| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 The Marquesan Godfather |
|||
|
Posts: 10672 (05/02/08 11:46 AM) Registered User |
Edgic is always fun for a laugh.
I tell you how to handle this problem next season. People want to sign up for edgic, have the mods blackout the spoiler section for those posters, then they will trully be in the dark. |
||
|
ProbstFan123 |
|||
|
Posts: 10023 (05/02/08 2:14 PM) Registered user |
Then they would just read the spoilers at SurvivorFever or another site. There's always ways around it.
Edgic will never be 100% spoiler-free. |
||
 craig |
|||
|
Posts: 12980 (05/02/08 9:01 PM) Registered User |
Actaully, Sucks and Spoilers are full of people who think Amanda will win if she makes the Finals, but Edgic will stick by Parvati.
Parvati win = Edgic ownage. Edgic called Sandra and Yul correctly too, when spoilers were sure Darrah would win and had Ozzy winning 5-4 over Yul. As for reading spoilers, I only needed to read all the Alexis hype in Sucks back in February to figure she had spoilers backing her, and yet Edgic efused to pick here (with a couple exceptions).
Last Edited By: craig
05/02/08 9:07 PM.
Edited 2 times.
|
||
|
DevilChild255 |
|||
|
Posts: 156 (05/02/08 9:18 PM) |
^^ Acknowledging the "couple of exceptions" = agreeing edgic will never be completely spoiler free....
|
||
|
ProbstFan123 |
|||
|
Posts: 10030 (05/02/08 9:20 PM) Registered user |
A Parvati win (or even a Cirie win) would be a huge victory for edgic.
An Amanda/Erik/Natalie win would be a fiasco for edgic. There's no middle ground. |
||
|
Oowatanite |
|||
|
Posts: 5149 (05/02/08 9:51 PM) Registered User |
I don't recall any spoiler about "Ozzy wins 5-4". If there was one, it sounds like another Bluto-like "guess".
Alexis was a legitimate Edgic choice early in the season, but her string of UTRs killed that chance.
Edgically, only Eliza and Cirie and Parvati were alive at the merge. When Eliza was booted in that merge episode and Cirie got a very weak merge ep, to go
along with Cirie's weak Ep1, Parvati was/is clearly the best bet edgically.
|
||
|
craig |
|||
|
Posts: 12984 (05/02/08 11:34 PM) Registered User |
I don't recall any spoiler about "Ozzy wins 5-4".True Dork Times, the leading spoiler site at the time, and several others made that pick. They got the Adam vote wrong. Spoilers about who wins among finalists have a poor track record. |
||
|
chaperone |
|||
|
Posts: 2479 (05/03/08 10:31 AM) Registered User |
ProbstFan123 wrote: The fiasco wouldn't be spoiler related though, it'd be that the concept of edgic would definitively be demonstratably flawed. Natalie winning would be like Darrah Jen Becky or Denise winning. A bunch of early INV episodes is edgic death, and that exception has never been broken. It'd also be the death of Survivor editing...not introducing your winner until episode 6 is a bizarre idea. |
||
|
Relynn |
|||
|
Posts: 437 (05/03/08 12:27 PM) Registered user |
ProbstFan123 wrote: I'm not sure how Amanda can be compared to Erik/Natalie...Erik has been portrayed as almost one note, and certainly not really a gamer. And Natalie
was rarely seen until last episode where they instantly made her the epitome of all that was Evil and a Psychopath. (Can I kill the chickens)
|
||
|
ProbstFan123 |
|||
|
Posts: 10043 (05/03/08 12:37 PM) Registered user |
Amanda had 4 episodes where she was rarely seen to start the season. She was almost non-existent in the first episode, which is the most important episode of
the season.
|
||
|
kishuu |
|||
|
Posts: 5 (05/04/08 7:25 AM) |
She was mainly non-existant basically because nobody knew how well she did in China (except James). Oh, and the first ep on the faves was basically solidifying
two alliances, with both targetting one of the opposite (Eliza & Parvati). It suddenly all got down to Fairplay and what move he made so yeah.
|
||
|
AllMenAreIslands |
|||
|
Posts: 23621 (05/04/08 11:36 AM) Registered user |
chaperone wrote: Sorry, chap, but I must disagree with you. Rather than demonstrably flawed, should Amanda end up winning, it would simply mean Edgic needs a tweak.
"Players who return in back-to-back seasons and win the 2nd season can be hidden for the first FEW episodes, in order to keep the public from getting sick
of them." Or something to that effect.
It seems unlikely to me that such a tweak will be needed, but if Amanda won, that's the tweak I would suggest. It would not change the many guidelines
that apply to regular seasons in which ALL the players are completely new.
|
||
|
ProbstFan123 |
|||
|
Posts: 10079 (05/04/08 2:28 PM) Registered user |
That's a pretty specific guideline.
It reminds me of the people who were arguing that the guidelines should be changed after Danni's win: "If a popular player from the previous season comes back and loses to a UTR player in the final 2, the UTR player will be ignored for most of the season because they have to explain why the fan favorite lost." If you have to make guidelines that specific in seasons with returning players, it probably means edgic just doesn't work in those seasons. It's impossible to change the guidelines to account for every unique circumstance and special editing exception that might take place. But considering that this is probably the last season they will ever do with returning players (unless we get an All-Winners edition), it's a moot point.
Last Edited By: ProbstFan123
05/04/08 3:24 PM.
Edited 2 times.
|
||
|
AllMenAreIslands |
|||
|
Posts: 23626 (05/04/08 3:41 PM) Registered user |
If Amanda won, then that's a guideline we should consider adding. If they did do an All-Winners edition in a few seasons' time, then it's not
inconceivable that the person who won the preceding season could pull off the repeat. So, it would be a specific guideline, yes.
It wouldn't affect
the vast majority of guidelines. And that's why I disagree that Amanda winning would indicate a 100% failure of Edgic. How could we know how editing would
handle a player who makes it to the endgame in back-to-back seasons? And yet, it does feel like this tweak won't be necessary. Amanda's gameplay has
improved (or her edit has) but we don't know how good of a job she's capable of doing in front of the jury, since she doesn't know how dismally she
did in her previous season. However, her performance at TC this past ep could make some people nervous about her ability to pull votes based on visible
gameplay and she is booted before it can be put to the test.
|
||
|
ProbstFan123 |
|||
|
Posts: 10081 (05/04/08 3:55 PM) Registered user |
Yes, but how would we even know that's the reason she was invisible for the first 4 episodes?
It might not be because she was on back-to-back seasons. Maybe they just thought she was boring. Maybe she didn't do anything interesting the first 4 episodes. Maybe the editors just wanted to throw people off. I just think it's impossible to tailor the guidelines to fit every unique situation that might take place. There's no guideline that can accomodate a Danni win, without making the guidelines so broad that they essentially become useless. And I think it's the same with Amanda (if she wins, which she won't). Sure, you could make new guidelines to try to prevent a similar situation from happening in the future. But more than likely the next Danni or Amanda would have their own special circumstances that don't fit into those guidelines either. Trying to bend the rules to fit every Danni or Amanda or Amber that comes along is a futile endeavor. But the thing is, you notice that all of these "special exceptions" to edgic rules are female winners. Instead of adding specific guidelines to edgic, it might be worth considering separate edgic rules for male and female winners. Because it's pretty obvious that men and women don't get the same winner edits on this show. The last female winner that edgic was able to predict was Sandra, and that was 9 seasons ago. So if Amanda wins (which she won't), it might be worth changing the guidelines to something like this: A) There is an obvious male winner's edit (Earl, Yul, Todd, etc.) In which case you use the standard edgic rules. B) If no one looks like an obvious male winner, then more likely a woman wins, in which case you look at the female winners of previous seasons and try to come up with universal guidelines for those winners. I guess it's something to look into in the off-season. But again...Amanda ain't winning. |
||
|
Oowatanite |
|||
|
Posts: 5155 (05/05/08 10:27 AM) Registered User |
I just read your recent post, PF123, and I just have one question for clarification.
In your opinion, is Amanda winning this season ?
|
||
|
AllMenAreIslands |
|||
|
Posts: 23636 (05/05/08 12:22 PM) Registered user |
ProbstFan, I hope you're right and Amanda isn't winning.
What concerns me is the imagery of the sea turtle preceding Amanda's turn at Exile Island. It's like the editors are telling us they KNOW Amanda was hidden during the first few eps, she got started slowly, while everyone else burst out of the gates so to speak, all hare-like. Of all the players whose edits over the course of the show (except for the lack of Ep 1 confessional), Amanda's is coming steadily into the home stretch. She benefitted from Ozzy being blindsided in more ways than one. First of all, a major threat to win was removed without her knowledge. Second of all, she has no blood on her hands from anyone for that maneuver. Lest anyone think she hasn't done anything to be deserving of the win, lo & behold, she has a major episode and a blindside coup of her own, appearing to have surprised everyone except her good ally Parvati. The only thing preventing an Amanda win at this point looks to be Amanda's inability to sell her game to sufficient number of jurors. But this jury doesn't know about her lousy performance last time. She is already showing that she learned from mistakes, and worked out how to SHOW HER WORK so the jury can see her playing the game. That's often difficult to do and still retain a majority of people willing to cheer for you AND vote for you. Parvati may have a good edit, and earn some votes. It won't be a landslide, so it's not just a story this time of How The Loser Lost. It's also going to be the story of the slow, steady development of a game, not making too many moves nor too few. Sadly, we may well see Amanda winning this thing. The only way she doesn't is if the final 3 are Natalie, Parvati & Amanda, and there's a sudden change of gameplan, with an F2 instead of an F3, and Natalie wins it and takes Parvati. That is the only way I can see Parvati winning. Then it would mean Parvati has morphed into the Tortoise, who started her race and kept going steadily even if she ran into problems. Trouble is, she seems like more of a "hare" kind of personality, one who made alliances perhaps too soon. Can she sell the fact of having to double-up on her allies in order to ensure sufficient votes to take Ozzy out? I want Amanda to be a distraction, but what if she isn't? That turtle image being shown in proximity to her facetime at a key moment (just prior to cutting to her on EI) is very worrisome. Let's recall that in ep 1, she may not have had a key quote, but JFP was shown saying it was a Slow & Steady Wins the Race kind of game. Everyone else seemed to be off to a flying start, making alliances and concocting overly complicated plans, while Amanda wasn't even very visible for 4 episodes. If she's meant to be represented by the sea turtle, then she could be the winner. Was it a failure of Edgic, or simply a learning experience for Edgic?
Last Edited By: AllMenAreIslands
05/05/08 12:26 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
Jenny du Jour |
|||
|
Posts: 818 (05/05/08 2:50 PM) |
Well the shark has consistently hung around cirie so shouldn't she be eating the competition? :/ Sharks can eat turtles right??
|
||
|
craig |
|||
|
Posts: 13008 (05/06/08 7:12 PM) Registered User |
Edgic usually doesn't put huge stock in one ambiguous animal image. I didn't even notice the turtle. People were specing Alexis based on sea creature imagery too. Uused to be water in opening credits meant death, then Yul won.
|
||
|
Jenny du Jour |
|||
|
Posts: 832 (05/07/08 1:05 PM) |
|
||
