers. Everyone's doing multiple choice questions (or multiple guess, and even then with four chips, it's not really a guess). I did like the set and particularly the SFX/music cues, but I felt that they distracted from the show more than add to it. This stuff should compliment the game, not become the game. Way too much glitz & glamour for my taste.
The most annoying thing is not the game itself, but the commercials ABC keeps airing. I'll add my voice to the chorus on this one ... they're spoiling the game. What's the point of watching when I know who's going to win and play later -- and know for how much they'll be playing. I watched the episode online, and I saw the commercial showing the challenger from the game in progress getting to pick her next challenger!! It became a matter of how many questions we'd see before the inevitable happened to the first champion.
I'm not holding my breath on this show, but it does have plenty of room to go up. It could be worse, but it needs to be a lot better if it's going to make it.
-
Well night 2's ratings are in... (http://\"http://www.zap2it.com/tv/ratings/zap-ratings121807,0,1925770.story?coll=zap-tv-ratings-headlines\") It's gone down a little, but the competition was a little tougher (specifically, NCIS was a lot stronger than the House rerun last night). Let's see how the 18-49's turn out...
-
NIght 3's ratings...it's consistant if anything... (http://\"http://www.zap2it.com/tv/ratings/zap-ratings121907,0,2122379.story?coll=zap-tv-ratings-headlines\") I don't know what ABC is looking for in ratings to bring it back- it seems to be stuck at just over 7 million viewers (and the 18-49's are not bad-just about even with Clash of the Choirs)....They picked up the pace last night, which is good. I'll be interested to see how it does on Sunday night- It's up against an Amazing Race episode (after a week off for the Survivor finale), but it could be delayed by a football overrun (but it's the Patriots/Dolphins game in most of the country-so that's another factor)
\we won't get the Patriots/Dolphins game here- we get Ravens/Seahawks
\\Billick needs to be fired-you just don't lose to the Dolphins....
\\\he should have gone for it on 4th and Inches...
-
[quote name=\'weaklink75\' post=\'172571\' date=\'Dec 20 2007, 01:41 PM\']
\we won't get the Patriots/Dolphins game here- we get Ravens/Seahawks
[/quote]
You might actually have the better game. I mean, 14-0 vs. 1-13? The NFL should award the Miami Guppies a half-win if they hold New England under 50 points.
[quote name=\'weaklink75\' post=\'172571\' date=\'Dec 20 2007, 01:41 PM\']
\\Billick needs to be fired-you just don't lose to the Dolphins....
[/quote]
Billick coached the Ravens this year the way he played MGPM 30 years ago. The guy won a Super Bowl, but believe me, he [blanks].
/ Bears repeating?
// not this year. :-(
-
[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' post=\'172597\' date=\'Dec 20 2007, 05:02 PM\']
You might actually have the better game. I mean, 14-0 vs. 1-13? The NFL should award the Miami Guppies a half-win if they hold New England under 50 points.
[/quote]
Hey, the Dolphins held the Pats to under 50 the first time they met this season, in Week 7. Granted, the Pats scored 49, but if they did it once...
/Dol-fan here but don't tell anybody.
//I picked NE this week in my football pool but don't tell anybody.
///Prior to last week's win, the last time the Dolphins won a game was against the Pats last year.
-
Ouch....Thursday wasn't good. (http://\"http://pifeedback.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63310451/m/43210139?r=36210139#36210139\") 4th in the timeslot (CBS 1st-NBC 2nd-Fox 3rd)...
-
It appears people perferred Are You Smater Than a Fifth Grader?
ON a similar note when was the last time 3 games shows aired at the same time in prime time? (even if one is rerun)
-
Well it actually won the timeslot Friday night by quite a bit (from PIfeedback) (http://\"http://pifeedback.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63310451/m/18310239/p/1\")
-
On a side note The Singing Bee losing to Duel and a rerun of Lyrics is probably the final nail in its coffin,
Who really thought Lyrics would be the more successful of the two?
-
[quote name=\'Chuck Sutton\' post=\'172885\' date=\'Dec 23 2007, 08:29 AM\']
On a side note The Singing Bee losing to Duel and a rerun of Lyrics is probably the final nail in its coffin,
Who really thought Lyrics would be the more successful of the two?
[/quote]
Beforehand, never -- purely based on Fox yet again ripping off an existing show -- but it turned out Lyrics really is much more entertaining to watch than Bee .. of course the ONLY way to watch it is by Tivo, as it's one of the higher offenders of drama-stretching, Wayne Brady is a surprisingly decent host and it is somewhat entertaining..
W/ Bee, that elimination round is silly and the general execution of the game is lame.. I'm surprised they have that $50k top prize.. strange for a primetime NBC game show, no?
-
Bee got no respect in the Indy market; WTHR bumped it for a holiday special. Usually, they'll either move bumped NBC prime-time shows over to their all-weather station WALV (on an in-set screen with a radar map on the left-hand side and a news scroll/text ads panel on the bottom), or slot them for late-night or weekend runs. This time, they did none of the above.
-
[quote name=\'lobster\' post=\'172886\' date=\'Dec 23 2007, 10:11 AM\']
Beforehand, never -- purely based on Fox yet again ripping off an existing show -- but it turned out Lyrics really is much more entertaining to watch than Bee .. of course the ONLY way to watch it is by Tivo, as it's one of the higher offenders of drama-stretching, Wayne Brady is a surprisingly decent host and it is somewhat entertaining..
[/quote]
See, I preferred Bee because it offered more variety (loved the mini-games idea), and could deal with a lower top prize if it meant putting an entertaining game behind it. I just couldn't get into Lyrics for a number of reasons: FOX's rushing to copy NBC, the drawn-out pacing, Mark Thompson, the money tree, Mark Thompson, the fact that it's Smarter Than a 5th Grader with karaoke, Mark Thompson.
/Did I mention Mark Thompson?
-
I also thought Singing Bee was the better show. After its strong start in the summer I thought it would last longer than Lyrics --- but I guess you never tell what's going to be a hit and what isn't!
ON a similar note when was the last time 3 games shows aired at the same time in prime time? (even if one is rerun)
Kind of reminds you of the good old days of daytime, doesn't it?
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'172912\' date=\'Dec 23 2007, 05:21 PM\']
ON a similar note when was the last time 3 games shows aired at the same time in prime time? (even if one is rerun)
Kind of reminds you of the good old days of daytime, doesn't it?
[/quote]
Yes it does, but even then it was usually only one ot two slots that ahd more than 2.
-
Duel hit a new low for the conclusion
8:00 p.m.
ABC
Duel
Vuewers: 5.57 million (#3), A18-49: 1.4/ 4 (#4)
CBS
60 Minutes/The Amazing Race 12
Viewers: 12.12 million (#1), A18-49: 3.4/10 (#2)
NBC
Sunday Night Football (Redskins vs. Vikings)
Viewers: 9.88 million (#2), A18-49: 3.6/11 (#1)
Fox
Movie: Spiderman 2
Viewers: 4.24 million (#4), A18-49: 1.6/ 5 (#3)
CW
Story of Santa Claus
Viewers: 1.07 million (#5), A18-49: 0.4/ 1 (#5)
-----
8:30 p.m.
ABC
Duel
Viewers: 6.72 million (#3), A18-49: 1.7/ 5 (#3)
CBS
The Amazing Race 12
Viewers: 8.98 million (#2), A18-49: 2.8/ 8 (#2)
NBC
Sunday Night Football
Viewers: 12.26 million (#1), A18-49: 4.3/12 (#1)
Fox
Movie: Spiderman 2
Viewers: 4.47 million (#4), A18-49: 1.6/ 5 (#4)
CW
Story of Santa Claus
Viewers: 1.20 million (#5), A18-49: 0.4/ 1 (#5)
-
Not surprising though...holiday week, and both Amazing Race and football pull very good ratings.
-
[quote name=\'Chuck Sutton\' post=\'172885\' date=\'Dec 23 2007, 08:29 AM\']
On a side note The Singing Bee losing to Duel and a rerun of Lyrics is probably the final nail in its coffin,
Who really thought Lyrics would be the more successful of the two?
[/quote]
I did, the minute I realized Bee was the vastly superior show. I mean, it's so good, they don't need to throw scads of money everywhere to get people hooked!
-
I liked Duel and would like to see it return. Regarding Singing Bee
and DFTL, I think Singing Bee is the better show, but I think Wayne
Brady is the better host. But Bee is struggling in the ratings.
-
I hope it returns too, and if it does it would be the perfect format to make a tabletop game out of.
-
It really doesn't look good for "Duel" returning, which is a shame, because the Sunday night finale in particular was pretty good.
I think ABC's decision to give "Samantha Who?" some more breathing room (as it's down to two or three unaired episodes and the WGA strike is not going to be over soon) and drag the first episode out to 90 minutes may've hurt the show in the long run.
How did "Clash" do? Would there be any reason for NBC to bring it back at Easter?
-
[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'173175\' date=\'Dec 26 2007, 05:20 PM\']I think ABC's decision to give "Samantha Who?" some more breathing room (as it's down to two or three unaired episodes and the WGA strike is not going to be over soon) and drag the first episode out to 90 minutes may've hurt the show in the long run.[/quote]
Absolutely. I don't think many of us took a moment to take in exactly what David told us in the Summaries thread. The producers had finished production and finished preparing hour-long episodes, THEN the word came down from ABC that the first two needed to be 90 minutes. So the first two episodes basically had thirty extra minutes of filler that the producers themselves had already decided we didn't need to see.
But yeah, when the finale you've been building toward ends up your lowest-rated night, the audience is not joining you on your little ride. This is probably the last we've seen of Duel.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'173185\' date=\'Dec 26 2007, 07:40 PM\']
But yeah, when the finale you've been building toward ends up your lowest-rated night, the audience is not joining you on your little ride. This is probably the last we've seen of Duel.
[/quote]
There's something to be said when I skip the Friday airing altogether and just watch the finale, but I don't feel that I missed anything. That something is, "Ditto what Matt said." I wasn't overly impressed with the way this game played, I wasn't overly impressed with the hosting job. As I wrote in my review, the set and SFX were about the only impressive things out there. If set and SFX made a game show, "Winning Lines" might still be airing, among others.
I hope ABC just quietly lets this one go away, and better luck to them on their next outing.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'173185\' date=\'Dec 26 2007, 06:40 PM\']
I don't think many of us took a moment to take in exactly what David told us in the Summaries thread. The producers had finished production and finished preparing hour-long episodes, THEN the word came down from ABC that the first two needed to be 90 minutes. So the first two episodes basically had thirty extra minutes of filler that the producers themselves had already decided we didn't need to see.
[/quote]
I hadn't read the summaries yet because I've only seen the first episode yet, but boy, does this explain everything. To go in and "unedit" a show is madness and here, wrecked what could have been a fine game. Replace the $5000 chips with $500 chips and get it to GSN. Oh, and get a real host.
-
[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'173315\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 01:48 PM\']Replace the $5000 chips with $500 chips and get it to GSN. Oh, and get a real host.[/quote]
Even $500 chips would probably be more than a GSN budget would allow. The ABC show gave away two million dollars over the course of essentially six one-hour shows Figure a GSN version might be five half-hour shows for each tournament, and you'd still be looking at a little less than $100,000 a week, way more than GSN typically gives away.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'173330\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 01:47 PM\']
Even $500 chips would probably be more than a GSN budget would allow. The ABC show gave away two million dollars over the course of essentially six one-hour shows Figure a GSN version might be five half-hour shows for each tournament, and you'd still be looking at a little less than $100,000 a week, way more than GSN typically gives away.
[/quote]
Does it work if you yank out the "tournament" nonsense? Players start with $5K in chips, you win whatever you keep, you keep playing as long as you win, $500 house minimum if it goes to a shootout?
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'173331\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 03:53 PM\']
Does it work if you yank out the "tournament" nonsense? Players start with $5K in chips, you win whatever you keep, you keep playing as long as you win, $500 house minimum if it goes to a shootout?
[/quote]
Seeing as how GSN keeps their games in the $6K range, I think that could work. Figure 3 duels a show, 5 chips for an average win - that's $7,500 a show. A little pricey for GSN's current crop, but I'm guessing the contestant coordinators could make sure the chips are spent freely during gameplay, given their general casting tendencies.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'173331\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 04:53 PM\']
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'173330\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 01:47 PM\']
Even $500 chips would probably be more than a GSN budget would allow. The ABC show gave away two million dollars over the course of essentially six one-hour shows Figure a GSN version might be five half-hour shows for each tournament, and you'd still be looking at a little less than $100,000 a week, way more than GSN typically gives away.
[/quote]
Does it work if you yank out the "tournament" nonsense? Players start with $5K in chips, you win whatever you keep, you keep playing as long as you win, $500 house minimum if it goes to a shootout?
[/quote]
Do it sorta like the Brits (according to BothersBar)...
Dump the Tourney, but keep the growing pot. Win a game...take your winnings home or risk em for another Duel. Win 5 dues, take the pot home. Lose a game, lose your money, which gets dumped into the pot.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'173334\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 02:12 PM\']
Dump the Tourney, but keep the growing pot. Win a game...take your winnings home or risk em for another Duel. Win 5 dues, take the pot home. Lose a game, lose your money, which gets dumped into the pot.
[/quote]
That works for me. (In fact, I really like it.) I could see the pot getting REALLY big REALLY fast, though.
(Unless you guys are thinking of this as a weekly. I have it in my head as a daily strip.)
-
I always figured that if you wanted to do this as a 5-a-week strip and wanted to save money, you have the Big Prize be a fixed amount (say $10,000 in GSN's case). I do like the Joker's Jackpot idea, though.
/Get Croton to make Duel watches as parting gifts. Those could be cool.
-
I was thinking maybe 10 chips @ $50 each for GSN...but you'd still be pulling $10,000 a week.
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'173337\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 05:25 PM\']
/Get Croton to make Duel watches as parting gifts. Those could be cool.
[/quote]
What about lots of love? (http://\"http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/8448/temptationgz5.jpg\")
/sarcasm FWIW.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'173337\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 05:25 PM\']/Get Croton to make Duel watches as parting gifts. Those could be cool.[/quote]
I'd rather have one of Greeny's pens from Duel with the custom engraving "You're watching Duel on ABC".
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'173339\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 05:39 PM\']What about lots of love? (http://\"http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/8448/temptationgz5.jpg\")[/quote]
How about wearing Rossi's love on your chest? (http://\"http://www.classicgameshows.com/other/temptationshirt.gif\")
That came out the wrong way...
That did as well.
-
[quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'173341\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 05:48 PM\']
How about wearing Rossi's love on your chest? (http://\"http://www.classicgameshows.com/other/temptationshirt.gif\")
That came out the wrong way...
That did as well.
[/quote]
I lol'd Hard.
/That too came out wrong.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'173336\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 05:19 PM\']
That works for me. (In fact, I really like it.) I could see the pot getting REALLY big REALLY fast, though.[/quote]
Not necessarily a bad thing, though, even for the bean counters. You figure your budget based on the number of chips that get played per show. Doesn't matter whether they go home a little at a time or in one big jackpot. You're counting on them going home with somebody eventually, and you budget based on that.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'173344\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 03:18 PM\']
Not necessarily a bad thing, though, even for the bean counters. You figure your budget based on the number of chips that get played per show. Doesn't matter whether they go home a little at a time or in one big jackpot. You're counting on them going home with somebody eventually, and you budget based on that.
[/quote]
True. And I missed the part about players who fail to quit in time "donating" their winnings into the jackpot, which does simplify the math a lot. I had it in my head that there was the potential for winnings to "fly away," and that that needed to be figured in.
So I guess for me the question is what is realistic in terms of the value of a chip, for a GSN budget. Still seems a little dodgy to figure out, due to how much fluctuation there can be between the number of chips played in a game: at $500 per, could be $1000 worth, could be $9,500 worth. I wonder how many trials it would take for the average to level off.
-
[quote name=\'Sodboy13\' post=\'173333\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 04:10 PM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'173331\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 03:53 PM\']
Does it work if you yank out the "tournament" nonsense? Players start with $5K in chips, you win whatever you keep, you keep playing as long as you win, $500 house minimum if it goes to a shootout?
[/quote]
Seeing as how GSN keeps their games in the $6K range, I think that could work. Figure 3 duels a show, 5 chips for an average win - that's $7,500 a show. A little pricey for GSN's current crop, but I'm guessing the contestant coordinators could make sure the chips are spent freely during gameplay, given their general casting tendencies.
[/quote]
Also, they could probably edit out fewer questions...I find it hard to believe that there was not a single question all week that both contestants did not know the answer to without pressing.
(Plus, 5 chips per average win seems generous...outside of the one-question, nine-chip winners, how many games saw the winner keep more than two or three?)
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'173334\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 06:12 PM\']
Do it sorta like the Brits (according to BothersBar)...
Dump the Tourney, but keep the growing pot. Win a game...take your winnings home or risk em for another Duel. Win 5 dues, take the pot home. Lose a game, lose your money, which gets dumped into the pot.
[/quote]
So basically a twist on the old Joker's Jackpot, which could be cool.
-
[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'173337\' date=\'Dec 28 2007, 04:25 PM\']
/Get Croton to make Duel watches as parting gifts. Those could be cool.
[/quote]
I still don't have my MGC watch. But it's only been 60 out of the 120 days to wait, so whatever.
-M
Off topic.
-
We'll obviously have to wait for official ABC confirmation, but a recent Craigslist post (http://\"http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/tfr/580680458.html\") is suggesting that Duel is coming back for a second season. No word of a huge cash jackpot like what was plastered all over the first season casting notices yet, just the promise of "Huge cash for winners", so maybe we went for the British idea of a definite amount of wins = jackpot, which I'd at least enjoy much more. I liked the trivia aspect, but the tournament format did nothing for me.
-
[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'178366\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 12:47 PM\']
We'll obviously have to wait for official ABC confirmation, but a recent Craigslist post (http://\"http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/tfr/580680458.html\") is suggesting that Duel is coming back for a second season. No word of a huge cash jackpot like what was plastered all over the first season casting notices yet, just the promise of "Huge cash for winners", so maybe we went for the British idea of a definite amount of wins = jackpot, which I'd at least enjoy much more. I liked the trivia aspect, but the tournament format did nothing for me.
[/quote]
Good. I liked it well enough, but I'm with you, I thought the tournament took away from the game, and a building jackpot is a lot more interesting.
(It's still a show to be watched via Tivo, though. You can bang through all of the actual content inside of 20 minutes.)
-
[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'178366\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 04:47 PM\'] No word of a huge cash jackpot like what was plastered all over the first season casting notices yet, just the promise of "Huge cash for winners", so maybe we went for the British idea of a definite amount of wins = jackpot, which I'd at least enjoy much more. I liked the trivia aspect, but the tournament format did nothing for me.
[/quote]
So is this close in concept to the old Joker's Jackpot? I forgot who said it or where, but as soon as I heard that, it was a eureka moment. Great mechanic, and an easy solution to the tourney format if they ever wanted to make "Duel" a regular part of the schedule.
-Jason
-
This is a show that would have benefited hugely from a faster pace, and saw no benefit whatsoever from its ginormous jackpot. ABC did itself no favors by stuffing an extra 30 minutes of dull filler into the first two episodes. The later episodes didn't exactly zip along, but were a lot more tolerable.
Encouraged by the thought of a second go-round, though. Maybe we can hope for a learned-from-their-mistakes improvement?
-
Our esteemed moderator wrote:
Encouraged by the thought of a second go-round, though. Maybe we can hope for a learned-from-their-mistakes improvement?
Sure, we'll get Celebrity Duel. ;-)
[Fedya ducks to avoid the tomatoes....]
-
Assuming it's renewed, they should air it in the summer, and should only air during the summer.
-
How the hell is that going to change things?
(not quoted so it's not visible to those who have the OP on killfile.)
-
I got a response from ABC, and all they are saying is "chatter rumors, nothing to confirm." So it's at least being thought of making the Craigslist call more believable to me.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'178369\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 02:53 PM\']
(It's still a show to be watched via Tivo, though. You can bang through all of the actual content inside of 20 minutes.)
[/quote]
I managed to make it a good eight minute watch, but that came after a few runs, learning to blow through the contestant pool bios, drawn-out pauses and fountain pen waving =]
-
[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'178371\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 01:29 PM\']So is this close in concept to the old Joker's Jackpot? [/quote]Until the most recent episode:
Each wrong answer adds £1,000 to a growing jackpot, which starts at £100,000 and grows until claimed. A first duel wins nothing, a second wins the choice of two face down chips: one bearing £10,000, the other 10%. The champ can take the money and run, or continue and try to win the jackpot with two more wins. That was changed to where a two-duel winner got to play one question against the Accelerator for up to £10,000 depending on how many chips were used to cover the answer (£10k, £5k, £2,500) There's no longer the risk factor, but I don't recall a two-time winner opting to punt the money for a shot at the big fella.
One change I like is if you fail to cover the right answer, you're out. No sudden death. The longest-serving player in the waiting pod comes out, and chooses the opposition, and the play is on.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'178397\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 09:30 PM\']
[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'178371\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 01:29 PM\']So is this close in concept to the old Joker's Jackpot? [/quote]Until the most recent episode:
Each wrong answer adds £1,000 to a growing jackpot, which starts at £100,000 and grows until claimed. A first duel wins nothing, a second wins the choice of two face down chips: one bearing £10,000, the other 10%. The champ can take the money and run, or continue and try to win the jackpot with two more wins. That was changed to where a two-duel winner got to play one question against the Accelerator for up to £10,000 depending on how many chips were used to cover the answer (£10k, £5k, £2,500) There's no longer the risk factor, but I don't recall a two-time winner opting to punt the money for a shot at the big fella.
One change I like is if you fail to cover the right answer, you're out. No sudden death. The longest-serving player in the waiting pod comes out, and chooses the opposition, and the play is on.
[/quote]
It is, truly, a fantastic game.... much better than our version. I recommend hunting it out online.
I don't like this one question change though. I like the risk involved, even if too many cautious Brits were jumping off with the safe money.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'178404\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 08:12 PM\']I don't like this one question change though. I like the risk involved, even if too many cautious Brits were jumping off with the safe money.[/quote]True enough, but the problem is that no one's taking the risk, so why bother?
I agree about how great the program is. Much like lots of things in the game show realm these days, the Brits have our number here. I'm seeing all sorts of little things that I never noticed before (was it a rule on our version that you had to lock down your answers before Pressing your opponent? One contestant wasted both of hers by getting the button pushes out of order). High marks also to the various musical bits (their stinger for when someone is under the Accelerator timer is a perfect fit), and the question writing is superb.
/And Nick Hancock doesn't insist on ending every segment with "This is Duel...on ITV!"
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'178408\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 09:33 PM\']
(was it a rule on our version that you had to lock down your answers before Pressing your opponent? One contestant wasted both of hers by getting the button pushes out of order).[/quote]
To penalize someone for doing that is stupid. The Press button simply should not light up (and subsequently work) until a player has locked in answers.
/And Nick Hancock doesn't insist on ending every segment with "This is Duel...on ITV!"
Truth? I kinda like outcues like that. It breeds a sense of familiarity, and to me it made it feel like the show was somehow more closely tied to the network. All horsepucky, of course, but that is the effect it has on me as a viewer, and if it makes the show more enjoyable for me to watch, I don't mind an assful of smoke every now and again. :)
-
Duel was OK I thought except for 3 things:
The tournament-This left a few players "stranded" in the gallery. Either make it a single-elimination event or dump it in favor of the British format.
The pacing-It was sooooo slooooow at times it felt like watching paint dry. Speed it up a bit & maybe we'll have a decent show to watch here.
The host-Greenburg wasn't my idea for a host. He was good at times, but his "screen-up/screen-down" bits were annoying. A better host would help.
Other than that, keep it like it was & maybe I'll change my tune. For now, Duel's nothing to write home about.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'178414\' date=\'Feb 21 2008, 07:34 AM\']
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'178408\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 09:33 PM\']
(was it a rule on our version that you had to lock down your answers before Pressing your opponent? One contestant wasted both of hers by getting the button pushes out of order).[/quote]
To penalize someone for doing that is stupid. The Press button simply should not light up (and subsequently work) until a player has locked in answers.
[/quote]
Light up? We'll have none of your American vulgarity over here, we have two columns of steel for contestants to pummel into the desk when they want to play an accelerator.
To be honest I don't think anyone really thought the original prize thing through. What you have is an escalating jackpot with similarly escalating walk-out prize. Right now the jackpot is £300k+, that means after two duels you would have got a shot of either £10k or over £30k, which is a lot of money. Maybe people will risk £10k for something thirty times that, it's the other prize that's the problem, that's just going to get bigger and bigger. £50k for half hour's work? Thank you very much! This also leads to potential prize budget problems, if the jackpot got to £1m they'd potentially be giving away £100k per game. Who is going to risk going on when a third win could mean turning down £100k and picking the wrong chip and leaving with "just" £20k?
No, I accept that a change was necessary, whether the current "Player vs The Accelerator" was the correct change is a decision I'll put off for a couple of weeks. But certainly if you build around a game mechanic that involves risk and nobody bothers risking then there's something wrong.
Duel UK is tanking in the ratings, it should be noted.
-
[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'178366\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 03:47 PM\']
We'll obviously have to wait for official ABC confirmation, but a recent Craigslist post (http://\"http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/tfr/580680458.html\") is suggesting that Duel is coming back for a second season. [/quote]
Recent = the day I *leave* Southern California.
Bites.
-
[quote name=\'Brig Bother\' post=\'178421\' date=\'Feb 21 2008, 05:15 AM\']
Light up? We'll have none of your American vulgarity over here, we have two columns of steel for contestants to pummel into the desk when they want to play an accelerator.[/quote]
Fine, and we won't be boiling meat anytime soon, either. In the meantime, our Duel contestants know when they've locked in and/or fired a Press and yours can keep hammering on columns ineffectively.
/you had to come up with a gimmick for getting rid of the chips and you're talking to ME about vulgarity?
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'178438\' date=\'Feb 21 2008, 12:45 PM\']
/you had to come up with a gimmick for getting rid of the chips and you're talking to ME about vulgarity?
[/quote]
Personal opinion, naturally, but the chips effortlessly dropping down into the jackpot beats superfluous eye candy fumbling them off the table seven ways to Sunday.
-
[quote name=\'Sodboy13\' post=\'178440\' date=\'Feb 21 2008, 11:05 AM\']
Personal opinion, naturally, but the chips effortlessly dropping down into the jackpot beats superfluous eye candy fumbling them off the table seven ways to Sunday.
[/quote]
And one that you're entitled to, and I'm giving Bother the benefit of the doubt and assuming that tongue was planted in cheek, but suggesting something that actually serves a useful game function is "vulgar" when they actually gimmicked their table MORE is a bit silly.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'178397\' date=\'Feb 20 2008, 09:30 PM\']
There's no longer the risk factor, but I don't recall a two-time winner opting to punt the money for a shot at the big fella.[/quote]
Nobody in the original Cash or Chips format played on for a third duel. We had two people walk away with £10,000 and one person walking with 10% (£17,000). Two weeks ago actually had no winners since we had duels with both players answering incorrectly. This problem was the same when we had Greed here, unlike the US version where nearly all the teams went on to play the four answer questions and face the terminator. Everybody was walking after the fourth question at the halfway stage (£50,000).
As Brig Bother stated, the ratings have tanked here. Last Saturday's edition performed the same as My Dad Is Better Than Your Dad. Six million watched Ant & Dec's Saturday Night Takeaway but 50% from that audience continued to watch Duel. This time last year, PokerFace was performing double the ratings Duel is getting now, it's worth noting that PokerFace is a "tournament". ITV is set to continue airing the series and is unlikely they will pull it from the schedule. However, it's almost likely the show won't return to primetime for a second series but I won't be surprised if they slash the jackpot and the chip value and run it in daytime and have it rotating with Golden Balls at 5pm.
-
[quote name=\'TravisP\' post=\'178453\' date=\'Feb 21 2008, 12:46 PM\']
However, it's almost likely the show won't return to primetime for a second series but I won't be surprised if they slash the jackpot and the chip value and run it in daytime and have it rotating with Golden Balls at 5pm.
[/quote]As drawn out as it is, that something like Duel failed and that the utter tripe that is Golden Balls succeeds tells me that our British friends are not nearly as refined as they would have us believe. :)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'178443\' date=\'Feb 21 2008, 07:27 PM\']
[quote name=\'Sodboy13\' post=\'178440\' date=\'Feb 21 2008, 11:05 AM\']
Personal opinion, naturally, but the chips effortlessly dropping down into the jackpot beats superfluous eye candy fumbling them off the table seven ways to Sunday.
[/quote]
And one that you're entitled to, and I'm giving Bother the benefit of the doubt and assuming that tongue was planted in cheek, but suggesting something that actually serves a useful game function is "vulgar" when they actually gimmicked their table MORE is a bit silly.
[/quote]
Yes, tongue firmly in cheek well done. But actually you're missing the point a bit, our accelerators serve a much more visual purpose - you've pressed it, it's gone, ergo it's pretty simple for players to know how many they have left. Visual AND tactile? Awesome.
It's also interesting to point out that Duel gets about twice the ratings of Goldenballs, but because Duel is primetime Saturday night and Goldenballs does very well for an afternoon slot, one's a failure and the other one is the second coming. I was at the pilot for Goldenballs, didn't think it was all that and was more than surprised to see it do as well as it does.
-
[quote name=\'Brig Bother\' post=\'178502\' date=\'Feb 22 2008, 03:50 AM\']
Yes, tongue firmly in cheek well done. But actually you're missing the point a bit, our accelerators serve a much more visual purpose - you've pressed it, it's gone, ergo it's pretty simple for players to know how many they have left. Visual AND tactile? Awesome.[/quote]
And if your contestants can't count to two, should they be on the show? :)
There's a happy medium here, I think: it would be pretty trivial to make these cylinders acrylic or some other plastic that can be used as a prism, and then install LEDs in the desk under them that only light upon lock-in. That way you get the cool (subdued, and functional) lighting effect and the tactile thing with the cylinders actually being there.