Skip to main content

Why is "playing the game" taboo?

Ellie Mae

Ellie Mae

Does this picture make my ears look big?
It seems as if a lot of the housemates stigmatize strategy. I wonder why. You wouldn't go into the house without the prize, would you? It seems as if, whatever version you happen to fancy, AU, US, UK, ect... the players who are open about wanting the cash, are harshly criticized by their "opponents." I tend to find the ones playing a strategic game much more fascinating. As opposed to those who just want to be on telivision.
What do you think?
 
I feel like it's a lot more accepted in BBAU than it once was (at least among the fans).

I seem to remember a time when if I got a whiff of a housemate being strategic or wanting to win, I would be very dirty on them. I mean, I know that almost all of them are there for the money, and I know it's a game, and why not play it to win, but...?

I guess what initially attracted me to BB was that it was essentially a social experiment, and what I really wanted to see was just people interacting and - very importantly - being themselves.

And that's what I dislike about "playing the game"; I think it effectively has to clash - at least somewhat - with my whole "be yourself" ideal.

Tim found a pretty good balance last year. David and Priya are trying this year, but as yet are floundering.
 
I agree with you @Ellie Mae . The whole baseline premise of the game is to outmanoeuvre the other hm's and be the last hm standing. It's a game, not a holiday. Occasionally you hear a hm say "Anyone who says they're not here to win the prize is lying!" I agree with that. No matter what they say their reasons are for being in the house, they would all love to win.

I don't understand either why they think it's such a bad thing to strategise. I think usually that accusation is thrown around by the hm's who are either too thick to be able to do it, or by those who are doing it but don't want the others to realise just how much. I agree that someone playing strategy is much more interesting to watch than someone sun baking.
 
P.S. I definitely think it could be argued that many past winners like Ben, Peter, Reggie, Trevor and Aleisha won precisely because people thought that they were just being themselves and weren't playing the game.
 
It could also be argued that they were the ones who won when to was vote to evict and the reason they lasted so long was that people forgot they were there. The noisy interesting ones got evicted. I think times have changed though, people want to see more thinking now the novelty of just watching has worn off
 
Raphael said:
It could also be argued that they were the ones who won when to was vote to evict and the reason they lasted so long was that people forgot they were there. The noisy interesting ones got evicted. I think times have changed though, people want to see more thinking now the novelty of just watching has worn off
Click to expand...

Yeah, I see what you're saying. Times have definitely changed. It's almost a completely different game now.

Different strokes for different folks.
 
In the earlier BBAU years the HMs did perceive those "playing the game" as being unfair. The HMs appeared to prefer the idea of "keeping it real" and "being yourself". I suspect "playing the game" was frowned upon because it meant that you were lying, cheating, and pretending to be somebody you weren't just to win. Back then, Australian values (in general terms) were "a fair go" etc.

It certainly has changed, perhaps during the hiatus, and HMs who openly admit to playing the game aren't necessarily disliked by the audience anymore, probably because of the realization that they are indeed playing a game.

BUT "playing the game" seems to have been swapped for "strategist", which probably boils down to the same thing.

So, if the HMs are no longer sour about "playing the game" but dislike other HMs because they are a "strategist", what's the difference?
 
These housemates this year are morons. They act as though someone 'playing the game' is a terrible thing while saying "the game...." 20 times a day.

I personally think the problem is the producers have changed it and made it a 'game' but kept the old rules of them not being allowed to discuss nominations. The show doesn't know what it is anymore and nor do the housemates seem to. They know viewers are down on people who play the game, but are being told by BB it's a game constantly.

I as a viewer don't even know what the show is anymore. At least on shows like Survivor they have a solid format and you know what the point is. This year it's just a bunch of dull people sitting around discussing the other people in the house.

Every year bar BB08 and this year, I've been SO jealous of the housemates getting to have the BB experience, but BB08 and this year I think "it would SUCK to be in the house, how bored out of your #%%@ brain would you be??!". The housemates are endlessly bored, and so thus so are the viewers. BB08 housemates were complaining about two weeks into it. This year people like Sandra were complaining by Day 2!

Peter Abbott said on Reality Check that what he was warned about by overseas BB producers, was to NOT rely on stunts, as then the housemates simply sit around bored waiting for the stunts, instead of creating content to screen themselves. And that's exactly what's happened this year, every Monday and Tuesday night is a stunt, and the rest of the time they sit around bored out of their minds. They don't even seem to enjoy Friday night drinks anymore - Marina's welcome picnic evening they even admitted being completely bored (the comments which lead to Travis and Ryan's almost coming to blows). So you know you have problems when your housemates are even bored on drunk night!

The show needs to just END. I enjoy watching the new intruders but as for the housemates themselves I can't stand them they're SO boring. Each episode I just sit there painfully watching them be dull. Thank god for the intruders as otherwise I would have switched off.
 
Isn't playing the game and strategising what we all do in normal life anyway? It's just that the housemates are exaggerating and making public, sooner or later, their ways of doing it.
 
I reckon it stems from Aussie culture.

Where we like to "facade" that we don't take things too seriously.

No one likes a tryhard.

But also, these housemates seem to link playing the game and not being genuine, which is true in a way. If they know someone is playing the game, then they know that some things they say or act may not be how they really feel. And that leaves them untrustworthy.

So I can see why they would not want to like it, if someone is "playing the game".

Khun Khun said:
Isn't playing the game and strategising what we all do in normal life anyway? It's just that the housemates are exaggerating and making public, sooner or later, their ways of doing it.
Click to expand...
Not in the Big Brother sense.
 
I am an American, and this is only my second year to watch BBAU. I have, however, watched almost every season of BBUS. The differences in sensibilities can sometimes astound. I absolutely find you Aussies to be so much more polite and kind towards one another. Our (US) housemates sometimes ( in the case of the last 2 years always) sink to such a low level, it's almost sickening. But, they always are playing, strategizing, and manipulating. From day one! So, when I see Skye complain that Lawson is rude, and brought to tears. Or Some commentators call Priya a snake. It's hard for me to see where it is coming from. Because everyone, to my eyes, seems to have such an aversion to the game aspect of BB. But, I also, am aware that most of this years crop are a least trying to be strategic in the manner they a lot their points.
 
I guess when Tim succeeded last year with playing the game it was a game changer.

But Tim was an entertaining and charismatic personality so it worked for him. He also never forgot about the audience watching him.

Priya as much as I love her she's too desperate to win and holds back and over thinks. This works against her.

Dave suffers from foot in mouth syndrome and is only really likeable when he's on the outer. But now that he is popular it's gone to his head and he's unappealing.

Skye is cute and is playing to the audience. But she's too self assured and the audience does not like that.

I don't think a game player will win this year. They're too obvious in their game playing. All three lack a self awareness that I believe Tim had.
 
madambec said:
I guess when Tim succeeded last year with playing the game it was a game changer.

But Tim was an entertaining and charismatic personality so it worked for him. He also never forgot about the audience watching him.

Priya as much as I love her she's too desperate to win and holds back and over thinks. This works against her.

Dave suffers from foot in mouth syndrome and is only really likeable when he's on the outer. But now that he is popular it's gone to his head and he's unappealing.

Skye is cute and is playing to the audience. But she's too self assured and the audience does not like that.

I don't think a game player will win this year. They're too obvious in their game playing. All three lack a self awareness that I believe Tim had.
Click to expand...

Absolutely... very observant!

And Tim really turned "playing the game" into an art form. Even if BB keeps going year after year... I don't know when we will ever see another housemate who do it like that.
 
Because playing the game insinuates they are doing things out of character to get air time or manipulate other HMs. Its not Survivor they sit in a house for 3 months and do tasks.
 
Tim got away with it because he was so good at it.

It's like a shock value comedian, who uses all the racist, sexist, -ist slurs you can think of.

It's all fun and jokes..... until it's not funny anymore, and then we all get offended.

It's the same with game playing imo.

Just speculating here, the difference between Aussies and Americans, is that we discourage peacocking. But when Tim did it, it was funny and it was entertaining, so we gave him a free pass.

I'm not a Tim fan btw.
 
Tahan said:
Tim got away with it because he was so good at it.

It's like a shock value comedian, who uses all the racist, sexist, -ist slurs you can think of.

It's all fun and jokes..... until it's not funny anymore, and then we all get offended.

It's the same with game playing imo.

Just speculating here, the difference between Aussies and Americans, is that we discourage peacocking. But when Tim did it, it was funny and it was entertaining, so we gave him a free pass.

I'm not a Tim fan btw.
Click to expand...
and we never got a sense of the real Tim at all! A character won last year.
 
Tim didn't just strategize, he manipulated. For sheer ability to control others emotions, I would give him an 8 or 9 out of 10. And he still managed to be a loveable scamp. A player like Priya will never be loveable. She is admirable, because she is smart and has an iron will. But, I don't believe she can manipulate emotions the way Tim did. David, poor David, while very intelligent, just can't help stepping in piles of pooh. So, him getting others to love him anyway is just out. The other "smart" player is Skye, and I can't tell if she is brilliantly playing dumb or is just a BB savant. The rest of them seem to be thinking it is a wacky version of a beauty contest where everyone wants to be Miss Congeniality. Or perhaps the camp from Friday the Thirteenth and no one has told Clawson, Traisha, or Skylo that anyone who has sex dies.
 
Last edited:
It's definitely more accepted now, even encouraged. I look for the housemates who observe and strategise and try to support them.
I think the reason its stigmatised is because the other housemates assume that if you're playing the game, your actions aren't genuine and the relationships you've developed aren't organic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top