haha, nice! for some reason it's really funny to me that scott was wearing a yellow HQ shirt in public.
i have to admit, i have fully come around with him, especially when comparing him to the several other side-hosts. he's just way better at it.
For all his off-the-cuff weirdness, Rogowsky is serious about his work: “I put hours of prep into this sometimes.” It’s mostly research into the questions, but, yes, he prewrites many of his puns. “I’m doing my best to entertain,” he says.
it pays off. i like how he's developed his own series of catchphrases that become engrained in your memory. q-umero numero uno question one, let's get this show on the road, savage question, the long series of pun-nicknames at the beginning that somehow just get longer and longer with each passing week. those aren't HQ-created catchphases. the other hosts hardly use any of them, although a few will kind of make a nod at a particularly savage question. but for the most part they seem to conspicuously avoid repeating scott-isms, which to me suggests that they don't want to formally establish themselves as the also-rans - they see themselves as potential claims to scott's host throne. it's fascinating to watch but also has the whiff of an old superhero comic story because you just know that scott's gonna win that battle.
― Karl Malone, Friday, 5 January 2018 18:14 (two years ago) link
sorry to post a tl;dr HQ post, but i don't know who else to talk to about this stuff.
there was a particularly bad side-host faux pas the other day when the host kept getting the stats wrong by an order of magnitude. so when 460,000 people got the first question right, she said that 46,000 people were still in, and when 135,000 were in the game a few questions later, she said 13,500 were in the game (those aren't the exact figures. i can't remember). i felt really bad for her because the chat mob just tore her apart and some of the most sexist things i've ever read by in the chat panel for...about 5-10 minutes straight. if you watched closely you could see that a bunch of people were getting banned from the chat by the mods, but the mob was much, much larger than the mods, and so it continued pretty much unabated. the dystopia of this game is real. dystopia already exists, in this world, in this game, which is growing. you can't look away! 'of course i felt bad for her because of that hellscape, but the number-counting problem was emblematic of how clear it is that the side-hosts don't really play HQ or know much about it. putting aside the difficulty of reading numbers, if you play HQ even a few times you quickly come to understand how a typical HQ game proceeds. if there were only 46,000 people left after the first question, that would be an all-time highlight reel HQ moment, just an incredibly savage first question revealing deep systemic flaws in the US educational system. so when the host kind of casually said "wow, 46,000 people are still left after that one" - after the first question - "such a great job, guys, you all got that one!" she revealed herself as an outside. a substitute science teacher who plays a film for the class because we all know they're not prepared to hold forth on intermediate chemistry.
almost all of the side-hosts reveal themselves to be pretenders at some point. those who can stick around for multiple hosting opportunities inevitably face the Gauntlet of the Indeterminate Pause, which is when the question panel fails to show up in the app and the host is suddenly required to completely improvise until the techs fix it. these unexpected but recurring segments are some of the best tv/live media i've ever seen. sometimes the pause lasts only a few seconds, sometimes it takes 20-30 seconds, and at others the pause lasts a couple minutes and then they're forced to abandon the game and kick everyone out. i admit that the whole thing can be thought of as part of the "cringe" genre, but there's more to it than that. but i can't think of a comparison to this situation - a host suddenly being forced into a very anxious situation, live in front of half a million people, and they don't know how long it's going to last, and the chat mob is just exploding with rage at the delay. day after day, unpredictably! of course there are other sudden imposed performances that play out like this in public: a video or audio miscue on a news show that leaves the correspondent kind of hanging there for a few seconds, or the mariah carey NYE fiasco. but i can't think of an emergency improv situation that happens with such regularity, in front of such a hostile audience, and with such undeterminate length and results. some day the techs will fix the problem and memory of it will fade away, but for now the tech problems are not only part of the show but are in some ways the best part of the whole thing. that's just my edgy HQ opinion there but i mean it!
anyway, every host runs into it at some point. but only scott deals with it in a satisfying way. he manages to offer empathy to the agitated audience while still keeping a light humorous tone. he can tell an anecdote, on the spot, about anything, and just fill it up while still providing status updates about the tech problem. in the same situation, the other hosts quickly fall apart. i think it's interesting that some of them wind up projecting the audience's rage back onto the viewer, while other hosts quickly reveal themselves to be frightened of the entire situation, frightened of the audience, of not knowing when it will end.
― Karl Malone, Friday, 5 January 2018 18:48 (two years ago) link
It’s after 8, and Rogowsky has to rush off. He can’t take me to the studio, or tell me anything about it. The company wants to maintain whatever competitive advantage it can about HQ’s technical setup and filming process, he explains.
lol at the idea of competitors trying to emulate HQ's technical setup
― Karl Malone, Friday, 5 January 2018 19:03 (two years ago) link
big nyt piece today as wellhttps://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/05/arts/hq-trivia-app-appointment-viewing.html
― Chocolate-covered gummy bears? Not ruling those lil' guys out. (ulysses), Friday, 5 January 2018 19:07 (two years ago) link
scott is intensely a reddit.com user
― lag∞n, Friday, 5 January 2018 19:11 (two years ago) link
Did our own “josh in Chicago” just get a shout out there, or just a different josh in Chicago?
― jjjusten, Saturday, 6 January 2018 02:24 (two years ago) link
haha, i wondered the same!
― Karl Malone, Saturday, 6 January 2018 02:33 (two years ago) link
we could win cash prizes.
― Karl Malone, Thursday, November 16, 2017 9:25 PM (one month ago)
― calstars, Saturday, 6 January 2018 02:37 (two years ago) link
everything that is interesting must be ruined
― Karl Malone, Friday, 9 February 2018 19:45 (two years ago) link
Got to #6
― fuck the NRA (Neanderthal), Friday, 14 September 2018 01:22 (one year ago) link
i've won like 3-4 times now and still haven't made enough money for to cover the processing fee
― Clay, Friday, 14 September 2018 02:31 (one year ago) link
56k people guessed that Tony Montana directed The Bling Ring tonight
― fuck the NRA (Neanderthal), Tuesday, 15 January 2019 02:13 (one year ago) link
i played that hq words game twice so far and won both times. well, "won" as in i survived all the questions and earned between 9 and 15 cents
― suggest boban (Will M.), Tuesday, 15 January 2019 22:24 (one year ago) link
shut down last night
― Piven After Midnight (The Yellow Kid), Sunday, 16 February 2020 04:31 (one week ago) link
won this once when it was a thing, collected the $1.24 or whatever, never played again
― ℺ ☽ ⋠ ⏎ (✖), Sunday, 16 February 2020 04:33 (one week ago) link
burned bright, burned out
― Fuck the NRA (ulysses), Sunday, 16 February 2020 04:35 (one week ago) link
Incidentally, is this our dude? https://i.imgur.com/rrnQeak.jpg
― brimstead, Sunday, 16 February 2020 04:47 (one week ago) link
This sounds awesome
― Andrew Farrell, Monday, 17 February 2020 11:50 (one week ago) link
― Andrew Farrell, Monday, 17 February 2020 11:54 (one week ago) link
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 17 February 2020 14:47 (one week ago) link