Could "Countdown" Work in the States?

[TheInquisitiveOne]

Hey there folks!

I have gained interest in the British hit Countdown for quite a while now. (For those unfamiliar with the show, click here.)

My question is: could this show work here in the United States? Or is the show "too smart" for us?

Auxiliary question: What type of prize structure would you devise for returning champions?

Thanks in advance for your responses.

The Inquisitive One

[Jimmy Owen]

[quote name=\'TheInquisitiveOne\' post=\'158560\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 12:17 PM\']
Hey there folks!

I have gained interest in the British hit Countdown for quite a while now. (For those unfamiliar with the show, click here.)

My question is: could this show work here in the United States? Or is the show "too smart" for us?

Auxiliary question: What type of prize structure would you devise for returning champions?

Thanks in advance for your responses.

The Inquisitive One
[/quote]


Yeah, I think it could work here.  We had similar shows in the past like "The Jan Murray Show" and "Word for Word" which had decent runs.  Instead of cash, players would receive a piece of a replica of a brain. Every day they are on the show and win, they earn a quarter of a brain for a maximum of four days when they complete the pieces of the brain.  If they lose after, say, two days, the host could say "You leave us with half a brain"   For a show like this, the game is more important than the prize, both for contestant and viewer.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'TheInquisitiveOne\' post=\'158560\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 12:17 PM\']My question is: could this show work here in the United States? Or is the show "too smart" for us?[/quote]
I've never understood that as a reason.  Are British people just naturally smarter than Americans?  (Our British members are free to put a snarky comment here.)  

The problem is that American producers feel the need to cater to the widest possible audience.  That's the biggest reason why British and other international programs are "dumbed down" here, and a big reason that purely intellectual exercises like Countdown, Mastermind or 15-to-1 aren't even tried.

On the other hand, I've spoken to British friends who aren't necessarily game show fans, and they tell me that Countdown and similar afternoon shows are looked down upon as programming for old people, not unlike the demographic problem we have here.  So you could make the argument that Countdown isn't really even working over there, it's just a cheap way to fill a half-hour, and preferable to bringing something new in that might do worse.

I still say than GSN ought to do some smart games in the late afternoon on the supercheap for those of us who like to play along and challenge ourselves, and who don't care about hyperactive, good-looking twenty-something strangers winning five thousand dollars.  As it is, they've started taking some of the smartest playalong reruns they've got (Blockbusters, Lingo and -- god help us -- Chain Reaction) and running them in the afternoon, so maybe that's the next best thing.

[Neumms]

Could GSN simply run the British version of Countdown, at least as a test to see if people like it? Aside from the occasional "colour" or "centre," there's nothing specifically British about it, is there? Hell, the accent didn't keep them from subjecting us to that awful woman who preceded Shandi on Lingo, or the Brit on Quiz Nation.

[Gus]

On the PYLP Studios Palace, where we have Countdown, there always seems to be a discussion every so often as to how we'd pull off CD in the US, and everyone seems to have their own deep-rooted-if-not-well-thought-out-or-feasible thoughts pertaining the format. We've never seemed to come to a consensus.

PYLP's own format is LNLNLNLNC. Commissioner Klauss instituted cash scoring for this season, namely, $5/point for the loser, and $25*(# of consecutive wins)/point for the winner, plus an octochamp bonus of $100*(combined 8-game score)

My own personal, non-reality-based, non-feasibility-based, non-popularity-based, in capite, ex rectum, not-likely-to-ever-happen, very-likely-to-be-objected-to format conceptualization is LLLN LLN LN: first three letters rounds worth $25/letter, first numbers round worth $250 for spot on, with $25 off for each one off; second three rounds are Double rounds ($50/letter, $500-50), and the final two are Double-Double rounds ($100/letter, $1000-100). If it's the winner's second win, their winning score is doubled; third win, tripled; etc. Winner plays the bonus round, the Conundrum; either 10 or 15 seconds to unscramble the word, to double their day's score. Octochamps retire undefeated.

[itiparanoid13]

Honestly, if you had to put cash into the format, wouldn't it be just easier to give $1,000 to a winner, and bump it up to $10,000 if you win the 8 games?  Although there are no returning champs on GSN for some reason even though they air episodes in order so whatever.

And that being said I'd love if GSN would try some sort of afternoon cheap word game block.  Like put Countdown or something like That's The Question, both really cheap shows, at 3PM or so.  I can't see five year old reruns of horrible horrible season one of Whammy doing any better.  And although I'd love for GSN to try Countdown, I'd seriously kill for one decent quiz show on the network.  It's been a really long time.

[ucb2912]

I once hosted a countdown netgame using a format with bigger prizes. What I did was pretty simple: The fomat was LLNLLNLLN. $10 per letter, or $100 for a perfect numbers game round (That value decreased by $10 for every number they were off). After 9 rounds, the higher score played the conundrum as a bonus round, solving it won an additional $1000.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'158581\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 02:45 PM\']I'd seriously kill for one decent quiz show on the network.  It's been a really long time.[/quote]
I think quiz show lovers can find a lot to like in Camouflage.  In fact, I know this to be true.  At the party for critics than GSN threw last week, our own Mike Burger (mmb5) let attendees play a variety of GSN games using his Game Show Round computer simulations.  His simulation of Camouflage stopped a number of quiz show champions, including Bob Harris, Nancy Christy and Phyllis Harris, dead in their tracks as they immediately started playing along from a distance, just trying to answer the clues.  

As has been said before, I wish there was more to the format, but the playalong value of the game is undeniable.  In other words, it goes well with Lingo and Chain Reaction, two other games that are fun to play along with at home, yet have fundamental structure problems.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'Gus\' post=\'158576\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 02:17 PM\']
On the PYLP Studios Palace, where we have Countdown, there always seems to be a discussion every so often as to how we'd pull off CD in the US, and everyone seems to have their own deep-rooted-if-not-well-thought-out-or-feasible thoughts pertaining the format. We've never seemed to come to a consensus.[/quote]
I think this shows why serious game show fans aren't necessarily network-programmer material.  When deciding whether or not Countdown would work well in the states, the difference between "LNLNLNLNC" and "LLLN LLN LN" probably isn't what you should be focussed on.

[Brig Bother]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'158563\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 06:08 PM\']
On the other hand, I've spoken to British friends who aren't necessarily game show fans, and they tell me that Countdown and similar afternoon shows are looked down upon as programming for old people, not unlike the demographic problem we have here.  So you could make the argument that Countdown isn't really even working over there, it's just a cheap way to fill a half-hour, and preferable to bringing something new in that might do worse.[/quote]

Bingo. My feeling is that Channel 4 would love to get rid of Countdown but its small audience is terribly vocal and it would be a complete PR disaster - I get the feeling that installing a 70-odd year old host in Des O' Connor is less about engaging with the audience and more so they can go "well, that's all folks!" when it reaches a natural end, if you see what I'm getting at. Especially as it's only getting half the viewers it was getting when Des Lynam was hosting. But I'd be surprised if Challenge TV didn't pick it up if C4 did decide to drop it, it is inexpensive after all.

[mmb5]

The show has definitely lost something with O'Connor on board.  I used to download religiously but not so much now.  As much as Richard played the clown, you always felt he was the clown in control.  O'Connor doesn't seem to be in control.

If this was airing here, it would have the same problems that the British one has -- it skews incredibly old, and in the US where that is so much more important, it would have the same issues.  However, I would like to see GSN try.  Put it on at 4 or 5 PM, it can't be much worse than what's on.  And if it works, great.  If it doesn't, at least we know.  The problem is, GSN doesn't care about 4 or 5 PM.

As far as format, they probably want to use the French version as a model more than the U.K. one.  They have mini-games in the middle which at least break up the monotony.  Plus you *must* have returning champs.  It's an incredible charm to this show (as well as others) that GSN doesn't seem to get.


--Mike

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'158591\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 12:45 PM\']
As has been said before, I wish there was more to the format, but the playalong value of the game is undeniable.[/quote]
As I've said before: it's an interesting mechanic (which I believe is your point) that they didn't bother to actually develop a GAME around at all.

[WhammyPower]

If there were any show from the UK I'd rather see over here than Countdown, it would be The Crystal Maze.  It would need a few changes, though:

1) Jimmy Carr hosts
2) Lengthen the show to 90 minutes, with commercials* (possibly by playing 4 games/zone no matter what?), or shorten it to 60**.
3) In the Dome, gold tokens = $600 ($100/player), silver = -$300 (-$50/player)
4) 100 more gold than silver = double the bucks

* = Without commercials, the average show in the UK was 49 minutes long, plus 11 minutes for commercials.  The average show in the US has 1 minute of commercials for every 2 minutes of programming.  A 60 minute taping would then have 30 minutes of commercials added in, hence the 90-minute figure above.

** = Shortening the show would probably mean only 3 games/zone no matter what.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'158597\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 04:17 PM\']
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'158591\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 12:45 PM\']
As has been said before, I wish there was more to the format, but the playalong value of the game is undeniable.[/quote]
As I've said before: it's an interesting mechanic (which I believe is your point) that they didn't bother to actually develop a GAME around at all.[/quote]
Yeah, what we have here is a semantic problem.  Words like 'format', 'game', 'mechanic', 'structure' and tons of others don't necessarily mean the same thing to the same people in describing the nuances.

We're on the same page.  The thing-that-they-do, the clues and the disappearing letters and the trying-to-figure-it-out-first element is marvelous.  There's just not a game built around it.

[Gus]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'158592\' date=\'Jul 25 2007, 03:48 PM\']
I think this shows why serious game show fans aren't necessarily network-programmer material.  When deciding whether or not Countdown would work well in the states, the difference between "LNLNLNLNC" and "LLLN LLN LN" probably isn't what you should be focussed on.
[/quote]

Precisely my thought. Hence the non-reality-based, non-feasibility-based, non-popularity-based, in capite, ex rectum, not-likely-to-ever-happen, very-likely-to-be-objected-to bit. I know my priorities would be misplaced if I were in the programmer's position, which is why I don't ever plan on holding that job :-P