Survivor: Game Changers Preview Makes the Merge Interesting

Jeff Probst, host of SURVIVOR, themed ÒGame Changers.Ó The Emmy Award-winning series returns for its 34th season with a special two-hour premiere, Wednesday, March 8 (8:00-10:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network. The season premiere marks the 500th episode. Photo: Timothy Kuratek/CBS ©2017 CBS Broadcasting, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Jeff Probst, host of SURVIVOR, themed ÒGame Changers.Ó The Emmy Award-winning series returns for its 34th season with a special two-hour premiere, Wednesday, March 8 (8:00-10:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network. The season premiere marks the 500th episode. Photo: Timothy Kuratek/CBS ©2017 CBS Broadcasting, Inc. All Rights Reserved. /
facebooktwitterreddit

The latest Survivor: Game Changers preview gives fans a better understanding of the already-known change to the merge, but it’s still not perfect.

Those who’ve checked out the synopsis to Survivor: Game Changers‘ next episode know that two people will find themselves unable to participate in consuming the pile of food that comes with making it to the effective halfway point of the game: the merge. (Although it may not be halfway in terms of days, it is the second phase.)

But, being that the synopsis only consists of one sentence, we didn’t know how exactly that would work at the time. Granted, we still don’t know exactly how the exclusion will come about, but it’s a bit more apparent now. Listen closely to what Jeff Probst says in the following promo:

“Before we merge, you have one decision to make,” he says. Now, although we don’t know how they come to that decision, the obvious answer is a vote. However, there’s no time to come up with a strategy and try and coordinate with allies.

Then again, these are Survivor experts. Should each castaway be able to vote for two people to not get a meal, there are two choices that make a certain amount of sense here: Ozzy and Brad. Let’s break that down.

In the merge phase of the game, physicality becomes a threat, not an asset. We’ve already seen people talking about how Ozzy, for instance, shouldn’t make it to the merge because of the chance that he’ll go on an immunity streak. As he’s shown no signs of slowing down despite first playing over 10 years ago and then playing again in South Pacific 6 years ago, that makes sense. The only person who can really counter him, or, in other words, maybe get the win, is Brad.

So, depriving them of a chance to fuel up is probably not a bad idea. But that only thinks in terms of threat assessment, not alliance assessment, and there’s where the game gets tricky. Do you alienate an ally in the hopes of beating them in a challenge, or do you go for someone else and stay in tune with what you think your alliance wants?

It’s a tough question, and we suspect everyone will take a different approach.

Next: Survivor's Best Athletes

Who would you vote for if you could choose someone to miss out on Survivor: Game Changers?