17 Responses

1. Chris

   1

   January 20th, 2008 at 7:32 am

   Too bad the idea of making “Chip Girls” obsolete wouldn’t work here.

2. Cosmic Jester

   2

   January 20th, 2008 at 8:51 am

   Amen to that, Chris. Especially since I had wished that the chips would vanish like they do on Duel UK. It also makes it seem like the chips are getting directly added to the jackpot; as the chips disappear into the stage, the stage’s total goes up. Simple, but it works. The chips locking themselves into the board was a brilliant touch that I hadn’t thought of.

3. Marc Power

   3

   January 20th, 2008 at 10:09 am

   The host is Dave Spikey am I right? who also does bullseye in the uk. He did a great job he shows lots of energy but still conveys suspense and tension my only gripe (and its a minor one) is that he had to do a demonstration in order to explain the rules. the chips themselves are a little cheap looking but that’s fine they serve their purpose. and like previously said the “trap door” effect on the wrongly placed chips is awesome. and the uk even came up with a better name for the pressure button; The accelerator, what a name! albeit I still prefer the effcts and music for the accelerator/press on the us version.

   i want to live in the uk one day just becuase they keep blowing me away with these great shows and wanting to get in the tv production industry I’d love to be a aprt of it., I’d lose GSN but right now that’s a small price to pay,

4. CarShark

   4

   January 20th, 2008 at 10:54 am

   Meh. I still prefer the U.S. version. Our theme and sound effects are better. The UK host is way too informal for my tastes. I don’t see how saying “Let’s lose the screen” is any better than “Screen down”. The set doesn’t convey the same feel of being surrounded like the U.S. set does. The chip lock-in and drop out effect isn’t terribly impressive. Rather grade school, in fact. All in all, not bad, but not nearly as good as ours.

5. Mike

   5

   January 20th, 2008 at 11:52 am

   The questions in the UK version seem more “even” than the US version, and I like the pacing better. The two complaints I have are that the pressure buttons look awkward to hit and are harder to visually capture, and the shiny desk makes it hard to see the number of chips a contestant has left.

6. David Howell

   6

   January 20th, 2008 at 12:47 pm

   The host is Nick Hancock. Last seen hosting Win My Wage, also did sport-themed panel game They Think It’s All Over and too many other non-game shows in the 90s.

   I said that US Duel was a few tweaks from greatness. The UK has made those changes and the result is the best primetime game show since Millionaire.

7. steve

   7

   January 20th, 2008 at 2:01 pm

   (*Taps microphone) Hello, ABC, you watching this?
   Gut reaction: I love this! Creating a special category called “The British are Better Than Us” was a good decision, Alex, and I’m sure we’ll see it get filled rather quickly. I love the music, I love the questions, I love the host, I love the set… actually, maybe not the whole set. I had heard about the man who got injured from the fall, and that just seems like a good reason to be leary about those above-ground sets. If we really need to have the playing field as a raised platform, how about we have the area around the playing field (ie, a giant donut) raise and lower at the appropriate times? That way, say for example, if someone wins the jackpot, the family can run on stage quickly to congratulate the contestant, without having to walk across the thin bridge, swim under the burning surface of the water, navigate the handbike that everyone falls off anyway… you catch my drift. But I must say, I really do like the contestant podiums more, and I think I peed myself a bit from excitement when I saw the chips drop into the stage for the first time. I know that’s awkward place to end off this post, but…

8. Michael

   8

   January 20th, 2008 at 2:32 pm

   I have to totally agree with you Alex. The UK is blowing the US and to a small extent, Canada in the quality of game shows. Ever since Deal or No Deal premiered in December 2005, I have found that a lot of the new shows have followed some very crappy formulas:

   1: Give away or show what will happen on that night’s show. In other words: let’s ruin the surprise before anybody gets to see it. I do not find it fun when I know what case the contestant is going to pick on Deal or No Deal. What NBC does is just unacceptable but the FOX network is even worse. Watch an episode of AYSTA5G and as they go to break, we get to find out what’s coming up. Coming up?! Excuse me?! Am I watching a scripted drama or a game show?! Game shows are supposed to surprise, tease, and make you asked yourself what you think is going to happen. Why don’t you just give up a blow by blow account on what is going to happen on tonight’s show like they do on Maury! If Jeopardy ever started doing this, oh man. Moving on…

   2: Make the game an hour long…for only one contestant. This is one of the key reasons why Game Show Marathon was not picked up for a second season by CBS. They’re problem was for some games that were half hour (Card Sharks, Press Your Luck, Match Game, Family Feud, Let’s Make a Deal, Beat the clock) and thought that making them an hour would be a great idea. I found myself screaming at the tv when they did Card Sharks saying “Oh great move on already!” You get that same feeling watching the current crop of shows like DorND, ARSTA5G, DFTL, (even I felt that GSN should not have made the championship match of Grand Slam an hour long) just make you want to change the channel. I watched Joe Trella’s game on WWTBAM when it was on ABC (on tape of course) and saw that by the time Mr. Trella had won the million, his game took only 45 minutes. 45 minutes! A Deal or No Deal match that goes 6, 7, 8, 9, or even the full 10 rounds takes up an hour that I can’t still can’t get back! I’m amazed that people are still watching as I gave up a long time ago. A full game on DorND should only take 45 minutes and less time if less rounds are played. But NO, producers want to torture you even more with my next 2 problems…

   3: Supporters. Why in the world does every game show other than 1 vs. 100 have to have the contestant bring people with them? All the supporters do if drag the game play to death and give really bad advice. If I was a contestant on DorND, I would tell NBC (or Global for us Canadians) like some criminals on Law & Order, we want to represent ourselves!

   And finally…

   4: Cliffhangers. Look what you have done Ryan Seacrest! You pulled this stunt on American Idol (I read about it. I don’t watch that garbage show) and it spread into the game show world. On the clip, the commercial break was taken after a question was completed. That how every show should be done! None of these opening the case…after this. Or We’ll reveal the answer….after this. Enough already!

   But my ideas are meaningless as most of you people still seem to let Deal and other crappy show like this survive. The answer my friends is very simple, JUST DON’T WATCH!!! As much as we would like these to have better UK shows like their DUEL or WEAKEST LINK, we will be forever sufficated by stupid US producers who know nothing about game shows and continue to butcher what was once a great genre. We need to send a message that we are not going to take this anymore! You have the power, please use it!

   Thank you.

9. Wheelloon

   9

   January 20th, 2008 at 3:36 pm

   While the UK was version was good, as their show history would’ve led me to believe that this one also would be, I don’t believe the Brits’ was “SO MUCH BETTER OMGWTFWOWBBQ!!!!11!1!!!!111one” that it made ours look wretched. It was my belief that our version just needed some tweaking:

   1. Mikey Greenberg, yah need to rework your hosting style a bit! Your constant, invariant, commercial intro “YOU’RE WATCHING DUEL ON ABC” needs to be changed up, it became annoying by the end of the first night. This also applies to other little “sayings” you had during the show. A good game show host does not have only one way he can think of to explain something. You weren’t altogether bad, you were good at building tension at certain times, and you had the right “tone” and appearance for the show, but some variance in your hosting patterns needs to happen. For a commercial intro, something to the effect of “Who will be the last one standing after this duel? Find out in a moment!” can’t be that hard to think of. I’m not a game show host *yet* and I friggin did it…

   2. Up that pace people! Napping is for Jimmy Kimmel’s timeslot, not primetime. 1vs100 seems to have done pretty well with an upped pace this season, Millionaire has never been good show for trying to fall asleep to, and Po10 has also had a strong pace going during the whole of its life, now don’t yah think? Is there a particular reason why this concept wouldn’t work on other quiz shows? I can’t think of one…

   3. Commerical timing… It’s my biggest gripe on Gladiators, and it was my biggest gripe on Duel. We are SICK of seeing this, ladies and gentlemen in network TV, and we are not going to do a 180 turn anytime soon. The contestants, very visibly, were not happy with how commercials were handled on Duel, and this passed over to the viewers. The game is good enough it can build tension on its own, it doesn’t need you to pull stunts like this to make it watchable. In fact, it does the opposite. If it starts to deter me from continuing to watch (especially with a game show), it’s gonna deter others, mark my words.

   NOW, some thoughts about the British version:

   1. That set was COOL. Admittedly, I also loved our set here, and I wouldn’t change it at all, but that Brit set was also slick. The sorta bent pillars that surrounded the stage reminded of set pieces used on post 80’s Pyramid, and they just looked really cool. I’d like to see something similar done for another game show over here *weird ideas start running through mind*. Just don’t bring that star/spacey background over, that was a bit cheesy, IMHO

   2. Chip drop… LOVE it! It’s a small thing, yes, but it does create that much more visual interest, which never hurts. I say go for it. You could still have a model or two, as well, to give the contestants their chips and escort them to their spot, if you really felt it was necessary. I’d also like to see how the models could interact with Greenberg, if he had any clue what to say if they approached him…

   3. Sound fx and music? Ehhh, I’m not impressed. This was one of the things I really did like a lot about our Duel. Nothing jumped out at me over there. Then again, I’ve seen that before with a number of British games I’ve seen, some sounds and cues seem a bit out of place. They’re not horrible, but they’re not spectacular either…

   4. Da HOST? Hey Mikey, TAKES NOTES! He was excellent. If Mikey wanted a model to go by, look at this guy, he’s got the right motions and idiosyncrasies down. He was also very good at varying up his lines, which a lot of recently hired hosts over here seem to have a problem with. Mikey can become a good host, I think. Like most though, he first time out the gate left some room for improvement…

   With that, I want our Duel to get a 2nd run, not mattering if in syndication (where I’d think it could work spectacularly), or back in primetime. It’s a good format with natural suspense built in. It’d definitely better then ABC’s past two attempts at game show greatness *hint hint, they both begin with S*…

10. LaJuan

    10

    January 20th, 2008 at 10:56 pm

    Seeing this clip makes me blame the production company and ABC more than Greeny for Duel’s failures.
    I think everybody thought that the chip drop would have been there in some form. Too bad ABC thought that having models would bring in the horny teenage boy viewers (Blame DoND for that). Also notice that the host has more control over the show. I’m almost willing to bet that the head honcos pounded into Greeny’s head that you have to say “You’re watching Duel on ABC”.

    Now that I think about it, if we put together all of the gripes of the current crop of American game shows, about 85-90% of them made its debut on DoND. So just as much as Survivor and American Idol ruined television (reality or not) when it first came on, DoND has done the same.

    So, take the US stage & sound effects, the British producers and directors, freedom for Greeny….you may have a pretty good show.

11. Tim

    11

    January 21st, 2008 at 12:07 am

    I like it, but I wouldn’t say that I love it. The game is good. The music didn’t seem to kick for me. The theme wasn’t as good. I personally liked Greenley (err. whatever his name was) hosting the show in the US. I think the explanation of the game in the beginning was dumb. And someone said they liked them being called accelerators… I’m not so sure. I think it’s a pressure button… so Press seems to work for me.

    I really liked the chips falling into the jackpot though. I wanted that from the beginning of US Duel. Isn’t there another way to implement the chip girls. Can’t we just have them bring in the contestants. I’d be content with that! :)

    I think I like our version better… even though I seem to be in the minority here!

    TT

12. David B

    12

    January 21st, 2008 at 10:40 am

    >so Press seems to work for me.

    “Press” is an American term - half-court press etc. Press on its down doesn’t really convey the right message here. “Pressure” sure, but not press.

13. Charles Blaquière

    13

    January 21st, 2008 at 1:35 pm

    Alex, this new “The British Are Better Than Us” is a stroke of genius. Long-overdue. Hurrah! Americans may generally suffer from lack of global awareness, but not game show fans — certainly, those active here and on Game Show Forum display extensive knowledge of, and appreciation & passion for, quality foreign game shows.

    I LOVED this clip; it was like an extra Christmas present. While I preferred the US music and sound effects (especially the Press), the UK version grabbed me right from the gorgeous cinematic opening. One of the best opening sequences in recent memory. The jib camera shots, circling the table, were an excellent establishing device. And having the table swallow up wasted chips into some netherworld, is an effective way to highlight the contestants’ loss.

    One suggestion: if you’re going to post widescreen clips, can you alter their coding accordingly? I altered two lines of code on a saved copy of the page, and found the resulting widescreen player window much more enjoyable than anorex-o-vision:

    var s1 = new SWFObject(”http://flashgameshows.com/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/flv-embed/flvplayer.swf”,”player1″,”427″,”260″,”7″);

    s1.addVariable(”width”,”427″);

14. Travis P

    14

    January 21st, 2008 at 3:13 pm

    Unfortuately the show got slaughtered in the ratings on Saturday. It could only manage 3.2 million (In It to Win It on BBC1 got 7.7 million). However, it’s early days and word has it the show is being pushed later in the schedule.

    >1: Give away or show what will happen on that night’s show.

    Not sure if this is a sign ITV being under pressure but they aired a promo for the next Duel. However, it had a vocal spoiler regarding the episode.

15. Martin

    15

    January 22nd, 2008 at 3:24 am

    Hey Alex — “The Brits Are Better Than Us” = Good Idea!

    Duel is a good example of how the Brits do better than the US when it comes to game shows. (See my rant from the Alex’s last post)

    Things I like about this compared to the US:
    - Fast Moving
    OMG I got so sick of the long drawn out conversations/etc. during the US version of Duel. It was quite annoying. I like that the British host explained and got the audience in the game while still moving the game along.

    -The Set
    I don’t care what anyone says. The UK set was better. I like the screens they had in the background with this kinda spacey/stary type of backdrop when the questions are being asked. I like when the question was correct the panels turned green. I especially liked the Jackpot total at the bottom of the set. The one in the US version was very Password Plus-esc with its almost awkward position. Oh I just remembered…I also liked the fact that the set has a seat for the contestants. I remember looking at one of the contestants slouching on the set on the last show. This is not good for appearance.

    -The Chips
    I remember looking at the the US version of Duel and just assumed that the chips would drop down. But NO the idiot producers suggested we have ancillary ‘chip ladies’ to remove the chips. I thought that was so dumb and another reason why the show was SO slow! I loved that the chips dropped down and with the jackpot on the bottom of the set it seemed like the chips were literally being added to the jackpot. Good jobs there.

    Things I like about the US compared to the UK:
    - The Music
    The music on the UK version isn’t that great. But it is not horrible either (e.g. the Family Feud music) so I can forgive them on this.

    Overall, I think that the producers of game shows are losing it. I think most of them are/were sitcom or reality show producers and they figure they can just add flash and dash or some lame lights/music (e.g. Pyramid and the updated version of Card Sharks) and the audience will be happy. I think that they are ruining the genre, preventing new fans, and alienating the game show regulars. Get it together!

16. Marc

    16

    January 22nd, 2008 at 12:47 pm

    Yes, the British version is everything the American version should have been, but there are only 2 things I don’t like about it.

    1) A duelist has to win at least TWO duels before he can quit. Someone could win his first duel quite handily and then get beaten in his second, and leave with nothing.

    2) That leads to my second gripe. Every chip a duelist loses adds £1,000 to the jackpot, so why don’t duel winners get £1,000 for every chip they save?

17. David B

    17

    January 23rd, 2008 at 7:46 am

    >Someone could win his first duel quite handily and then get beaten in his second, and leave with nothing.

    But if you start with two players, one of them’s going to win (almost certainly). Winning 2 duels proves it wasn’t a fluke.

    >so why don’t duel winners get £1,000 for every chip they save?

    Why do they need to? They get compensated as it is.