Match Game 1990-91 thoughts

[Sodboy13]

Did you get this idea from the DVD game? Because Audience Match is played exactly this way in the DVD game. I've played it with a lot of groups of friends and while it tends to go over well (I don't think anyone really cares who wins the Match Game DVD game), thing that I noticed from all those playings is that a player who matches the top answer in between-rounds Audience Match will for sure win the whole game.

I've actually never played the DVD game. The idea came to me back when MGHSH was new in the nightly rotation on Buzzr, and I was thinking about ways to not make the MG portion the three-round slog it so often was, while keeping the breaks the same and not having to depend on a band being present in the audience.

[Jeremy Nelson]

...having the game come down to blind guessing doesn't sit right with me for whatever reason.

I never liked this distillation of Match-Up as a coin flip. While this doesn't apply to every pair of options, knowing your celebrity could mean that some options were softballs. It might only result in a couple extra matches, but at $100 a pop, that makes a huge difference in winning and losing.

That said, I kinda love the idea of it as a cash builder.

[TLEberle]

The two sides for me—as a game player I dislike that a Contestant can speak all of twice and be spun off. At the same time Match up does test that catch a wavelength thing but it is still unsatisfactory. It’s one of those where the surroundings hsve to make up for the onion skin thin premise.

Regarding not winning your audience match prize, I thought up it was odd a perfect game was $5,600 in 1973, but in 1990 you’re winning in the neighborhood of $1,000 for the main game. Maybe they should have brought out bonus shuffle out and the best slider plays for ten times that.

It’s a case where if you want you can pick it apart and you can also enjoy it for what we got as a final product.

[knagl]

Maybe they should have brought out bonus shuffle out and the best slider plays for ten times that.

I think we're on to something here. Bonus Shuffle, but then there are match-up words hidden under the pucks for extra money. 

[JohnXXVII]

MG 90 isn't that bad. But it isn't that good either. It's a solid, middle of the road type show, nothing edgy or remarkable or anything, 6/10.

They needed to do a better job with the panel. There are so many D-level celebrities. But maybe by this time, that was all who was willing to do game shows. Those who appeared semi-regularly and were not MG7x vets were more annoying than anything else. Charles is by far the funniest panelist; he's the highlight in most episodes.

Ross is too introverted, and his humor is too ironic. I think they needed to get someone more extroverted. Bert Convy would have been perfect.

Match Up was out of place. It took away from the humor. There were also so many ways to game it. It's terrible that it determined who won the game. It would have been better as part of the end game.   

[chrisholland03]

Ross' humor was of its time and worked well, in my opinion.  The show didn't need more extroversion. 

[Neumms]

I never thought Ross was all that bad, but watching BUZZR lately, I like him even more. He was good with an ad-lib and good with the stars.

The fun of Match Game is making up an answer. Match-Ups don’t have that.

Good heavens, why they’d have the idiot with the dragon puppet on even once is beyond me.

[JohnXXVII]

Just like I've Got A Secret went from outgoing Garry Moore to reserved Steve Allen, Match Game went from outgoing Gene to reserved Ross.

Match Up went against the spirit and flow of the whole proceedings. The time to get serious was during the end game, not during the main game.

What was Mark Goodson's beef with having a show that emphasized the comedy? The game aspects of Match Game are so lame, for them to emphasize more game, it will fall flat.

[Neumms]

shit-faced Brett

Toward the end of the syndicated daily version, was Brett less able to handle her Russian club soda? It has seemed to me she was, uh, tired more of the time. Is that why she was invited to the MGHSH?

Was Gene? Adam, I think in your book you note that he was drinking less when MGHSH started. I think he was great on that with new stars helping.

[Adam Nedeff]

Toward the end of the syndicated daily version, was Brett less able to handle her Russian club soda?

I went on a bingewatch of the final season. It wasn't so much drunkenness that stuck out to me, it was how "checked out" everyone was. The moment that sticks out to me is one that involves Brett. With about nine weeks to go, there was an episode that opens with "Get ready to match the stars..." and when Johnny announces Brett Somers, Brett's chair is empty. "As we play the star-studded big-money Match Game!" The set lights up, and Brett is crossing the stage with a cup in her hands and heading to her seat. Wasn't a bit or anything--she just wasn't there when tape started rolling and nobody CARED.

[Adam Nedeff]

Watching more of Match Game '90 and there's another issue that sticks out to me--playing for cash doesn't work on this show.

With the format as it aired--for Final Match-Up, the game STOPS as soon as the player who goes second takes the lead. That makes sense, but it pretty much means the amount of money that you can win depends on how good your opponent is at the game. Some contestants win $1200-$1300, but then one contestant is saddled against a bad opponent and ends up with $500 because they only needed to play Final Match-Up for 10 seconds. And if they played all the way through, it would be anticlimactic.

And if they just played standard Match Game rounds for cash, what do you do in the same situation? It looks awkward again. "You matched Charles and that means you win the game!....Oh, uh, let's see what everyone on the bottom tier said...okay, that's a match so you win more money...not a match...and another match for more money." There's just not a graceful way to give contestants money with this structure.

[whewfan]

As "out of place" as Match Up seems, I think Match Game 1998 shows why Match Up makes the game more fair. I always
 thought that MG 98's scoring format was broken. Pearson, the company that owned MG productions then, wasn't satisfied
with the lack of matching on that version of Match Game, so consequentially the questions were written with only one or two possible answers. It also didn't help that the panel made no attempts to be discreet in copying off each other... they looked like a class of students cheating on a test with no teacher in the room. So, that made the game less fun knowing that all the celebs would have the same answer. With each celeb having the same answer, that meant either you would match everyone or no one. With the MG 98 scoring format, there was no room for error. So, I think Match Up takes off the pressure to have to match each celeb TWICE to secure a win. On the 70s version, you only had to match each celeb once.

Ross was just fine for me. His more reserved style allowed the panel more leeway to be more funny. I do think the panel selection was sometimes hit or miss, but I think overall they kept within the spirit of the game.

Edited to remove a bunch of blank lines at the end of the post. -knagl

[TimK2003]

It also didn't help that the panel made no attempts to be discreet in copying off each other... they looked like a class of students cheating on a test with no teacher in the room.

A bad trait that carried over to the Alec Baldwin version as well.

[Jeremy Nelson]

With the format as it aired--for Final Match-Up, the game STOPS as soon as the player who goes second takes the lead. That makes sense, but it pretty much means the amount of money that you can win depends on how good your opponent is at the game. Some contestants win $1200-$1300, but then one contestant is saddled against a bad opponent and ends up with $500 because they only needed to play Final Match-Up for 10 seconds. And if they played all the way through, it would be anticlimactic.

I think the easy fix here is just having the leader play first.

What was Mark Goodson's beef with having a show that emphasized the comedy?

I think Jonathan was the one handling things by 1990, no?

[Matt Ottinger]

With the format as it aired--for Final Match-Up, the game STOPS as soon as the player who goes second takes the lead. That makes sense, but it pretty much means the amount of money that you can win depends on how good your opponent is at the game. Some contestants win $1200-$1300, but then one contestant is saddled against a bad opponent and ends up with $500 because they only needed to play Final Match-Up for 10 seconds. And if they played all the way through, it would be anticlimactic.

I think the easy fix here is just having the leader play first.

Not really.  I mean, sure, it "solves" the money issue, but it creates a bigger issue in that most of the games would end with a loss, rather than most of the games ending with a win.  You really want the latter, which is why in a lot of games like this, the one who's trailing goes first.