Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Camouflage  (Read 14627 times)

bandit_bobby

  • Guest
Camouflage
« Reply #15 on: July 03, 2007, 09:15:59 PM »
What I've noticed is that the first episode of each doubleheader is an early-taped episode, while the second episode is a later-taped episode because of the graphical transition during a Double Camouflage. And call me crazy, but the better players are on the second episode each night. Don't ask me why.

TLEberle

  • Member
  • Posts: 15951
  • Rules Constable
Camouflage
« Reply #16 on: July 03, 2007, 10:00:37 PM »
[quote name=\'xavier45\' post=\'156554\' date=\'Jul 2 2007, 05:04 PM\']I really like this show. I am one of those people who hates overly excited contestants, so this is a good show for me.[/quote] I don't mind amped contestants, but it does need to be in the proper arena, and also not a caricature.

Quote
So I like this show. It isn't appointment television, but I will watch it whenever I have time. If I had to grade it I would give it a 7/10.
I'm curious, because a "7/10" with nothing to base it on doesn't help me all that much in judging what you think. (one man's 7 is average, another below average, and so on) How would you stack Camouflage against Lingo, Chain Reaction, That's the Question, or even the GSN Originals of old?
If you didn’t create it, it isn’t your content.

xavier45

  • Member
  • Posts: 495
Camouflage
« Reply #17 on: July 03, 2007, 10:16:15 PM »
Well here is a list. This is the way I would stack them.

1. Lingo
2. That's The Question
3. Camouflage
4. I've Got a Secret
5. Russian Roulette

Jay Temple

  • Member
  • Posts: 2227
Camouflage
« Reply #18 on: July 04, 2007, 12:11:41 AM »
TLEberle, you addressed xavier45, but you've given me a good framework for my review.

The clever clues make it very much like Scrabble. In that respect, it's already better than Lingo, and I like Lingo.
The rules and the scoring are not very complicated, which puts it ahead of any of the shows you mentioned.
The most obvious comparison is to Chain Reaction. CR has a solid game but a lousy host and worse contestants. Lodge is okay and the contestants I saw were better than I'd expect to see from a pool of people who haven't seen the show yet.

About explaining the puzzles: I think he could strike a happy medium by rereading the clue after the puzzle is solved, stressing the key word, rather than elaborating.

I didn't really notice the graphics or music much, which is not a bad thing.

The Double Camouflage seems like they added it so that you wouldn't just have 20 minutes of the exact same thing. In the game I saw, the first DC puzzle was solved for only ten points, hardly exciting. I think it would have been more interesting to play for a sponsored prize.

Despite the small prize budget, I like this show better than any other GSN original.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2007, 12:12:26 AM by Jay Temple »
Protecting idiots from themselves just leads to more idiots.

Clay Zambo

  • Member
  • Posts: 2065
Camouflage
« Reply #19 on: July 04, 2007, 10:19:28 AM »
Well, hey, the set for the Fleming-era Jeopardy! was small, too, and we don't gripe about that.  Nor the 3Ws set.

This is a well-presented, challenging, though not particularly interesting, game with a $5000 top prize, presented on TV during an era in which gas prices are way too high.

It's 1975 all over again!
czambo@mac.com

mmb5

  • Member
  • Posts: 2181
Camouflage
« Reply #20 on: July 04, 2007, 10:29:12 PM »
Hidden in the credits: it's shot at KCET, one of LA's PBS stations.  Any other game shows do that?


--Mike
Portions of this post not affecting the outcome have been edited or recreated.

BrandonFG

  • Member
  • Posts: 18592
Camouflage
« Reply #21 on: July 04, 2007, 10:30:11 PM »
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'156680\' date=\'Jul 4 2007, 10:29 PM\']
Hidden in the credits: it's shot at KCET, one of LA's PBS stations.  Any other game shows do that?
[/quote]
Either they don't squeeze the credits, or you have some good eyes. ;-)
"It wasn't like this on Tic Tac Dough...Wink never gave a damn!"

bricon

  • Member
  • Posts: 322
Camouflage
« Reply #22 on: July 04, 2007, 11:38:20 PM »
[quote name=\'mmb5\' post=\'156680\' date=\'Jul 4 2007, 09:29 PM\']
Hidden in the credits: it's shot at KCET, one of LA's PBS stations.  Any other game shows do that?
[/quote]

The ill-fated WB game "In The Dark" was done there.  Currently, the California Lottery's "Big Spin" is taped there, with our esteemed Mr. West announcing.

KCET's studio lot has a long history; more details can be found here.

CaseyAbell

  • Guest
Camouflage
« Reply #23 on: July 05, 2007, 10:00:49 AM »
The show does have a That's the Question vibe, as many have noted. Quiet, deliberate, cerebral, interesting to a word game fanatic like me. And probably not easy or fun enough for the casual channel-hopper. It just doesn't get a quick hook into the audience, the way Lingo did when Chuck first trotted out those twenty eps from Holland a long, long time ago.

Matt Ottinger

  • Member
  • Posts: 13014
Camouflage
« Reply #24 on: July 05, 2007, 11:25:57 AM »
[quote name=\'CaseyAbell\' post=\'156695\' date=\'Jul 5 2007, 10:00 AM\']
The show does have a That's the Question vibe, as many have noted. Quiet, deliberate, cerebral, interesting to a word game fanatic like me. And probably not easy or fun enough for the casual channel-hopper. It just doesn't get a quick hook into the audience, the way Lingo did when Chuck first trotted out those twenty eps from Holland a long, long time ago.[/quote]
It's very much like That's The Question, but I like this one a lot more and I'm not exactly sure why.  Maybe the writing?  I also don't believe this is any more or less accessible than Lingo.  Even if it's not easy to play, what you're trying to do is almost immediately understandable.

I do wish they hadn't seen fit to air Camouflage during the 7-8 hour in the East, since that is the one hour of the day where game show fans are already being served.  Still, I really shouldn't complain, since this is exactly the kind of show I'm been asking GSN to get behind for quite some time now.
This has been another installment of Matt Ottinger's Masters of the Obvious.
Stay tuned for all the obsessive-compulsive fun of Words Have Meanings.

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27693
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Camouflage
« Reply #25 on: July 05, 2007, 11:41:57 AM »
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'156699\' date=\'Jul 5 2007, 08:25 AM\']
I do wish they hadn't seen fit to air Camouflage during the 7-8 hour in the East, since that is the one hour of the day where game show fans are already being served.  Still, I really shouldn't complain, since this is exactly the kind of show I'm been asking GSN to get behind for quite some time now.
[/quote]
I'd agree with you if the gameplay wasn't so freakin' mundane. Look at something like Wordplay: relatively simple concept made watchable through the inclusion of the gameboard and an interesting endgame. This feels like they came up with the mechanic and said "Okay, we're done now." It's strong, granted, but not THAT strong.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

CaseyAbell

  • Guest
Camouflage
« Reply #26 on: July 05, 2007, 11:42:04 AM »
I hope the show works, too, but I'm not optimistic. Hard-to-use is a killer. Lingo is a breeze by comparison, which is why it clicked immediately. Almost as soon as the show premiered, GSN was bragging about Lingo's numbers. I haven't seen anything similar for Camouflage. But who knows?

At this point GSN needs something to work. The numbers have been terrible recently. I just hope the network stays on CableWorld's top fifty list when they publish the June chart later this month. GSN might slide right off, judging from the Variety story about second quarter ratings and the network's perilous 48th slot on the May chart.

uncamark

  • Guest
Camouflage
« Reply #27 on: July 05, 2007, 12:49:39 PM »
MTV's "WEBriot," hosted by Dweezil Zappa's disembodied head, was shot at KCET (and wasn't a bad show, particularly with Chris Darley doing some creative-but-not-annoying directing choices using the jib cams).

Seems to me that Comedy Central's "The News Hole with Harry Shearer," an unsuccessful attempt at a show like "HIGNFY!", was also shot at KCET.

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27693
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Camouflage
« Reply #28 on: July 05, 2007, 01:17:10 PM »
[quote name=\'uncamark\' post=\'156713\' date=\'Jul 5 2007, 09:49 AM\']
MTV's "WEBriot," hosted by Dweezil Zappa's disembodied head
[/quote]
Ahmet.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

Sodboy13

  • Member
  • Posts: 1558
Camouflage
« Reply #29 on: July 05, 2007, 02:10:30 PM »
You know, I really enjoy the concept behind this game, and I liked the fact that it made me think and stumped me on numerous occasions.  But I got the feeling several other posters have noted - that there just isn't much "there" there.  By the time I hit the midpoint of Round 2, I felt like things were just kinda droning on.

Just a thought here, and feel free to tear me to shreds on it, if necessary:

Round 1: Standard gameplay, one-word puzzles from 100 points on down.

Round 2: All Double Camouflage puzzles.  Two-word puzzles from 200 points on down, and a correct answer gets you a crack at the answer within an answer to double the score.  Lowest score leaves at the end of the round.

Round 3: Speed Camouflage.  3 minutes of timed gameplay.  Point values start at 100 for the first puzzle, increasing in 20-point increments for subsequent puzzles.  Points do not decrease as letters drop off.  Correct answer gets the points; buzzing in with a wrong answer costs the player the puzzle's value, the answer is revealed, and play moves on to the next puzzle.

Bonus Round: I like it as is.  It's different enough from the standard "Answer __ questions in __ seconds to win __ dollars," and the consolation prize is respectable.  The only change I might make is allowing the player to pass one puzzle during part one of the round.

And, at the risk of having Mr. Lesko appear on my doorstep, I think playing for dollars instead of points should be considered.  Unlike Lingo, this bonus round isn't a near-gimme, and there isn't any sort of escalating bonus jackpot.  I would think that even if money was paid out in the front game, the budget would be fairly equal to Lingo's, and may even average out a bit under, given the potential forpoints/dollars being lost in the third round.
"Speed: it made Sandra Bullock a household name, and costs me over ten thousand a week."

--Shawn Micallef, Talkin' 'bout Your Generation