• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Survivor: Worlds Apart |OT| Season 30, 15 years of blindsides

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jigorath

Banned
Since we're talking about differing opinions....

I liked Russell Hantz

Russell is a terrible player but he does keep things interesting. If it wasn't for him Rob would have dominated Heroes vs Villains just like Redemption Island and the whole thing would have been so boring.

I'm fine with him losing. Finishing second is a fitting end for a villain.
 
- Sophie is a great winner, completely schooled her competition, a physical force bested only by Ozzy until it mattered, and went through a uniquely entertaining personal development

Sophie's such an overrated winner! If she'd been on a season with an actual likable cast, no way does she become the audience proxy. Anyone who needs to be reminded of how terrible South Pacific was as a whole need only look at the fact that Coach -- COACH! -- was relatively sympathetic, and his charm (such as it is) stems from the fact he's so cartoonish and silly in his villainy.

Probst has ranked his top 10 winners in no particular order. I mostly agree with his list. I just don't get the love for Sandra. "Favorites" like her and Cirie just make no sense to me. Who is watching this show and excited to see lazy, non competetive, almost non speaking players like this and hoping they win? Also luckily not on the list is Sophie, my least favorite winner. Great season with a worthless winner. I think Bob Crowley deserves a spot.

I don't get how someone can have tastes so similar to mine and yet be so wrong on other things. I didn't like Cirie, I never really disliked Russell Hantz, and my feelings about Sophie are above. But I hate RI with a burning passion, and even if I don't think Sandra winning twice automatically makes her the best player ever (since Parvati deserved that second win), she's definitely up there, at the very least.

Two more days! Can't wait for the season to start. Here's how excited I am: this Wednesday is my tenth anniversary with my wife, and she's already agreed to an early anniversary dinner to ensure we're home in time to watch the beginning of the first episode.
 

Jigorath

Banned
Probst has ranked his top 10 winners in no particular order. I mostly agree with his list. I just don't get the love for Sandra. "Favorites" like her and Cirie just make no sense to me. Who is watching this show and excited to see lazy, non competetive, almost non speaking players like this and hoping they win? Also luckily not on the list is Sophie, my least favorite winner. Great season with a worthless winner. I think Bob Crowley deserves a spot.

My favorite no question is
Tony Vlachos.

Can't wait for Wednesday! Is it actually a two hour special as was rumored?

I don't know why Brian Heidik isn't on the list. He's the first player in Survivor history to completely dominate his season. Before Kim, Tyson, Rob, etc. Thailand may have been boring but Brian played a masterful game.

And lol @ Cochran. The guy couldn't have had an easier win if Probst just handed him the million dollars on the first day.
 
I've never seen Thailand, but I've always had the impression Probst hates that season, so that may be why he doesn't rank Heidik as one of the best winners.
 
Two more days! Can't wait for the season to start. Here's how excited I am: this Wednesday is my tenth anniversary with my wife, and she's already agreed to an early anniversary dinner to ensure we're home in time to watch the beginning of the first episode.

awww, that's sweet!


edit: and yes, production hated Thailand with a burning passion so it's rarely talked about.... All-Stars, too, for that matter
 

kirblar

Member
I've never seen Thailand, but I've always had the impression Probst hates that season, so that may be why he doesn't rank Heidik as one of the best winners.
It's really awful. Sexual harassment/boundary issues, a finalist throwing allegations at the other finalist behind their back in order to pick up a jury win, one of the worst twists of all time, one of the most unlikeable casts of all time, it's a nightmare of a season.
 

Jigorath

Banned
It's really awful. Sexual harassment/boundary issues, a finalist throwing allegations at the other finalist behind their back in order to pick up a jury win, one of the worst twists of all time, one of the most unlikeable casts of all time, it's a nightmare of a season.

Oh I remember the sexual assault episode. Man that was uncomfortable.

Brian was still great though.
 
I mentioned it in an earlier thread but I'm definitely watching this season, for context my last season was Fiji. I'm going in blind so it will be interesting to see how much the show has changed and it will be nice to have some people to follow along with. Jeff looks exactly the same though, lol.
 

whitehawk

Banned
Intro is out!: http://www.ew.com/article/2015/02/2...es-survivor-worlds-apart-and-new-amazing-race
I mentioned it in an earlier thread but I'm definitely watching this season, for context my last season was Fiji. I'm going in blind so it will be interesting to see how much the show has changed and it will be nice to have some people to follow along with. Jeff looks exactly the same though, lol.
Haven't watched since Fiji? You're in for a treat. Fiji is often regarded as a poor season.
 

kirblar

Member
Intro music is just a mix of a bunch of former themes. I definitely heard Heroes vs. Villains and China in there.
Lots of Cook Islands in there.

Vanacore is doing the music solo now, hence the remixes.

Survivor roundtable with Probst, 3 good players, and gumby: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKINR_9K6bY

edit: Watching now- he specifically calls out that Parvati's brought up as a possible replacement host for himself one day.

Sandra should totally try playing Poker. She'd be insane at it.

Probst reiterates at the end- they want gamers. Lots of them. So glad they finally figured that out.
 

Grexeno

Member
I like how Probst is like "You have to make big moves to win the game, right?" and everyone is like "Well, uh................."
 
Got it set on my PVR. It'll be my first Survivor since the first All-Stars one with Rupert.

I'm not sure if I'll watch it all, but it's quite possible. The Amazing Race also interests me.
 

kirblar

Member
Got it set on my PVR. It'll be my first Survivor since the first All-Stars one with Rupert.

I'm not sure if I'll watch it all, but it's quite possible. The Amazing Race also interests me.
Important explanation- they added HIIs (Hidden Immunity Idols) to the game in Season 11 and fixed the rules for them in season 14.

If you find one, you can play it on someone after the votes are cast, before they are read. They will negate any votes case for that person. The tension they cause is fantastic, and they allow comeback potential that wasn't there previously.

If you get into this season- Seasons 10, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 25, 27, 28 & 29 are all fantastic.
 
Important explanation- they added HIIs (Hidden Immunity Idols) to the game in Season 11 and fixed the rules for them in season 14.

If you find one, you can play it on someone after the votes are cast, before they are read. They will negate any votes case for that person. The tension they cause is fantastic, and they allow comeback potential that wasn't there previously.

If you get into this season- Seasons 10, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 25, 27, 28 & 29 are all fantastic.

They've made it to 30 seasons? Holy shit.

Thanks for the explanation. I do remember hidden immunity idols from their first appearance, though.
 

kirblar

Member
They've made it to 30 seasons? Holy shit.

Thanks for the explanation. I do remember hidden immunity idols from their first appearance, though.
Yup. And they finally, after S25/27/28, realized that they needed to cast gamers. It's improved the show immensely as the lack of deadweight is causing the games to play out much less predictably.
 
I like how Probst is like "You have to make big moves to win the game, right?" and everyone is like "Well, uh................."

he's a mess

I hate how he's the primary exporter of the stupid lie that Parvati did well because of her "outer assets" or whatever euphemistic bullshit he said



Sandra remains the peak >>>>>>>

her ability to repeat her line about Survivor "really being a simple game, people overthink it" and still have it annoy so many people

still the queen!
 

belushy

Banned
On the finale of Borneo, and then the first episode of this season starts in a few hours. Very excited for this season.
 

llehuty

Member
Survivor - Get hyped over nothing!

Or at least until I can get in shape, learn how to swim and then be likeable enough to get on the show myself!

image.php
 

kirblar

Member
Listening to Sandra attempt to explain the way she plays the game is painful.

Don't get me wrong - I do love her as a character, but a lot of people seem to believe that winning twice automatically makes her the "best player ever!" and don't seem to acknowledge the reasons behind her success.
It's because it's completely intuitive to her. The whole "not everyone who can do something can teach it thing".
 

Camwi

Member
Man, it can't be worse than last season. That was the first Survivor finale that I skipped out on and went straight to the reunion special. I gave zero shits about the final people, plus I knew the jury was going to go soft on them.
 

flyover

Member
It's because it's completely intuitive to her. The whole "not everyone who can do something can teach it thing".

It's true. She could be akin to many star athletes -- who often make bad analysts/coaches. They don't always know how to express exactly what they're doing, and they may not even know why it works! (Then there are players like Kim Spradlin, who knows exactly how and why she won, and can explain it in interviews.)
 

Macka

Member
It's because it's completely intuitive to her. The whole "not everyone who can do something can teach it thing".
I disagree. I do think she excels in some aspects - namely finding ways to shift the target off herself...which isn't there very often to begin with. Sandra as a player has certain advantages and disadvantages based on nothing more than her physicality. Pre-merge she's always going to be a liability, while post-merge she's almost never going to be targeted. With that said, in her first game she was on an incredibly successful tribe who dominated the challenges, so she managed to sail to the merge easily. Her second game was an All-Stars season, where challenge prowess is nowhere near as important. Who is good at challenges never enters the equation [pre-merge] in returning player seasons, it's all about the relationships. So in both her seasons she has, through no skill of her own, managed to make it to the merge and become a non-threat.

Aside from that...well she said it herself in that roundtable video. "If I don't like you, I'll come after you, I don't care about the consequences." This is Sandra to a T. Despite her insistence of being able to separate her personal feelings and the game...she has played very emotional games both times. She was determined to eliminate Fairplay and Russell in her seasons and failed each time, despite the more logical approach being to take the disliked tribemates to the end. Except that's the thing...Sandra could never 'take' anyone to the end. She plays the game as a number, not in a position of power. If more likeable people than Russell or Lil had taken her to the end, she wouldn't win. Sandra has benefited heavily both times by, through no skill of her own, being taken to the end by less likeable people. Especially in Heroes vs. Villains thanks to Russell's complete lack of awareness.

I could go on about this a lot more, but I highly doubt I'll be changing any minds here. Again, I don't think she's an awful player, I just think she's overrated.
 

kirblar

Member
She doesn't actually play on that emotion, despite that. Both times she played with Rupert, she let Rupert hang himself. (She intentionally dodged a tie vote in PI, and she actively voted him out in HvV when he decided to play with Russell instead of trying for a Colby/Sandra/Rupert F3.) Who she would have murdered in the F3. In fact, there's virtually no combination of people she actually loses to in the end in HvV, yet she made it there anyway.

Last season's postmerge was amazing. Natalie won playing the type of mercenary game that I had been dying to see happen for 29 seasons.
 

Grexeno

Member
She doesn't actually play on that emotion, despite that. Both times she played with Rupert, she let Rupert hang himself. (She intentionally dodged a tie vote in PI, and she actively voted him out in HvV when he decided to play with Russell instead of trying for a Colby/Sandra/Rupert F3.) Who she would have murdered in the F3. In fact, there's virtually no combination of people she actually loses to in the end in HvV, yet she made it there anyway.

Last season's postmerge was amazing. Natalie won playing the type of mercenary game that I had been dying to see happen for 29 seasons.
Sandra would have lost to Jerri in the final 3, but that's it.
 

UberTag

Member
Sandra would have lost to Jerri in the final 3, but that's it.
I'm a big fan of Sandra but was really pulling for Jerri in that season for a full-fledged redemption arc from Season 2. Would have been extra special if she bested Colby in front of the jury.

One of my all-time favorite episodes (in an otherwise forgettable season) is when she was adamant that Rupert was making a mistake by building a shelter on the beach but he stubbornly charged on and built it anyhow only to lament at it being flooded.

Returning player fatigue is legit (a big reason I'm thrilled we're about to enter our 3rd straight season without one) but I love when players come back and get different edits or consciously play the game differently.
 
Man, it can't be worse than last season. That was the first Survivor finale that I skipped out on and went straight to the reunion special. I gave zero shits about the final people, plus I knew the jury was going to go soft on them.

yeh that really was one of the worst seasons of the show ever.

i watched the first few episodes and then gave up. didn't tune in for the finale either.
 

Macka

Member
She doesn't actually play on that emotion, despite that. Both times she played with Rupert, she let Rupert hang himself. (She intentionally dodged a tie vote in PI, and she actively voted him out in HvV when he decided to play with Russell instead of trying for a Colby/Sandra/Rupert F3.) Who she would have murdered in the F3. In fact, there's virtually no combination of people she actually loses to in the end in HvV, yet she made it there anyway.
Sandra by no means stomps Rupert/Colby. She has Courtney, Parvati and Danielle...and potentially gets Candice? Jerri, Russell, J.T, Amanda and Coach don't vote for Sandra. And that F3 was her endgame until Rupe and Colby decided to work with Russell. She has a chance but it's super close at best. Hell, if Sandra actually succeeds and votes out Russell, it's very likely that she either doesn't make the end (as Parvati and Jerri were aware that she would have support on the Jury). I also think if this happens that Parvati has a better shot to win even against Sandra just by virtue of not being seated next to Russell. Jerri likely beats her too.

As for your examples of her not playing with emotion...what? None of those votes were initiated by her, and of course she's not going to force a tie. Sandra doesn't have any say over who she sits next to at the end and this is why she's far from the best player ever.
 

kirblar

Member
Sandra by no means stomps Rupert/Colby. She has Courtney, Parvati and Danielle...and potentially gets Candice? Jerri, Russell, J.T, Amanda and Coach don't vote for Sandra. And that F3 was her endgame until Rupe and Colby decided to work with Russell. She has a chance but it's super close at best. Hell, if Sandra actually succeeds and votes out Russell, it's very likely that she either doesn't make the end (as Parvati and Jerri were aware that she would have support on the Jury). I also think if this happens that Parvati has a better shot to win even against Sandra just by virtue of not being seated next to Russell. Jerri likely beats her too.

As for your examples of her not playing with emotion...what? None of those votes were initiated by her, and of course she's not going to force a tie. Sandra doesn't have any say over who she sits next to at the end and this is why she's far from the best player ever.
It doesn't matter if you have any say. Control is unnecessary. You just need to get to the end in a position to win.

Colby was a goat in that season, and Rupert is pretty hugely disliked by a lot of people who have to actually play with him.
 

Macka

Member
It doesn't matter if you have any say. Control is unnecessary. You just need to get to the end in a position to win.

Colby was a goat in that season, and Rupert is pretty hugely disliked by a lot of people who have to actually play with him.
Without control, getting to the end in a position to win is entirely out of your hands. Russell's lack of self-awareness gave her that win.

Colby was still well-liked despite being useless that season, and the only members of the Jury who actively disliked Rupert are Russell and Candice.
 

Jigorath

Banned
It doesn't matter if you have any say. Control is unnecessary. You just need to get to the end in a position to win.

Colby was a goat in that season, and Rupert is pretty hugely disliked by a lot of people who have to actually play with him.

The problem is that Sandra kept trying to control the game post-merge but failing every time. If she had made a conscious decision to stay in the background a la Natalie in Samoa then I would have respected her win more because that was her strategy all along. Up until like the final five she was still trying to take out Russell for no reason other than the fact that she just didn't like him. And taking out Russell would have basically destroyed any chance she at winning. What exactly was Sandra's plan if she had managed to take out Russell at Final 9 like she wanted to? Did she actually expect two of the heroes to take her to the end against an all villain jury?
 

TheYanger

Member
The problem is that Sandra kept trying to control the game post-merge but failing every time. If she had made a conscious decision to stay in the background a la Natalie in Samoa then I would have respected her win more because that was her strategy all along. Up until like the final five she was still trying to take out Russell for no reason other than the fact that she just didn't like him. And taking out Russell would have basically destroyed any chance she at winning. What exactly was Sandra's plan if she had managed to take out Russell at Final 9 like she wanted to? Did she actually expect two of the heroes to take her to the end against an all villain jury?

She would have had like 6 more episodes to get something going. There are always cracks to exploit and Sandra is a master of that shit. She wanted to take out Russel because he was such an asshole wildcard, someone like that in power is almost the worst for everyone. Once it became obvious that making him keep her was the right move she kept things going that way.
 
Without control, getting to the end in a position to win is entirely out of your hands.

nah, kirblar's right

You can have power without having actual control over the game; Sandra realized that when most others didn't and she won twice.

Take a quick glance at the winners of the show -- many didn't "control" the game or even their alliance throughout and they still deftly managed their relationships with their tribemates enough to get to the end and win.


The only requirements to win are getting to the final tribal council and having a plurality of the jury vote for you. You don't need a "plan" or "strategy" to be successful, it just makes the show more fun to watch. Nu-Survivor de-emphasizes the most important part of the game - the relationships - in favor of numbers talk and "what lie should I tell so-and-so", which often doesn't even matter.
 

kirblar

Member
Sandra's an Iago-type. (See: stuff like Christa's scapegoating in PI and her manipulating Russell to boot Coach and to think that he could beat her at the end.) She's amazing at it- it's just not the most dynamic thing to watch on-screen.
 

Macka

Member
Yes? What's your point. She kept trying to get something else going and when it failed she made sure she lived to try again.
Except she never had to ensure her survival. She was never a target post-merge, despite pissing off Russell at every opportunity. Sandra benefits by being such a non-entity when it comes to challenges in that once she reaches the merge she's very likely going to stick around until late in the game. This isn't really unique to her - it's the same for all 'weaker' players and happens regularly with older women and people like Cochran. This isn't a plus for Sandra as a player - it's not something she can control. But she shouldn't get credit for it either.

Sandra has no forethought to her strategy. She relentlessly tried to get rid of Russell in HvV despite his presence in the game actually improving her chance to win, and had she succeeded in convincing the Heroes to eliminate him at F10 or F9, she would have had very few options going forward.

Yes, Sandra has won twice. She beat Lil, the lady who was voted back into the game because she was so annoying, and Russell, probably the most hated player of all-time. This does not make her the best player ever.
 

Macka

Member
She's actually good at the puzzles pre-merge.
I don't recall any individual puzzle components in pre-merge challenges in either of her seasons? Just checked Pearl Islands (have the season saved) and there definitely wasn't any in that season...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom