Crosswords Close to Sinking? Colbert Speaks.

[uncamark]

[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'169677\' date=\'Nov 16 2007, 11:02 AM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'169649\' date=\'Nov 15 2007, 06:59 PM\']
See, I though the Race was simple-boring (or simple-painful if Jayne Meadows was on and Eubanks had to read her the categories every time because she was too vain to wear glasses)
[/quote]

Particularly painful in that she showed up without Steverino. Why else do you invite her? You only do it to get him. After all, Audrey was the funny, talented one.
[/quote]

Allen may've been booked but bailed out--had to be illness, because he seemingly never turned down a TV gig.  *Never.*

[chris319]

Why else do you invite her?

In the case of Trivia Trap, because she was so good on IGAS 30 years prior.

[JacksonBrowne1980]

i've been taping crosswords a lot, i love that game show, i hope it gets renewed for at least 2 more years

[DoorNumberFour]

[quote name=\'JacksonBrowne1980\' post=\'170561\' date=\'Nov 26 2007, 06:47 PM\']
i've been taping crosswords a lot, i love that game show, i hope it gets renewed for at least 2 more years
[/quote]

I don't know what to say to this...

so here's a picture of Tommy Oliver in his underwear.

[alfonzos]

After watching one lady answer question after question correctly to the tune of $4000+ only to lose her podium to a slacker on a Pokemon clue on the last question, I would prefer it if the contestants stayed all week a la Jackpot!

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'alfonzos\' post=\'174584\' date=\'Jan 11 2008, 05:52 PM\']
After watching one lady answer question after question correctly to the tune of $4000+ only to lose her podium to a slacker on a Pokemon clue on the last question, I would prefer it if the contestants stayed all week a la Jackpot!
[/quote]
Someone else brought it up, but I noticed that most spoilers who sit the whole game, only to win on the last question usually do horribly in the bonus round.

The trade mags report a season two...somehow, they need to remedy this flawed main game...perhaps go back to the "three-as-a-team-then-opponents" format from the CGI pitch film. We've pitched some good ideas around the board, but something needs to give.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'174586\' date=\'Jan 11 2008, 05:56 PM\']The trade mags report a season two...[/quote]
There must be some financial way that makes sense, in much the same way that Family Feud has managed to stay on the air all these years, 'cuz it's sure not setting the ratings world on fire.

[TenPoundHammer]

Wow, I didn't even notice that MGC was on in my area... It got buried at the 1:30 PM slot on WNEM-DTW/CW-47/RSTLNE/KFC/whatever, that oddball network that used to be something else. Now I know where Temptation's been hiding too.

Seriously, though, I watched an ep of MGC on YouTube recently, and I must say it's a decent game. Ty is the average embodiment of the "young clean game show host" category into which I'd also lump Osmond, Lane, et al. (translation: he ain't bad, just kinda bland).

The game moves at a nice clip, the set is sharp, the music is good (although I'd prefer to hear more than just 8 notes of it), and there's even a great announcer. The only flaw, of  course, is that whole spoiler thing that everyone has pointed out -- I agree with the idea  that, at the very least, the contestants should  stay on all week long á la "Jackpot!". And I've never even seen "Jackpot!".

Yes, I know I'm, like, five months behind, but actually for me, that's fast.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'TenPoundHammer\' post=\'174604\' date=\'Jan 11 2008, 06:04 PM\']Seriously, though, I watched an ep of MGC on YouTube recently, and I must say it's a decent game. [/quote] No, it isn't. Any game where a contestant can answer once and win a pile of cash is by definition bad.

(translation: he ain't bad, just kinda bland).

If he didn't have that annoying trait in his voice where it would go up an octave at the end of a sentence, maybe he'd be 'passable.'

[Robert Hutchinson]

[quote name=\'TenPoundHammer\' post=\'174604\' date=\'Jan 11 2008, 09:04 PM\']The only flaw, of  course, is that whole spoiler thing that everyone has pointed out -- I agree with the idea  that, at the very least, the contestants should  stay on all week long á la "Jackpot!". And I've never even seen "Jackpot!".[/quote]
There have been other serious flaws seen in the past months: entries with wide-open clues and no helping letters, a scoring structure that encourages a trailing player to take a dive, and huge variances in how difficult the bonus round clues are, to name three. (I still get a laugh out of Patrick Jordan solving that insane, budget-saving bonus, though.)

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'174626\' date=\'Jan 12 2008, 04:22 AM\']There have been other serious flaws seen in the past months: entries with wide-open clues and no helping letters...[/quote]
Not just that, but short answers with vague clues that could be filled in any number of ways.  I realize that's sometimes what makes solving a regular crossword challenging, but a regular crossword doesn't have such a dramatic penalty for getting one clue wrong.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'174600\' date=\'Jan 11 2008, 04:39 PM\']There must be some financial way that makes sense, [/quote]How exactly does the money work? Does the production company get the ad revenue from each market depending on the time slot? If that's so, sell the show to a bunch of markets and you ought to make something, even on a one rating.

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'174637\' date=\'Jan 12 2008, 07:22 AM\']Not just that, but short answers with vague clues that could be filled in any number of ways.  I realize that's sometimes what makes solving a regular crossword challenging, but a regular crossword doesn't have such a dramatic penalty for getting one clue wrong.[/quote]Has there ever been a game show other than Crosswords where you could give a right answer and end up hearing "That's not the answer we wanted, so sorry, you're wrong."?

[JasonA1]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'174697\' date=\'Jan 13 2008, 02:47 AM\']Has there ever been a game show other than Crosswords where you could give a right answer and end up hearing "That's not the answer we wanted, so sorry, you're wrong."?[/quote]

Well, "Family Feud," "Chain Reaction," "Wheel of Fortune," to name a few. It's definitely more egregious on "Crosswords" but there are several shows where a perfectly all right answer falls to the buzzer.

-Jason

[TimK2003]

[quote name='TLEberle' date='Jan 13 2008, 02:47 AM' post='174697']
[quote name='Matt Ottinger' post='174600' date='Jan 11 2008, 04:39 PM']There must be some financial way that makes sense, [/quote]How exactly does the money work? Does the production company get the ad revenue from each market depending on the time slot? If that's so, sell the show to a bunch of markets and you ought to make something, even on a one rating.


To a smaller degree, one of the reasons why mediocre shows like FF and MGC (if it indeed sees 2008-09) stick around a while is that for many independent and smaller market stations, it costs less to acquire than say reruns of Seinfeld or more popular first run syndie shows (Springer, Judge Judy,...).  And for many of these smaller stations, cheaper is better.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'174698\' date=\'Jan 13 2008, 01:51 AM\']
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'174697\' date=\'Jan 13 2008, 02:47 AM\']Has there ever been a game show other than Crosswords where you could give a right answer and end up hearing "That's not the answer we wanted, so sorry, you're wrong."?[/quote]Well, "Family Feud," "Chain Reaction," "Wheel of Fortune," to name a few. It's definitely more egregious on "Crosswords" but there are several shows where a perfectly all right answer falls to the buzzer.[/quote]
Good examples (and there are others, like the Pass the Buck bonus round), but the difference here, of course, is that those shows aren't Q&A.  And my problem isn't actually with just the possibility of multiple answers to a clue, it's that coupled with the enormous penalty for getting one wrong, or even for laying off a clue because you're not sure, only to have someone else swoop in and guess right.