[quote name=\'MSTieScott\' post=\'183628\' date=\'Apr 9 2008, 10:21 AM\']so I'm wondering if the trend can be traced to poor promotion or network impatience.[/quote]It seems like shows aren't being given a chance to grow, to find a niche or an audience. The idea has to be a home run on the first pitch, or it's off to the Friday Night Death Slot, if not outright canceled.
"My Dad" wasn't a very compelling show, so that didn't have much of a chance.
How much can be attributed to the compelling factor, and how much to familiarity?
Fifth Grader and
Lyrics have huge amounts of play along value, as well as a format that's easy to pick up on in the middle of an episode.
Deal or No Deal is easy to follow along, and everyone can plot what they'd do. As easy as it is to see why a particular show succeeds, it's more challenging to see why one doesn't.
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'183640\' date=\'Apr 9 2008, 11:44 AM\']
Deal or No Deal continues to come up with new wacky gimmicks, and while purists here can bemoan that all you want, it's awfully hard to argue with the show's sustained success. And they've never even given away their top prize. [/quote]I don't mind gimmicks. I think the Super Case and Megaguess help to break up the repetition of the Australian version. I don't like that our version resorts to exploiting fears, hobbies and personality quirks to hide the fact that otherwise it's the same thing every time.
If they're going to do gimmicks, I prefer that they pertain to the game. Whip out the Deal Wheel, or offer some way to increase the potential prize in a way that the production team devises. (One of my favorites came from the British version: contestants who dealt could take their choice of a stocking hung next to the Banker's Christmas Tree, and they'd keep the contents.
You can argue whether there's been a downward trend regarding the "quality" of the games on the air, but the ones that survive are there for a reason, and "BIG MONEY" isn't it.
