-
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.
-
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].
-
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.
-
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.
-
[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 (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7489&st=14\"):
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.
-
[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
-
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.....
-
[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.
-
[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. :)
-
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.
-
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....
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
[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?
-
I guess I'm showing my (young) age because I do tend to prefer monitors, video walls, and whatnot over the old-fashioned pull-cards. Then again, I much preferred the old eggcrate score displays over the modern vane ones. I guess I'd say that when it comes to game shows, I'm a child of the 80s and early 90s. I also can appreciate TPiR's retro charms.
But all in all, I don't really care that much about little things like that. I think as long as a game show has a reasonably attractive-looking set, and it works, it won't detract from the quality of the show. And while I'm not of the opinion that a show's aesthetics don't matter at all, I do of course agree with the original poster that the game itself is always the most important thing.
-
[quote name=\'chris319\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 08:23 PM\']
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.
[snapback]80826[/snapback]
[/quote]
You mean like a certain fellow who's initials are ZH?
-
On a slightly related note, do you guys prefer having a car on set (a la TPIR), a film clip of the car rolling down the highway (TTD) or a miniature plastic model of a car (Hot Seat) or does that even matter?
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 11:29 PM\']On a slightly related note, do you guys prefer having a car on set (a la TPIR), a film clip of the car rolling down the highway (TTD) or a miniature plastic model of a car (Hot Seat) or does that even matter?
[snapback]80837[/snapback]
[/quote]
To me, a car on-set just adds a certain flair to the show. If I know the show offers a car and they just show stock footage (B&E shows/80s Pyramid), somehow the set feels "empty." Although in the case of stock footage, the car was just an occasional incentive, and not something offered every single show.
When HSq came back in 1998, I found it kinda weird that a car wasn't on-stage until the 2002 revamp.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 10:51 PM\']Then how does TPiR fill their audience with college students every day?
[snapback]80833[/snapback]
[/quote]
Please.
1. Cute Models
2. Winning a car or cash with little to no pricing knowledge needed
3. Ability to be on TV and make a complete idiot of yourself
4. An occasionally charismatic host
5. "Bob, I've been waiting my whole life to say this...$420" (Though that would be under #3, though.)
There are plenty of reasons that TPiR is popular, and I highly doubt that the straight-out-of-the-seventies set is one of them. In fact, I would like to see how the younger set would react to Davidson's more modern, primetime-y PiR set. The stagnation is more likely for the Little Old Ladies that have been watching on their Admirals since Barker had black hair. Not that they help matters much.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 11:29 PM\']On a slightly related note, do you guys prefer having a car on set (a la TPIR), a film clip of the car rolling down the highway (TTD) or a miniature plastic model of a car (Hot Seat) or does that even matter?
[snapback]80837[/snapback]
[/quote]
Definitely cars on set. They add realism to the show & you knew exactly that you're playing for a car. Seeing it on film leaves some variables as to the actual car being offered. So, the on-set cars are my choice.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 12:34 AM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 10:51 PM\']Then how does TPiR fill their audience with college students every day?
[snapback]80833[/snapback]
[/quote]
Please.
1. Cute Models
2. Winning a car or cash with little to no pricing knowledge needed
3. Ability to be on TV and make a complete idiot of yourself
4. An occasionally charismatic host
5. "Bob, I've been waiting my whole life to say this...$420" (Though that would be under #3, though.)
There are plenty of reasons that TPiR is popular, and I highly doubt that the straight-out-of-the-seventies set is one of them. In fact, I would like to see how the younger set would react to Davidson's more modern, primetime-y PiR set.
[snapback]80839[/snapback]
[/quote]
Given the five reasons you yourself just listed, I can't imagine why you'd think they'd give a damn.
[quote name=\'Craig Karlberg\']Definitely cars on set. They add realism to the show & you knew exactly that you're playing for a car. Seeing it on film leaves some variables as to the actual car being offered.[/quote]
...and yep, you're still an idiot.
-
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!
And I have to admit, I loved the old, clunky, mechanical Concentration board.
Agree with the assessment of "Classic Concentration". It always bugged me how the contestant or Alex would walk off camera, then they'd dissolve to a shot of him in front of the puzzle. I would have at least liked to have seen a monitor with the game board in it - but it was probably done the same way most weather forcasts are done, by standing in front of a blue or green screen and using a chroma-key.
As for the old board, I liked it too but can understand why they made the change. The old board required cutting the puzzle into 30 pieces and inserting them into the trilons on the board. I've read on various sites over the years what a colossal pain that was!
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 06:53 AM\']Given the five reasons you yourself just listed, I can't imagine why you'd think they'd give a damn.[/quote]
I don't know, I just think that might appreciate something different, unlike the aged LFaTs the show has.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 01:34 AM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 10:51 PM\']Then how does TPiR fill their audience with college students every day?[/quote]
Please.
1. Cute Models
2. Winning a car or cash with little to no pricing knowledge needed
3. Ability to be on TV and make a complete idiot of yourself
4. An occasionally charismatic host
5. "Bob, I've been waiting my whole life to say this...$420" (Though that would be under #3, though.)[/quote]
Your own point being that there are plenty of reasons to enjoy a game show besides cutting-edge computer graphics, and that low-tech alternatives are not by themselves a deterrent to enjoyment, and certainly not a reason to be "laughed out of syndication".
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:23 AM\']
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!
And I have to admit, I loved the old, clunky, mechanical Concentration board.
Agree with the assessment of "Classic Concentration". It always bugged me how the contestant or Alex would walk off camera, then they'd dissolve to a shot of him in front of the puzzle. I would have at least liked to have seen a monitor with the game board in it - but it was probably done the same way most weather forcasts are done, by standing in front of a blue or green screen and using a chroma-key.
As for the old board, I liked it too but can understand why they made the change. The old board required cutting the puzzle into 30 pieces and inserting them into the trilons on the board. I've read on various sites over the years what a colossal pain that was!
[snapback]80854[/snapback]
[/quote]
Of course, the change had to be made. All I would've asked is that they built a set piece for a giant monitor to establish where the contestants were looking at.
Personally, I would've preferred having Trebek behind a podium, as well, rather than standing between the contestants all the time. He kept having to shift around to allow the viewers to see the prize list behind him. But with the exception of the car display, the entire "CC" set was not one of G-T/MGP's finer moments.
Otherwise, I can accept computerized readouts--just let me know where they're seeing them.
-
I prefer monitors because of the technology. But this is a double-edged sword because the cpu that operates the game, can malfunction...and the manually operated game board can...malfunction as well. Me personally, I like update technology on some shows like, Rafferty's Blockbusters, and classic manual items as seen on TPIR. Doesn't the idea of using monitors for a game board depend on how the set designer designs the set of a particular show or what the producer wants?
-
[quote name=\'14gameshows\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:41 AM\']Doesn't the idea of using monitors for a game board depend on how the set designer designs the set of a particular show or what the producer wants?
[snapback]80871[/snapback]
[/quote]
That and budget. The difference in costs can be huge.
Randy
tvrandywest.com
-
[quote name=\'14gameshows\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:41 AM\']I prefer monitors because of the technology. But this is a double-edged sword because the cpu that operates the game, can malfunction...
[snapback]80871[/snapback]
[/quote]
I remember watching 'CC' and 1 "Wild!" card and one prize was still left on the board. The contestant matched the prize naturally, with the "Wild!" card being left on the board all alone. Guess what? The computer wouldn't remove the card. (It was dead center, so it didn't cover much)
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:16 AM\']Your own point being that there are plenty of reasons to enjoy a game show besides cutting-edge computer graphics, and that low-tech alternatives are not by themselves a deterrent to enjoyment, and certainly not a reason to be "laughed out of syndication".
[snapback]80859[/snapback]
[/quote]
PiR is established, though. I doubt that a new game show could get away with being so far behind in the times. The residual oldness can make it hard to get a new audience to take PiR seriously. After all, what is the first thing people see when they are flipping the channels? The old set? The old games? The aging host? It's good to keep things fresh!
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:23 AM\']Agree with the assessment of "Classic Concentration". It always bugged me how the contestant or Alex would walk off camera, then they'd dissolve to a shot of him in front of the puzzle. I would have at least liked to have seen a monitor with the game board in it - but it was probably done the same way most weather forcasts are done, by standing in front of a blue or green screen and using a chroma-key.
As for the old board, I liked it too but can understand why they made the change. The old board required cutting the puzzle into 30 pieces and inserting them into the trilons on the board. I've read on various sites over the years what a colossal pain that was!
[snapback]80854[/snapback]
[/quote]
I thought Concentration lent itself perfectly to a video wall, where the individual numbers are each on their own screen yet pieced together the whole puzzle. And, of course, this video wall should be on stage.
Classic Concentration was sort of stuck between out-moded and hi-tech. The graphics didn't look sleek and modern by any means, they still had the cards for the prize lists, and the puzzles would have looked better (or at least hipper) had they been drawn on a digital medium.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 02:10 PM\'][quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:16 AM\']Your own point being that there are plenty of reasons to enjoy a game show besides cutting-edge computer graphics, and that low-tech alternatives are not by themselves a deterrent to enjoyment, and certainly not a reason to be "laughed out of syndication".
[snapback]80859[/snapback]
[/quote]
PiR is established, though. I doubt that a new game show could get away with being so far behind in the times. The residual oldness can make it hard to get a new audience to take PiR seriously. After all, what is the first thing people see when they are flipping the channels? The old set? The old games? The aging host? It's good to keep things fresh!
[snapback]80891[/snapback]
[/quote]
...unless people express that they like things to stay the same, which is generally the vibe I get from normal people who I happen to be talking to about The Price is Right.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 07:31 PM\']...unless people express that they like things to stay the same, which is generally the vibe I get from normal people who I happen to be talking to about The Price is Right.
[snapback]80941[/snapback]
[/quote]
Good for you. The vibe I get is usually a)"That show's still on?" or b)"That guy's still hosting?" or c)"Sheesh, it looks the same." or d)"You watch that show?" Not as positive. It just depends.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 07:40 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 07:31 PM\']...unless people express that they like things to stay the same, which is generally the vibe I get from normal people who I happen to be talking to about The Price is Right.
[snapback]80941[/snapback]
[/quote]
Good for you. The vibe I get is usually a)"That show's still on?" or b)"That guy's still hosting?" or c)"Sheesh, it looks the same." or d)"You watch that show?" Not as positive. It just depends.
[snapback]80944[/snapback]
[/quote]
Those sound like people who wouldn't like the show even if Plinko were played on a monitor. Why try to attract them at all?
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:06 PM\']Those sound like people who wouldn't like the show even if Plinko were played on a monitor. Why try to attract them at all?
[snapback]80948[/snapback]
[/quote]
There isn't much hatred for it, just...surprise. I guess people can really underestimate a daytime show's lasting power when primetime changes all the time. I get the same surprise when I talk about long-running soaps like Bold and Beautiful and Young and Restless.
-
I don't watch as many soaps as I used to, but I think they embrace the familiar as well. Susan Lucci has been on AMC longer than Bob's been on TPIR. Susan Flannery is still on B&B and Doug Davidson still toils on Y&R.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:12 PM\'][quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:06 PM\']Those sound like people who wouldn't like the show even if Plinko were played on a monitor. Why try to attract them at all?
[snapback]80948[/snapback]
[/quote]
There isn't much hatred for it, just...surprise. I guess people can really underestimate a daytime show's lasting power when primetime changes all the time. I get the same surprise when I talk about long-running soaps like Bold and Beautiful and Young and Restless.
[snapback]80950[/snapback]
[/quote]
So basically, you're saying that the people who actually watch the show may very well like it the way it is, but that you can't be sure because you haven't talked to any of them.
Now, since the show is consistently either #1 or #2 in Daytime...why screw with it just because you personally don't like it?
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:09 PM\']So basically, you're saying that the people who actually watch the show may very well like it the way it is, but that you can't be sure because you haven't talked to any of them.[/quote]No, my point is that when those Little Old Ladies keel over, they might have trouble getting younger bodies in the seats at home...where it counts.
Now, since the show is consistently either #1 or #2 in Daytime...why screw with it just because you personally don't like it?
[snapback]80970[/snapback]
Didn't you just answer your own question, Steven? It's just a suggestion. Just because they're Number One now doesn't mean that they can't improve. I think that they could modernize the show slowly. That way they won't alienate the current viewership (who may or may not care one way or the other) and attract a younger audience that may have dismissed the show previously.
-
Thank god...I thought I was the only one who felt this way!
I too feel that a slow modernization of show could work. Leave the games manual, but use classier styles on the doors, a more defined turntable, better computer graphics, and please- less pink. I think red, purple, blue and green would look good.
-
I had a thought. I also had a question. In fact, I still have a question. I may as well ask it. Here I go:
Given various factors, such as the advancement of flat-screen display technology quality- and price-wise, and the possibility of a better-looking, maybe better-produced game, would it be feasible to have one or both sides of the big turntable on TPIR be a video screen?
Possible uses: Off-screen: showing the name of the contestant that's coming on down, especially in the opening; showing the one-bids, so contestants will quit asking "What was the highest bid?". On-screen: use to play some games, such as Any Number, Bonus Game, Clock Game; when not otherwise in use, show the TPIR logo in front of the blue/pink sparkly pattern.
And of course, it'd look purty. But as I said, would it be feasible? Would it cost too much to install? Too much effort to operate, possibly? Just plain not worth the investment, perhaps? I wouldn't know, because due to my being a crazed game show fan, my perceptions of the difference between fantasy and reality are sumewhat clouded.
On another note, speaking of being a crazed gmaew show fan: I know this will never happen, but I think it'd be really cool-lookin' if the *doors* were flat-screen display panels. They'd slide behind one another to open.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:45 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:09 PM\']Now, since the show is consistently either #1 or #2 in Daytime...why screw with it just because you personally don't like it?
[snapback]80970[/snapback]
[/quote]Didn't you just answer your own question, Steven? It's just a suggestion. Just because they're Number One now doesn't mean that they can't improve. I think that they could modernize the show slowly. That way they won't alienate the current viewership (who may or may not care one way or the other) and attract a younger audience that may have dismissed the show previously.
[snapback]80978[/snapback]
[/quote]
1.) My name is not Steven. Do not call me that again.
2.) They've left things basically the same, aside from the color changes in Season 31, and their ratings have gone up. Obviously, they're improving already.
3.) If the audience, as you suggested, doesn't know the show is still on, making it less recognizable won't keep them from flipping by it while they're channelsurfing.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:09 PM\']Now, since the show is consistently either #1 or #2 in Daytime...why screw with it just because you personally don't like it?
[snapback]80970[/snapback]
[/quote]
Ask Fred Silverman.
-
I don't watch as many soaps as I used to, but I think they embrace the familiar as well. Susan Lucci has been on AMC longer than Bob's been on TPIR. Susan Flannery is still on B&B and Doug Davidson still toils on Y&R.
I think one thing that bugged me about soaps is that games always came and went (with the possible exception of "Price is Right"), but most soaps seemed to go on forever.
I was always surprised - and a little delighted - when I saw the next week's TV Guide and "Last show of the series" was listed under a soap. Didn't happen very often.
Quite frequently game shows would be replaced by soaps - either new ones or expanded ones. I don't think there were too many instances of it happening the other way around. I can only think of a couple: "Tattletales" replacing "Secret Storm" in 1974, and "Wordplay" replacing "Search for Tomorrow" in 1986.
I'm sure there are others...that's just all that I could think of off the top of my head.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Apr 8 2005, 07:57 AM\']
Quite frequently game shows would be replaced by soaps - either new ones or expanded ones. I don't think there were too many instances of it happening the other way around. I can only think of a couple: "Tattletales" replacing "Secret Storm" in 1974, and "Wordplay" replacing "Search for Tomorrow" in 1986.
[snapback]80998[/snapback]
[/quote]
Texas and the Doctors on NBC were replaced by $otC, Hit Man, and Just Men on 1/3/83. Scrabble93 and Scattergories replaced Santa Barbara on NBC on 1/18/93.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 11:46 PM\']2.) They've left things basically the same, aside from the color changes in Season 31, and their ratings have gone up. Obviously, they're improving already.[/quote]But who's to say that they wouldn't improve more if they implemented some changes. That's the problem. TPiR fans can be way too...complacent. Set in their ways.
3.) If the audience, as you suggested, doesn't know the show is still on, making it less recognizable won't keep them from flipping by it while they're channelsurfing.
[snapback]80986[/snapback]
If they don't know it's still on, then the don't know which parts are 10 years old or 15 years old...just that they're old. It's probably not recognizable to them now. But a more modern set will help it stand out.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 8 2005, 09:22 AM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 11:46 PM\']2.) They've left things basically the same, aside from the color changes in Season 31, and their ratings have gone up. Obviously, they're improving already.[/quote]But who's to say that they wouldn't improve more if they implemented some changes. That's the problem. TPiR fans can be way too...complacent. Set in their ways.
3.) If the audience, as you suggested, doesn't know the show is still on, making it less recognizable won't keep them from flipping by it while they're channelsurfing.
[snapback]80986[/snapback]
If they don't know it's still on, then the don't know which parts are 10 years old or 15 years old...just that they're old. It's probably not recognizable to them now. But a more modern set will help it stand out.
[snapback]81008[/snapback]
[/quote]
Your first point, I admit, is valid...we're just not going to agree on that one.
Your second point, though...no. If Price suddenly looked more like every other game show on the air, it would stand out a lot less.
(And Travis pointed out to me last night that my first statement sounded kinda angry. I should point out that I don't want to be called "Steven" because my name is Stephen. :-)
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 8 2005, 09:32 AM\']Your second point, though...no. If Price suddenly looked more like every other game show on the air, it would stand out a lot less.
[snapback]81010[/snapback]
[/quote]
I messed up that point. TPiR stands out now, but not in a good way. With J! and WoF using video walls and computers, and even GSN's Originals were pretty modern with their graphics. Price is Right probably looks behind in times, and modernizing would be like catching up.
-
[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 8 2005, 10:56 AM\']I messed up that point. TPiR stands out now, but not in a good way. With J! and WoF using video walls and computers, and even GSN's Originals were pretty modern with their graphics. Price is Right probably looks behind in times, and modernizing would be like catching up.[/quote]
Except that for whatever reason, part of the appeal of TPIR seems to be its throwback look. Remember, it really wasn't all that long ago that they tried to give us a version of TPIR that had cool, modern, high-tech touches and frankly, it was "laughed out of syndication".
What you're defending is the fact that you personally like shows to look more high tech and your opinion that a lot of other people share your view. I tend to feel that beyond a minimum level of competence, the height of the tech really isn't much of a factor for viewers. I don't think either attitude can be conclusively proven; there are lots of examples on either side.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Apr 8 2005, 07:57 AM\']
I don't watch as many soaps as I used to, but I think they embrace the familiar as well. Susan Lucci has been on AMC longer than Bob's been on TPIR. Susan Flannery is still on B&B and Doug Davidson still toils on Y&R.
I think one thing that bugged me about soaps is that games always came and went (with the possible exception of "Price is Right"), but most soaps seemed to go on forever.
I was always surprised - and a little delighted - when I saw the next week's TV Guide and "Last show of the series" was listed under a soap. Didn't happen very often.
[snapback]80998[/snapback]
[/quote]
Part of it is that Conventional Wisdom states that a soap needs at least a year to determine if it's drawing an audience. The opinion is that viewers make their minds up on game shows faster.
It also should be noted that while a game show could be put on the air weeks after a pitch is made, it usually takes a year from the network's commitment to a soap to get the show on the air (and who knows how long from an initial pitch), due to bible and storyline development, casting, etc. It just happens that soaps are a bigger investment in time and money and the networks act more conservatively and are more likely to make changes than drop the hook, unless the ratings are hovering towards slash marks. (It's also more difficult to make changes in storylines drawn up weeks, if not months, in advance.)
Meanwhile, if a game show's tanking, they may have changes made a few weeks in. If not, it's gone--and back in the day, there were more shows out there ready to replace it.
-
On the subject of modernizing game shows and of Price is Right, wasn't there an interview made with Bob Barker several years ago in which he said the show was going to get an updated look and feel? And wasn't there an outcry from fans for them to leave the show the way it was? The interview may have been an E! True Hollywood Story. Correct me if I'm wrong.
-
Think of the kind of programming that appeals to the youth market. "Survivor," "Fear Factor," "Trading Spaces," "Amazing Race," "Pimp My Ride." Not only are there no fancy giant screens on set, there's no set at all.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Apr 8 2005, 10:25 AM\']I tend to feel that beyond a minimum level of competence, the height of the tech really isn't much of a factor for viewers.
[/quote]
Save for us, of course. We care deeply beyond measure. :)
Isn't it very much a matter of what we're used to? In an alternate universe, where the "original" $10K Pyramid set was comprised of monitors, think of the hoopla there'd be when a revival brought in a board with trilons.
There's no reason that "Millionaire" couldn't have a Very Large Display on stage showing a contestant's progress up the ladder...and there'd probably be (among us) outcry if a redesign put one on stage.
And my wife says *I'm* unwilling to accept change...
-
Well, I watched the MDS Saturday night with a view at looking to see at which of the stage games could be electronically updated.
Decision? 2 out of 6--One Away could be played with one monitor and the numbers Chyronned (Barker doesn't have to turn the blocks). That's Too Much! could work with the prices on the monitors (and Barker could still hit the buttons to "activate" the monitors).
Also, yeah, you could put a monitor on Push Over for the ARP. But Push Over's main visual punch is those blocks falling into the trash can. And the other games on the show that night don't really need to be punched up (Coming or Going, in particular, is a great use of gravity as a display technique and shouldn't be changed at all).
Yeah, Clock Game needs an update bad--and I could buy a CG Hans for Cliff Hangers (let's not make his death graphic, though). I could also see Credit Card redone to look like a 2004 ATM (complete with one of the models doing a computer voice "your limit is--Two-thousand-four-hundred dollars"--of course, they'd have to pay the model more for speaking). And there are other boards that need a refurbishing. But there are other areas of "TPIR" that I'd fool around with more before the game boards.
(In fact, I'd rather do It's in the Bag with *real* bags, with the prices painted on them. Of course, unless all of the items are the same weight, it may be difficult for Barker to feign heaviness--but I think they'd look better than the fake bags and be one less mechanical thing to worry about.)
-
[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 04:19 PM\'](Coming or Going, in particular, is a great use of gravity as a display technique and shouldn't be changed at all)[/quote]
That poses an interesting side question: How would TPIR be affected if it were played on the moon???
1. Bob could sprint out of the big doors like he used to.
2. Hans the Cliffhanger guy wouldn't fall off the cliff - he'd simply float away.
3. Money Game cards would float out of their slots, resulting in easy wins.
4. Plinko and Let 'em Roll would have to be retired.
5. Each Showcase Showdown would take 13 hours.
6. Enthusiastic contestants who jump risk busting their skulls on studio lights.
7. New car prizes would be replaced with lunar rovers.
These are the kinds of things I think about in my spare time.
-
[quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 05:08 PM\']These are the kinds of things I think about in my spare time.
[snapback]81527[/snapback]
[/quote]
And that explains more about you than your idiotic post.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 05:18 PM\']And that explains more about you than your idiotic post.
[snapback]81530[/snapback]
[/quote]
Let's see you do better, Copernicus.
-
[quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 05:23 PM\']Let's see you do better, Copernicus.
[/quote]
I assure you, Matt has a long history of intelligent and useful posts to this forum.
You have rather a long way to go.
-
[quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 05:08 PM\']2. Hans the Cliffhanger guy wouldn't fall off the cliff - he'd simply float away.
3. Money Game cards would float out of their slots, resulting in easy wins.
4. Plinko and Let 'em Roll would have to be retired.[/quote]
"The moon" != "outer space"
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 08:09 PM\'][quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 05:08 PM\']2. Hans the Cliffhanger guy wouldn't fall off the cliff - he'd simply float away.
3. Money Game cards would float out of their slots, resulting in easy wins.
4. Plinko and Let 'em Roll would have to be retired.[/quote]
"The moon" != "outer space"
[snapback]81555[/snapback]
[/quote]
Good to know you folks have a sense of humor. Let's get back to a far more important discussion...like WHAT STUDIO WAS USED TO TAPE CARD SHARKS EP.#423.
-
[quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 08:35 PM\'][quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 08:09 PM\'][quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 05:08 PM\']2. Hans the Cliffhanger guy wouldn't fall off the cliff - he'd simply float away.
3. Money Game cards would float out of their slots, resulting in easy wins.
4. Plinko and Let 'em Roll would have to be retired.[/quote]
"The moon" != "outer space"
[snapback]81555[/snapback]
[/quote]
Good to know you folks have a sense of humor.
[snapback]81557[/snapback]
[/quote]
Well, if your post had been remotely funny, maybe we would have laughed.
-
[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 10:25 PM\'][quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 08:35 PM\'][quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 08:09 PM\'][quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 05:08 PM\']2. Hans the Cliffhanger guy wouldn't fall off the cliff - he'd simply float away.
3. Money Game cards would float out of their slots, resulting in easy wins.
4. Plinko and Let 'em Roll would have to be retired.[/quote]
"The moon" != "outer space"
[snapback]81555[/snapback]
[/quote]
Good to know you folks have a sense of humor.
[snapback]81557[/snapback]
[/quote]
Well, if your post had been remotely funny, maybe we would have laughed.
[snapback]81568[/snapback]
[/quote]
Oh come on folks, lighten up. I got a few giggles out of it.
-
[quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 06:08 PM\']
5. Each Showcase Showdown would take 13 hours.
6. Enthusiastic contestants who jump risk busting their skulls on studio lights.
7. New car prizes would be replaced with lunar rovers.
These are the kinds of things I think about in my spare time.
[snapback]81527[/snapback]
[/quote]
These are absolutely stupid.
So stupid I'm finding them unbelievably funny.
5 especially...Bob sometimes brings up a strong spin and them going into Y&R...He'd be talking about them going into Craig Ferguson at this point!
-
[quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 08:35 PM\']Good to know you folks have a sense of humor. Let's get back to a far more important discussion...like WHAT STUDIO WAS USED TO TAPE CARD SHARKS EP.#423.[/quote]
Yes, I'm often glad to know that I have a sense of humor. It's right up there with knowing about the moon's gravity.
Now, go find me anywhere on this board talking about what show taped in what studio, or what syndicator was airing what version of what show on what independently-owned network on Septober 34, 1919. Good luck.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 05:26 AM\'][quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 11 2005, 08:35 PM\']Good to know you folks have a sense of humor. Let's get back to a far more important discussion...like WHAT STUDIO WAS USED TO TAPE CARD SHARKS EP.#423.[/quote]
Yes, I'm often glad to know that I have a sense of humor. It's right up there with knowing about the moon's gravity.
Now, go find me anywhere on this board talking about what show taped in what studio, or what syndicator was airing what version of what show on what independently-owned network on Septober 34, 1919. Good luck.
[snapback]81584[/snapback]
[/quote]
No syndicators were airing shows that day, because Septover is not a month. Dumbass.
:)
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 09:13 AM\'][quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 05:26 AM\']
Now, go find me anywhere on this board talking about what show taped in what studio, or what syndicator was airing what version of what show on what independently-owned network on Septober 34, 1919. Good luck.
[snapback]81584[/snapback]
[/quote]
No syndicators were airing shows that day, because Septover is not a month. Dumbass.
:)
[snapback]81588[/snapback]
[/quote]
Oh, you don't have the new Craig Karlberg Calendar Expansion Pack. It has extra months for certain ethnic groups. :-)
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 05:26 AM\']Now, go find me anywhere on this board talking about what show taped in what studio, or what syndicator was airing what version of what show on what independently-owned network on Septober 34, 1919. Good luck.
[snapback]81584[/snapback]
[/quote]
Actually, a couple of posters whose names I best not mention would know. Septober 34, 1919 was yesterday's date on the planet they're from.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 05:26 AM\']Now, go find me anywhere on this board talking about what show taped in what studio, or what syndicator was airing what version of what show on what independently-owned network on Septober 34, 1919. Good luck.
[snapback]81584[/snapback]
[/quote]
Well here's just one, Mr. Happy:
http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7492 (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7492\")
Took me about 10 seconds to find. Got anything else to say?
-
The Password Plus episodes with David Letterman and Marian Ross were taped in studio 3 at NBC Burbank. Episodes with Betty White, Bill Cullen, Dick Martin, Debralee Scott and Judy Norton-Taylor were taped in various other studios at NBC Burbank.
Sorry, that's all I remember off the top of my head.
-
[quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 02:49 PM\']Well here's just one, Mr. Happy:
http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7492 (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7492\")
Took me about 10 seconds to find. Got anything else to say?
[snapback]81641[/snapback]
[/quote]
Yes. Yer a pinhead.
He challenged you to find a post where HE HIMSELF asked the pertinent question. I see the name "Robert Hutchinson" nowhere in the post you cite.
I suggest you give up before you make a larger fool of yourself.
-
I think that time has already come and gone...
-
I suspect my post was taken too slangily. "Go find (for) me anywhere on this board (that features someone) talking about" etc.
I also think that my very plain first response was conflated with other more negative responses. I never commented on the humor of the post--I thought it was decent. I just got a twinge from the confusion of low gravity and no gravity. It's a science-nerd-y thing. I apologize for any confusion and/or anger that resulted.
(New arrivals to the moon, of course, would HAVE to play Race Game.)
(. . . "Mr. Happy"???)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 05:48 PM\']He challenged you to find a post where HE HIMSELF asked the pertinent question.
[snapback]81645[/snapback]
[/quote]
No, he didn't. Now you're just plain lying. Why don't you turn off the computer for 5 minutes and go get some fresh air? Get some blood circulating through those rusty brain cells.
-
This is quite off-topic, but I'm having a little trouble with a bit of trivia and I need someone to jog my memory.
On the Eagles' album, "Desperado", what is the name of the song that immediately follows "Desperado"?
-
[quote name=\'SplitSecond\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 09:59 PM\']
On the Eagles' album, "Desperado", what is the name of the song that immediately follows "Desperado"?
[snapback]81672[/snapback]
[/quote]
Certain Kind of Fool.
-
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 08:40 AM\']Oh, you don't have the new Craig Karlberg Calendar Expansion Pack. It has extra months for certain ethnic groups. :-)
[snapback]81590[/snapback]
[/quote]
Lousy Smarch weather!
-
[quote name=\'Fedya\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 10:27 PM\'][quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 08:40 AM\']Oh, you don't have the new Craig Karlberg Calendar Expansion Pack. It has extra months for certain ethnic groups. :-)
[snapback]81590[/snapback]
[/quote]
Lousy Smarch weather!
[snapback]81676[/snapback]
[/quote]
Is Cotillsday on this new calendar? I don't wanna miss the new episode of Dateline.
-
To me, a car on-set just adds a certain flair to the show. If I know the show offers a car and they just show stock footage (B&E shows/80s Pyramid), somehow the set feels "empty." Although in the case of stock footage, the car was just an occasional incentive, and not something offered every single show.
I agree...having the car on-set is just a nice cosmetic touch, and really added to the excitement on shows like Face the Music, Whammy!, etc. when a contestant was lucky enough to win it.
And don't get me started on the H-Q method of showing a MODEL of the car being offered, as was the case on Gambit, Hot Seat, etc.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
Is Cotillsday on this new calendar? I don't wanna miss the new episode of Dateline.
But what if it's on opposite Gumbel 2 Gumbel? :-)
Chuck Donegan (The Family-Guy-Referencing "Chuckie Baby")
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 11:01 PM\'][quote name=\'SplitSecond\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 09:59 PM\']
On the Eagles' album, "Desperado", what is the name of the song that immediately follows "Desperado"?[/quote]
Certain Kind of Fool.[/quote]
That's just wonderfully elegant on so many levels. Nicely done, Split.
-
[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Apr 13 2005, 12:19 AM\']I agree...having the car on-set is just a nice cosmetic touch, and really added to the excitement on shows like Whammy!, etc.
[snapback]81683[/snapback]
[/quote]
Really?
I think you could have added strippers to that show and it wouldn't have made it more interesting.
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 10:01 PM\'][quote name=\'SplitSecond\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 09:59 PM\']
On the Eagles' album, "Desperado", what is the name of the song that immediately follows "Desperado"?
[snapback]81672[/snapback]
[/quote]
Certain Kind of Fool.
[snapback]81674[/snapback]
[/quote]
There's a Line of the Day in here somewhere...I'm just not sure who to give it to. ;-)
-
"SplitSecond," for the best set-up ever.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' date=\'Apr 13 2005, 01:45 PM\']"SplitSecond," for the best set-up ever.
[snapback]81743[/snapback]
[/quote]
All we need now is Whoserman to slide in with his spiffy Line of the Day graphics. :)
-
[quote name=\'Desperado\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 07:40 PM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Apr 12 2005, 05:48 PM\']He challenged you to find a post where HE HIMSELF asked the pertinent question.
[snapback]81645[/snapback]
[/quote]
No, he didn't. Now you're just plain lying. Why don't you turn off the computer for 5 minutes and go get some fresh air? Get some blood circulating through those rusty brain cells.
[snapback]81671[/snapback]
[/quote]
Fine, I made a mistake, mea culpa.
Yer still a pinhead.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' date=\'Apr 13 2005, 12:45 PM\']"SplitSecond," for the best set-up ever.
[snapback]81743[/snapback]
[/quote]
But didn't the Classic Concentration set have more cars?
(I suppose it depends on whether you consider the Justy a car....)
-
I asked to find a post where I myself was discussing it--not necessarily asking it, no. I'm so glad to see what I hoped was a level-headed follow-up have some effect on the tone of the conversation, though.
Classic Concentration had the neon palm trees owned.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Apr 14 2005, 12:41 PM\']Classic Concentration had the neon palm trees owned.
[snapback]81920[/snapback]
[/quote]
I smiled ear-to-ear a couple of years ago when I was rumaging through NBC's scenic storage warehouse adjacent to Stage 9 (Supermarket Sweep). There, in all it's beauty (and with a fair amount of dust) was one of those neon palms! I wonder if they'll ever find another use for it/them. It would sure look nice in Bob Boden's backyard!!
Oh... game boards. Mechanical, clunking, rusty, noisy, mechanical boards and reveals for everything! And don't forget, lot's of grafitti on the back.
Randy
tvrandywest.com
-
[quote name=\'Fedya\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 09:49 PM\']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.
[snapback]80820[/snapback]
[/quote]
Hey, I noticed this, too ... "LARVE" going in a V shape from left to right jumped out at me as it did so many times on the Cullen version. Only reason I can imagine for doing this is to evoke the familiarity of the original. But how many people besides freaks like us would notice?
- ca -
-
[quote name=\'CoreyArcher\' date=\'Apr 17 2005, 11:13 AM\'][quote name=\'Fedya\' date=\'Apr 6 2005, 09:49 PM\']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.
[snapback]80820[/snapback]
[/quote]
Hey, I noticed this, too ... "LARVE" going in a V shape from left to right jumped out at me as it did so many times on the Cullen version. Only reason I can imagine for doing this is to evoke the familiarity of the original. But how many people besides freaks like us would notice?
- ca -
[snapback]82255[/snapback]
[/quote]
Next time take a healthy dose of lysergic acid diethylamide before watching Blockbusters and tell us if you see giant ants wearing paisley vests swarming over the board. And sitar music.