Early 1985...going back in time

[SRIV94]

I'll cut Davidson some slack since this was his first hosting gig

I wouldn't.  As HSq and $100KP proved, he never got the hang of it.

[clemon79]

I didn't like how the contestants were assigned whatever game they played.  Why not make it a buzzer beater with the three games of the day?

Because honestly, who cares? It's not like the contestants know one game from the other anyhow, and since they are properly-cast game show contestants of the 1980s, they are going to be happy to play any game thrown at them. I'd rather they give Davidson a little more mic time.

[whewfan]

Sometime in the run, though, they changed the format to a 2 player format. They had the same games as the first format, but each game was modified. They still played 3 games per show, but now both players played against each other, and whomever won the most games got to play against the champion.

In that round, the winner played against the champion and tried to guess the exact year 4 events happened. Whichever contestant was the closest got to play for a car (no more showcase of prizes... just a car)

In the bonus round, the player was given a year, and had to answer whether 2 given events happened before or after that year.

Anyone have thoughts on the second format? I'm not sure it was so much an improvement, but rather, perhaps GT or somebody pressured Reg Grundy to alter the format to not resemble TPIR.

If anyone's seen the finale, it's further evidence that the wrong host was chosen for a format that COULD'VE worked. So I don't spoil anything, let's just say that Davidson's antics during the bonus game were off the wall. You'd NEVER see any other host do what he did.

[wdm1219inpenna]

What did you think of this program?

It was an utterly shameless rip-off of The Price Is Right's formula. Not as bad as Bargain Hunters, but pretty close.

Are you even old enough to remember it?

Yes.

What changes would you make to it if you were given the green light to bring it back into production again?

I would change the format thusly: Two players compete. They face a board divided into a number of rectangles, and in turn select two of them in an effort to match the prizes hidden behind them. When successful, two parts of a rebus puzzle the size of the overall board are revealed, which resolves to the title of something, a well-known phrase, or something you know. Whoever manages to solve that puzzle first wins the game and whatever prizes they have accumulated to that point.

When I read the answer to "What changes would you make?", I swear I haven't laughed THIS hard in months!!!!  Truly classic!!!!

Thank you all for your feedback & replies, especially yours Clemon!  Truly made my week!!!

Not a match, the board goes back...

[J.R.]

When I read the answer to "What changes would you make?", I swear I haven't laughed THIS hard in months!!!!  Truly classic!!!!

Thank you all for your feedback & replies, especially yours Clemon!  Truly made my week!!!

Not a match, the board goes back...

Gee, I think I sense some sarcasm in that...

/Chris actually did match, since he's right. Two pieces of the puzzle will now be revealed...

[alfonzos]

Put the emphasis on nostalgia. Dates are just dull numbers without any sentiment behind them.

[clemon79]

Anyone have thoughts on the second format? I'm not sure it was so much an improvement, but rather, perhaps GT or somebody pressured Reg Grundy to alter the format to not resemble TPIR.

a) On what grounds do you make this claim, and b) when did something like that ever stop Reg Grundy?

If anyone's seen the finale, it's further evidence that the wrong host was chosen for a format that COULD'VE worked.

I see absolutely no reason why this format could have worked.

[TLEberle]

I think there's plenty that can be done with history and dates, but I don't think treading too near to The Price is Right is the way to go. Something nearer to Times to Remember, Chronology or Chronicle would be a huge improvement. I don't think that having the answers as years makes the show any less interesting or more cold. If you're playing a game like that, the point is to trigger the nostalgia and pleasant thoughts. The means to getting there just has to look good on TV and be fun.

[whewfan]

Anyone have thoughts on the second format? I'm not sure it was so much an improvement, but rather, perhaps GT or somebody pressured Reg Grundy to alter the format to not resemble TPIR.

a) On what grounds do you make this claim, and b) when did something like that ever stop Reg Grundy?

I wasn't making a claim, I was speculating.

If anyone's seen the finale, it's further evidence that the wrong host was chosen for a format that COULD'VE worked.

I see absolutely no reason why this format could have worked.

Maybe you don't, but sometimes the right host can save what might otherwise be a weak format for a game show. Gene Rayburn had said in numerous interviews that he did so many goofy things on MG (as did the panel) because "it was a rotten format" and "a dumb game."

I remember playing Hot Potato at GSC9 a while ago, and honestly I found the game a bit dull after playing it and watching it be played. This may be why Bill Cullen was as good as he was. While some of his shows were short lived, you can't argue that he wasn't entertaining to watch or blame him for not making the game work.

Another example is Beat the Odds. The original show was watchable IMO, but only because the host (whose name escapes me) made it enjoyable. The pilot that some of us may have seen, hosted by Chuck Henry, IMO, was dreadfully boring. It's a "no brainer" game, and we played it at GSC9 as well. I also found Beat the Odds quite dull to play because each word was a toss up, and I had great difficulty buzzing in first.

[TLEberle]

A good host saving a weak format is not the same as a format that works.

[clemon79]

Maybe you don't, but sometimes the right host can save what might otherwise be a weak format for a game show. Gene Rayburn had said in numerous interviews that he did so many goofy things on MG (as did the panel) because "it was a rotten format" and "a dumb game."

Are you really trying to compare Match Game and Time Machine?

I also found Beat the Odds quite dull to play because each word was a toss up, and I had great difficulty buzzing in first.

So in other words, you found it to be dull because you were bad at it.

[wdm1219inpenna]

When I read the answer to "What changes would you make?", I swear I haven't laughed THIS hard in months!!!!  Truly classic!!!!

Thank you all for your feedback & replies, especially yours Clemon!  Truly made my week!!!

Not a match, the board goes back...

Gee, I think I sense some sarcasm in that...

/Chris actually did match, since he's right. Two pieces of the puzzle will now be revealed...

One of the drawbacks of message board communications is sometimes an individual might perceive something that was not intended, or was not the case.  I can see why you might have thought I was being sarcastic, but in all honesty, clemon's post was genuinely awesome and it really did make me laugh too.  My apologies for any misunderstandings that my reply created.

[whewfan]

Maybe you don't, but sometimes the right host can save what might otherwise be a weak format for a game show. Gene Rayburn had said in numerous interviews that he did so many goofy things on MG (as did the panel) because "it was a rotten format" and "a dumb game."

Are you really trying to compare Match Game and Time Machine?

I realize they're both completely different games. I also agree with you that Time Machine, in both formats, just didn't work for various reasons, besides John Davidson's hosting skills. TLEberle made a good point about a weak format vs. a format that doesn't work that I didn't consider. It would be unrealistic to think that a good host could save a format that doesn't work... for example Gene Rayburn and Break the Bank... bringing on Joe Farago didn't help.

I also found Beat the Odds quite dull to play because each word was a toss up, and I had great difficulty buzzing in first.

So in other words, you found it to be dull because you were bad at it.

I was terrible at the buzzing in aspect, yes. However, the Chuck Henry pilot was about as much fun to watch as it is to watch paint dry.

[TLEberle]

Please match up the quote tags, Matt.

[J.R.]

One of the drawbacks of message board communications is sometimes an individual might perceive something that was not intended, or was not the case.  I can see why you might have thought I was being sarcastic, but in all honesty, clemon's post was genuinely awesome and it really did make me laugh too.  My apologies for any misunderstandings that my reply created.

Well, my fault there. I apologize for taking your reply as a slam and responding as such.