Jump to content

Ideas for Future Seasons


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.

47 replies to this topic

#31

Rillion

Rillion

    Couch Potato

Posted Jul 25, 2007 @ 11:24 AM

6) Unlimited booze. Seriously. They usually only give enough for each person to have about 2 beers. How is there supposed to be drunken drama?


Really? Jessica, Eric, and Jen were pretty clearly smashed last night when they stayed up until 3:30am playing stupid games. I suppose they could all be lightweights....

#32

Joran

Joran

    Couch Potato

Posted Aug 13, 2007 @ 9:10 PM

Don't think this has been brought up before, but I think the producers should throw out the lame "relationship" twists and instead change the rules so that houseguests are allowed to "abstain" from voting if they so choose. It might make for an interesting dynamic, knowing that the balance of votes would constantly be changing and you'd never know who actually voted. To make it work, the HoH would be included in the secret voting process, but would not be able to abstain, and his or her vote would only be used in the event of a tie (0-0 included).

#33

Hawkwild

Hawkwild

    Fanatic

  • Location:New York, NY

Posted Aug 17, 2007 @ 7:09 PM

Throw in one "America's Vote" for eviction. Let the HG's know about the fact of its existence. It's just a vote, like America is a single houseguest. HG's wouldn't be told how America voted...they'd have to figure it out (i.e., if there's a 'hinky' vote, there'd be no way to know if it was a Hamster or America). HOH would still break any ties.

#34

NTLurker

NTLurker

    Fanatic

Posted Aug 17, 2007 @ 7:39 PM

I don't like the "America's Vote" because the producers will just manipulate watchers into liking who they want to win and villanize those who they want to be vote off.

#35

Hawkwild

Hawkwild

    Fanatic

  • Location:New York, NY

Posted Aug 17, 2007 @ 7:45 PM

Yeah, but it's only one vote.

#36

Eagle1997

Eagle1997

    Video Archivist

Posted Aug 17, 2007 @ 10:48 PM

How about for a HOH competition every houseguest hsa to in secret name who'd they would nominate for eviction and then America votes on who gets HOH and the new HOH has to nominate who they said, no questions asked. And they cannot discuss who they each nominated.

#37

idledandy

idledandy

    Stalker

Posted Aug 20, 2007 @ 12:54 AM

They need to go back to everyone playing for the veto, because "backdooring" is unseemly. I loved when they did it to Jase, but this year it's like every week.

ETA, much later: Or how about this? The HoH can play for veto to defend his nominations, but if the HoH wins the veto, there is no veto ceremony and the nominations are unchanged. That way you don't have one person both taking someone off and putting someone on.

Edited by idledandy, Aug 22, 2007 @ 6:35 PM.


#38

Procrastination

Procrastination

    Couch Potato

Posted Aug 23, 2007 @ 2:37 AM

Yeah, but it's only one vote.

No it's not. Eric has to try to sway the house to get the person evicted.

#39

idledandy

idledandy

    Stalker

Posted Aug 24, 2007 @ 12:42 AM

each week, the person not evicted automatically becomes the new HoH

Ooh, that's wicked. Another possibility: the evictee appoints the new HoH on his way out the door.

#40

paganstar

paganstar

    Couch Potato

  • Location:Miami, Florida
  • Interests:Gardening, Writing, and Science Fiction

Posted Aug 27, 2007 @ 11:12 PM

Ooh, that's wicked. Another possibility: the evictee appoints the new HoH on his way out the door.


I like that idea. Can you imagine the looks on the faces of ED, Skelewhore, Er-ick, and Jessucka if Jen had appointed oh I dont know Amber or Zach as the new HOH!!!!.

#41

raceguy120390

raceguy120390

    Fanatic

Posted May 5, 2008 @ 1:26 AM

Judging from this thread, you want America to be able to vote, but let the housemates keep the eviction decision? The Australian BB is tried something similar as a one-off twist last year, and it worked so well it's now our Official Voting Method. You have Idol-like voting to keep your favourites, and the three lowest become the nominees. The house then decides which of them to evict. It's the best possible way to do both. (Although, it would make POV comps even more irrelevant than they currently are.)

#42

raceguy120390

raceguy120390

    Fanatic

Posted Jul 23, 2008 @ 10:27 PM

Couple of simple ideas to really fuck with the hammies:

1. All housemates must nominate BEFORE the HoH contest. Nominees are revealed, then PoV contest, leaving final list. Then, HoH right before the eviction. Whoever wins that has the sole decision on who goes. And make it a random-luck style challenge to stop people from throwing it. Wouldn't work every week, but try it once.

2. A simple twist which has been done in the other versions, but adapt it for yours. Get a housemate from an overseas BB to enter the house as a guest, and they get sole decision on who is nominated. No Veto. The shows for the week could involve some sort of BB1-esque weekly task rather than the usual alliancemaking. But you'd still get them trying to sway the visitor's decision.

#43

Ed Dunkle

Ed Dunkle

    Just Tuned In

Posted Aug 30, 2008 @ 12:08 PM

You guys have a lot of good ideas. And, trust me, every person working on Big Brother -- from the Exec producers to the craft service people have a ton of ideas, too. But CBS kills almost all of them. BB is a huge cash cow for them and they are very reluctant to make any meaningful changes. They'll just keep riding this same tired horse/cow until it dies.

And any idea that will increase the budget -- like a poor house and a luxury house -- has no chance at all.

My beef is that the show is just so freaking boring 99% of the time. You have people locked up in a cage and then you just ignore them. How about some interaction from the outside world like "celebrity" guests or bands or something? Maybe a visit from Dr. Phil?

Also, more booze, and maybe a house full of bisexuals of all ages. I love the fact that Jerry is 75. Props to CBS!

And, why do the competition questions have to be about the game? I think it would be a lot funnier if it was more like "Jaywalking" questions: who is the Vice President, etc. So many of these people are DOPES.

And, finally, more money! The HOH should get 10k and they should be able to use the money to buy votes, etc.

And raise the grand prize, you cheap asses! It's been 500k for TEN SEASONS.

#44

MRMO

MRMO

    Couch Potato

Posted Sep 10, 2009 @ 12:59 AM

I know throwing competitions is part of the game..but....I'd like to see a rule change that says the ending three part comp is not allowed to be thrown. If these wastes of protoplasm are on their way to some decent bucks, then they should have to really work for it at the end.

#45

dantsea

dantsea

    Video Archivist

Posted Sep 5, 2010 @ 12:25 AM

And, finally, more money! The HOH should get 10k and they should be able to use the money to buy votes, etc.


I think they actually used your suggestion last season or the one before that? They introduced a version of hard currency in the house (ersatz gold bars, IIRC) that had a redeemable cash value to the bearer upon leaving the house, that were used for barter or bribe.

#46

dantsea

dantsea

    Video Archivist

Posted Sep 8, 2010 @ 10:42 PM

And for BB13 (if there is one) I hope production tells them "don't even think about using part of your pre-vote speech to do shout-outs to all your friends and family." Christ, that's annoying.

#47

18matt

18matt

    Fanatic

Posted Aug 6, 2011 @ 12:58 PM

There's always exactly one (often flaming) gay guy per season. I honestly can't remember if they've ever had a lesbian in the house. Anyway, I'm not suggesting an all gay season of BB, but somewhere between 4-6 gays would definitely shake up the dynamic of the house.

Edited by 18matt, Aug 6, 2011 @ 12:58 PM.


#48

SnideAsides

SnideAsides

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 30, 2012 @ 3:52 AM

Two simple ideas.

Firstly, to stop backdooring (and expose sub-alliances): The HoH nominates three players instead of two; all players except the HoH and the nominees compete in the PoV; the winner vetoes the nomination of their choice, leaving the regular two. There are no replacement nominations.

Secondly: It's literally impossible to get a winner in Majority Rules without the Whiteboard Of Near Enough Is Good Enough (if two people are left, it's a tie; if more are left, one is never the majority). Maybe if they changed it to Minority Rules, it'd work better - it'd be quicker, for one; plus it opens up interesting reverse-psychology strategy dilemmas. Do you pick the answer you genuinely think is the minority answer, or do you expect everyone else to pick the minority answer (thus making it the majority answer), and pick the majority answer (which becomes the minority answer)?

Edited by SnideAsides, Jan 30, 2012 @ 3:53 AM.