8 Responses

1. Intelligentfan777

   1

   March 13th, 2008 at 1:07 pm

   I am looking forward to it, and you know, I’m beginning to really believe that game show producers do listen to what we have to say because, unlike other game show blogs, we’re a lot more open minded and analytical, we don’t just rant on every little thing. Believe me, there are some reactionary people on other boards I just can’t stand, instead of brainstorming ideas, they just yell and scream in an anti-social manner about what they don’t like about a certain show, without even seeing it first, or before a taping is even completed! That’s not how it should be!

   Look, I’m sorry if I come across a certain way to you sometimes, but I just feel game show fans need to stay open-minded. I like talking about game shows when I can, and I thank Alex for letting me and all the others be a part of this fantastic blog. I just wish others would follow our example.

   Game Shows, and TV in general can’t go back to how it “used” to be done, because it’s evolved in so many ways, technologically and entertainment-wise. My motto is……….Appreciate the past, but love for today! And in my mind, it’s mostly for the better, when you get right down to it.

2. ScottNotSteve

   2

   March 13th, 2008 at 4:32 pm

   I agree with IntellFan — Let’s be open-minded about Greenberg (who is coming back) and the changes to the show. ABC deserves a chance to make this a better show, and it is one of the best game concepts in some time, so let’s support it. Or do you want more Deal or No Deal clones or badly-done remakes of classic shows (though I am rooting for Match Game and MDPassword).

3. Scott Meckley

   3

   March 13th, 2008 at 10:25 pm

   I am open minded about Greeny coming back. I don’t think he was a bad host. I think he was just doing what the producers told him to do. I would like to see him show his personality more but I do admit he kept it serious very well. I agree with someone about please don’t let it be a double or nothing how about maybe a double or half meaning if you have $500,000 and you go for the million and you get it wrong you win $250,000. So this is a duel by duel basis kinda interesting. Maybe it might be like this

   1st Duel won- $50,000

   2nd Duel won- $100,000

   3rd Duel won- $250,000

   4th Duel won- $500,000

   then maybe something like this to go for the million

   one question if you only place one chip and it’s the correct answer then you jump to one million but if not then maybe it could go something like this

   2 chips placed cost you 10 percent of winnings - down to $450,000

   3 chips placed cost you 20 percent of winnings- down to $400,000

   If you place 1,2 or 3 chips and you get the wrong answer you lose half your winnings. - $250,000

   so no matter on the double question you at least leave with half your winnings which i think would make more people go for it.

   I personally can’t wait to see Duel come back though and maybe I’m jumping the gun here but I would be all for a PC, DVD, Board Game, Handheld game and you may ask why. This is a great quizzer with some strategy which makes this game so entertaining and fun to watch. I really wish though that ABC would make a twice a week run of this though because I’m not sure how well it will do on Friday at 9/8 Central but i plan to watch this. If the producers read this I ask that you let Greeny interact more with the contestants but also keeps it serious after interacting which I feel Greeny is capable of.

4. Dan Y.

   4

   March 14th, 2008 at 9:11 am

   I don’t know how many of you listen or watch Greeny on ESPN (ESPN radio, SportsCenter) but the guy has personality. I really think he got stuck in the realm of having to do too much “required reading” (things the producers want said or a line of questioning they wish the host to ask) which killed off any chance for Mike to be Mike.

   All this show needs is a few tweaks and it could be brilliant.

   Namely;

   - Speed up the pace of game
   - Lose tournament format
   - remove “cliffhanger” commercial breaks (It gets old fast and only makes me want to change the channel)

   The show, to me, seems to be the best quiz show that has come out in the last few years, and it’s one of the few that has actually been person vs. person, as opposed to a one-player game. (I would consider 1 vs. 100 a one person game as the mob has no control over the main player’s actions, and act only as the adversarial force to the player, not as an equal participant.)

   Cosmetically, remove the chip girls and add the automatic chip drop, (which I think they did, as the bios of those two girls have been removed from the site, while Mike’s bio is still up.) then keep the set, lighting, and music package. Then, maybe, use the UK duel term “accelerator” instead of “press,” the Brits have always had a better way with words.

   I’m very excited to see if they have moved this show in the right direction, could become the best game show on TV.

   Dan Y.

5. Marc Power

   5

   March 15th, 2008 at 10:14 am

   I enjoyed Duel, I thouhgt Greeny showed he can host but he needs experience and i’m predicting season 2 he’ll be better. I didn’t mind the “screen up” “screen down” line that was an attempt to coin a catch phrase something like millionaire’s “final answer?”

   yes, lose the chip girls and call the presses accelerators it just such a great word that conveys danger and tension, much better than ‘press’ but i did like greeny saying “(name) you’ve been pressed you have 7 seconds….max”.

   just a thought here but what if they used a pseudo-21 format where if you win you get $5,000 per remaining chip. and then you have a choice to walk away or face your next opponent where if they win the amount they win is deducted from your winnings. and ties mean play the game again but increase the payoff by $5,000 per chip. then again, these are such thoughts, maybe the formst they’re going to use will work, either way it’s gotta work better than that horrid tournament format.

6. David Howell

   6

   March 17th, 2008 at 7:13 am

   The tournament sounded good but didn’t work. Let’s hope whatever you have instead is half as good as ours.

   I’m liking Marc Power’s idea, or you could perhaps twist it (and play on the poker element) with this: after being told about your opponent, you get to decide how much to stake on beating them. Heck, have a whole freaking Rich List/poker-esque bidding round; each contestant could be spotted with $50,000 and they can choose how much to risk on the game, winner takes the pot? Or something. Not sure. The idea of determining how much to stake on beating your next opponent seems to fit here somehow.

   If you take the UK format, you probably need to add more guaranteed winnings - just something as simple as the winner of each Duel ‘cashing in’ their chips. A higher jackpot might help too, as it’ll take a heck of a while to get to a million with 100k + 1k/chip and I think a primetime US quiz needs seven-figure prizes now. Perhaps start the jackpot at $500k and make chips worth $2k or $2,500.

   Not sure. The basic premise is sound and I think it just needs a few production decisions changed. The UK show has made those different production decisions and is fabulous for it.

7. Bob

   7

   March 17th, 2008 at 11:36 pm

   I’m glad to hear the show is coming back. Of course, my favorite part of the show are the “presses” because they are intense!!

   Anyways, it seems there could be some sort of money chain, which isn’t horrible. I prefer a money chain over the shoddy tournament system the show had in December.

8. HomerJay

   8

   March 24th, 2008 at 7:54 pm

   Maybe it’s just something odd about me, but I just don’t get what was so bad about the scoring and tournament approach in the first batch of shows. I mean, I get that if they did some research and the general public didn’t follow…then, OK, do what you have to do. But I’m just puzzled about how it was hard to follow.

   But a game show addict isn’t the right person to ask, now is he?