Author Topic: Family Feud getting a new set? (Read 22759 times)

Lirodon · « **on:** July 02, 2010, 11:07:28 AM »

Well, I guess the move to Orlando also means its time for a new set, according to the FF Twitter feed, and I'm starting to think it may be a bit more retro-inspired than the current one (well, thenagain the O'Hurley set was supposed to be a modernization of the Dawson/Combs-era set)

Firstly, a tweet specifically mentioned a new set had been built, which is a no-brainer, but then it asked us if we remembered "this", and the resulting link for "this" was a screencap of the titlecard from the Dawson version. I'm starting to suspect something might be going on here, is technology good enough nowadays to make a giant trilon of HD monitors?

Steve Gavazzi · « **Reply #1 on:** July 02, 2010, 11:54:34 AM »

[quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'243488\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 11:07 AM\']is technology good enough nowadays to make a giant trilon of HD monitors?[/quote]
Isn't that what they did on Gameshow Marathon?

Lirodon · « **Reply #2 on:** July 02, 2010, 11:56:10 AM »

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'243491\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 10:54 AM\'][quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'243488\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 11:07 AM\']is technology good enough nowadays to make a giant trilon of HD monitors?[/quote]
Isn't that what they did on Gameshow Marathon?
[/quote]

Ahh no, I believe that was CGI on a projection screen

Jeremy Nelson · « **Reply #3 on:** July 02, 2010, 12:05:27 PM »

[quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'243492\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 10:56 AM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' post=\'243491\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 10:54 AM\'][quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'243488\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 11:07 AM\']is technology good enough nowadays to make a giant trilon of HD monitors?[/quote]
Isn't that what they did on Gameshow Marathon?
[/quote]

Ahh no, I believe that was CGI on a projection screen
[/quote]
Tis true. It was a modified version of Todd Robinson's Family Feud Software.

Bob Zager · « **Reply #4 on:** July 02, 2010, 12:23:55 PM »

It would not surprise me, if the show will be going back to a logo similar to the original one!

I say that because Endless Games, which is soon going to release a Fourth Edition of FF, originally had a prototype "Deluxe 4th Edition" featuring the current logo, and was supposedly going to feature a game board similar to the MB/Pressman versions. More recently, they show it in a smaller size box, called "Classic Family Feud," and showing the original logo!

Of course, EG still shows the original "Newlywed Game" logo on its forthcoming new version, so I could be wrong--just remember, I'd said it wouldn't surprise me!

WarioBarker · « **Reply #5 on:** July 02, 2010, 01:44:08 PM »

[quote name=\'Lirodon\' post=\'243488\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 11:07 AM\']Well, I guess the move to Orlando also means its time for a new set, according to the FF Twitter feed, and I'm starting to think it may be a bit more retro-inspired than the current one (well, then again the O'Hurley set was supposed to be a modernization of the Dawson/Combs-era set)

Firstly, a tweet specifically mentioned a new set had been built, which is a no-brainer, but then it asked us if we remembered "this", and the resulting link for "this" was a screencap of the titlecard from the Dawson version. I'm starting to suspect something might be going on here, is technology good enough nowadays to make a giant trilon of HD monitors?[/quote]
Perhaps, but they'd have to be HUGE, wouldn't they? They also could be returning to the classic opening sequence and/or classic logo. (EDIT: No...no they didn't.)

A "new set" could very well be like Dawson's Return -- similar, but more "modern" (and, some would say, much more "sterile"). And get a director who has watched episodes from about 1980-93, because I miss the old "profile of family and their score" shot about as much as I miss the classic Bullseye bank displays.

And could somebody raid the "Classic Sound Effects" Department, grabbing the 1994-95 music while you're at it?

----

But seriously, the most important thing is the rules. The only things I suggest changing are...
* Return the Lollipop Trees, with a black stem awarding a $250 bonus. I know it's silly, but you guys have been returning a classic element each season. Not only do they add a bit more color to the set, and may award a family some extra cash, but any lollipops drawn would not be replaced until a black-stemmed one is found (even if a new family comes in), increasing the odds of awarding the bonus.
* Increase the goal to $400. Yes, dollars. Time to make the main-game a little more relevant!
* Increase the number of rounds per game. Three is nowhere near enough, and no Sudden Death crap either. Back in the day, those families had to earn their $200/$300/$400 -- even if it took seven rounds!
* Increase the amount given for a Fast Money loss to $10/point. No offense, but the "$5/point" rule has been in place since the 1975 PILOT. Inflation has been long past due, guys.
* No returning-championship limit. Having a limit makes you look behind the times, and getting rid of said limit may draw in quite the audience if a family keeps winning (see Thom McKee, Tic-Tac-Dough).
* Related to the above, award a prize after every fifth game a family wins. The car for a fifth win, maybe a trip for the tenth, and so on.

clemon79 · « **Reply #6 on:** July 02, 2010, 01:57:00 PM »

So let me get this straight...you harp on changing the rules. and the VERY FIRST THING you start babbling about is:

[quote name=\'Dan88\' post=\'243497\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 10:44 AM\']* Return the Lollipop Trees, with a black stem awarding a $250 bonus.[/quote]
This throwaway? Are you frigging kidding me?

Quote

* Increase the goal to $400. Yes, dollars. Time to make the main-game a little more relevant!

Congratulations. You just made it LESS relevant by exponentially increasing the importance of the later rounds.

Quote

* Increase the number of rounds per game. Three is nowhere near enough, and no Sudden Death crap either. Back in the day, those families had to earn their $200/$300/$400 -- even if it took seven rounds!

You don't have the first freakin' clue about how to time out a show. You have 22:30 (or thereabouts; I have no idea what that number is there days; likely it's less and I'm sure someone will be along to correct me momentarily) to shoehorn all this in.

Though I wouldn't put it past you to suggest the show be aired commercial-free, too.

Quote

* Related to the above, award a car after every fifth game a family wins. It's just common sense.

My, but spending other people's money is fun!

You should look up the posts of one "Thad Dixon." Because you are now displaying every single clueless tendency he did. Gotta tell you, you're picking some fine people to emulate.

J.R. · « **Reply #7 on:** July 02, 2010, 02:01:57 PM »

[quote name=\'Dan88\' post=\'243497\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 12:44 PM\']* Increase the amount given for a Fast Money loss to $10/point. No offense, but the "$5/point" rule has been in place since the 1975 PILOT. Inflation has been long past due, guys.[/quote]
I can't believe I'm about to say this, but I agree with this statement.

I don't see how a maximum of $1990 split between five people is "Mo'Money". Some may disagree and that's fine.

/Danny Boy's other "suggestions"? Facepalm.
//OT: RIP Don Coryell

clemon79 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 02, 2010, 02:05:08 PM »

[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'243500\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 11:01 AM\'][quote name=\'Dan88\' post=\'243497\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 12:44 PM\']* Increase the amount given for a Fast Money loss to $10/point. No offense, but the "$5/point" rule has been in place since the 1975 PILOT. Inflation has been long past due, guys.[/quote]
I can't believe I'm about to say this, but I agree with this statement.[/quote]
I'm fine with how things are, but at the same time I have said in the past that I would accept this as a compromise, and I still would.

chad1m · « **Reply #9 on:** July 02, 2010, 02:07:08 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'243499\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 01:57 PM\']You have 22:30 (or thereabouts; I have no idea what that number is there days; likely it's less and I'm sure someone will be along to correct me momentarily) to shoehorn all this in.[/quote]It's about 21:00, judging from a recent episode. Doesn't make your point less valid which, unfortunately still doesn't mean Benfield will ever quit.

/I'm thinking maybe a spin-off a la Herman's Head just so we can see what the hell goes on in his mind.

tpirfan28 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 02, 2010, 02:09:40 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'243499\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 01:57 PM\']You don't have the first freakin' clue about how to time out a show. You have 22:30 (or thereabouts; I have no idea what that number is there days; likely it's less and I'm sure someone will be along to correct me momentarily) to shoehorn all this in.[/quote]I would assume it's closer to 20:00 (not a regular watcher). Price runs 38:30, give or take for a hour. Gotta remember there's the Bullseye game shoehorned in there, too. You might be able to squeeze one more round in there (Single/Double/Double/Triple?), but to say they should go 7, nada.

$10/point is the only change that really should be made, but I'm not losing sleep over it.

EDIT: Chad beat me to the punch on timing.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #11 on:** July 02, 2010, 02:54:04 PM »

[quote name=\'Dan88\' post=\'243497\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 01:44 PM\']* Increase the number of rounds per game. Three is nowhere near enough, and no Sudden Death crap either. Back in the day, those families had to earn their $200/$300/$400 -- even if it took seven rounds![/quote]
The 300 rule is fine with the 21 minutes and change they have, and I actually don't mind the sudden death rule. Besides, you have the Bullseye game, so the only way they'd pull off your idea is by either dropping Bullseye or making the show an hour long. Would you rather go back to the flawed one strike Triple round?

Quote

* Related to the above, award a car after every fifth game a family wins. It's just common sense.

Barry & Enright got away with this because the car was a cheap compact car, that even with inflation, is probably worth about $15,000. A base model Chrysler 300 is almost twice that, and you want to give them away for every five-game win?

Jeremy Nelson · « **Reply #12 on:** July 02, 2010, 02:54:24 PM »

[quote name=\'Dan88\' post=\'243497\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 12:44 PM\']And get a director who has watched episodes from about 1980-93, because I miss the old "profile of family and their score" shot about as much as I miss the classic Bullseye bank displays.[/quote]

I remember bringing something like this up when O Hurley Feud added the podium scoreboards pretty quickly into the first season. I'd like them to go back to the original blocking, only because right now, the board scoreboards are useless and rarely seen, and the eggcrates looked out of place with the flatscreen boards and all. I'd like them to be a little more creative with camera angles and blocking to make the board scoreboards work, but I don't see that changing. No biggie- I'm not gonna lose sleep over it.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #13 on:** July 02, 2010, 03:04:16 PM »

[quote name=\'Jeremy Nelson\' post=\'243507\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 02:54 PM\']I'd like them to be a little more creative with camera angles and blocking to make the board scoreboards work, but I don't see that changing. No biggie- I'm not gonna lose sleep over it.[/quote]
To me it just seems so odd to have two sets of scoreboards, it's almost gratuitous. If anything, make the eggcrates the Bullseye display (a la the later Combs years and New Dawson season). The one thing I found most jarring about the O'Hurley set was the fact that they kept eggcrates on the desks, but the monitors w/Times New Roman on the board. Would love to see the displays be more consistent, either all eggcrates or all monitors.

Or perhaps LED displays? #goinggreen

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 02, 2010, 03:23:41 PM »

[quote name=\'Dan88\' post=\'243497\' date=\'Jul 2 2010, 12:44 PM\']* No returning-championship limit. Having a limit makes you look behind the times, and getting rid of said limit may draw in quite the audience if a family keeps winning (see Thom McKee, Tic-Tac-Dough).[/quote]Wheel of Fortune doesn't even have returning champions. Does this make them behind the times?

Chris has articulated anything else I needed to say.