As you probably know, the US tried the public vote option in our first season. The reason the rules were changed (HOH, etc.) was because the American voting public voted out the most entertaining houseguests (housemates) and we were left with a lot of BORING people, playing to the public.
The house dynamics did not become fun until the power went to the actual players. I like the fact that they are responsible for their own nominations and evictions. It makes for more drama.
BB USA was boring in season one. Season two that brought us Dr. Will Kirby was great and a great improvement on season one, which is why I think BB USA has stuck with that format.
I enjoy your version, but to me it is more fun being judged (and nominated/evicted) by your peers. It makes for more drama, fights, alliances, etc.
I don't like the idea of 3/4 people being on the block (nominated) at the same time; I LOVE watching the two nominees jockeying for position/votes.
I also love the golden power of veto because it can totally change the game (like Brendon pulling himself off the block). That is fun and exciting to me.
Yes, your current season has "save and replace" and I like it. It gives people an opportunity to save themselves.
In the US version, I like that the results are in the hands of the actual players so they are not trying to play to the viewing public (being nice and stuff). I want fireworks!
We talk crap about them and all, but seldom do we really influence the outcome of the game (except for the America's Player twist, which by the way, I hate).
Put them in the house and let them do their thing. Fight, kill each other, etc. Just let me watch.
Thanks for sharing your views and commenting on mine.