| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Edinboro |
|||
|
Well in all fairness, they are not gonna go back to basics. Its only natural after so many seasons for the show to evolve. Its needs to be accepted.
|
|||
Dr Will Hatch two point oh |
|||
|
Posts: 6033 (11/23/08 2:42 PM) Registered user |
I agree, and that's why I'm not one of those nuts who say that the first two seasons are the only worthwhile ones, but Survivor has an identity crisis.
It comes down to this: do you care more about watching interpersonal dynamics more, or do you care more about the game dynamics and how they impact the
contestents? I care more about the former; the game is unavoidable but the twists should be used to accentuate the castaways personalities or create
interesting scenarios. Outcasts can be a play on oppressed minorities, the racial twist on CI is self explanatory. The final 3, hidden immunity idols, bloated
casts and the constant back and forth between seasons of whether they merge at 10 or 9 are all trite, boring attempts to appeal to game dynamics. I'm
interested in game dynamics, but the show's only an hour a week, and I'd rather see who these people are at the expense of a complicated game.
Last Edited By: Dr Will Hatch two point oh
11/23/08 2:46 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
TRAINROBBER |
|||
|
No player should have their strategy undermined by the producers of the show. Once the game begins, leave the players alone. If one team destroys another, so
be it. Stop with the switching of the tribes already...That's the only twist that bothers me...
|
|||
Dr Will Hatch two point oh |
|||
|
Posts: 6036 (11/23/08 5:01 PM) Registered user |
The challenges are designed to lean in a certain tribes favor usually, not that it is rigging but it is manipulation, so therefore it is impossible to remove
producer interference totally.
|
||
PrettyGoodYear1988 |
|||
No player should have their strategy undermined by the producers of the show. Once the game begins, leave the players alone. If one team destroys another, so be it. Stop with the switching of the tribes already...That's the only twist that bothers me...Then why didn't you stop watching after Africa? Or Marquesas? Or Amazon? Or All-Stars? Almost all games have a luck component, whether it's rolling dice, shuffling cards, etc. Survivor is first and foremost a show. Whether or not it's "fair" is secondary to whether or not entertaining situations will happen. If things worked out perfectly for a tribe or an alliance, then we'd have a boring season, which is one of the reasons why seasons like Thailand are hated... The dominant alliance waltzed to the Final 5 with almost no real competition, and the dominant member of that alliance won the game. The same goes for Palau. |
|||
TRAINROBBER |
|||
PrettyGoodYear1988 wrote:Entertaining moments are going to happen no matter what happens. Nothing works out perfectly for any tribe, who said it did? Just because a top five comes from the same tribe doesn't mean it will be boring...All I'm saying is that at the beginning of the game, the very beginning, all contestants are equal...when a tribe switch happens the show is putting some people at an advantage while others at a disadvantage...I'd like to know why they started doing it? were they bored by the way the game was originally played? did they think they would get more ratings? Or do they just want to try and get people so stop forming alliances? how about this: lets switch teams every other day...they did it twice this season... lets do it more next time...and exile island needs to go too. It is pointless... |
|||
Dr Will Hatch two point oh |
|||
|
Posts: 6057 (11/24/08 9:31 AM) Registered user |
Someone in the game is always at a disadvantage. The tribal switches, I think, are simulations of natural diasters. Noone can stop a crippling storm or a volcano eruption, which can ruin an empire. I mean, everything in Survivor is fair(except for the rule about not stealing the hii, that makes no sense whatsoever), so whatever happens is legitimate. I hate exile island, the hii, f3s and bloated casts on aesthetic grounds, not game grounds. |
||
survivor300 |
|||
|
it is weird because i think Randy and crytsal have made for some good Tv the past couple of weeks. But I also find myself rooting for sugar.. maybe it is
becuase she is cute and from brooklyn.
|
|||
PrettyGoodYear1988 |
|||
were they bored by the way the game was originally played?Probably. They were in the third season. Shows change over time. did they think they would get more ratings?Not necessarily, but since it would keep players on their toes and help avoid predictable outcomes, it probably kept viewers interested a little longer. Predictable outcomes spell death in television. That was why Fiji wasn't very well-liked. Earl was an obvious winner even in the pre-merge episodes. The Onions making F5 and Marcus winning would have made an equally boring season, and the ratings would have suffered as they did in Fiji. Yes, there probably would have been interesting, subtle dynamics among that alliance (as there was in Fiji's main alliance), but this is television, and subtleness really isn't what most people want to see. They want major shake-ups. Or do they just want to try and get people so stop forming alliances?No, they want people to form more alliances. Think about it. Susie and Randy switched over to Kota and became members of the dominant alliance there, but they still had ties with old Fang members. That's where the interesting dynamics come in. Are they going to stay with their new alliance or flip back to their old one? Which is better for them in the game? Randy chose to ditch his old alliance while Susie flipped back over to them, and we can see that Susie made the better decision. Candice ditched the alliance she made on Aitu with Yul and Becky and went back (literally) to Raro. These are interesting storylines. Let's face it: On the seasons without tribe swaps (Borneo, Australia, Thailand, Palau, Exile Island), we've ended up with Pagongings or near-Pagongings. The show would not have lasted if every season was like that. |
|||
7Sages |
|||
|
I don't think Fiji was that predictable. The problem is that there were accurate spoilers for that season. The moment there were no spoilers for seasons
then suddenly people had a much harder time figuring out the winner
|
|||