Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

G4TV Cancels More Shows

Posted by Zonk on from the needs-to-make-room-for-crap dept.

G4 has apparently canceled two more of their holdover shows from the TechTV days. G4TV.com and Filter have been been put under the axe. While I wasn't a big fan of either of these shows, this seems to be indicative of the market-driven decision-making over at that network. They've got their product, stamped it, and now they're pumping out whatever lifestyle some exec has decided is the flavour of the moment. "Geek is out, but we'll keep X-Play, Icons, and Cinematech for our old market, Whip Set, Anime Unleashed, and Fast Lane for the new market, and reruns of the Man Show for everyone to look at hot girls." Mmmmmeh.

97 comments

  1. You were expecting something else? by Threni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > They've got their product, stamped it, and now they're pumping out whatever
    > lifestyle some exec has decided is the flavour of the moment.

    It's the media - making money is their raison d'etre. TV, newspapers, websites - it's all about selling advertising. Apparantly it's that or socialism, and you picked that. Enjoy your coke...uh, day.

    1. Re:You were expecting something else? by Dadoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's the media - making money is their raison d'etre.

      I agree, but I find it very difficult to believe that anything they currently show could bring in more advertising money than Screen Savers or the tech news show right after it, when it was on TechTV. If G4TV does bring in more money now, we really need to give up all faith in this country. I mean, honestly, whose idea was it to have a beauty pageant with video game characters. Are we really that sad?

      --
      Sit, Ubuntu, sit. Good dog.
    2. Re:You were expecting something else? by shawb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would be willing to bet that a show that appeals to 1 million "Oooh look... shinies!" types would bring in more advertising dollars than a show that appeals to 2 million critical thinkers. Why? Commercials are more effective on the former. In fact, the critical thinker type will realize that the commercials are annoying and do something else... whether it is make a sandwhich, go to the bathroom or just flip through the channels in hopes of spotting something interesting.

      That's why I think the advertising model of content delivery will always lead to watered down content... the reader or viewer becomes the product, while the advertisers are the customers. The advertiser wants the network to deliver the most swayable audience possible, so advertising dollars are best spent on lowest common denominator type shows. With advertising supported media, it becomes financially irresponsible to create programming that actually inspires critical thinking.

      --
      I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
    3. Re:You were expecting something else? by Threni · · Score: 1

      > the reader or viewer becomes the product

      Huh?

    4. Re:You were expecting something else? by Zediker · · Score: 1, Informative

      He is saying that the advertisers are buying the most easily swayed audience from the network station. So, the audience becomes what the advertisers are 'buying'. They want people with low IQ and impulse control, so the network tailors the shows to fit that audience, in hopes of drawing them to the network to meet the advertiseres ratings expectations.

      --
      I love to slaughter the english language.
    5. Re:You were expecting something else? by kilonad · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, happy, shiny, flashy commercials will almost certainly be more effective on the unwashed masses. However, marketing to 2 million critical thinkers is still the better choice, but it requires a different mentality in advertising. PhDs aren't going to buy a Ford truck because some washed up country star is singing about it on TV (though the unwashed masses will). If the commercial is creative, informational, and presents a logical case for buying a product (all in 30 seconds), it would work. It's up to the advertisers and networks to figure that one out though.

    6. Re:You were expecting something else? by Soybean47 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      In fact, the critical thinker type will realize that the commercials are annoying and do something else... whether it is make a sandwhich

      You'd think they could at least get some money from the people who make bread and sandwich meats, then... right?
    7. Re:You were expecting something else? by Pxtl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yep. Just remember, unless you watch an expensive for-pay commercial free channel like HBO, then to the TV producers, you are not the customer. The advertisers are the customer. You are what they sell to the advertisers.

      You, the viewer, are the product. And the viewers that are more easily bent by commercials are a far better quality product than the skeptics. Thus, TVs focus on the lowest common denominator. It's not that the LCD is a larger proportion of the populace - its that they're a higher quality product to sell to advertisers.

      That is why TV is trash - eyeballs are _not_ equal. Gullible eyeballs are worth more money.

    8. Re:You were expecting something else? by Threni · · Score: 1

      > It's not that the LCD is a larger proportion of the populace - its that they're a higher
      > quality product to sell to advertisers.

      No, they are lower quality, as they are generally less well educated and therefore less well off, and consequently have less buying power, which is what the advertisers want. It's just that there are so many of them, and they're so undiscerning.

    9. Re:You were expecting something else? by Pxtl · · Score: 1

      The main educated, wealthy people who let commercials tell them what to buy are children/teenagers, which brings us back to the Lowest Common Denominator. And a person can be very well off and still be gullible and bereft of good taste.

    10. Re:You were expecting something else? by Lifelike · · Score: 1

      Gotta disagree with you on that point. While your model holds true for MOST telivision, it's not true for ALL telivision. Otherwise there would be no slick, clever creative comidies/dramas/etc... The clever consumers gotta watch TV too, y'know? After all, if 1 million easily swayed viewers make more money than 2 million clever ones, how about 4 million clever ones? Eventually they've got to all get together and watch the Daily show or something. Oh, and the consumers of the companies are the shareholders, which are in turn, wealthier, prettier, older versions of us. W00t disenfranchisement.

    11. Re:You were expecting something else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well aparently you haven't seen how much it costs to advertise on website's read by "critical thinkers" these days. I'll list a few:

      Forbes.com - $45 to $125 CPM (thousand impressions
      TechTarget.com - $100 to $400 CPM
      TechWeb.com - $60 to $100 CPM
      WSJ.com - $60 CPM

      There are two types of critical thinkers. The first think and do nothing, the second think, figure out what they want, and use their critical thinking skills to make it happen. Swayability? Lowest common denominator? These aren't the kinds of people who are making multi-million dollar purchasing decisions for their companies or taking our million dollar mortgages on a new home.

  2. Does anyone watch this channel by heinousjay · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I gave up on it after one week, because I watched the same show about 15 times. Do people out there have the patience for this dreck?

    --
    Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    1. Re:Does anyone watch this channel by KrisW · · Score: 1

      I gave up on it pretty quickly after the switch from TechTV. Actually, my cable company did too. A few months after the switch it was replaced with the *shudder* Hallmark Channel.

      --


      "Think you can take me? Go ahead on. It's your move." --Joe Don Baker in Final Justice
    2. Re:Does anyone watch this channel by dubiousx99 · · Score: 1

      Hey the Hallmark channel has 4 episodes of Mash daily, gotta love that.

  3. What I want to see by Falconoffury · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I want to see a show about indie games and other relatively unpopular games. I would like a show that digs deep to find the gaming gems from small companies or groups with limited budgets. Give us more information about development crews from other countries such as the Croatian team who created Serious Sam or the Czech Republic team who created UFO Aftershock. Give us a show that goes beyond mainstream.

    1. Re:What I want to see by Max_Wells_SH · · Score: 0

      Give us a show that goes beyond mainstream.

      Give the decision-makers a large enough, dependable audience to guarantee advertisers keeping that show afloat. Sorry.

      --
      I read Slashdot for the articles.
    2. Re:What I want to see by tansey · · Score: 1

      Yeah...I'd like to see a show that has real journalists that know their stuff! What G4 needs is a staff of experts! Here's a list of the areas they're lacking and who I think would fill the positions nicely:

      - An expert in finding underground tweaking apps and hacks (Kevin)
      - An expert in physical mods and hacks for gaming hardware (Yoshi)
      - Someone to explain issues in gaming technology to a lay audience (Leo)
      - Someone that people interested in gaming technology can actually relate to (Patrick)

      Hmm...now if only they could assemble such an elite team of experts.

    3. Re:What I want to see by Seumas · · Score: 1

      The Screensavers and Call For Help were fairly "dumbed down" shows. I, however, liked them. I used them mostly for background noise until Kevin Rose came on because his segments were usually somewhat interesting. I alo really liked Patrick a lot. Not for any particular geek reasons but more that he had a really good sense of humor and seem very likable.

      I'm a linux and unix guy by habit and trade, but I found both of these shows interesting to a degree because it was good to hear people like Leo explain things to your typical user. Sometimes it would clue me in on how to explain something to my own family or friends that I might otherwise find painfully frustrating.

      Also - I thought Call for Help or The Screensavers (one of the two) came back to G4 this year? Leo made a huge deal about it on his blog and then . . . after watching like two episodes, I never saw it again . . . ?

      I think a good geek network should have plenty of room for the uber geek and the yet to be initiated geek alike.

    4. Re:What I want to see by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Call For Help came back, but it seems they only bought one block of episodes, and they've started repeating them. They also moved its timeslot back a couple hours rather early.

      Strangely enough, they bought previously recorded Canadian episodes, so you have periodic mentions that the show will be coming back to US audiences. Has Leo been welcoming the return of his US audience in Canadian episodes that we won't be getting?

      I think the only shows from TechTV that truly survived were X-Play and Anime Unleashed, and looks like I'll be manually cancelling episodes of the latter until "Colorful!" finishes its run. It's not surprising that a show about games (X-Play) managed to survive the transition to G4 relatively unscathed.

      With the other crass programming coming in I can only assume Unscrewed was cancelled because G4 couldn't own it outright.

      I used to watch Cinematech(u), but lost interest. I can't watch Attack of the Show (I gave it several weeks of chance, but the musical guests and Furry Fridays turned me off). But then I actually liked Portal, so I guess my tastes are suspect.

      SpikeTV seems to want to be the other gamers' channel, but they lost me when they were still The National Network, cropping then distorting their programming with their omnipresent bar at the bottom of the screen.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    5. Re:What I want to see by Seumas · · Score: 1

      The sad part is, since cable isn't offered ala carte, there's no way to easily show them your disinterest in their current lineup. Sure - you can stop watching. Sure - you can write a letter. But nothing speaks louder than "I'm cancelling your channel from my personal lineup". If they ever offer ala carte cable subscriptions, that will give the consumer a lot of power to impact crappy channels (or once good channels that have crapped out).

    6. Re:What I want to see by shamer · · Score: 1

      i miss screen savers too. call for help anoyed me, that freak umm whats his name made the show unwatchable. Leo, Patrick, Yoshi, and Kevin (rose) not the other Kevin where true experts that accomidated the 4 major tech areas; Leo had the dumbies, Yoshi with the moders, Kevin with the hacks, and Patrick with the "macho" crowd. I will miss you!!!

  4. Bring back Starcade! by dividedsky319 · · Score: 2

    Am I the only one who would love to see Starcade come back to the channel?

    1. Re:Bring back Starcade! by AdrainB · · Score: 1

      It's bad enough they are airing The Man Show. I don't think showing old WCW pay-per-views is appropriate :)

  5. Now I'll have to... by Bin_jammin · · Score: 2, Funny

    stick with Slashdot to tell me how to be a geek. So much for being multicultural.

  6. Well... by sH4RD · · Score: 1

    Mmmmmeh.

    Couldn't have said it better myself.

    --
    WASTE - The Secure P2P
  7. G4TV? by tansey · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hmm, G4...ohhh that's the station with all those videogame commercials all the time right? ...

    What do you mean "those are the shows"?

  8. How silly of them by kramthegram · · Score: 1

    If they just folow these three easy steps they can be our friends!
    1. show the shows we want them to, despite their being poor advertising returns for our "tivo" demographic
    2. ???
    3. profit
    seriously... they do what makes them money, just like any other network, no point in complaining... have you seen the drible they show on the learning channel... and if I see one more shark week on discovery! It's the way tv works, unless they can make a premium(ads free) cable tech channel work, they're going to have to give us what the advertisers want, not what we want

    1. Re:How silly of them by webrunner · · Score: 1

      The thing is, they do what -doesn't- make them money and nobody wants to see. And then they try it again when it fails. And try it again slightly different.

      --
      ADVENTURERS! - ANTIHERO FOR HIRE - CARDMASTER CONFLICT
    2. Re:How silly of them by kramthegram · · Score: 1

      true, they are doing a horrible job in the programming department, but if they had done a better job as G4 and Techtv separately in that department they wouldn't be in this situation in the first place
      don't get me wrong, I loved techtv, especially "call for help" and "the screensavers" but obviously they whole thing was a wash financially, my point was the market for slashdot tv just isn't big enough, if it was, we'd be watching right here

    3. Re:How silly of them by toad3k · · Score: 1

      I have a problem with that theory. What amazes me is that what, 2 years later people still talk about techtv. They still remember the names of the hosts. I see it here, on fark, on every random forum on the internet. Yet it was hemorhaging money.

      I can't understand how a channel with such a large high income demographic could possibly NOT make money.

      I can only come to the conclusion that nielson ratings are not accurate in niche markets. Think with only 5000 users, 1/4 watching at any given time, splitting that audience between 30 channels. I find it hard to believe that an accurate metric can be obtained in such a manner. It is the only explanation.

    4. Re:How silly of them by KingSkippus · · Score: 1
      they do what makes them money

      That's not necessarily true. In the old days, if a business venture was making money, everyone was happy. These days, making money isn't enough.

      Most companies, and the media industry is particularly bad about falling into this trap, want to be SUPERSTARS! (Yes, read those caps as yelling, that's the idea.)

      So they have a show like The Screen Savers that a good number of computer geeks consistently watch and enjoy. Is everyone in the country watching it? What, everyone in the country isn't a computer geek? Dammit, we have to be a SUPERSTAR!, so yank it off the air and put a show on that everyone in the country will probably hate, but has a very small chance of being a breakout hit. Let's try more dribble about games!

      Then the network starts losing money, and they all have a meeting to figure out what went wrong. "Obviously, we need to change to something even more different than before! Let's put a shos on about cars! And video babes!"

      More money disappears. "Let's try old reruns of The Man Show!" More money out the window.

      In the quest to be a SUPERSTAR!, going back to what the channel was to begin with—a cool station with cool shows that made a decent income—will never be a consideration because they've already proven that that's not the formula to be a SUPERSTAR! Even if they have to go completely out of business and shut their studio doors forever, they think, it's worth it to relentlessly pursue the miniscule chance that they may yet be a SUPERSTAR!

      I don't have numbers to back me up on any of this. I'm not privvy to their financial records. For all I know, TechTV could have been losing money out the wazoo and G4 is now wildly successful. I just seriously doubt it, and I've seen what I've described happen to waaaay too many formerly reputable companies in this new age of the SUPERSTAR!

      I just don't see why it's such an either TechTV or G4 type of zero-sum game. Why can't someone just start another TechTV-like network? You know that the old TechTV crew are just dying for something like that to come along.

    5. Re:How silly of them by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 1

      I had to pay an extra $5.99 per month to watch TechTV as it fell into the "Premium Digital Sports" package on my cable system. I watch the Super Bowl each year (for the commercials) and that's it when it comes to sports - but I was willing to pay the extra money just for TechTV.

      Maybe they could bring it back as a premium channel with a similarly low cost.

      How many people would be willing to pay for that?

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    6. Re:How silly of them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note: the above is best read in the voice of Stephen Colbert.

      And that brings us to today's wørd: drivel. It's like "dribble", but spelled with a "v", and actually makes more sense in the above context.

    7. Re:How silly of them by PunkOfLinux · · Score: 1

      I would -- if i was the one in charge of the television here.

      --
      Show this to your friends and family that don't know what a real hacker is
  9. Bad move: A niche within a niche. by RatPh!nk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am a geek. I am a nerd. I play video games. I am not a "gamer". TechTV was a great all around nerd channel. They had gamer stuff, they have home audio stuff, they had anime, gear reviews, tech news/commentary. Their target demo seemed more inclusive, IMO. If I remember correctly, no one that I knew watched G4. Even my friends who were gamers. Now we have a network G4TechTV, that seems to have a very low age target demographic, and they have lost the general sense of geekiness, for a more gamer oriented approach. Take note of the professional, but still none too pleased ex-hosts. This niche in a niche business model - insert Apple joke .:here:. - is just too limiting, IMO.

    btw: ex-Apple employee, so no hard feelings

    --
    Argh. The laws of science be a harsh mistress.
    1. Re:Bad move: A niche within a niche. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true. They are taking the exact same route that MTV did and are proceding to copy all of MTVs formats (except for gamer market). It is sad to see it going this way. This all started when they cancelled Martin Sargent and moved from San Francisco to Los Angeles. I am still waiting for a "gamer" reality show analagous to MTV's Real World (or is that new sports one doing this?). Thats probably for after they cancel X-Play (or is that close enough to the MTV top ten to stay?). Then they move onto "making the game" (wait, they already did that...). They have gone from the silicon valley geek scene to the "Tony Hawk gamer" (read "no taste at all in games") wanna-be punk rock "I have only payed Xbox" scene. And it used to be so much more. Oh well, another one bytes the dust.

    2. Re:Bad move: A niche within a niche. by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      I saw the cancellation of Anime Unleashed coming a while now.

      It used to be on every night (or at least many times a week) and not THAT late that you couldn't stay up to watch it and go to work. Now it's rarely on, or at least so late that it's not worth considering, and the current show is the perfect stigmata of what Anime is viewed as by the general public: guys stealing panties and such.

      I say good riddance. Don't get me wrong, I love Anime. But they were showing way too much Gun Grave, as if it was their only show. I think they looped through the series 2 or 3 times almost back-to-back. Had they shown more shows they might have done better.

  10. not TTV but G4 by RoRo_the_Troll · · Score: 4, Informative

    These 2 shows were originally from G4 .. not from TechTV just my 2c

  11. My PVR watches it. ;) by PhoenixOne · · Score: 2, Interesting
    If I had to plan my time around their schedule, I'd give up too. But I have my PVR record a couple of the shows and watch them when I feel like filling in some free time.

    AOTS has some okay parts (I skip the really stupid parts, so it take like 15 minutes to watch) and XPlay is still fun. Also Happy Tree Friends (and Friends) and Cinematech make great background video while I wait for my MMPOG group to get their act together...

    --
    Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
  12. Fine by me by obeythefist · · Score: 1

    For those aussies who read /., TechTV was available through Foxtel. When G4 took over, they axed international distribution, so Fox replaced TechTV in Australia with C&I channel.

    From the looks of it, this is a no loss situation anyway. The old screensavers and call for help were great shows, though.

    --
    I am government man, come from the government. The government has sent me. -- G.I.R.
  13. Dear G4... by Seumas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The only shows I watch are, I'm ashamed to admit it, Attack of the Show and then the occasional X-Play or Icons. I like watching stuff about the history of gaming and the people in it.

    You may, however, cancel Cheat! and get rid of that annoying hostess all together. Please also get rid of all of your stupid car shows. I don't need to watch some guy named "Big C" with a bunch of fake bling showing photos of the occasional car between long takes of mostly naked asian chicks. You can put that on your sister-network -- MTV/MTV2.

    Please also get rid of Arena. Or rather - make it less campy. The only hosts who seemingly care at all are Kevin P - and that's only because he's a real dork and the other two hosts are jocks and middle-aged eye-candy. Maybe you could replace Arena with video, tips, interviews and sponsored competitions of REAL "cyberathletes". I hear a lot about this "Fatal1ty" guy who kicks a lot of ass but you've never shown him gaming. You could become the ESPN of "cyberathletes". It could be boring. Maybe not. It certainly couldn't be worse than the random inexperienced dorks you have competing on Arena currently. If I wanted to watch a bunch of dumbasses suck at games, I'd videotape myself and my friends.

    PS - More hot smart chicks. Not semi-hot chicks and not hot chicks doing stupid things. Actual hot chicks like the old Screensavers chick who does plays or something now or even Jessika from the last iteration of the show (yum). That Laura chick from Martin Sargeant's show wasn't too bad, either. Morgan Webb should maybe just have her own show where she poses half nude with various geek paraphenalia.

    Oh - and since you guys are pushing MAKE magazine all the time on your show and reality/DIY shows are all the rage on every other network, why don't you have a weekly hour long DIY show for geeks? Kevin Rose and Yoshi would be perfect for it - but I'm not picky.

    Geeks want to like your network. But we don't. Some of us watch it only because there is nothing else and the closest we ever had (Discovery and The Learning Channel) have turned into chick-reality shows that have nothing to do with discovering or learning ANYTHING.

    1. Re:Dear G4... by Wylfing · · Score: 1
      I'll share in your shame. I like X-Play, Cinematech, Attack of the Show, and occasionally Icons, in that order. Other than that, G4 sucks.

      --
      Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
    2. Re:Dear G4... by Pheret1 · · Score: 1

      Amen to all of the above.

      We still like Attack of the Show, but we also listen to the podcast done by the old Screensavers guys here at our house.

      AOTS and X-Play are pretty much all we watch.

      Except occasionally when I get drawn in to Arena (when they play DDR on there I LOL).

    3. Re:Dear G4... by coaxial · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You may, however, cancel Cheat! and get rid of that annoying hostess all together. Please also get rid of all of your stupid car shows. I don't need to watch some guy named "Big C" with a bunch of fake bling showing photos of the occasional car between long takes of mostly naked asian chicks. You can put that on your sister-network -- MTV/MTV2.

      You're disin' semi-naked asian chicks? That's like the only reason to watch whatever-the-hell that show is. I never understood "Formula D". I get racing. I like racing. It's something about sliding around, but for the life of me, I don't understand what they're trying to do, or can figure out who wins. Well spinning apparently make you lose, but that's not the same thing.

      On semi-related note what's up with cable channels getting out of their "core competencies"? AMC is now running an original tv series, instead of a movies and things about movies. Cartoon Network (CARTOON NETWORK!) is now running live action movies. I like "Goonies", it's just not what I expect to see on CARTOON network.

    4. Re:Dear G4... by Kementari · · Score: 1

      See, I was thinking maybe they could try harder NOT to alienate female viewers. Yes, there are female viewers. I have no problem with attractive women being on the show unless they are only there for that purpose. Morgan web kicks ass because she is not only attractive, but she knows her stuff and she's a real gamer. I fully agree about the crappy car shows and the suckiness of arena. I also feel that putting on the Man Show was possibly the worst idea ever. Put that shit on Spike TV who already has lost all hopes of not alienating female viewers. Yes, women watch that channel too, I'm all about 5 straight hours of Star Trek. I know some feel that the subject of women gamers is getting to much attention, but until something in the industry actually changes, including guy's attitudes, then it will continue to be brought up.

    5. Re:Dear G4... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Honestly, they don't care about female viewers. If they want to target the female viewer, they'll hit Oxygen or We or one of the Oprah / Soap Opera / MTV reality show timeslots. The demographic here is young males, 18-34 with disposable income.

    6. Re:Dear G4... by Kementari · · Score: 1

      Well they should care about female viewers, not all women are into that Oprah crap. Not only are there plenty of female viewers, but they are an untaped market that if the egocentric male dominated network heads could get a clue, they would realize the profit potential for including women in their target market. Apparently you are one of the clueless.

    7. Re:Dear G4... by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Yes, apparently I'm one of the "clueless" for recognizing what demographic G4TV executives are after.

      *eyeroll*

      Retard.

    8. Re:Dear G4... by Kementari · · Score: 1

      *scoff*

      nice of you to sign your reply "retard". you are clueless for not realizing that women make up a significant segment of the gaming market and for having no clue what women are interested in. I pity the lonely womenless life you must lead.

    9. Re:Dear G4... by pappy97 · · Score: 1

      "Man Show was possibly the worst idea ever. Put that shit on Spike TV who already has lost all hopes of not alienating female viewers."

      I agree the Man Show should be on Spike TV, but who cares if Spike TV alienates female viewers? It's a television network FOR MEN, just like Lifetime is a television network FOR WOMEN.

      I don't see men complaining that Lifetime alienates male viewers.

    10. Re:Dear G4... by Kementari · · Score: 1

      That is a good point about there being networks for women, so why can't there be networks for men? It's just Spike plays so many shows, like Star Trek, and MXC that I like to watch and I wish I could watch them without seeing women being belittled and objectified during commercials. It's fine to cater to men's tastes, but it shouldn't be at the cost of female dignity and equality. Not that I watch Lifetime that much, but I don't believe there are commercials that blantantly offend and belittle men, and if there are then I don't feel that is right either. Is it really necessary to completely block out women viewers in order to appeal to men?

    11. Re:Dear G4... by pappy97 · · Score: 1

      "That is a good point about there being networks for women, so why can't there be networks for men? It's just Spike plays so many shows, like Star Trek, and MXC that I like to watch and I wish I could watch them without seeing women being belittled and objectified during commercials. It's fine to cater to men's tastes, but it shouldn't be at the cost of female dignity and equality. Not that I watch Lifetime that much, but I don't believe there are commercials that blantantly offend and belittle men, and if there are then I don't feel that is right either. Is it really necessary to completely block out women viewers in order to appeal to men?"

      Spike TV is actually a television network for men, just as openly as Lifetime is. The thing is, just because these networks have programming designed for men, does not mean that they operate the same.

      With Lifetime, you get loads of made-for-TV movies (think Meredith Baxter-Berney) and female oriented drama's and comedies. That sure sounds like a network for women.

      With Spike TV, you get programming that tends to appeal to males, but you also get something else: scantily clad women. Those are things you expect from a network that is designed to appeal to men.

      Of course Lifetime does not have many scantily clad men, but this is not to preserve dignity or equality. It's simply because the viewers of Lifetime are not into it.

      Compare Lifetime to Spike. Lifetime tends to showcase women, which women like.

      Spike TV gives men eye candy in the form of provocative women, which men like.

      "Is it really necessary to completely block out women viewers in order to appeal to men?"

      Your question can be turned upside down, i.e. is it really necessary to completely block out MEN in order to appeal to WOMEN (Lifetime)? I don't know any men who can stand to watch Lifetime for more than 5 seconds. Obviously Lifetime turns off men. Spike TV turns off women.

      If you want SpikeTV to not block out women, you should get Lifetime to not block out men.

    12. Re:Dear G4... by coaxial · · Score: 1

      Women make up at best 40% or market, with women over 40 being the largest segment. Women tend to play solitare, The Sims, and some "online" games. Are you seriously arguing that G4 simultaneously target very lucrative 18-35 year old males market AND the 40+ year old women market? What would this be? "G-Phoria is brought to you by Boniva."?

      That's just dumb. The interesection of these two markets is pretty much empty. While some women play games, they don't play the same games as the rest of market. Sure 18-35 year old males also play The Sims, but there's no way to sell to both markets simultaneously.

    13. Re:Dear G4... by Kementari · · Score: 1

      Here are the facts according to the 2005 ESA report found on www.theesa.com:

      -women make up 43% of game players
      -women over the age of 18 make up a larger portion of the gaming population(28%) than boys age 6 to 17 (21%)
      -44% of online game players are female

      All I'm saying is that you DON'T have to shut out and alienate women gamers in order to appeal to male gamers. It's possible to target men without objectifying and alienating women. And if you wonder why there aren't more female gamers it may be because not only do people not target them, but they push them away from gaming. The growth of the video game industry is starting to slow and taper off(as shown in ESA report), and I think it's about time to open it up to broader demographic and to stop shutting out the ones who try and be included already.

  14. Right... by diitante · · Score: 0

    It's just proof that some suites running that place and they think they're all techie because they can use a Blackberry to send email from the golf course. ttfn

    --
    $ whatis msft msft: nothing appropriate
  15. May I take your order. by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1

    Welcome to the Microsoft and Sony world of videogames!

    For only 49 cents extra, you can get some video game programming with your stupid ass show about cars!

  16. Boo hoo? by bi_boy · · Score: 1

    The only show on I watch on G4 is "Icons." It's the only show of their line-up I feel which has something interesting to offer. To those who don't know they pick a topic and basically just go in-depth with it, providing history, interviews, etc. They have some pretty big hitters too; Shigeru Miyamoto, Nobou Uematsu, Hideo Kojima (at least as part of the Metal Gear Solid episode).

    --
    Chicken fried butter sticks? Do ... do you use a fork? - Black Mage, 8-Bit Theater
  17. I'll miss you, yammering threesome by spyrochaete · · Score: 3, Funny

    G4TV.com was a great show and I'll really miss it. It was a show hosted by 3 hardcore gamers (at least one of which writes game manuals) with strong preferences and opinions, tackling the big issues of the day and conducting interviews with industry greats like Peter Molyneux and Sid Meier. No topic was taboo and they pulled no punches in their interview questions. Although it was presented in a different format it was no less informative than Icons. Why they would axe this and not Arena or Cheat is ridiculous.

    For the record, Filter wasn't really so bad either. Diane "Fook Mi" Mizota was little more than a cue card reading Vanna but she did it with flare and was a treat to look at. (Yes, she played Fook Mi in Goldmember. I'm not being a racist ass.) John Walsh was a freaking hilarious little creep too.

    As Seumas says above, more smart hot chicks! Tina Wood and Laura Foy were both in spades, and at least Diane Mizota read her lines in the right order. Whatsherface on Cheat has the personality of a cheese coupon and smarts to match.

    Will I stop paying $2.50 per month for the network because of this? No, but I'm barely getting my money's worth now.

    1. Re:I'll miss you, yammering threesome by Seumas · · Score: 1

      All they ever talked about on G4TV.com was console games, so I really only ever turned in because nothing else was on and that faux-punk chick (I think it was Laura) was kinda hot.

      There are enough channels available that you'd think they could split the stuff up. Cars and dumb dude stuff on one channel and games/geek on another.

      I don't know that I like the ominous sound of "we're keeping blah blah and blah for the old audience"... sounds like they're eventually planning to ditch all the remotely geek stuff and replace it with 24x7 MTV/Comedy Central washouts.

    2. Re:I'll miss you, yammering threesome by Traiklin · · Score: 1

      G4TV.com was a great show and I'll really miss it. It was a show hosted by 3 hardcore gamers (at least one of which writes game manuals) with strong preferences and opinions, tackling the big issues of the day and conducting interviews with industry greats like Peter Molyneux and Sid Meier. No topic was taboo and they pulled no punches in their interview questions. Although it was presented in a different format it was no less informative than Icons.

      you just explained right there why the show was cancled. $10 says they are getting rid of these shows to make room for a combination of Music videos with cars.

      I just turned and saw cinematech was on so I thought I would watch...the commercial that was playing was the sex line advertisments they show no...you know where it has the "Geeky" girls, you know the all to common C & D cup sized tight ass bikini clad geeky girls.

      this network is such a joke it's not even funny anymore, they hired all these new people, forced them all to move to LA and then over thanksgiving weekend proceded to fire them all...I still remember that screen savers after thanksgiving...4 people were on the show 4, out of the original 8 (or was it 10?) and the 8 (or 10) were ALWAYS doing something, when it went to 4 they got rid of the audiance (the only smart move they ever did) and butchered the living hell out of the show.

      kevin was no longer allowed to talk about the really dark tips he used to, they were turned into crap people that watched that segment knew about making the show pointless to watch, then he was finnaly let go (or quit, I'm not sure which) leaving it with only three. I watched a total of two whole episodes after the cast was cut down to 4, when it was the Screen savers I never missed an episode, when G4 took over and 80% of the cast was let go (since they didn't want to move to LA) I still gave them a chance (probably the only one), when they let go of the cast over thanksgiving weekend though that's when I drew the line, I watched two episodes after that and haven't watched one episode in over a year now. Why should I? It's probably the same bull they were putting on when I stoped watching.

      Icons is the only Show G4 has done that is truely interesting to watch, to bad they are focusing more on the "Car Scene" and the "hip-hop" culture then what they should be focusing on. I guess this is what happens when you have old white guys in charge of a company...

      "What's the hottest "It" thing right now?"
      "Well there's rap and car games seem to be really popular"
      "good let's make shows that are focused completly around that, but drop the cars, just show a black guy who represents the rap aspect and throw in a bunch of half naked girls ontop of cars, that will do a lot better"
      "Sounds like a plan."

      as time goes on people lose intrest so they drop the drift racing show and replace it with the man show, after all it has half naked chicks bouncing all around.

      who are they targeting with their shows again? they seem to have shows targeted at the 18-30 demographic but the shows seem to have the intelegent factor for the 8-12 year olds.

    3. Re:I'll miss you, yammering threesome by spyrochaete · · Score: 1

      I hated what The Screen Savers became shortly after the merger. I dispised Attack of the Show on principle until I watched it a few times. Kevin Perreira is actually really sharp and very funny, and Sarah Lane is a good host who presents The Feed (aka Slashdot narrated by a chick) with attitude and an amusing left wing bias. I honestly don't know why AOTS is still on the channel considering the dreck we're left with now. At least Tommy and Vic and Adam and Morgan are still around to keep us company.

  18. Exactly by aztektum · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I know that I and many others share the same sentiment. I have non "nerd" friends who watched Screensavers to learn a bit more about computers, but also watched Fresh Gear because they were typical guys who liked gadgets. When it became G4, they all quit watching because they aren't hardcore gamers. Way to shoot yourself in the foot.

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
    1. Re:Exactly by AdrainB · · Score: 1

      Come on! Most guys watched Fresh Gear to see Sumi Das first, gadgets second.

  19. Rough definition of content by winmine · · Score: 1

    G4 still has no idea what a video game channel should include. They've tried showing Counter-Strike (and others) with BattleBots-esque commentary. Cinematech recently took videos from http://www.speeddemosarchive.com/ and played them in edited form without contacting the creators or the site, and then denied any copyright violation when people complained. The content of the channel is determined entirely by third-parties or whatever is easy to put together (or steal).

    You might say I don't like G4.

    1. Re:Rough definition of content by Radix37 · · Score: 1
      You might say I don't like G4.

      Seconded!

      --
      Speed Demos Archive - Lots of speed runs!
  20. TechTV didn't die by wbren · · Score: 4, Informative
    TechTV didn't die; it just changed into a series of IPTV shows and podcasts. I stopped watching G4TV when The Screen Savers was cancelled, because that was the last show I really liked on that network. A while after that, I started wondering what the old TechTV crew was doing with their time. I was impressed with what I found.


    I still watch TechTV, just without the TV part. I like it better the way it is now.
    --
    -William Brendel
  21. Meh by Corbu+Mulak · · Score: 1

    I only watch X-Play and ATOS (and occasionally Icons when they have something good on) so it doesn't bother me, though. I wish they would just get rid of those damn annoying game degree commercials. The first one with the two retards playing PS1 were bad enough, but the new one with the women who says "Join brown college now" with a near snear in her voice and the black guy who holds the right thumbstick with his left hand is abysmal.

  22. Gwhat? by BrookHarty · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I stopped watching that channel after techtv was gone, removed it from my tivo season pass, and deleted it from favorites on the remote. And from the articles on every board, seems like most people did.

    So, wheres the tv exec out there reading slashdot that will bring back the shows on another network?

  23. Several Things That Bother Me About G4 by -Brodalco- · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is a very lengthy rant, but sue me.

    1. I'm sick of the hyper people that host G4 shows. I couldn't tell you who they are, because I couldn't stand to watch them long enough to find out. Upon further reasarch, it turns out the hosts aren't even real gamers- just very desperate actors. (I bet a lot of you already knew that.) This PA strip sims up my feelings. (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/10/28)

    2. Putting on reruns of "The Man Show" just renforces the stereotype that all gamers are overwieght, lonely males with acne problems and the social skills of a brick. I'd imagine many other shows on G4 are in the same gear, but with lower production values. This in itself will be a turn-off to most female gamers.

    3. Yes, I'm stating the bluntly obvious here, but the lineup of shows they have... suck. The first reason is lack of efficiency and common sense. I've looked through the list of shows they have on thier site, and it's pitiful. Who wants to watch 30 minute show about one game's cheats, when you can look up several in the space of 10?

    4. Even if they were more effiecient, (or even entertaining), G4's still very based in the moment. Cheats for "King Kong" aren't going to be up to date or serve any purpose a year or two from now, and niether is the coverage of E3 2004. If I were in control of G4, I would be shelling out all of my money to Blind Ferret Entertainment to try to get the Ctrl-Alt-Del Animated Series (http://www.cad-animation.com/) and maybe a VG Cats animated series onto it. Even then, there are tons of other webcomics suitable for this type of thing. (If you don't know what I'm talking about, go to blindferret.com)

    If you read all of this crap, you just made me feel special.

    --
    I regret spilling a glass of ginger ale on an achritect!
    1. Re:Several Things That Bother Me About G4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Putting on reruns of "The Man Show" just renforces the stereotype that all gamers are overwieght, lonely males with acne problems and the social skills of a brick.

      Bricks have feelings too, your insensitive clout!

    2. Re:Several Things That Bother Me About G4 by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 1

      Putting on reruns of "The Man Show" just renforces the stereotype that all gamers are overwieght, lonely males with acne problems and the social skills of a brick.

      Hey - I happen to love the Man Show... and I don't have acne...

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    3. Re:Several Things That Bother Me About G4 by -Brodalco- · · Score: 1

      My apologies. I wasn't aware.

      I'm still pretty sure they don't have any social skills, and they couldn't read my comments anyway due to lack of proper sensory organs.

      --
      I regret spilling a glass of ginger ale on an achritect!
    4. Re:Several Things That Bother Me About G4 by -Brodalco- · · Score: 1

      I'm still adjusting to the slashdot response layout. The thing about "Not being aware" and "No sensory organs" was about someone commenting that "Bricks have feelings too." I further apologize to that guy, and it was a very... brickist thing to say. (Anti-Brick?)

      I love the Man Show as well (Mainly that Kid who begs stangers for beer), and I am also acne free. Notice I didn't say it was true- it was mainly symbolic. But like the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue, and porn in general, the "Girls on Trampolines" segment of the show is often (and justly, to some extent) classified as one of those things reserved for lonley guys who can't get a woman themselves. And of course, G4 puts thier advertising focus on this part of the show.

      When you link the nature of the segment of the MS that G4 loves so much, and then link it to games, it generally just makes the channel look (even) less elegent, as well as the gamers that are its target audiance.

      Simply put, it's in very bad taste. Of course, bad taste is the key appeal of the Man Show, because they embrace it and use it so well. But the man show is better off to a channel with the same behavior- Spike TV comes to mind. In fact, it's the Man Show, and the First Television Network for Men. We don't need any more association between video games and bad taste.

      But in all honesty, it looks like G4 is just becoming another Spike.

      http://blindferret.com/

      (I still wish they would use some of the Blind Ferrent Lisences)

      --
      I regret spilling a glass of ginger ale on an achritect!
  24. Meanwhile the BBC.... by SpodBoy · · Score: 1

    Has just finished a successful run of a new Computer Games show

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/tv/videogaiden/>Vide oGaiden.

    Pure PsychoMantis Man!

  25. An in-depth article about it all by thegamebiz · · Score: 1

    This delves deep into the history of the G4 programming, its changes in executives, and the online entrepreneurial initiatives of former TechTV employees. Good read: http://igo.ampednews.com/news/3151/

  26. The one thing G4 Execs seem to have forgotten: by Thedalek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't help but think that the G4 executives were either never informed of, or have completely forgotten that G4 is meant to be a network for Gamers. Right now, a massive bulk of their programming seems to have been put there just for the sake of Tommy Tallerico. Man Show? Whip Set? FASTLANE?

    When you branch out and try to serve the percieved "other interests" of gamers, make sure you're not distancing yourself from your stated goals. Tech TV had shows which appealed to gamers and informed them of technology, and which appealed to tech heads and informed them of gaming news. That was good synergy. Now however, G4 is becoming worse than SpikeTV in terms of having a direct focus as a network.

    Never let Tommy pick shows. That's the moral.

    --
    Happiness is relative, Based upon the way we live.
  27. G4 shows not TechTV shows by aka_big_wurm · · Score: 1

    Those were orgainal G4 shows - Filter was not bad then they reworked it and it sucked that talk show one was ok but I have not watched it in a very long time so that may suck now too.

  28. Sad and sadder by Nycteris_a · · Score: 1

    I used to really enjoy TechTV. I really liked Screensavers. I really liked reruns of Thunderbirds!
    But now all I watch is the occasional X-Play or Cinematech, and is it just me or has X-Play been getting more and more foul-mouthed? If the demographic age is dropping why is the nsfw component skyrocketing?

    The whole channel has very little appeal any more. If I want to Cheat I'll go to gamefaqs.com. It's not a smart or clever channel any more. It has become just loud and annoying.

  29. Amazing! by thundar2000 · · Score: 1


    It is amazing that they took a channel that had a perfectly focused audience, with shows that felt like they were by geeks for geeks. and in general was begining to really hit its stride with great shows like the screen savers...

    They took it, and killed it.

    And then replaced with a pseudo hip game channel, that feels like it is made by people who don't know games, hosted by actor rejects, and is generally more insulting than an MTV Xbox Launch Show.

    I miss tech tv.

    I would like a real game channel.

    Right now, I got nothin'

  30. Filter? by Sierpinski · · Score: 1

    If I remember correctly, wasn't Filter that "show" where there was some sort of storyline that was played by various toons from various games? Who walked around moving with human voiceovers?

    If so, I'm SO glad to see it go. That was a such a waste, and was ultimately what made me change the channel. I used to watch G4TV all the time, at least before the merge with TechTV. Filter was by far the worst show on that channel.

    Shows that suck should be cancelled, that's how it works. Stop this 'Sign of the Times' crap and just move on. Lots of shows get cancelled. Perhaps they should do a little more rotation of the Neilsen boxes to get a better sense of what people like to watch. I used to watch Battlebots on TV all the time on Comedy Central. I know the competitons are still on, yet the show is no more. Yet I see that Sanford and Son is still on TV. Shows that suck are taken off the listings, thats just how it works.

    Flame/mod away, I don't care, the world just got better by a miniscule amount now that Filter is gone!

    --
    And they said zombies weren't real!
    1. Re:Filter? by Detritus · · Score: 1
      If I remember correctly, wasn't Filter that "show" where there was some sort of storyline that was played by various toons from various games? Who walked around moving with human voiceovers?

      No.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:Filter? by vertinox · · Score: 1

      Shows that suck should be cancelled, that's how it works. Stop this 'Sign of the Times' crap and just move on. Lots of shows get cancelled.

      Explain Firefly and Farscape?

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    3. Re:Filter? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      If I remember correctly, wasn't Filter that "show" where there was some sort of storyline that was played by various toons from various games? Who walked around moving with human voiceovers?

      That was Portal, and I felt it was the best show on G4 before the takeover. Take that as you will.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    4. Re:Filter? by Sierpinski · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, PORTAL. That was it. Thanks, got my 6-letter name shows confused. :)

      For my original post: s/filter/portal/

      --
      And they said zombies weren't real!
  31. hold on by HotSIag · · Score: 1

    and reruns of the Man Show for everyone to look at hot girls." Mmmmmeh.

    but I watch g4tv.com and Filter to look at hot girls!

    1. Re:hold on by vertinox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      but I watch g4tv.com and Filter to look at hot girls!

      You know for $5 a month more on your cable/satellite bill you can watch them naked on 200 channels up.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    2. Re:hold on by Kementari · · Score: 1

      are you 13? or are you 35 and still living in your mother's basement? if you wanna see hot girls rent porn or pay the extra couple of bucks like the other person's comment said. I know it's sad that you will never get a girl like you see on tv, or any girl at all for that matter, but some of us like to see good quality shows about games and tech related things, not trashy shows with eye candy.

  32. Not only hot, Tina admits to being bisexual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She was on Stern last year or before, talking about all her bisexual escapades! Gaming, computers and dyking out! Yummy!

  33. G4 blows now by GmAz · · Score: 1

    I used to watch TechTV quite a bit. Though everything said on the shows like Call for Help and The Screensavers never really taught me anything I didn't already know, it did help to show me how to relay this information to other people. Being a computer tech for a school district, I not only need computer skills, but also people skills. Those shows helped me learn how to convey information to my teachers I assist. Now, I can watch X-Play which seem to be mostly re-runs and the man show when I need mindless humor and bouncing breasts. The channel now rarely ever comes on my TV. It was a shame TechTV is gone. It helped all the n00bs out there with their new Dells.

    --
    Click Click Bloody Click PANCAKES!
    1. Re:G4 blows now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FWIW, the host of Cheat (Kristin Holt) was a finalist on American Idol.

  34. At least they drink more by jfsather · · Score: 1


    I do like ATOS on Tuesdays(?) when they do the drinking. Seems like a sad channel when you can only get Sarah to work by getting her drunk. :)

    -J

  35. OT: Battlebots by British · · Score: 1

    Why the heck was Battlebots aired on Comedy Central? The show, from what I saw of it(and its much better UK counterpart 'robot wars') there was no "comedy" in it. Mind you several years ago Comedy Central loved to air movies that weren't purely 'comedy', but comedy was more of a sidepart(like that one where a girl wants to divorce her parents, and "FM").

    What is it with cable networks airing shows that have little or nothing to do with the channel's context? It seems any show, whether new or syndicated can be shoehorned into any cable network, or shifted around(or syndicated around). While it's nice to be able to catch a missed episode of the Apprentice on MSNBC, it doesn't make much sense for other networks.

  36. G4TV.COM and Filter are NOT TechTV shows! by pappy97 · · Score: 1

    "G4 has apparently canceled two more of their holdover shows from the TechTV days. G4TV.com and Filter have been been put under the axe. "

    G4TV.com and Filter were always G4 shows. They were G4 shows that appeared on the original G4 and came over to G4TechTV (Which is now of course G4) They were never produced by TechTV.

    How can factually incorrect stories make it to Slashdot???

  37. Victor Lucas is G4's only intelligent gamer left by *BBC*PipTigger · · Score: 1

    I've watched G4 whenever I could stand to for over a year. The channel consistently deteriorates with few spikes of hope for improvement.

    Victor Lucas is a gem (on Judgement Day and Electric Playground [the only two G4 shows I TiVo]). He carries the network in my opinion. He has obviously played (and beaten) tons of games throughout his life. He understands compelling gameplay and the trappings of genres. He is occassionally cynical and witty but the vivid contrast with Tommy Tallarico's flamboyance is grating. Tommy just sets himself up for both blatant and subtle ridicule. I don't mean to idolize Lucas or be some lame fanboy but my only fault with him is he's consistently too generous with his scores for crappy games. Victor finds and focuses on the best parts of the worst games so his typical spectrum of rating scores rarely diverges from something between 6 and 9. When he recommends a game because of its gameplay though (even if I've never heard of it), I've heeded his advice and not yet been disappointed. Ikaruga is the best example.

    I guess it makes for good contrast and conflict but Tommy in particular (and Julie, Jade etc. to a lesser extent) comes off as a gaming retard compared to Victor. I give Tommy the benefit of the doubt that he's probably a cool guy to hang out with who plays lots of games and has fun cocaine parties with strippers and enjoys life. He enthuses on about hot virtual game chicks and games being good because of breasts first (constantly making base sex and masturbation puns). His secondary focus is audio (as he has been a sound designer on many good games). I guess his tertiary focus is simplistic gameplay. I can understand all of those but I don't respect them as appropriate priorities from a reviewer who should have integrity to be intelligent, consistent, and critical in his evaluations and advice.

    I guess I feel Victor is a connoisseur of video games (and a respectable authority on solid gameplay) while Tommy is an infantile moron who is more excited by shiny things and splashy noises than substance. Tommy regularly says games are no fun because he couldn't be bothered to learn their most basic play controls or mechanics. He gives great games poor scores because of bad sound effects or voice-overs. I don't respect or value his opinion on games.

    G4TV.Com was a decent show. Tina Wood and Laura Foy are obviously capable gamers and even though they would often rely on tedious and campy sketches to pepper their show with flat humor, they at least had some well reasoned arguments about the relative strengths and merits of relevant game titles and platforms.

    Icons has a few treasures. Some of the history of the game industries that have developed around the world is fascinating and even poignant as it relates to present-day industry events. Usually the show is merely interesting but barely relevant to anything current.

    Some of the best segments G4 has ever aired were something I think they called "Screenshots". There were only a handful of them but they were some of the greatest game TV I have ever seen. There's one of a guy commentating over the video of his record time completing Tomb Raider's training challenge. He talks about inspiration from Bruce Lee and preparation. It is a remarkable performance and should be thoroughly impressive to anyone who's ever run that course. An even better one is of a guy who plays 18-Wheeler's Parking Challenge Number 5 about 8 hours a day. Those videos are amazing. The geeks who performed them and their explanations are awesome. I don't remember any more off-hand but those segments were great.

    G4 should show a million exhibitions of the very best gameplay performances. Reviewers should be critical thinkers. They should not be struggling actors who care more about some movie debut's red-carpet event than E3. Don't show retarded rookie gameplay. Don't show airheads. There are many intelligent and talented gamers out there. Their voices would be totally interesting. Be more like

  38. G4TV vs. Tech TV = Los Angeles Vs. San Francisco by crazyphilman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I always saw it this way:

    When G4TV took over Tech TV, it was like Los Angeles invading and conquering San Francisco. Consider the way the two cities map onto the TV channels.

    L.A. (and G4TV): All attitude, no geek. Smartass, fashioned up faux geeks and gamers with lots of attitude and tons of manufactured "cred". The Hollywood version of geeks and gamers, in other words.

    San Francisco (and Tech TV): All geek, all the time. All about substance, focusing on gaming and technology, totally geek friendly and tons of useful information.

    When G4 took over Tech TV, the channel went straight down the toilet. If it wasn't for the GORGEOUS Morgan Webb, I wouldn't spend thirty seconds there.

    But... Damn! Morgan! Whatta babe!

    Of course, G4 DID find that "blondie" chick, she's kinda cool. But even if she broke out into a chorus of "Call me", it still wouldn't be as good as the old Tech TV.

    --
    Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
  39. Acronym Explained by iridium_ionizer · · Score: 1

    G4TV - Gonad-4 Testicular Virus. Symptoms include painful hallucinations of scantily clad women, pop-media reviews, ditz speech patterns, and cheesy art design. May prevent significant female others from remaining in the room. In rare extreme cases, prolonged exposure may lead to hemorrhaging of the eyes. Upon diagnosis, immediately shut off television.

    Seriously though, there are only a few shows that I can stand to watch. I mainly watch X-Play for the humorous vignettes and the ability to check out the graphics in real-time without downloading. Occasionally Icons or Gamemakers make for interesting mini-documentaries.