Monitors or game boards?

[Neumms]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:23 AM\']Agree with the assessment of "Classic Concentration".  It always bugged me how the contestant or Alex would walk off camera, then they'd dissolve to a shot of him in front of the puzzle.  I would have at least liked to have seen a monitor with the game board in it - but it was probably done the same way most weather forcasts are done, by standing in front of a blue or green screen and using a chroma-key.

As for the old board, I liked it too but can understand why they made the change.  The old board required cutting the puzzle into 30 pieces and inserting them into the trilons on the board.  I've read on various sites over the years what a colossal pain that was!

[snapback]80854[/snapback]

[/quote]

I thought Concentration lent itself perfectly to a video wall, where the individual numbers are each on their own screen yet pieced together the whole puzzle. And, of course, this video wall should be on stage.

Classic Concentration was sort of stuck between out-moded and hi-tech. The graphics didn't look sleek and modern by any means, they still had the cards for the prize lists, and the puzzles would have looked better (or at least hipper) had they been drawn on a digital medium.

[Steve Gavazzi]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 02:10 PM\'][quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:16 AM\']Your own point being that there are plenty of reasons to enjoy a game show besides cutting-edge computer graphics, and that low-tech alternatives are not by themselves a deterrent to enjoyment, and certainly not a reason to be "laughed out of syndication".

[snapback]80859[/snapback]

[/quote]
PiR is established, though. I doubt that a new game show could get away with being so far behind in the times. The residual oldness can make it hard to get a new audience to take PiR seriously. After all, what is the first thing people see when they are flipping the channels? The old set? The old games? The aging host? It's good to keep things fresh!

[snapback]80891[/snapback]

[/quote]

...unless people express that they like things to stay the same, which is generally the vibe I get from normal people who I happen to be talking to about The Price is Right.

[CarShark]

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 07:31 PM\']...unless people express that they like things to stay the same, which is generally the vibe I get from normal people who I happen to be talking to about The Price is Right.

[snapback]80941[/snapback]

[/quote]
Good for you. The vibe I get is usually a)"That show's still on?" or b)"That guy's still hosting?" or c)"Sheesh, it looks the same." or d)"You watch that show?" Not as positive. It just depends.

[Jimmy Owen]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 07:40 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 07:31 PM\']...unless people express that they like things to stay the same, which is generally the vibe I get from normal people who I happen to be talking to about The Price is Right.

[snapback]80941[/snapback]

[/quote]
Good for you. The vibe I get is usually a)"That show's still on?" or b)"That guy's still hosting?" or c)"Sheesh, it looks the same." or d)"You watch that show?" Not as positive. It just depends.

[snapback]80944[/snapback]

[/quote]


Those sound like people who wouldn't like the show even if Plinko were played on a monitor.  Why try to attract them at all?

[CarShark]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:06 PM\']Those sound like people who wouldn't like the show even if Plinko were played on a monitor.  Why try to attract them at all?

[snapback]80948[/snapback]

[/quote]
There isn't much hatred for it, just...surprise. I guess people can really underestimate a daytime show's lasting power when primetime changes all the time. I get the same surprise when I talk about long-running soaps like Bold and Beautiful and Young and Restless.

[Jimmy Owen]

I don't watch as many soaps as I used to, but I think they embrace the familiar as well.  Susan Lucci has been on AMC longer than Bob's been on TPIR.  Susan Flannery is still on B&B and Doug Davidson still toils on Y&R.

[Steve Gavazzi]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:12 PM\'][quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 08:06 PM\']Those sound like people who wouldn't like the show even if Plinko were played on a monitor.  Why try to attract them at all?

[snapback]80948[/snapback]

[/quote]
There isn't much hatred for it, just...surprise. I guess people can really underestimate a daytime show's lasting power when primetime changes all the time. I get the same surprise when I talk about long-running soaps like Bold and Beautiful and Young and Restless.

[snapback]80950[/snapback]

[/quote]

So basically, you're saying that the people who actually watch the show may very well like it the way it is, but that you can't be sure because you haven't talked to any of them.

Now, since the show is consistently either #1 or #2 in Daytime...why screw with it just because you personally don't like it?

[CarShark]

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:09 PM\']So basically, you're saying that the people who actually watch the show may very well like it the way it is, but that you can't be sure because you haven't talked to any of them.[/quote]No, my point is that when those Little Old Ladies keel over, they might have trouble getting younger bodies in the seats at home...where it counts.

Now, since the show is consistently either #1 or #2 in Daytime...why screw with it just because you personally don't like it?

[snapback]80970[/snapback]

Didn't you just answer your own question, Steven? It's just a suggestion. Just because they're Number One now doesn't mean that they can't improve. I think that they could modernize the show slowly. That way they won't alienate the current viewership (who may or may not care one way or the other) and attract a younger audience that may have dismissed the show previously.

[urbanpreppie05]

Thank god...I thought I was the only one who felt this way!

I too feel that a slow modernization of show could work. Leave the games manual, but use classier styles on the doors, a more defined turntable, better computer graphics,  and please- less pink. I think red, purple, blue and green would look good.

[Gus]

I had a thought. I also had a question. In fact, I still have a question. I may as well ask it. Here I go:

Given various factors, such as the advancement of flat-screen display technology quality- and price-wise, and the possibility of a better-looking, maybe better-produced game, would it be feasible to have one or both sides of the big turntable on TPIR be a video screen?

Possible uses: Off-screen: showing the name of the contestant that's coming on down, especially in the opening; showing the one-bids, so contestants will quit asking "What was the highest bid?". On-screen: use to play some games, such as Any Number, Bonus Game, Clock Game; when not otherwise in use, show the TPIR logo in front of the blue/pink sparkly pattern.

And of course, it'd look purty. But as I said, would it be feasible? Would it cost too much to install? Too much effort to operate, possibly? Just plain not worth the investment, perhaps? I wouldn't know, because due to my being a crazed game show fan, my perceptions of the difference between fantasy and reality are sumewhat clouded.

On another note, speaking of being a crazed gmaew show fan: I know this will never happen, but I think it'd be really cool-lookin' if the *doors* were flat-screen display panels. They'd slide behind one another to open.

[Steve Gavazzi]

[quote name=\'CarShark\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:45 PM\'][quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:09 PM\']Now, since the show is consistently either #1 or #2 in Daytime...why screw with it just because you personally don't like it?

[snapback]80970[/snapback]

[/quote]Didn't you just answer your own question, Steven? It's just a suggestion. Just because they're Number One now doesn't mean that they can't improve. I think that they could modernize the show slowly. That way they won't alienate the current viewership (who may or may not care one way or the other) and attract a younger audience that may have dismissed the show previously.

[snapback]80978[/snapback]

[/quote]

1.)  My name is not Steven.  Do not call me that again.

2.)  They've left things basically the same, aside from the color changes in Season 31, and their ratings have gone up.  Obviously, they're improving already.

3.)  If the audience, as you suggested, doesn't know the show is still on, making it less recognizable won't keep them from flipping by it while they're channelsurfing.

[GS Warehouse]

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 10:09 PM\']Now, since the show is consistently either #1 or #2 in Daytime...why screw with it just because you personally don't like it?

[snapback]80970[/snapback]

[/quote]
Ask Fred Silverman.

[Ian Wallis]

I don't watch as many soaps as I used to, but I think they embrace the familiar as well. Susan Lucci has been on AMC longer than Bob's been on TPIR. Susan Flannery is still on B&B and Doug Davidson still toils on Y&R.

I think one thing that bugged me about soaps is that games always came and went (with the possible exception of "Price is Right"), but most soaps seemed to go on forever.

I was always surprised - and a little delighted - when I saw the next week's TV Guide and "Last show of the series" was listed under a soap.  Didn't happen very often.

Quite frequently game shows would be replaced by soaps - either new ones or expanded ones.  I don't think there were too many instances of it happening the other way around.  I can only think of a couple:  "Tattletales" replacing "Secret Storm" in 1974, and "Wordplay" replacing "Search for Tomorrow" in 1986.

I'm sure there are others...that's just all that I could think of off the top of my head.

[zachhoran]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Apr 8 2005, 07:57 AM\']

Quite frequently game shows would be replaced by soaps - either new ones or expanded ones.  I don't think there were too many instances of it happening the other way around.  I can only think of a couple:  "Tattletales" replacing "Secret Storm" in 1974, and "Wordplay" replacing "Search for Tomorrow" in 1986.

[snapback]80998[/snapback]

[/quote]

Texas and the Doctors on NBC were replaced by $otC, Hit Man, and Just Men on 1/3/83. Scrabble93 and Scattergories replaced Santa Barbara on NBC on 1/18/93.

[CarShark]

[quote name=\'Steve Gavazzi\' date=\'Apr 7 2005, 11:46 PM\']2.)  They've left things basically the same, aside from the color changes in Season 31, and their ratings have gone up.  Obviously, they're improving already.[/quote]But who's to say that they wouldn't improve more if they implemented some changes. That's the problem. TPiR fans can be way too...complacent. Set in their ways.

3.)  If the audience, as you suggested, doesn't know the show is still on, making it less recognizable won't keep them from flipping by it while they're channelsurfing.

[snapback]80986[/snapback]

If they don't know it's still on, then the don't know which parts are 10 years old or 15 years old...just that they're old. It's probably not recognizable to them now. But a more modern set will help it stand out.