Fun with GSN's "Divided"

This is where all of the games are discussed.

Moderators: alietr, trainman, econgator, dhkendall

User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 16471
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by MarkBarrett »

Divided is a GSN game show that begins with a team of four players. They have to agree on an answer and lock it in while their bank counts down. A miss cuts the bank in half. A question from one of the Feb. 16 episodes:
Spoiler
Image
The answer the team agreed on:
Spoiler
Image
The correct answer in green:
Spoiler
Image
After the first round the four players vote one player out of the game to receive nothing, so there were 3 players remaining for this question:
Spoiler
Image
Their answer:
Spoiler
Image
The correct answer in green:
Spoiler
Image
The game ends with a final round and the players having to agree how to divide their bank with splits of 60%, 30% and 10% all while time counts down and the amounts diminish.

How the money was divided:
Spoiler
Cerise: $1,126
Luke: $3,377
Korama: $6,754
User avatar
dhkendall
Pursuing the Dream
Posts: 8789
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Contact:

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by dhkendall »

Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
"Jeopardy! is two parts luck and one part luck" - Me

"The way to win on Jeopardy is to be a rabidly curious, information-omnivorous person your entire life." - Ken Jennings

Follow my progress game by game since 2012
User avatar
Vowela
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 3:07 am

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by Vowela »

Just saw an episode for the first time. There was one question that seemed particularly terrible.
Spoiler
"How did most Americans say they felt about the safety of the country now compared to the time before 9/11?"

A, a lot safer
B, in real danger
C, pretty much status quo
Spoiler
Answer: B, in real danger, which the host said was the response of 40% of Americans. Which is not really most. And also means 60% did not feel we were in more danger, which is a lot more. Seems like an absolutely terrible and misleading question, which I suppose may have been the point, but still terrible.
As for the show itself... eh...
Spoiler
To put it nicely, I felt the contestants eliminated the wrong contestant immediately, and in hindsight, they'd probably agree. Wasn't particularly enjoyable to watch.
IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1270
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by IronNeck »

It's funny that I made a topic about how odious I found the British version of the show...but the American one is much worse. The actor question I noted in the link is merely cruel and utterly random trivia.

Some of the questions on the American show are either inscrutable minutia (my girlfriend and I are both very mindful of caloric intake, and neither of us knew whether medium fries or Filet-of-Fish had more) or outright wrong/faulty opinion polls. Vowela pointed out one, but it should be noted that there have been HUNDREDS of such safety polls, often with wildly differing results. Nor does it even specify when the poll was taken.

Surely, people feel less safe right after a major terrorist attack. When was the "9/11" poll taken, and when was the more recent one taken?

Also, some people might feel more or less safe under different presidential administrations, another important variable.

The show I watched a few minutes of had a question asking about how much voter fraud there was in a national election. It cited some type of research, but wasn't specific on who did it. The choice was between 250, 2,500, and 25,000. Without diving into politics, this is a contentious issue with many other claims. A recent academic paper (not a news article, but published research) by a researcher at Old Dominion claimed the number was actually 800,000. Others believe it's much higher.

Point being, there is no way to get these random, often flat-out wrong "answers" whatsoever.

And don't even get me started on the foolishness of eliminating a contestant after just a few questions.
User avatar
xxaaaxx
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 2131
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 9:29 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by xxaaaxx »

IronNeck wrote:It's funny that I made a topic about how odious I found the British version of the show...but the American one is much worse.
I honestly didn't think it was possible. The format is dreadful; adding Weakest Link-style elimination voting makes it even worse, but makes a twisted sort of sense...
dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
...because the producers care more about the potential for conflict among the contestants than the actual trivia. They think it's entertaining, and in any event, poor contestants don't win much money.

Speaking of the trivia, good questions are the only thing that could make this show even slightly watchable, and boy what a failure it is in that regard. According to Google (I didn't see the episode), the fries have 340, and the fish has 379. SERIOUSLY? And yeah, the survey questions are pure garbage.
Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 12897
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by Bamaman »

When does this air next?
User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 16471
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by MarkBarrett »

Bamaman wrote:When does this air next?
There are two new episodes on both 2/22 & 2/23 at 9 and rerunning the same ones at midnight PST. A rerun of one of the 2/16 eps. is on at 10:30 tonight PST. One a day rerun eps. will air on Sunday & Monday at various times.

**********
Yes, the survey/poll questions are terrible. There was one about a Harris poll of over 2,000 people naming the greatest athletes of all time.

Which of these athletes made the list of the top five “Greatest Sports Stars of All Time”- Muhammad Ali, Babe Ruth &/or Michael Jordan?

In this question it could be one, two or all three of the names. Sure, you would think Muhammad Ali absolutely has to be there for sure no matter who they asked and when. Michael Jordan seemed quite likely as well. Babe Ruth? Yes, has to be? No, not in top 5? The clock is counting down with the money dwindling while three players have to agree. What to do? It sucks watching it at home and must be awful as a contestant.

Turns out it was all three.
IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1270
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by IronNeck »

MarkBarrett wrote: Sure, you would think Muhammad Ali absolutely has to be there for sure no matter who they asked and when.
Well, unless they asked a bunch of boxing fans/historians this question! Then, Ali might not even make the 5 greatest boxers pound-for-pound, let alone top 5 athletes in any sport.

But yes, horrible question. Obviously, comparing athletes from different sports is dumb, but I even hate the idea of comparing athletes in the same sport from different eras. Like, how can anyone possibly do that?!

In general, athletes will be bigger, stronger, more athletic, have better training, better nutrition, and better drugs as time goes on. Which is unfair to the older legends. On the flip sides, if one only goes by accomplishments, dominance, championships, etc. that's unfair to modern titans, since there was so much less competition back in the day.
Bamaman
Also Receiving Votes
Posts: 12897
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:39 pm

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by Bamaman »

Unless you happened to read the survey, it is a complete guess who was named best athlete, actor, etc. It is not like asking who won an Oscar or MVP, a verifiable fact that is highly publicized.
User avatar
ihavejeoprosy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 5:17 pm

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by ihavejeoprosy »

dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
To make the TV audience feel better about themselves when playing at home.

Also, it introduces more conflict and makes for better TV.
Please follow me on Twitter @Cinjeopardy
Total game show losings: $25 K
User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 16471
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by MarkBarrett »

IronNeck wrote:
MarkBarrett wrote: Sure, you would think Muhammad Ali absolutely has to be there for sure no matter who they asked and when.
Well, unless they asked a bunch of boxing fans/historians this question! Then, Ali might not even make the 5 greatest boxers pound-for-pound, let alone top 5 athletes in any sport.

But yes, horrible question. Obviously, comparing athletes from different sports is dumb, but I even hate the idea of comparing athletes in the same sport from different eras. Like, how can anyone possibly do that?!

In general, athletes will be bigger, stronger, more athletic, have better training, better nutrition, and better drugs as time goes on. Which is unfair to the older legends. On the flip sides, if one only goes by accomplishments, dominance, championships, etc. that's unfair to modern titans, since there was so much less competition back in the day.
Fair points about Ali and I hear you. For game show purposes he had to be correct or that question would have been even worse than it was.

This link seems to have more of the list: http://www.theharrispoll.com/sports/Gre ... -Time.html

Serena #4 does not bother me. Peyton #5 shows how ridiculous such things are and of course they are terrible for game shows.
User avatar
dhkendall
Pursuing the Dream
Posts: 8789
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Contact:

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by dhkendall »

ihavejeoprosy wrote:
dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
To make the TV audience feel better about themselves when playing at home.

Also, it introduces more conflict and makes for better TV.
One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.
"Jeopardy! is two parts luck and one part luck" - Me

"The way to win on Jeopardy is to be a rabidly curious, information-omnivorous person your entire life." - Ken Jennings

Follow my progress game by game since 2012
bpmod
Rank
Posts: 5424
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:26 pm
Location: Hamilton Ontario

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by bpmod »

dhkendall wrote:... and way longer longevity.
Keep that up and I'll report you to the DORD.

Brian
...but the senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity.

If I had 50 cents for every math question I got right, I'd have $6.30 by now.
User avatar
SweepingDeveloper
Loyal Jeopardista
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 12:11 pm
Contact:

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by SweepingDeveloper »

dhkendall wrote: One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.
I'm wondering...does it also depend on the type of target demographic? To me, Divided and Jeopardy!'s target demographic seem like polar opposites, if you just look at the material.
User avatar
dhkendall
Pursuing the Dream
Posts: 8789
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:49 am
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Contact:

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by dhkendall »

SweepingDeveloper wrote:
dhkendall wrote: One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.
I'm wondering...does it also depend on the type of target demographic? To me, Divided and Jeopardy!'s target demographic seem like polar opposites, if you just look at the material.
What are their demographics? Hanging out on this board and in the community, I tend to think that the target demographic is the 30-50 crowd with a masters degree. But, going by actual viewer data and the ads that run on the show, it's the over 50 retired crowd. That isn't the type that would do well on the show itself generally, but enjoy watching it.
"Jeopardy! is two parts luck and one part luck" - Me

"The way to win on Jeopardy is to be a rabidly curious, information-omnivorous person your entire life." - Ken Jennings

Follow my progress game by game since 2012
User avatar
Maven
Fate's Law Prevails
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: Like Savoir-Faire...Everywhere!

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by Maven »

dhkendall wrote:
ihavejeoprosy wrote:
dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
To make the TV audience feel better about themselves when playing at home.

Also, it introduces more conflict and makes for better TV.
One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.
It's gotta be asked somewhere, I've always wanted to ask it, and now I'm going to with the above mentioned being the perfect opportunity to do so...how on Earth can GSN stay afloat when they can keep churning out such craptastic original programming? I can give GSN this much credit where due: They are one of the very, VERY remote few networks remaining that have managed to keep their intended overall format intact. Yes, they have had one or two diversions on/off through the last sixteen/seventeen years, but have altogether and for the most part kept the 'everything game show' format. BUT that's where my kudos for GSN begin and especially end...most particularly with the likes of Divided on there currently. And yes, there does appear to be an apparent aversion to programming that is either 'dated'* and/or intellectual. :roll:

Oy...believe me, I could go on about what a brainless and not retro friendly nightmare GSN has become over time. And everyone thought the 'no Goodson-Todman programming' days were horrendous...although, yes, that was pretty damn bad too.

* - Which makes one wonder how in the wide world of sports the classic and best Match Game has finally gotten back its allotted hour...that much has given me a teeny tiny glimmer of hope that GSN may be finally, albeit super slowly coming to their senses. But I know better than to allow any and all hope to rise above that teeny tiny glimmer for the time being...
Last edited by Maven on Sun Mar 26, 2017 11:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Yes, I can do that!" - Ivan Lawrence Blieden

"Those who believe need no explanation." - Dionysos, The Bacchae by Euripides

Marvel Future Fight: InimitableMaven / Yahtzee With Buddies: TheInimitableMaven
IronNeck
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1270
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 12:26 am

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by IronNeck »

Maven wrote:...how on Earth can GSN stay afloat when they can keep churning out such craptastic original programming?
Because they are extremely cheap to produce.
User avatar
ihavejeoprosy
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2013 5:17 pm

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by ihavejeoprosy »

dhkendall wrote:
ihavejeoprosy wrote:
dhkendall wrote:Why do so many of these shows put people on that are clearly not Jeopardy! material?
To make the TV audience feel better about themselves when playing at home.

Also, it introduces more conflict and makes for better TV.
One would think so, but then why is Jeopardy!, one that has really smart contestants answering well-written difficult trivia questions, be so incredibly popular (way more so than "Divided" or any of those other ones that have dumb people answering easy, poorly-written trivia)? Most "average" viewers get maybe 5 or 6 J! clues a day if they're lucky (just look at TPH, who I suspect would definitely represent the "average" viewer in his get rate (if not for his constant bitching about it), but J! has way more viewers and way longer longevity.
Both are very different games with different motivations to watch. Divided is more of a reality show where the fun is watching people argue. J is the classic quiz show. There is a lot of overlap between the two imo.
Please follow me on Twitter @Cinjeopardy
Total game show losings: $25 K
User avatar
Maven
Fate's Law Prevails
Posts: 148
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: Like Savoir-Faire...Everywhere!

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by Maven »

IronNeck wrote:
Maven wrote:...how on Earth can GSN stay afloat when they can keep churning out such craptastic original programming?
Because they are extremely cheap to produce.
And always have been...I am honestly amazed GSN managed to keep the classic rerun train running as long as they did before succumbing to almost all original programming and recent reruns all the time. The sharks* were already circling around 1999 when they had things like Inquizition, All New Three's A Crowd, and Burt Luddin's Love Buffet crammed into the schedule in a [sing-song]'Three of these things don't belong here!'[/sing-song] manner.

* - Yea, I could have made a reference to a certain 'classic' game show and one of at least several that more than prove that the 'dumb knowledge' sub-genre has always been prevalent to varying degrees...but 'blasphemous' game show fan I tend to be, I don't care for it to the point of not even wanting to mention its title. :twisted: :P

And yet, until now, I didn't have any qualms in merely mentioning Inquizition, All New Three's A Crowd (and really, Three's A Crowd in general) and Burt Luddin's Love Buffet... :shock: :?
"Yes, I can do that!" - Ivan Lawrence Blieden

"Those who believe need no explanation." - Dionysos, The Bacchae by Euripides

Marvel Future Fight: InimitableMaven / Yahtzee With Buddies: TheInimitableMaven
User avatar
MarkBarrett
Watches Jeopardy! Way Too Much
Posts: 16471
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:37 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: Fun with GSN's "Divided"

Post by MarkBarrett »

I caught up on some episodes I missed and had to share this quad beaut.

Image
Post Reply