So???? Poor them!

I think a good combo of two formats would be having a HOH each week who would make one killer nomination which would cause drams as they'd have to do it face to face. Later in the week the rest of the housemates would nominate as normal, and the fact they'd be allowed to talk about them would add to paranoia in the house.

I just think taking away public vote from the UK version would ruin the whole point of it and people would turn off in their droves. Almost every eviction in BBUK that hasn't had a public vote has been awful as big characters have mostly left.

One could argue though that viewers have already turned off in their droves (Timebomb was the lowest rating series yet, with ratings dipping under the 1m mark on some nights) so it's better to try something new rather than continuing with the same failing format?

I agree, good example about the live feed too - that's another thing, if they're gonna implement the US format it is essential, you literally cannot understand the dynamics of the game without it.

BIB - idk, as much as I would love this to happen people who are opposed can relax, it will never. The BBUK producers are nowhere near daring or creative enough to actually go out on a limb and attempt this. I guarantee the 'nothing will ever be the same again' stuff is just yet more typical hyperbole **** which'll entail something like two houses existing without knowing about the other and more messy face to face noms that'll ROCK THE HOUSE!!!11

Again, that's your subjective opinion. I don't actually disagree with it btw, HoH's failing can be good for entertainment but it doesn't change the fact that having your target stay because they're saved in a popularity vote as opposed to flipping the house vote themselves renders trying to play a strategy-based game pointless. You can't do both at the same time.

I'm sure what you've suggested is actually a format somewhere else but I don't think there's much strategy in that at all which is what we're arguing about so I'll just leave that there, although I would say that the US format itself lends itself to drama, the BBUK producers love face to face noms - well you'd have that at a nomination ceremony every week :joker:

People are turning off in their droves as it is! What is there to lose at this point? May as well give something drastic a trial run rather than pursue whatever messy nonsense we have as a format now. Also Sam (BB16) was a dullard, Vanessa (and Makosi) were at first facing a public vote so they're still to blame, same for Gerry (and Carole), Danielle's probably the only genuine example of it not working out.

That's why I'm suggesting changing the format up a bit. But changing it into a completely different show which BBUS/BBCAN basically is would not help because the public would not like power taken away from them.

Jack lets just agree to disagree, you clearly value gameplay and strategy over entertainment, and I'm the opposite. :)

There will always be a public vote involved as that is how Channel 5 make a profit from the show. There probably won't even be a new format - now they've announced there's 2 gardens it'll probably be two seperate houses with two seperate casts with two people evicted every week for a couple of weeks before the houses are merged together in the final few weeks. It's been rumoured on and off since the first series.

I actually don't? :conf: I even said HoH's failing is entertaining, personally I think the US format lends itself to more entertainment, that's why I prefer it

My point was that you're arguing a strategy based format can coincide with a public vote and they can't, the two cancel each other out. It has nothing to do with whether you or I think it would be entertaining, you said it wouldn't make gameplay pointless, I'm saying it would

Who said the BBCAN format isn't entertaining Greg? It clearly is, possibly more so, as there is a new element added to the show.

And I wholeheartedly agree with Jack; you can implement bits of strategy to the current format, but you can't involve the public on a format that is based on gameplay. Otherwise there is no point in 'playing a game' as your game could be ruined at any point by an external force over which you have control. It literally doesn't work.

this is probably the truth tbh.

I think a good way of keeping public involved but having US/CAN rules would be to have the HoH nominate three houseguests, and then have a Viewer's Veto to save one of the three before the normal PoV competition resumes.

I actually really like this. It doesn't actually interfere much as still if the HMs campaign well enough inside the house they can stay.

You really are not getting my point. It does not matter if someone's game could be ruined by the public. My point is that aspects from BBUS could add to the entertainment value of BBUK. Whether or not letting the public vote in evictions enables housemates to "play the game well" is irrelevant.

but that's just my opinion
https://media4.giphy.com/media/26tPk...FPPO/giphy.gif

You never actually said you wanted to 'add elements of BBUS to BBUK' though, you said you wanted to involve the public in the BBUS format, which as I've said, wouldn't work. If that wasn't what you were meaning, you should have made yourself clearer.

It is relevant, whether the public can destroy a good gameplayer's chances. It's not fair. Hence why, for example, there is a huge uproar when one of the best dancers are voted out of Strictly.

Yes I did say that though?
Literally my first post on this topic was
I made myself perfectly "clear" thanks

Also why is it a necessity that the best game player wins? The winner should be the one who has been most entertaining imho

That's my mistake, sorry, but you did go on to say that public vote and strategic gameplay can coexist which I still disagree with, for the reasons I've stated.

Because the new format would be an actual competition based on strategic gameplay rather than a popularity contest.

Well I could sit here and argue all night but it's clear we are not going to convince eachother lmao

I win :hee:

(Jk Sorry)

So then why did you say this?

You can think someone's game being ruined is entertaining - I don't necessarily disagree, but the point both of us are making is that you cannot make BBUK a strategic game if the overall control of who's evicted is left up to the public. That's what you disputed.

Lol I've never said that I want BBUK to be a "strategic game". All I'm saying is that elements of the North American BB format could be added to BBUK to freshen it up a bit and make it more enjoyable to watch. I don't understand what you're not getting and why you're so pressed?

I never said you said that either :unsure: I'm completely aware of what you're saying, but when me and Tom were discussing how it's not possible to have a strategic format if you still keep the public vote as they cancel each other out, you quoted him and said 'yes it is'

That's what we've been discussing the whole time. Not whether we should make it a strategic game, not whether ruining someone's strategy is entertaining, the fact that you cannot make BBUK a strategic game if you still have a public vote. You said you can? I'm not pressed in the slightest, just really confused why you're not seeing what you wrote yourself

I know you can't make it a truly strategic game with a public vote. That's not what I'm suggesting. I'm saying in terms of entertainment BBUK could consider adding elements in North American BB. Which is what I've been saying the whole time :spin:

So then why when Tom said you can't have a strategy based format with a public vote, did you say 'yes you can'? :laugh:

That's what started this whole thing! I know that's what you're suggesting and that's fine, I'm not disputing it, I've just been confused as to why you said 'yes you can' if that's not what you believe lol

All I'm saying is that mixing BBUK with certain aspects of BBUS (which by its very nature is strategic) could be entertaining and make the show feel a bit fresh and new.
Your point is that it wouldn't work because people's game plans could be ruined. But that's irrelevant to me and the vast majority of BBUK viewers who are interested in being entertained, not ensuring that someone's strategy goes to plan every week.