The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: The Pyramids on July 08, 2012, 02:24:20 PM
-
I think we can all agree on what was Bob Stewart's best format when he was off on his own, but what would be second best? Some of the choices would be 'Chain Reaction', 'Jackpot' and 'Eye Guess'. I go with "Chain Reaction'.
-
My choice, believe it, or not, is Double Talk. It used gameplay aspects from three different Stewart shows. It had phrases written in different style like on Shoot for the Stars, had two contestants, each partnered with a celebrity for the entire show compete (if both contestants won the same amount of money, they came back) like on Pyramid, and its endgame was loosely based on $50,000 a Minute (unsold pilot).
-
I've actually never seen "Eye Guess" enough to judge. My vote is "Chain Reaction", closely followed by "Go". Both have great playalong value, and could make for a great party game.
-
"Three on a Match" was my favorite.
-
"Three on a Match" was my favorite.
Jimmy wins, and pretty easily.
-
I've actually never seen "Eye Guess" enough to judge. My vote is "Chain Reaction", closely followed by "Go". Both have great playalong value, and could make for a great party game.
You really only need the one episode. Fun, cerebral and with a dash or six of humor, play-along up the wazoo, and a terrific host/announcer pairing. Great stuff.
/Double Talk?
/Rly?
-
I've actually never seen "Eye Guess" enough to judge. My vote is "Chain Reaction", closely followed by "Go". Both have great playalong value, and could make for a great party game.
Chain Reaction was a good format, and despite it having a longer run WITHOUT celebs, I still found non-celeb Chain Reaction quite dull, despite Geoff Edwards' attempts. Edwards' version also had a better scoring system. However, Cullen's version definitely had a more compelling bonus round (despite many changes in the payoffs and time allotted).
Go was, at times, fun to watch, but not everyday for a full half hour. I mean, "How...long...can...you...watch...people...talk...one...word...at...a...time...before...you...go...insane?" Playalong? Well, if you're watching with a couple of people, one not looking at the screen, that could work, but it would be hard to play along watching alone. I give Kevin O'Connell props for being a very competent host for his first and only hosting job, but this was not really amongst Bob Stewart's best shows.
I would agree with you on Eye Guess. Bill Cullen was the perfect host and I wish there were more Eye Guess shows out there. I also believe Eye Guess could've worked with other established hosts because its format was very solid and simple. Dick Clark, Geoff Edwards, Art James (he hosted a very similar game called Matches and Mates)and maybe Richard Dawson could've handled Eye Guess if Cullen wasn't available.
Jackpot!, IMO, could've had potential for a longer run if NBC hadn't decided to tinker with it by dropping the riddles in favor of trivia questions. When you have a game show with 16 contestants, how can you make each one stand out and not make them seem like people just getting face time? How well did we really know the contestants in 1 vs. 100 or Winning Lines? Not very well, because they didn't play for 5 days. Geoff was very good at keeping tabs on all 16 players and giving the viewing audience a reason to root for them. Jackpot's format was perfect for a game of riddles, and Bob Stewart should've NEVER tinkered with it by doing a celebs vs. civilians format called The Riddlers... David Letterman did a fantastic job with a very weak format, but when you have celebs that don't seem to care much for the game (Michael Mc.Kean saying "let's get this overwith" didn't help much) you're in trouble.
-
/Double Talk?
/Rly?
I think Mr. lover87 was trying to show-off his obscure game show knowledge again.
/Got "Three on a Match" from Matt a while back. Loved it.
-
If you ask me, it's a dead heat between Jackpot and Chain Reaction. (the 1980's versions, that is.....)
Cordially,
Tammy
-
My vote goes to the one-word-at-a-time format. Yes, I actually enjoy it. Mainly for its comic potential when things got off-track, but yes, I unabashedly enjoyed it. Pyramid, of course, is best, but I like to think of shows like Go as an expansion of the main concept. The flaws in the one-at-a-time format were in its various executions: the Get Rich Quick pilot had good potential, but was stymied mainly by Steve Edwards's uncomfortable hosting. Go was clunky with one player bouncing from one end of the table to the other. As the bonus round to Chain Reaction, you almost needed a schedule to keep up with the changes in payouts. I thought Chain's main game could get dull with lower-key players.
If it were me (and it were about 25 years earlier), I'd bring the concept back to its roots as Quick and add a couple touches from Pyramid.
Double Talk? Not with Henry Polic II as host, and probably not even as a game of synonyms. Next time I get enough of the right people together (GSC, anyone?), I'd like to see if it works as a game of opposites instead.
-
"Three on a Match" was my favorite.
Jimmy wins, and pretty easily.
Yes I definitely agree here, but I was considering the list and I have little knowledge of Winning Streak, aside from the one episode floating around. Does anyone recall the game getting really exciting at any point?
-
Does anyone recall the game getting really exciting at any point?
I don't think it ever did, but it was still one of my favorites growing up.
Nevertheless, the existence of Three on a Match makes this conversation moot. As far as I'm concerned you can now discuss Stewart's Third.
/Actually, that's Go. So Stewart's Fourth, please.
-
"Three on a Match" was my favorite.
Jimmy wins, and pretty easily.
Between this and "Eye Guess," 3oaM was pretty solid to say the least.
-
I don't think it ever did, but it was still one of my favorites growing up.
I adore the money round format, and as a way to help out a friend with spelling and word-building, I cobbled together a set and spruced it up, and I found that it is regularly exciting. That's probably because I refused to wuss out before I have five letters face up and we're not actually playing for money, but it has morphed into something decent nearly forty years later.
-
Depends on what you want. Watchability? Three On A Match had it - somewhat- but mostly thanks to Bill. Okay game, but, IMO, not great. In some ways, my choice, Chain Reaction, wasn't a great game as far as the history of game shows goes, but it has great playability. I just had my daughter, son in law and four grandkids down to see us. Kids ages range from 8 to 15. Tried to think of a game we could all play, and I broke out Chain Reaction. Everybody loved it! And the younger kids even surprised me with how they came up with the answers. They have demanded I make them a copy. CR is the most playable, cleverest Password spin-off (I tend to call it vertical Password). CR has also been popular in other countries, where I'm not aware of a UK Jackpot or Three On A Match. Other Stewart games have done better, but I'll put Chain as among my top 3 ever. Pyramid, Chain, Eye Guess.
-
I'd probably put Jackpot second, and Three on a Match third.
Chain Reaction was OK, but the Geoff Edwards version was kind of dry. I did like Double Talk, but only saw two episodes of it (the debut and finale, both of which GSN ran). I remember Shoot for the Stars quite well and would probably rank that just head of DT.
Not meaning to start any arguments or anything, but I must admit I'm surprised by the love for Go on this forum. I never really cared for it and I'm not surprised it was cancelled so quickly. I just can't see what's so appealing about that show.
-
Not meaning to start any arguments or anything, but I must admit I'm surprised by the love for Go on this forum. I never really cared for it and I'm not surprised it was cancelled so quickly. I just can't see what's so appealing about that show.
I would be interested to see a comparison of "likes communications games like Go" to "is good at communication games like Go." Not saying you are or aren't, but it would not surprise me to learn that the people who worship at the altar of Bob Stewart's Communication Games (so Password, Pyramid, Go, etc.) also happen to be some of the better players of them.
-
I'd have to go with Three on a Match also, though Chain Reaction and Eye Guess are right up there. And to whomever was talking about foreign versions, Reg Grundy did
copy import Three on a Match to Australia in the early 70s.
-
Three On A Match is certainly high on my list, as are Eye Guess and Go (which, for the record, was very fast-paced).
And to whomever was talking about foreign versions, Reg Grundy did copy import Three on a Match to Australia in the early 70s.
Yeah, the man imported a lot of classic games, which apparently included an Aussie Second Chance in 1977 (http://www.memorabletv.com/australia/tvas.htm).
CR has also been popular in other countries, where I'm not aware of a UK Jackpot or Three On A Match.
Jacpot (http://ukgameshows.com/ukgs/Jacpot) (different spelling) ran for about six years on S4C, slightly longer than Lucky Ladders. TOAM had an Australian version in at least 1973.
-
I liked Three On A Match very much ... but I absolutely loved Eye Guess. Cullen was perfect for it, and the comedy aspect of it, makes it one that I'd love to see reborn.
-
Not meaning to start any arguments or anything, but I must admit I'm surprised by the love for Go on this forum. I never really cared for it and I'm not surprised it was cancelled so quickly. I just can't see what's so appealing about that show.
Thank you! There are times I wonder if I am the only one who did not like it. Go was completely unwatchable for me.
-
For me, Stewart's Second is The $xx,000 Pyramid because I have Jackpot(!) at the top of mine.
-
Thanks for the info on the imports. I'll agree the Edwards version was dry, but it didn't help that the show looked like it was so done on the cheap, along with the rule changes and the lack of a studio audience. The only attraction was the basic game...what is the next linking word? So if you like that kind of game in general, you tolerate it. With the absence of the original bonus game, it just kinda stayed flat. As to GO, since we're still tossing opinions , I think Bob's original 1980 CR bonus was one of tv's cleverest and most demanding. Add that you were playing for $10,000, and you have an exciting 90 seconds. Just like Pyramid - you start with a simple game, then move on to an exciting, pulse-pounding bonus. GO was just too much of a good game idea, awkwardly played. I also found it hard to watch. An entire half-hour game based on the Pyramid winner's circle might be a bit much, too. Kinda like eating only desserts. Both bonus games were something you looked forward to as special moments in the overall game. But that's me...
And ya know, I hope Bob's friends and family hear and appreciate the love we're pouring on him and his shows....
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
EDIT: Just happened to remember that one of my favorite Stewart pilots, CAUGHT IN THE ACT with Jim Peck was pretty much an elongated variation of the Pyramid end game. However, it wasn't played under a high-pressure time limit. It was more laid back and played for laughs as well. It can be done.
Watched a GO on You Tube to refresh my memory on exact rules. Another thing that bugged me about this game was: A team plays a list of words and comes up with a time score. Another team plays a totally different set of words in an attempt to beat the first team's time. I know it's a tossup as to which is possibly worse...the chance that you might draw a list of words that could be harder to communicate than a previous one (the writers assuming all words are equally easy to develop clues for), or the potential boredom that some people might get from watching two teams play the same list of words. A personal preference would be having both teams play the same list of words - having, say, team B in some sort of simple soundproof isolation until it's their turn to play the same word list. Part of the fun could come from seeing how different minds attack the same words, and if they do it more skillfully than the other team. It's a nit-pick, I know, but in this type of game, it's a preference.
-
Agreed with the above, in that the Go/Instant Reaction/Get Rich Quick mechanic was wonderful, but I liked it more as a part of a whole, rather than the whole. And going back to an earlier point: as somebody who is very good at word games (and this one is terribly fun to play), watching "Go" was often a little frustrating. There's a difference between watching somebody forget the obvious "next word" to a question-to-be, versus the people who never seem to "get it," and can't handle a sudden shift in the question. It's fun to watch two people who are really good at it come from different directions and still pull out a win. But the idea wasn't around long enough for people to develop that talent. I think more celebrities than contestants work in that game, because at least they could be on often enough to develop the skill, and/or have a natural knack for improvising.
-Jason
-
What irks me about Go: After a while, seeing contestants "talk... like... uh um oh... that... kind... oh uh... way... um geez... is..." can seriously grate on me.
But, is it fun to play? Absolutely.
-
For me it's Jackpot (the 74-75 riddle version), then Eye Guess. In fairness, there are others that could easily go ahead of EG, but for its time it was a simple, cute, and clever idea that, as Bob always liked to say, would have the home viewer calling out to the TV. The closest runner-up would be ToaM. And, like a few of you others, although I like *playing* Go, it was too much of the same thing for my viewing tastes.
By the way, when I interviewed Geoff about 15 years ago, the impression I got was that it wasn't Stewart's decision to go from riddles to trivia questions on Jackpot; it came from the network, who had let focus groups determine the direction of the show.
-
By the way, when I interviewed Geoff about 15 years ago, the impression I got was that it wasn't Stewart's decision to go from riddles to trivia questions on Jackpot; it came from the network, who had let focus groups determine the direction of the show.
No, that was what happened: Lin Bolen listened to focus groups who didn't like riddles -- and perhaps as a side effect, the show got really cheap (the Super Jackpot maximum went from $50,000 to $10,000). Stewart didn't like the change, and neither did Geoff.
(Source: Game Show Utopia (http://www.game-show-utopia.net/geoff/jackpot74/jackpot.htm).)
-
Among shows where I've seen more than one episode, I'd go with the riddle version of Jackpot, but the one ep of Eye Guess makes it seem like a lot of fun.
-
Watched a GO on You Tube to refresh my memory on exact rules. (snip) A personal preference would be having both teams play the same list of words - having, say, team B in some sort of simple soundproof isolation until it's their turn to play the same word list. Part of the fun could come from seeing how different minds attack the same words, and if they do it more skillfully than the other team. It's a nit-pick, I know, but in this type of game, it's a preference.
I think it would have worked. It worked okay on Show-Offs.
-
I just can't see what's so appealing about that show.
I find it interesting to see how long (or even if) people can stay on the same wavelength. A good player can take a botch and work it into something successful and seeing if that can be done - and quickly enough to keep a good enough score to win the round - is part of the fun for me.
-
I think more celebrities than contestants work in that game, because at least they could be on often enough to develop the skill, and/or have a natural knack for improvising.
Related to that: ISTR that for the first week or so, one loss sent a team home. There's no doubt that the change improved the game play.
-
Related to that: ISTR that for the first week or so, one loss sent a team home. There's no doubt that the change improved the game play.
I remember it being longer, and Wiki is saying the first four weeks had that format.
-Jason
-
When I got a ToaM episode in a trade, it took me a while to figure out all the rules (the bidding process, how was a $ amount determined, where & when you can call on a box/column,...). That said, despite all of the initial confusion, I have it as my 2nd favorite Stewart show, followed by Chain Reaction.
-
Lin Bolen listened to focus groups who didn't like riddles -- and perhaps as a side effect, the show got really cheap (the Super Jackpot maximum went from $50,000 to $10,000).
(Source: Game Show Utopia (http://www.game-show-utopia.net/geoff/jackpot74/jackpot.htm).)
Keep in mind that it became much easier to win the Super Jackpot (whoever found the Jackpot riddle had to answer all of the remaining riddles - even if it was just one (you couldn't win the Super Jackpot if the Jackpot riddle was the last one uncovered) - to win it). Of course, they "balanced" that with the rule where, if somebody went for the Super Jackpot, the Jackpot went back down to zero, win or lose.