Does RAW being live help your enjoyment of the show?

Discussion in 'RAW' started by Snowman, Jun 30, 2013.

  1. (Or if you'd rather, does SD/TNA/ROH/etc suffer from being taped?)

    See plenty of people complain about all the taped shows and how much better they would be live, but honestly don't see it as that big of a deal outside of getting rid of the spoilers. How do you think the live show helps the "feel" of the show, help the production quality, or even help ratings?
  2. Apart from the spoilers I don't see anything that actually is or can be better. I actually enjoy more watching TNA or SD than watching Raw because even if it's taped and you know what will happen you want to see how they did it. You can know Aries will win a championship but it's better to see the match and his promos.
  3. I think it does. Something you know isn't edited makes it more interesting to watch. You never know what could go wrong, or happen.

    Example is CM Punk hitting a fan. Surely that'd have been edited out of SD.
  4. It is the "anything can happen" feel. SD is taped, and if something HUGE happened (it doesn't on SD) we would have heard about it. Same with a taped Impact. On a live PPV or Raw we don't know if something monumental is about to take place or what.

    Imagine if Raw were taped and how shit it would have made some of the huge moments like Rock or Brock's re-debut.
  5. Yeah, but we heard about Lesnar's debut ahead of time anyway, and those who avoid spoilers were able to avoid the Aries reveal (although they spoiled the title change on the website, nice job)...

  6. We had heard speculation of Lesnar's debut, but that doesn't 'spoil' it nearly as much as a taped show.
  7. Being live just has a better atmosphere because as Bischoff said on the Monday Night Wars DVD, there's that spontaneous feeling that anything could happen at any moment. I'm sure they use the 5 second delay when it comes to language (though I can't recall the last time someone was censored as far as words go, unless you count PPV) but there's certain things they couldn't censor out. Catching someone's language is one thing, but as mentioned, if you have a fan incident or something like a unique crowd reaction that can't be contained, that helps give Raw a really special atmospheric feeling.

    However, I'm pretty sure ratings aren't really any better because of the show being live. If I recall, Raw was still primarily a taped show (despite a live show here and there) all the way up until some period in 1999 where they decided to go live full time, but yet, the ratings had already long turned around by then and they were beginning to not only beat but destroy Nitro, despite Nitro being a live show. Raw has been live ever since, even though the ratings have continued to decline. Smackdown's peak in ratings was also when it was a regularly taped show, even though it started out live. (Not arguing that being taped is better, just that it doesn't guarantee a bump in ratings, but despite this, I still wish Smackdown was live and on Tuesdays.)
  8. The biggest (and possibly only) problem is spoiling big moments. I don't read spoilers myself, but if something big happens on SD/taped IW I'll know it (Christian dropping the WHC to Orton less than a week after winning it for example) because people will be talking about it all over the place. Therefore, taped shows pretty much kill the excitement one would get from huge moments.
  9. no cause that Fucking App get's on my nerves
  10. I have no idea why, but I always enjoy watching things live more than I do taped. I don't think RAW could improve at all even if it was taped.
  11. This.

    Makes a huge difference.
  12. Better cause the fake crowd reactions on SD pee me right off.