Tommy Platinum

This refers to PPVs such as One Night Stand (all hardcore), Cyber Sunday (fan input into match stipulations) and No Way Out (Chambers). Although Royal Rumble is also an example, and so is Survivor Series to an extent, these PPVs are traditional and generally accepted. TNA's Lockdown is also a good example, with every match taking place inside the six sides of steel.

Basically, what do you think of the amount of gimmick PPVs in WWE nowadays, mainly the 3 that I mentioned? Cyber Sunday has been going for a few years now, and has always seemed to me a pretty poor concept and pretty much a throwaway PPV. One Night Stand was great the first two years but there is no reason for it to exist now, and its just hardcore overkill which devalues everything. No Way Out has apparently become established as the Elimination Chamber PPV, with two happening last year and two more scheduled for this year.

Some people like the idea of every PPV having a ''gimmick'' - something which defines it from other PPVs, but I personally think that besides the classic PPVs, these gimmick PPVs are pretty pointless. They either ..... out stipulations or are just boring, such as Cyber Sunday. I mean, as if a title is going to change hands when fans are choosing the challenger.

I would much rather WWE made PPVs buyable on the strength of the card rather than giving lower level PPVs a set gimmick in an attempt to attract buys.

You?

__________________

Tyler Durden

I dislike them since I kind of like the idea of a "balanced" PPV. A bit of everything really. A mat match, a high spot match, a more hardcore style. I have to say TNA had this slightly closer a couple of years back for me (despite their horrendous weekly show).

__________________
A throne is just a bench wrapped in velvet

MR. PEACHES

They are overkill, but they can also be very entertaining at the same time eg. the early Lockdowns. If the gimmick matches are good then I don't mind very much, but reading everybodies opinions of the shows, they sound like shit. Hardcore matches should only be used in a heated feud tho. >.>

RaiZ-R

I feel about gimmick pay-per-views the same as I feel about gimmick matches... In the right context and place they work but otherwise it's pretty much pointless.

As for those mentioned, I'll start with No Way Out as that's the next PPV. I mentioned in the No Way Out thread how I feel about it, but I'll reiterate here. Having two matches with the same gimmick on one show makes the second match look (and feel) less impressive, putting more pressure on those involved to put on a great match, often resulting in epic failure or injury (at least that's how I see it).

Cyber Sunday (or Taboo Tuesday, as it was) is a cool concept on paper but in reality is very, very flawed. Especially since they changed it to text voting this year, isolating over half the audience from participation in the damn thing. In fact as Taboo Tuesday it was much better, the quality since the name change has plummeted even lower, and this year it was easily the worst PPV I saw from any wrestling or MMA promotion all year. Totally awful.

One Night Stand and Lockdown have good and bad points, and are PPV's that have the ability to be really good but rarely are. ONS '05 and '06 were brilliant, '07 was pretty tragic, and '08 was alright. It really depends on the matches and stipulations in the end with that particular PPV, but after a whole night of hardcore matches the headliner has to be something really epic and brutal to hold your attention. Lockdown on the other hand has just the one stipulation (or should). TNA occasionally ends up giving you a match in a cage with another stipulation added on because Vince Russo is a moron of epic proportions. It also becomes pointless when you've got an entire PPV dedicated to Six Sides Of Steel and yet the promotion still using the match type on other PPV's and even on Impact. That's overkill done right. Hahaha!!

Dr. Proxy

I used to like one night stand when it actually involved "hardcore", I mean, the most hardcore thing at last years ONS was 'Takers bump through the tables, which to an extent was only slightly hardcore.
I dont mind cyber sunday, because it can be fun, different stipulations are pretty good, it gets the fans involved so to speak.
I actually wouldn't mind No way out if it wasn't the elimination chamber, seriously, they are just a crap version of the hell in a cell. Maybe they should only have one match, but not the same every year. It would be good to see a steel cage match one year, or a HIAC, and maybe an elimination chamber the next, I mean, one elimination chamber match is unbearable enough, never mind two
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

But, overall, I have no disliking of "gimmick" PPV's, I love the concept of the traditional survivor series elimination matches, I used to like ONS, I love the Royal Rumble, but No way out could be far better if they alternated between different matches.
Maybe they should start making different types of steel cage matches, for example, A steel cage with barbed wire around the top or flames (inferno match and cage in one?me), or they could use the hardcore elimination chamer, with a different weapon in each chamber. But please, not the same crap year in year out, be creative every now and then.

__________________

horrorfan_1986

It's all about how much gimmick is forced in the PPV. The best are those that have that main event with the gimmick and the rest of the PPV is regular matches. The Royal Rumble is a great example of having only one gimmick match on the show works. Would the Rumble be as popular if there were three Rumbles per Royal Rumble PPV? I doubt it. It would lose all magic. With the only exception of two other times (Not counting the original Rumble on the USA Network), but Rumble is only done one time of the year only. You don't have time to grow tired of it since you have a full year to get hyped for it again.

On the other hand, there's Lockdown. How are you supposed to be excited about the main event cage match when you just witnessed seven other ones? Worst yet is that whenever TNA throws on other cage matches throughout the year, it's not as important and it hurts their PPV.

The only time a gimmick is suitable to showcase more than once a night is when it's a very simple gimmick. Case in point: The Survivor Series Elimination Matches. These are matches very similar to normal ones, only with the addition of having wrestlers be eliminated. There aren't cages, ladders or weapons of any kind. The WWE is also smart in that they don't hold 4-on-4 or 5-on-5 Elimination matches any other time of the year besides November.

I'm all in favor of the WWE trying to make each PPV have it's own unique feel. Afterall, that's how the Royal Rumble became one of the best created ideas ever. However, keep it to a minimal. If you want a PPV to be known for the Championship scramble match, fine, but only have one. Increase the time between the entrances to make the match even longer. The same goes for a PPV known for the Elimination Chamber. Allow each and every match to be memorable. Last year's No Way Out didn't allow that and due to that, I remember very little from the Elimination Chamber matches besides the feeling of being underwhelmed and knowing that Jericho was blading.

As for Cyber Sunday, it's a great event in theory, however; the fans really have very little say in the matches. When you only give the fans three choices (All predictable ones), it's not going to feel like a fan made PPV. For Cyber Sunday, they could easily put it together with only one gimmick match. For a World Title match, allow the fans to pick from the entire brand. Little things like that will help Cyber Sunday feel more like a dream PPV instead of a One Night Stand part 2 with the amount of useless gimmick matches.

__________________

CGS

Night Of Champions is also a Gimmick PPV you could say.

Anyway i don't mind gimmick PPV's as they could be very entertaining. PPV's like Cyber Sunday should be scrapped though since they serve no real purpose anymore Especially since you have to text in and can only vote if you are American now.

ONS is a pretty good PPV which i don't mind at all. 07 was pretty bad i couldn't even get through the whole show, 08 was pretty good, 06 was the best so far IMO. 05 is not to far behind 05 though. As For No Way out 1 elimination chamber a year makes a lot more sense that two elimanation chambers a year. The match should only be used for the show who's superstar didn't win the rumble match and be used as a number 1 contenders match.

__________________

RaiZ-R

I disagree with that point. If you're only having the one Chamber then it should be for a title.

CGS

If They was going to have a 1 Chamber Match at No Way Out then Whats the point of it being for title? They Might as well just use it to decide whose gonna compete in the main event at Mania. If it was at Any Other PPV they i would say put the title on the line instead.

__________________

horrorfan_1986

And that's the problem, the Elimination Chamber shouldn't be held at No Way Out. The first few months are already so crowded with the Royal Rumble match, Money in the Bank and the lead up into the major matches at Mania. The Elimination Chamber is somewhat made less special being forced to be in between two of the biggest events of the year.

The best time to do an Elimination Chamber (If they want it to be a yearly event) is at Survivor Series. It fits perfectly in with the Survivor Series name (Rather than a team survival, it's about surviving in the chambers) and it can only make Survivor Series more meaningful.

__________________