23Dec2007
Recent “Crosswords” Changes
I don’t know if you’ve been watching Crosswords recently, but they’ve made a few changes. One change is especially nice for the budget. Round 3 now has the totals $200, $400, and $600 for right answers. We’ve seen some players get $10,000 or more in the main game recently, so it’s helping some apparently. The X-Box plug during the extras are gone, and the announcer now introduces the Spoilers. It seems like host Ty Treadway is doing less relying on teleprompters or cards, but he now sounds a bit robotic and non-emotional. If we get a second season, hopefully we can see some improvement there. Oh, a new theme would be nice too. It’s really hard to have a dark, neon set and cheesy synth theme music.
maybe I’m alone on this but I actually like the music to it. Sure it does sound a bit cheesy but I enjoy it. I do enjoy this show and have a bigger appreciation for crosswords. If my grandfather were alive he would like this show more than I would because he use to do crossword puzzles all the time and watching this game gives me great memories of my grandfather doing crossword puzzles. I hope this show lasts a long time and one of the best new syndication shows I’ve seen. I haven’t seen Temptation but from what alot of you tell me it wouldn’t be worth the 30 mins. hopefully long live crosswords.
My local affiliate dropped one of the Crosswords airings for the other airing to be on right before Temptation. YUCK!
haven’t watched it lately becuase I’m in school until 4 most days and the show airs at 3:30 and 4 here, that’s good that they’ve up the round 3 values and that we now longer have to hear Ty say “you’ve also discovered the crosswords Xbox 360 xtra”. I find Ty’s hosting somewhat like Mike Reilly from Monopoly he’s somewhat monotone and repetitive maybe a host change will help, but then again, makign so may changes within the first season would probably just annoy people.
also i admit I don’t like the spoiler rules but there’s more strategy to it than i thought becuase sometimes you might want the 2nd place podium since 1st place would make you vulnerable for spoiling later in the game.
but this creates a flaw, when you’re a distant 2nd place your changes are better if you intentioanlly answer incorrectly and hope to get spoiled so that you can spoil and take over 1st place.
haven’t watched it lately becuase I’m in school until 4 most days and the show airs at 3:30 and 4 here, that’s good that they’ve up the round 3 values and that we now longer have to hear Ty say “you’ve also discovered the crosswords Xbox 360 xtra”. I find Ty’s hosting somewhat like Mike Reilly from Monopoly he’s somewhat monotone and repetitive maybe a host change will help, but then again, makign so may changes within the first season would probably just annoy people.
also i admit I don’t like the spoiler rules but there’s more strategy to it than i thought becuase sometimes you might want the 2nd place podium since 1st place would make you vulnerable for spoiling later in the game.
but this creates a flaw, when you’re a distant 2nd place your chances are better if you intentioanlly answer incorrectly and hope to get spoiled so that you can spoil and take over 1st place.
I’m not much of a fan of this show.
The theme music is, in my opinion, one of the worst themes I’ve heard in a long time. I don’t find the game play particularly exciting, and I don’t find Treadway that impressive, either. His voice during his entrances sound as if he’s intentionally trying to lower his voice…at least he stops doing that fairly quickly.
My biggest pet peeve of this show is its constant misuse of the word podium. Sure, this is a nitpick, but we’re talking about a game that relies on crossword definitions and exact spellings, so nitpicking isn’t exactly unreasonable: a podium is the PLATFORM one stands on, not the lecturn or desk or stand that a person stands BEHIND. They could have easily said that a spoiler would capture a contestant’s “station” rather than “podium” and be more correct.
I’ll exercise my credentials as a puzzle writer and say that any definition a dictionary supports is considered a valid crossword clue. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate, 11th Edition, has “lectern” marked as an exact synonym as its last definition for “podium”. It also includes the sense Patrick brings up. In other words, people have used podium in print in reliable places often enough and long enough to refer to the vertical bit a speaker stands behind, and the dictionaries have noticed. It’s valid. “Lecturn” as you’ve spelled it, Patrick, is not.
Back on topic, the theme is unexciting, and the second-place station is a dead-end for whatever poor soul winds up there far more often than it gets used to come from behind. I’ve never seen anyone deliberately throw an answer to escape from it and trap some other poor sucker in it, but then I’m not sure the contestants know who’s rung in and who hasn’t. Without that information, this strategy won’t even work most of the time. The leader can’t have rung in, and one of the spoilers must have, in order for it to work. We can argue over whether it’s correct to call it a lectern, a podium or a station, but behaves most like quicksand.
I’m still watching Crosswords (it comes on right before WOF in my area, so how could I not), and I’m happy with the changes they made, but it’s still not perfect.
Ty, while not horrible anymore, still needs work, and needs to be less repetitive with his commentary. You can tell he has a good sense of humor, but he’s holding back a bit and is a bit constrained. Part of his improvement would also lie in not having the game going at a super-induced ritalin pace, done so they can fit the whole crossword in a half-hour.
Which leads to my next point, that breakneck speed. This creates issues in the bonus round. Anyone who’s watched MGC has seen it at one point or another. Some “bonus rounds” aka “crossword completions” have wayyyyyy too much left to be completed in 90 seconds, making them too hard to win, too often, and thus, the bonus prize, which already looks cheap compared to the likes of WOF, isn’t won, and, IMHO, comes off as not offering enough, given what one has to do just to earn it on some days. More consistency has to be needed to make it a fair win, and so the people that should win do, most of the time. They’ve upped the money elsewhere in the game, and that’s excellent. In season 2, make a tweak or two the bonus.
I suggest: Up the “crossword completion” time to 2 minutes, so that ALL people who actually deserve to win the round will, and potentially (if such can be afforded), a car to be won. $10k and a car would be a GREAT bonus package. On the same note, if the show had returning champs (which is was originally supposed to), they could do a progression idea. For example: a trip for bonus win one (plus maybe like $2500), $10k for win 2, a car for win 3, $25k for win 4, and a final MO MONEY NUMBER for win 5 ($50k would be fine, $100k if they wanna go nuts). The game is difficult enough that I think people would deserve those kinds of big numbers if they won the bonus 5 times.
Big problem 1 fixed there. Big problem 2 (of 2): those ole spoilers. I suggest either a 4th round, before the bonus, between the two in the front podiums, without any spoilers, where they’ll duke it out alone and the player with the most money wins (causing the controversial one answer spoil and win idea to possibly be dashed by the opponent in the final round), or… a very long winded idea: Have the 5 come out at the start, where they all can buzz in and answer from the get go. The 3 who have the lowest scores at round’s end become spoilers, the 2 with the highest become the front podium holders. For a spoiler to overtake a front podium, they have to, EITHER, answer a word in the normal spoil way, and claim the trailing contestant’s podium, OR answer 1 or 2 other words, besides their spoil, to claim the leader’s podium. Yes, this gives a spoilers a big disadvantage, but they earned that, given their not as great performance in round 1. Otherwise, the main game can proceed accordingly.
Andd these may not come off as well to others as they sound to me, I dunno. But there definitely need to be some changes made to the spoiler system and the bonus round. If the producers reconcile those pieces, in my view, then I could see some more exciting games, bigger wins, more intense bonus rounds, and *hopefully* some more interested viewers. The show has great potential, unlike some other new not so tempting syndie concepts out there………………….
Well I do like the fact that now they are improving Crosswords. (I just recieved notice that Next Monday the 31st, XWords will move from 3-4 PM on FOX to 10 AM and just like the NBC station I get, they will slice the run in half The NBC station airs it at 2 PM) I think the best thing is that the show seems to now have more of the good pacing of it’s own. BTW, according to the November 26th issue of B&C Magazine, XWords is getting a 2nd season, although it is not been officially announced. I see this being one of the next Feud/Millionaire hit. But they picked a right time for the budget. I just hope now that they will add something extra for the show in the 2nd season.
The theme music used was actually background music on WoF (once-upon-a-time) when they still did shopping…they played while the announcer described the prizes that were just bought…and thinking that this music eventually became a show’s own theme music pretty much nausiates me.
I like the new money changes, but the we need prizes other than trips for the first 2 rounds, and 2 extras for round 3.
Good catch on my spelling error, Darren; I stand corrected.
A dictionary defines words based on historical usage, but does not necessarily decide what is “valid.” The fact that a word can be misused enough to reach a point of “acceptance” in a dictionary still doesn’t mean that it should be considered acceptable. “Irregardless” is listed in many dictionaries because it has been used for a long time, and ALWAYS incorrectly: it isn’t a word. Does that mean that it should be acceptable to use the word instead of “regardless” just because it’s in the dictionary? (Yes, probably an argument for some other place and time.)
Back on topic, I hadn’t realized that the theme was one of the shopping cues from WoF. I’ve always thought there was only one shopping cue, but the more I think about it, this theme does have a small note of familiarity to it. Unfortunately, it doesn’t make me like it any more.
As being a person that has been on the show (during the Xbox episodes) I can tell you all that the only podiums (There are podiums. Deal with it.) you can tell have been buzzed in are the front two. The only way you can tell if a spoiler has buzzed in is if you hear the buzz in sound, but neither front two podiums have buzzed in.
I discussed the whole “if you are behind near the end of the game, get the answers wrong” strategy on another page.
http://www.greylabyrinth.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?t=12250
This benefits the person in the lead as if the person that is behind buzzes in, your podium is safe if you don’t buzz in. I used this logic on my show and I ended up winning.
As for the whole “spoilers are unfair” argument, it should be known that they are called “spoilers.” Also, as being a person that started in the spoilers’ row, I can tell you that the spoiler row SUCKS! No matter how many times you buzz in, if a person in front gets it right, you look stupid. Then when you finally get an answer, everyone claims that you “only got one right” even though you knew the answer to many but were unable to answer. Perhaps on my episode there was only one spoil, my own, I felt imprisoned in the back. The people in the front on my episode were really good so the spoiler opportunities were very rare. On my episode only 3 clues led to spoilers attempting to answer. (There were many clues that no one buzzed in.)
Here’s a clip of me on the show in case you are interested. Please note that the better the group does on the crossword, the easier the bonus round is. If there are many spoils or many wrong answers given, it will make the bonus round hard. On my episode, the bonus round was easy as the first two players were getting almost all of the answers. There is a group dynamic to the show and you are kind of working as a team even though it does not look the part.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dO001uSApc
I really like Crosswords. I think it’s a very good show and fun to play along at home with. I like the theme song I think it’s cute. Ty Treadway’s hosting wraps circles around that boring hag on Temptation. Merv gave us a great show and I hope Crosswords lasts.
Patrick:
—
A dictionary defines words based on historical usage, but does not necessarily decide what is “valid.” The fact that a word can be misused enough to reach a point of “acceptance” in a dictionary still doesn’t mean that it should be considered acceptable. [...]
—
If the dictionary isn’t the arbiter of what is a correct word and what isn’t, then what greater authority do you personally appeal to? Where is this podium-equals-flat-thing argument coming from? Citation, please.
Let’s go back to MW’s Collegiate. It lists definitions in chronological order of when they came into usage. By that metric, a podium isn’t what you describe, a platform to deliver a speech on, but a low wall serving as a foundation or terrace wall, what would today be called (redundantly, apparently) a retaining wall. So your definition is clearly a fly-by-night neologism, since this definition dates back to 1743, trumping yours.
Also, since “lectern” derives ultimately from the Latin verb “legere”, meaning “to read”, the object we’ve been discussing isn’t a lectern either unless you’re reading something there, as opposed to delivering a memorized speech, or delivering an answer as on “Crosswords” or “Jeopardy!” off the top of their heads. So even that name is wrong. So what do we call this thing?
I hope you see my point here. Relying on personal opinion about what’s a word and what’s not is ridiculous. And pretending that descriptivist dictionaries (ones that use print citations from reliable, accepted literary and journalistic sources) are wrong because they reflect current usage implies pretending that language does not evolve. If that were true, neither Shakespeare nor Chaucer would need glossaries. Find me a purely *proscriptivist* dictionary (one that claims to be an authority, regardless of how people actually use words, like the role the Académie Française fills for French) from the past twenty years that supports your position, or some other higher authority, and then I’ll re-evaluate my position.
(And on the topic of “irregardless”, MW Collegiate does list it, but with a one-word definition [regardless] and an eight-line usage paragraph which basically says you will look unprofessional if you try using the word to mean “regardless”. “Podium” has no usage tag in place.)
Again, back on topic.
mtc:
—
As for the whole “spoilers are unfair” argument, it should be known that they are called “spoilers.” [...] Perhaps on my episode there was only one spoil, my own, I felt imprisoned in the back. The people in the front on my episode were really good so the spoiler opportunities were very rare. On my episode only 3 clues led to spoilers attempting to answer. (There were many clues that no one buzzed in.)
—
In my mind, this reinforces the “spoilers are unfair” argument. On your show, the leader made at most three mistakes — perhaps not even mistakes, but simply failed to answer a clue that you or someone else thought they could — and for that, s/he lost the game. You gave one correct answer, and that gave you access to a win. If it had been on the last question, would you feel you deserved the win? Or an easier bonus round, as you described? A spoiler usually wins by stealing the success of other contestants. On something like “Dog Eat Dog” this is to be expected, because we expect that show to be trashy. “Crosswords” isn’t trying to be trashy, but its rules are. They need work.
Like I said, the spoilers do spoil the game for others, hence the name. This is what makes this game unique. Without the spoilers, it would be just like Jeopardy.
Had I got it on the last question rather than 8 questions before, (The edit out some questions on the groadcast that no one answered) I probably would have freaked out more than I did on the show if that is even possible. Watching the show, I know how easy it is for someone else to swipe your podium so I felt very lucky that I held on.
When waiting to get on the show, one of the producers says to the people in the spoilers’ row “If you manage to get a successful spoil, that means that you got a question right that 4 other people did not get right.” The point the producer was trying to make is that one should feel proud of pulling off a successful spoil.
Technically a spoiler got a question right that at least 2 others did not get right. Only if the other spoilers did not buzz in or buzzed in with wrong answers can you actually say that 4 other people failed.
Although the winner may not be the smartest person on the show, at least it is not won by the second dumbest person like on “The Weakest Link.” Now there was a show that rewarded stupidity.