What can they do to make the next show better?

The ClubHouse: Archives: What can they do to make the next show better?
 SubtopicMsgs  Last Updated
Archive through January 13, 2002 25   01/14 06:04pm

Car54

Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 12:12 pm Click here to edit this post
Demeter, I agree. A lot of the parts I remember most had nothing to do with strategy or "the game"- Frank and the Elephants is a perfect example. I think diversity is important, and some of the players, who are there to prove something to themselves have really surprised us in the end (Tina, Kimj).
I enjoyed the more strategic players too, but a mix is important- who would want to see a show with 8 Colby's and 8 Jerri's?

I think Mark Burnett is very in tune with this. A lot of his programs have to do with personal challenges.

Gina8642

Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 12:31 pm Click here to edit this post
Oh, I don't think it is wrong to have those parts of the show shown to us. You (Car and Demeter) are both very right that those moments are some of the most entertaining of the show.

What I am talking about is providing players who move the plot along. Otherwise it becomes more of a travel show. I admit, I sometimes watch those. But if MarkB wants to maintain a top rated show, with everyone dying to tune in each week to see what happens, he needs to work on the plot more.

The same players who want to win, can provide the same interesting outtakes of humor, beauty, or personal growth. And they can move the plot forward more.

I'm just trying to think of how to make the show better. With that thought process I try to keep in mind how to keep the show a sucessful commercial enterprise. For example - You can make some changes which make a very small porportion of the audience alot happier, but cause disinterest to the average viewing public - they don't want to do that, even if it would make it more interesting to a few. To make it commercially viable enough to haul 100+ crew to some remote location, and then award someone a million bucks, you need to please the maximun viewing audience with each show.

I just think MarkB needs to work on the plot if he wants to keep the maximum number of viewers and be able to air the show on a major commercial network. Otherwise, Survivor just becomes another niche show on a cable network.

Whoami

Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 01:28 pm Click here to edit this post
I think someone earlier posted the suggestion that the loser in a challenge is the one who leaves, rather than whoever is voted.

Part of the fun of the game is seeing the social interaction, which includes the forming alliances, the plotting, etc. So just having the loser leave could be kind of anti-climatic. However, it becomes pretty predictable when you know what the controlling alliance is doing.

So, how about something like this:

In the tribal challenges, the winning tribe votes for who in the losing tribe will go. That could make the tribes perform more like a team, and try to stratagize how to utlilize each person's abilities, without putting them in the spotlight to make an easy target for the other tribe to pick off. This also puts all contestants at the tribal councils, perhaps giving everyone a chance to know each other better.

When the tribes merge, the top X amount of players vote who to eliminate from the remaining placed players. For instance, in the merged number of 10, the top 5 vote who to eliminate in the bottom 5. With nine, 5 vote to eliminate 4. With 8, it splits back up to 4 voting against 4 (at first I thought the voting sector should always be an uneven amount to eliminate ties, but another interesting part of the game is to see how previous votes affect the outcome).

This type of voting would really throw the alliances into a loop. You can't be part of a voting alliance if you don't place well in the challenges. Also, it gives people more of an incentive to really compete in the challenges, instead of flying under the radar for fear of making oneself a target. This would also lessen the chance for a strong competetor to get singled out and eliminated early in the merge, giving people like Alicia and Gretchen a better chance of competing.

Whoami

Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 01:43 pm Click here to edit this post
Whoops, I waited too long to edit, so here's another post.

I got to thinking, the strong players might get eliminated too early if the winning tribe succesfully identifies the strong players to boot. To solve this problem, perhaps the losing tribe can protect their strong players from being eliminated by picking a "franchise player," (to borrow the term from the NFL) who the winning tribe may not vote for at that TC. Then the strategy is, do you pick the same franchise player at each TC? Or do you risk spotlighting someone by protecting them at one TC, then make them vulnerable at the next TC if you protect someone else?

Whew! Confusing and complicated for sure, but it would sure put the contestants on their toes!

Squaredsc

Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 07:30 pm Click here to edit this post
personally i want to see some hand 2 hand combat. lets see these people kicking some a**. i think the challenges that they have been repeating are as exciting as watching paint dry. or how about a a football game now that's what i would like to see or human chess matches like on harry potter(i loved that movie and the whole book series). ho hum guess we have to wait for the next TAR if we want to see any action.

Tntitanfan

Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 07:49 pm Click here to edit this post
WhoamI - The "top" players vote who among the other players to eliminate? Are the "top" players the top five in an IC? I like your ideas, just didn't understand the terminology -

Llkoolaid

Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 08:28 pm Click here to edit this post
Personally I like all the nice players but I wouldn't mind seeing a show with 16 Jerri types. I watch the show to see who is being sneaky and underhanded. I think the bad guys provide the most entertainment. These are the people we love to hate and they are the ones we remember most. Maybe not 16 Jerri types but definately 16 Theresa types. She was in the game right to the bitter end. The pagonging comes from all the loyality the aliances show to each other and that makes it boring. I really like the people who are there to win and will do whatever it takes. It is a game and if you can't take the heat you shouldn't be in it.

Fantastic ideas about voting off players. Something has got to change to get rid of the pagonging which is the worst part of the show.

Whoami

Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 11:19 pm Click here to edit this post
Tnt,

What I mean is, when they compete head to head in the merged tribe, the ones who place 1-5 in the challenge then get the privlede of voting someone off who placed 6-10. So, as an individual, you hope to place in the top 5 in the challenge, and hope enough people in your alliance also place in the top 5 (or whatever number, depending on how many competitors there are at the time), so you can still try to control the vote.

Tntitanfan

Monday, January 14, 2002 - 03:47 pm Click here to edit this post
Thanks - and good ideas!!

Gina8642

Monday, January 14, 2002 - 06:04 pm Click here to edit this post
Whoami -

I like that idea. The producers would need to make sure to have a variety of challanges too. So the same players don't win everytime. All around players like Lex or Colby may always be there, but most players would make it sometimes and sometimes not - right?

This would definately shake up strategy.

Pamy

Monday, January 14, 2002 - 07:26 pm Click here to edit this post
I think the should not be allowed to win back to back immunity, like in bb2 you couldn't be HOH two wks in a row.
Mark B TRIES to make the challenges diverse so the same people wont win but we saw the same person win most of the time in the last 2 survivors, even with the different types of challenges

Gina8642

Tuesday, January 15, 2002 - 01:48 pm Click here to edit this post
Don't forget Kelly Wigglesworth had an immunity run of her own in Survivor1 too. It's happened in every episode.

Pamy

Tuesday, January 15, 2002 - 07:21 pm Click here to edit this post
Your right Gina!, I had forgotten about her!!

Chance

Wednesday, January 16, 2002 - 08:13 am Click here to edit this post
Puter girl suggest Survivor in a cold climate. While I, a female, would like this....I believe it will never happen cause there would be no T**S
& A**.... no skimmpy clothing thus the networks would nix the idea.
Chance