Survivor: Generic Thread (No Spoilers)

6149 posts / 0 new
Last post

Wish they'd do a Surprise start like they did in China and/or have a school yard pick. Just something different and not predictable.

I never understood why people say they should go back to focusing on the survival aspec, that god old and played out which is why we have all these twists in the first place. 

I wonder how different Caramoan would have been if Corinne flipped to the fans side when the tribe swap happened. I feel like Philip and Cochran would have been the boot before merge.

I never understood why people say they should go back to focusing on the survival aspec,

It's literally the name of the show. 

 

Challenge 17 wrote:

I never understood why people say they should go back to focusing on the survival aspec,

It's literally the name of the show.  

And? They’re still struggling, they still need to fend for a lot of their food, they still need to build their shelter. They’re still surviving. It’s also a game and it still needs to be entertaining. 

 

Bacchus wrote:

Challenge 17 wrote:I never understood why people say they should go back to focusing on the survival aspec,

It's literally the name of the show.  

And? They’re still struggling, they still need to fend for a lot of their food, they still need to build their shelter. They’re still surviving. It’s also a game and it still needs to be entertaining. 

And? It's LITERALLY the name of the show.  It would be like calling a gameshow "The Voice" and it being miming competition. 

Outwit  - Social game. Outplay - Challenges. Outlast - Survival. Nullifying a core pillar of gameplay by giving away rice and having food reward challenges every few days makes the game less interesting, less entertaining.

If you want a show just about social game and challenges at a static location there's Big Brother. Survivor has always been about survival in some form or fashion in grand locations. That's the very niche it created. The further they go away from the formula that brought them success, the more viewers they lose. 

Challenge 17 wrote:

I never understood why people say they should go back to focusing on the survival aspec,

It's literally the name of the show.  

But like I said, its played out, we've seen it over and over and people got sick of which is why we got a million twists in the first place.

We still get focus on the survival aspect, but its no longer a unique thing for survivor, to launched a ton of other survival type shows, what people watch survivor for is the gameplay, look at heroes vs villains, probably the most beloved season by fans, what was the main focus, how to survive? Or the big personalities and gameplay? And I guarantee if they went back to basics people would like it for a season then immediately complain how it's boring and nothing new to the game.

Bacchus wrote:

Challenge 17 wrote:I never understood why people say they should go back to focusing on the survival aspec,

It's literally the name of the show.  

But like I said, its played out, we've seen it over and over and people got sick of which is why we got a million twists in the first place.

You do realize you are actually describing the current state of the show, right? Regurgitated location. Regurgitated challenges. Regurgitated cast. People are getting sick of it which is why the show hasn't seen 2.0 in the demo since the first season permanently moving to Fiji. 

 

Survivor has multiple meanings.  Personally, "surviving" isn't the environment part solely.  They still deal with that but it's about surviving the vote each week.  

Bacchus, I think you're so mad about a few things you're simply refusing to acknowledge certain things--like this season is very good regardless of 4 returnees and the same environment.  The ratings have nothing to do with the same location IMO--rating continue to drop because less and less people are watching anything other than sports live.

like this season is very good regardless of 4 returnees and the same environment. 

You can keep saying it is good over and over. It doesn't make it so.

Ratings are for both live and DVR +7. While it is true overall TV viewership is declining, Survivor viewership is falling at a much fast pace and IMHO it's because the show has become completely one-note with recycled cast members, dumb twists, monotonous gameplay, and a singular location. 

 

kvm1977 wrote:

like this season is very good regardless of 4 returnees and the same environment. 

You can keep saying it is good over and over. It doesn't make it so.Ratings are for both live and DVR +7. While it is true overall TV viewership is declining, Survivor viewership is falling at a much fast pace and IMHO it's because the show has become completely one-note with recycled cast members, dumb twists, monotonous gameplay, and a singular location.  

Survivor has multiple meanings.  Personally, "surviving" isn't the environment part solely.  They still deal with that but it's about surviving the vote each week.  Bacchus, I think you're so mad about a few things you're simply refusing to acknowledge certain things--like this season is very good regardless of 4 returnees and the same environment.  The ratings have nothing to do with the same location IMO--rating continue to drop because less and less people are watching anything other than sports live.

Not even worth the argument anymore lol. Someone so friggen caught up in the location, who can’t even acknowledge a fantastic cast like this one and DvsG, isn’t worth even bothering with. The only reason viewership is down is because television in general is, because actual fans are enjoying the hell out of this season, and the casual fans who I know are too. No season is perfect but having such a ridiculous hard on for hating a season must seriously be tiring.

kvm1977 wrote:

Survivor has multiple meanings.  Personally, "surviving" isn't the environment part solely.  They still deal with that but it's about surviving the vote each week.  Bacchus, I think you're so mad about a few things you're simply refusing to acknowledge certain things--like this season is very good regardless of 4 returnees and the same environment.  The ratings have nothing to do with the same location IMO--rating continue to drop because less and less people are watching anything other than sports live.

Not even worth the argument anymore lol. Someone so friggen caught up in the location, who can’t even acknowledge a fantastic cast like this one and DvsG, isn’t worth even bothering with. The only reason viewership is down is because television in general is, because actual fans are enjoying the hell out of this season, and the casual fans who I know are too. No season is perfect but having such a ridiculous hard on for hating a season must seriously be tiring.

I don't hate this season. I don't like it either.  It's utterly bland. 

As to the location, don't be so myopic. I never said the location was the only factor, just one of many. Having more variety is a good thing and in Survivor the location breathes life into each and every season. 

Survivor is still outperforming every show on tv not named GoT, Grey's, The Voice, TBBT, This Is Us or The Walking Dead. I'm sure producers are more than happy with the numbers and they're not gonna fix what's not broken. 

Survivor is still outperforming every show on tv not named GoT, Grey's, The Voice, TBBT, This Is Us or The Walking Dead. I'm sure producers are more than happy with the numbers and they're not gonna fix what's not broken. 

Survivor averaged a 2.4 rating in 2017-2018. It's averaging a 1.49 in 2019. It's down almost an entire point in the demo! I'm sure they are more than concerned. When you put up a mediocre product you are going to get mediocre results. 

I feel like I’m on a merry go round with this convo.

nevidcm wrote:

Survivor is still outperforming every show on tv not named GoT, Grey's, The Voice, TBBT, This Is Us or The Walking Dead. I'm sure producers are more than happy with the numbers and they're not gonna fix what's not broken. 

Survivor averaged a 2.4 rating in 2017-2018. It's averaging a 1.49 in 2019. It's down almost an entire point in the demo! I'm sure they are more than concerned. When you put up a mediocre product you are going to get mediocre results. 

I don't know where you're getting your ratings because I just checked and the last time Survivor got more than a 2.0 for an episode was on MvGx on 2016. 

Bacchus wrote:

nevidcm wrote:Survivor is still outperforming every show on tv not named GoT, Grey's, The Voice, TBBT, This Is Us or The Walking Dead. I'm sure producers are more than happy with the numbers and they're not gonna fix what's not broken. 

Survivor averaged a 2.4 rating in 2017-2018. It's averaging a 1.49 in 2019. It's down almost an entire point in the demo! I'm sure they are more than concerned. When you put up a mediocre product you are going to get mediocre results. 

I don't know where you're getting your ratings because I just checked and the last time Survivor got more than a 2.0 for an episode was on MvGx on 2016. 

https://deadline.com/2018/05/2017-2018-tv-series-ratings-rankings-full-list-of-shows-**********/

Survivor was 17th overall in the 2017-2018 season with a 2.4 rating in the demo. 

nevidcm wrote:

Bacchus wrote:

nevidcm wrote:Survivor is still outperforming every show on tv not named GoT, Grey's, The Voice, TBBT, This Is Us or The Walking Dead. I'm sure producers are more than happy with the numbers and they're not gonna fix what's not broken. 

Survivor averaged a 2.4 rating in 2017-2018. It's averaging a 1.49 in 2019. It's down almost an entire point in the demo! I'm sure they are more than concerned. When you put up a mediocre product you are going to get mediocre results. 

I don't know where you're getting your ratings because I just checked and the last time Survivor got more than a 2.0 for an episode was on MvGx on 2016. 

https://deadline.com/2018/05/2017-2018-tv-series-ratings-rankings-full-list-of-shows-**********/Survivor was 17th overall in the 2017-2018 season with a 2.4 rating in the demo. 

That's definitely taking into account DVR viewings at the very least. If you look for individual ratings for each episode they're definitely not anywhere near that. The ratings for Game Changers are all on the wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivor:_Game_Changers

I do agree though that we can do without so many reward challenges and that we could use that time for more camp life scenes, but it's not make or break for me. 

I really don't believe there's a single person out there not watching because of the location.  And returning players definitely doesn't hurt viewership either.  Now, I wish they made better selections with returning players sometimes but let's not pretend Wentworth or Joe don't have fan bases.  Hell, even Aubrey does.  David...meh.

The gameplay this season is anything but bland.  The one point you're absolutely right on is that there are too many twists and advantages which takes away from the game itself.   One of the reasons Big Brother isn't watchable any more IMO and, yes, if anything is a factor in the ratings dropping, other than simply tv viewing habits have changed, it's that.

I really don't believe there's a single person out there not watching because of the location.

Location is not going to dissuade someone from watching, but it might interest someone in watching. It definitely makes the show more interesting. A new location, means new themed rewards, new themed challenges, new local people and a different climate. It really has the ability to change the complexion of the game. Does it always? No, but it can. 

I'm confused why people are actually arguing against locational variety. It makes no sense to me. Why wouldn't you want the show to be in new and interesting places?

Oh...it’s still going. Maybe if we debate is 40 more times someone will change their viewpoint.

Oh...it’s still going. Maybe if we debate is 40 more times someone will change their viewpoint.

I think if we work on the areas where we agree, it can help bring this conversation to a productive conclusion. For instance, I completely agree that no location could make the Edge of Extinction cast interesting. 

Kajun wrote:

Oh...it’s still going. Maybe if we debate is 40 more times someone will change their viewpoint.

I think if we work on the areas where we agree, it can help bring this conversation to a productive conclusion. For instance, I completely agree that no location could make the Edge of Extinction cast interesting. 

LOL dead.

This cast isn’t the best of the best but to say they aren’t interesting is hilarious. Ok I’m done with the bottom of the barrel taste and negativity that spews in this thread lmaoooo.

New topic hmmm, season 39 is currently filming! Woo!

This cast isn’t the best of the best but to say they aren’t interesting is hilarious. Ok I’m done with the bottom of the barrel taste and negativity that spews in this thread lmaoooo.New topic hmmm, season 39 is currently filming! Woo!

I saw rumors of the theme. Not sure if we can post it in this thread.

nevidcm wrote:

Survivor is still outperforming every show on tv not named GoT, Grey's, The Voice, TBBT, This Is Us or The Walking Dead. I'm sure producers are more than happy with the numbers and they're not gonna fix what's not broken. 

Survivor averaged a 2.4 rating in 2017-2018. It's averaging a 1.49 in 2019. It's down almost an entire point in the demo! I'm sure they are more than concerned. When you put up a mediocre product you are going to get mediocre results. 

You realize its been almost 40 seasons right? The fact they are still one of the top viewed shows is far from mediocre. 

Bacchus wrote:

nevidcm wrote:Survivor is still outperforming every show on tv not named GoT, Grey's, The Voice, TBBT, This Is Us or The Walking Dead. I'm sure producers are more than happy with the numbers and they're not gonna fix what's not broken. 

Survivor averaged a 2.4 rating in 2017-2018. It's averaging a 1.49 in 2019. It's down almost an entire point in the demo! I'm sure they are more than concerned. When you put up a mediocre product you are going to get mediocre results. 

You realize its been almost 40 seasons right? The fact they are still one of the top viewed shows is far from mediocre. 

I watched the first season when it aired. I know how long the show has been running.  

Survivor pulled a 1.5 in the demo this past week. It's fine in the current climate but isn't great either. Just mediocre. I promise you CBS isn't celebrating over those type of numbers and it's also the reason Survivor will probably never leave Fiji (cost cutting). 

Pages