The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: goongas on January 25, 2004, 09:14:22 PM
-
ABC Brining Back 'MILLIONAIRE' And Regis For Limited Run ... Developing... According to drudgereport.com
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 09:14 PM\'] ABC Brining Back 'MILLIONAIRE' And Regis For Limited Run ... Developing... According to drudgereport.com [/quote]
That's amazing. I hope this turns out to be true, but it really underlines just how desparate ABC is for a hit, any hit. I am not surprised, though.
I hope this means the return of Fastest Finger and they they've learned their lesson with regard to overdoing both the show and celebrity editions.
-
I hope this means the return of Fastest Finger and they they've learned their lesson with regard to overdoing both the show and celebrity editions.
I also hope it means the return of the phone qualifier...if nothing else, it'll be good for daily reports on successful/failed calls. :-)
Chuck Donegan (The Hopeful "Chuckie Baby")
-
I honestly thought ABC was done with Millionaire primetime and would have aired pigs flying first. They must like the rating the syndicated show gets.
-
Link for news articles:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/26/arts/tel...&partner=GOOGLE (http://\"http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/26/arts/television/26ABC.html?ex=1075698000&en=31c5925cb9096c38&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE\")
Very interesting article. More lifelines, $10 million grand prize, etc.
-
I hope the changes that are being made to the format won't ruin the original feeling of the show. It's a smart move that they're going back to the "British" scheduling, and of course bringing back Regis! At any rate, I'm excited to see how this turns out, and how well it will do.
-
Is this real? April 1 isn't for another two months!
If this is true, you can bet my VCR will be fired up. I also feel bad for ABC; this should be living proof that the reality wave has leveled.
The Inquisitive One
(Thank God.)
-
[quote name=\'TheInquisitiveOne\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 09:56 PM\'] If this is true, you can bet my VCR will be fired up. I also feel bad for ABC; this should be living proof that the reality wave has leveled.
The Inquisitive One
(Thank God.) [/quote]
The reality wave hasn't leveled; as the article stated, it was found that people still like the show and would like to see it back in prime-time again.
-
One only hopes that the alphabet network did learn their lesson from 2000, to only use the sweeps method. If they did, they probably would have still been on the air with no hiatus.
Let's pray they don't make any stupid changes to the format, I already am worried about additional lifelines. God help us. (And that's my honest opinion).
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 10:20 PM\']Let's pray they don't make any stupid changes to the format, I already am worried about additional lifelines. God help us. (And that's my honest opinion).[/quote]
Memo to ABC: if you use any of the lifelines Randy and I developed for Moronionaire, we deserve at least a mention. And if you add wedgies, I want a royalty. :-D
-
Oooo, the giddy feeling I'm getting from this reminds me of the first NY Times Article regarding Millionaire I read. I'm really curious as to what the new lifelines are. I know when the British version did live shows the ATA was Ask The Home Audience, where they would go to commercial as people called a number to select their answer (one # was for A, one for B, and so on). I also seem to recall one where you could trade in a question for a lifeline, but I may be confusing that with something else.
Does anyone know of any other lifelines used on other versions? Celador likes to keep things as uniform as possible with the show, so perhaps they will be borrowing lifeline ideas from other countries.
-
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 11:39 PM\'] [quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 10:20 PM\']Let's pray they don't make any stupid changes to the format, I already am worried about additional lifelines. God help us. (And that's my honest opinion).[/quote]
Memo to ABC: if you use any of the lifelines Randy and I developed for Moronionaire, we deserve at least a mention. And if you add wedgies, I want a royalty. :-D [/quote]
Bah, Wedgies have already been done. See SNL's "Wedgie Fever!" and you'll never look at the state of Oklahoma the same again.
As for the additional lifelines, hey, it sounds cool and it sets it apart from the daily millionaire. I'm excited to see what they have cooked up. And Regis is back!
-
Very exciting news indeed and I like the 3 extra lifelines after the second plateau. From my understanding of the article they are increasing all of the current dollar values ten fold. So the new tree would look like this:
$10 Million
$5 Million
$2.5 Million
$1.25 Million
$640,000
$320,000 Plateau
$160,000
$80,000
$40,000
$20,000
$10,000 Plateau
$5,000
$3,000
$2,000
$1,000
Tim :-)
-
[quote name=\'Little Big Brother\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 12:39 AM\'] Does anyone know of any other lifelines used on other versions? Celador likes to keep things as uniform as possible with the show, so perhaps they will be borrowing lifeline ideas from other countries. [/quote]
The recent British live version added the lifeline of "get rid of the current question for a new one". They could use that one and maybe another PAF or 50/50.
Tim :-)
-
[quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 11:20 PM\'] Very exciting news indeed and I like the 3 extra lifelines after the second plateau. From my understanding of the article they are increasing all of the current dollar values ten fold. So the new tree would look like this:
$10 Million
$5 Million
$2.5 Million
$1.25 Million
$640,000
$320,000 Plateau
$160,000
$80,000
$40,000
$20,000
$10,000 Plateau
$5,000
$3,000
$2,000
$1,000
Tim :-) [/quote]
Wow, that means double the lifelines, and 10 times the cash from regular Millionaire!
I also hope that the remaining $0 Winners from the Primetime show will be allowed to play on this version, so that they can go from ZERO to TEN MILLION!
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:04 AM\'] I also hope that the remaining $0 Winners from the Primetime show will be allowed to play on this version, so that they can go from ZERO to TEN MILLION! [/quote]
So they can have a chance to possibly bomb again with even more money on the line? Oh puhleeze. Time for some fresh contestants rather than bringing some back from the past that has so miserably failed. (Llama, anyone?)
The point of the show is to see real people win, not to see already failed contestants get a second chance at so-called "glory".
-
This sounds interesting....But I'd be disapointed if the ratings bomb (which I doubt) and it doesn't ever happen again.
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:04 AM\'] [quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 11:20 PM\'] Very exciting news indeed and I like the 3 extra lifelines after the second plateau. From my understanding of the article they are increasing all of the current dollar values ten fold. So the new tree would look like this:
$10 Million
$5 Million
$2.5 Million
$1.25 Million
$640,000
$320,000 Plateau
$160,000
$80,000
$40,000
$20,000
$10,000 Plateau
$5,000
$3,000
$2,000
$1,000
Tim :-) [/quote]
Wow, that means double the lifelines, and 10 times the cash from regular Millionaire!
I also hope that the remaining $0 Winners from the Primetime show will be allowed to play on this version, so that they can go from ZERO to TEN MILLION! [/quote]
My apologies if this has been mentioned already and I skimmed over it w/o catching it, but I seriously, SERIOUSLY doubt we'll see anyone win the $10M. Notice in the article that the only safe haven is the 5th question, now worth $10,000. Any miss above that level, and the player is back down to $10,000, even if s/he passes the $320,000 question, and that's taking the extra lifelines into account.
Still, I'll be right there on my feet applauding as hard as I can if someone does manage to take it all the way.
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:15 AM\'] [quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:04 AM\'] I also hope that the remaining $0 Winners from the Primetime show will be allowed to play on this version, so that they can go from ZERO to TEN MILLION! [/quote]
So they can have a chance to possibly bomb again with even more money on the line? Oh puhleeze. Time for some fresh contestants rather than bringing some back from the past that has so miserably failed. (Llama, anyone?)
The point of the show is to see real people win, not to see already failed contestants get a second chance at so-called "glory". [/quote]
I agree -- once you've had a chance in the Hot Seat, that should be it, for good. The llama special from the series run in '01 was neat to do once, but it shouldn't ever become a routine event. Then again, I remember the championships series where none of the millionaires repeated, and at least one (Dan Blonsky, IIRC), missed a middle tier question and left with only $1,000.
-
[quote name=\'Little Big Brother\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 11:39 PM\'] I also seem to recall one where you could trade in a question for a lifeline, but I may be confusing that with something else.
Does anyone know of any other lifelines used on other versions? Celador likes to keep things as uniform as possible with the show, so perhaps they will be borrowing lifeline ideas from other countries. [/quote]
I seem to recall reading that in the pilot, or something, that if you answered an upper-tier question correctly, you got a lifeline back.
-
I'm all for a new Millionaire. The biggest problem is going to be getting through more than one contestant a show. (On Meredith's millionaire, they are lucky if they get 2 contestants a show)
However, these changes are a positive thing that ABC realises they need to put a decent format on the air to differentiate it from Meredith's version, as well as the fact that bringing Regis back will help ABC mroe than they know.
Of course, remember we all were like WTF when they put Meredith on the syndie version, so this is definately news.
They're going to need a huge prize budget if they want to really pull this off because offering $10 million will have to be next to impossible to win (I say bring the people who won the million back to try for the $10 million, that would be fun)
-
[quote name=\'Terry K\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 03:38 AM\'] They're going to need a huge prize budget if they want to really pull this off because offering $10 million will have to be next to impossible to win (I say bring the people who won the million back to try for the $10 million, that would be fun) [/quote]
That'd mean less time for me.
But if they keep the material at the level it is, or just turn up the difficulty level slightly, it should be interesting to see how people fare with the middle questions. Still, getting the first five and escaping with $10K ain't too bad. That's like a good second place on WOF.
-
[quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 10:20 PM\'] Let's pray they don't make any stupid changes to the format, I already am worried about additional lifelines. God help us. [/quote]
Bah. I say "change away". Original format Millionaire is passe and slow to watch. if they can jazz it up in a way to make the audiences respond - short of unneccessary sex, violence or gross-out factors - then I say "go for it, ABC."
-
[quote name=\'Terry K\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 03:38 AM\'] (I say bring the people who won the million back to try for the $10 million, that would be fun)[/quote]
Since the questions on the syndie version seemed harder in general than the original primetime show, if you bring anyone back - bring back the contestants from the syndie show. They probably deserve it more.
But is the Fastest Finger returning or not?
-
[quote name=\'ChrisLambert!\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:43 AM\'] [quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Jan 25 2004, 10:20 PM\'] Let's pray they don't make any stupid changes to the format, I already am worried about additional lifelines. God help us. [/quote]
Bah. I say "change away". Original format Millionaire is passe and slow to watch. if they can jazz it up in a way to make the audiences respond - short of unneccessary sex, violence or gross-out factors - then I say "go for it, ABC." [/quote]
I agree 100%. ABC wants to seperate this version from the syndicated with more than just the host. I think a bit of a change in the structure will help bring back some of that original excitement.
Of course the old phone game would also be great to see come back, but I am not seeing that happening. I do see the fastest finger returning and possibly ABC paying the contestant's way like the old days.
Tim :-)
-
[quote name=\'wasabe\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 08:40 AM\'] [quote name=\'Terry K\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 03:38 AM\'] (I say bring the people who won the million back to try for the $10 million, that would be fun)[/quote]
Since the questions on the syndie version seemed harder in general than the original primetime show, if you bring anyone back - bring back the contestants from the syndie show. They probably deserve it more.
But is the Fastest Finger returning or not? [/quote]
There are still people in the syndicated contestant pool. Since taping has ended for this season on the syndicated show, they may tap into that contestant database.
They have not said anything yet about the Fastest Finger. I would expect it to return, but who knows.
Tim :-)
-
[quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:44 AM\']
There are still people in the syndicated contestant pool. Since taping has ended for this season on the syndicated show, they may tap into that contestant database.
[/quote]
I guess what I was saying was that if in fact they were to bring people back, it might be interesting for them to do kind of what Survivior is doing with an "all-star" cast. Meaning that favorite personalities from past shows could be brought back on to go for the super-jackpot. And as it seemed that the syndie show, was in general harder, those people might deserve first crack at it.
Just meaningless speculation.
-
[quote name=\'wasabe\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 08:50 AM\'] [quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:44 AM\']
There are still people in the syndicated contestant pool. Since taping has ended for this season on the syndicated show, they may tap into that contestant database.
[/quote]
I guess what I was saying was that if in fact they were to bring people back, it might be interesting for them to do kind of what Survivior is doing with an "all-star" cast. Meaning that favorite personalities from past shows could be brought back on to go for the super-jackpot. And as it seemed that the syndie show, was in general harder, those people might deserve first crack at it.
Just meaningless speculation. [/quote]
Personally, I would like to see new people get a shot at the hotseat. I was on the show, I had my chance. I would like others to experience the same elation of being on Millionaire that I had.
Keep the All-Stars on Survivor. For Millionaire, fresh faces should be on the menu with a fresher format.
Tim :-)
-
I"m all for bringing it back - but if this is true about $10 million prize I don't like it. This whole thing about having multi-million dollar prizes all the time has gotten out of hand.
-
[quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 12:23 AM\'] The recent British live version added the lifeline of "get rid of the current question for a new one". They could use that one and maybe another PAF or 50/50.
[/quote]
I don't know how stupid it sounds but how about an "ask somebody on the street" lifeline? (ask somebody walking by the studio outside and see if they know it). I can't see their allowing a second 50/50 (since you could use both on the same question and get a free answer), but another PAF might work ("do I go with what my wife said or what my brother said?")
-
[quote name=\'catnap1972\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:30 AM\'] [quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 12:23 AM\'] The recent British live version added the lifeline of "get rid of the current question for a new one". They could use that one and maybe another PAF or 50/50.
[/quote]
I don't know how stupid it sounds but how about an "ask somebody on the street" lifeline? (ask somebody walking by the studio outside and see if they know it). I can't see their allowing a second 50/50 (since you could use both on the same question and get a free answer), but another PAF might work ("do I go with what my wife said or what my brother said?") [/quote]
Another idea would be to allow the contestant to get the advice of whomever is in the "relationship seat" for one question(though it would be a knockoff of the Second Chance from Povich 21)
If this is a hit again, perhaps WInkler and Levitt would consider resurrecting the cancelled H2 in primetime for CBS or NBC. Get Bergeron to host if he wanted to(or if they really wanted to be brave, convince Uncle Peter to come back for a weekly primetime show), play the games to time a la the 1968 primetime shows, first two games are secret square games, and have stakes similar to what they were on the syndicated show last season, or maybe a shade above that.
-
[quote name=\'catnap1972\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:30 AM\'] I don't know how stupid it sounds but how about an "ask somebody on the street" lifeline? [/quote]
"Hmm. I think I wanna use a lifeline, Reeg."
"Okay! Which one?"
"The What About That Guy? lifeline. I'd like to ask that homeless gentleman pissing in the gutter in that alley, there."
"Okay! Let's go down to the street! Sir! Sir, would you mind tucking that away? Good. This is Regis Philbin from Who! Wants To Be! A Millionaire! We have a question for you! Are you ready?"
"<burp>"
"Um, very good! Here it is...."
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:05 AM\'] I"m all for bringing it back - but if this is true about $10 million prize I don't like it. This whole thing about having multi-million dollar prizes all the time has gotten out of hand. [/quote]
I agree. I know shows like Greed and 21 taught us that $1,000,000 is now worthless*, but a $10 mil prize is just a bit too much, and seems like a severe case of Mo Money Syndrome. I know ABC needs ratings, but this seems a little desperate. (For the record, I hated the escalating jackpot, it made me feel as if Millionaire sold out)
*I'd still take $1 million. :-P
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 11:55 AM\'] "The What About That Guy? lifeline. I'd like to ask that homeless gentleman pissing in the gutter in that alley, there."
[/quote]
Given how obscure a $10 million question would be, you might be selling the pissing homeless guy short. Better chance of finding a Moroccan poetry expert under a bridge than in an audience at ABC.
It seems like the game is out of whack when winning $360,000 (or a million and a quarter, for that matter) would be a let down. Million dollar prizes are hardly commonplace. "Survivor" involves a 13-week elimination contest where you're gone from home, living in dirt for several months. Hell, on "Fear Factor," they're eating goat testicles for a mere $50,000.
Additional lifelines sound cool, though.
-
Are they running it at 9pm or 8pm? This could confuse some of the people who dont understand that the shows on GSN are RERUNS as opposed to NEW SHOWS. You'd be suprised how many fools in the GSN interactive wonder why Dharma and Greg didn't come on at 9pm :-)
They should try to keep the new and old one from running against each other since GSN has a cult following of the reruns. I am thinking that the reason we are gonna see it on ABC is the renewed popularity of the yr. 2000 eps. on GSN.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 11:55 AM\'] [quote name=\'catnap1972\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:30 AM\'] I don't know how stupid it sounds but how about an "ask somebody on the street" lifeline? [/quote]
"Hmm. I think I wanna use a lifeline, Reeg."
"Okay! Which one?"
"The What About That Guy? lifeline. I'd like to ask that homeless gentleman pissing in the gutter in that alley, there."
"Okay! Let's go down to the street! Sir! Sir, would you mind tucking that away? Good. This is Regis Philbin from Who! Wants To Be! A Millionaire! We have a question for you! Are you ready?"
"<burp>"
"Um, very good! Here it is...." [/quote]
LMAO @ that one. You should try out for stand comedy somewhere clemon79.
-
The New York Times article (all we have to go on at this point) is a little confusing about the structure of Super Millionaire, but it did say:
[A]ll the dollar figures will be expanded tenfold. Players will eventually be asked questions worth $2.5 million, then $5 million and ultimately $10 million.
So while we purists can bemoan the Mo' Money Syndrome all we want, this makes it look like it's going to come down to some poor schlub RISKING multi-millions to win multi-millions more. Unless you knew an answer cold, I'm not sure how many people woud be willing to risk that kind of money, even with a VERY comfortable $320,000 cushion to land on.
-
[quote name=\'passwordplus\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 11:39 AM\'] Are they running it at 9pm or 8pm? This could confuse some of the people who dont understand that the shows on GSN are RERUNS as opposed to NEW SHOWS. You'd be suprised how many fools in the GSN interactive wonder why Dharma and Greg didn't come on at 9pm :-)
They should try to keep the new and old one from running against each other since GSN has a cult following of the reruns. I am thinking that the reason we are gonna see it on ABC is the renewed popularity of the yr. 2000 eps. on GSN. [/quote]
The NYT article states that it will air 2/22/04 (Sunday) at 9PM ET, then the remaining shows that week (Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday) will air at 10PM ET.
I'm a little surprised they'd displace 20/20 for WWTBAM, but c'est la vie.
And, no, I'm not surprised how many GSN interactive players wonder why DHARMA & GREG isn't on next (if the boards are any indication--some members excepted).
Doug
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 12:18 PM\'] [quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:05 AM\'] I"m all for bringing it back - but if this is true about $10 million prize I don't like it. This whole thing about having multi-million dollar prizes all the time has gotten out of hand. [/quote]
I agree. I know shows like Greed and 21 taught us that $1,000,000 is now worthless*, but a $10 mil prize is just a bit too much, and seems like a severe case of Mo Money Syndrome. I know ABC needs ratings, but this seems a little desperate. (For the record, I hated the escalating jackpot, it made me feel as if Millionaire sold out)
*I'd still take $1 million. :-P [/quote]
And I, for the record, would take the $10 mil over the $1 mil.
Look, I know there's a basic feeling that big prizes are inherently bad, but I don't share that. Sure, some shows can't be played for $10 million (Password, Match Game, Body Language), but WWTBAM is a show that can benefit from more questions and more money, IMO. C'mon...imagine the suspense that can be built on those higher tier questions.
So, don't hate the game just because of the prize. Judge the game on the game itself...and I think there might be something to adding lifelines and extending the game.
-
[quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:03 PM\'] I'm a little surprised they'd displace 20/20 for WWTBAM, but c'est la vie. [/quote]
Barbara plans to leave 20/20 this fall anyway, so maybe this is preparation? Anyway, I'm kind of indifferent here. Will we actually see a $10M question? Don't bank of it. Greed had lots of players more content to leave with $200K than go for $2M. But I see one bit of scheduling shrewdness with placing all Super Millionaire shows at 10pm: since Fox does not program at that hour, they can't drop an extra American Idol or Simple Life in to face SM. Ratingswise, Thursday will be the night of keep an eye on the most, as SM will go against ER and Without a Trace (note that SM will not oppose Law & Order on Wednesday).
-
[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:53 PM\'] But I see one bit of scheduling shrewdness with placing all Super Millionaire shows at 10pm: since Fox does not program at that hour, they can't drop an extra American Idol or Simple Life in to face SM. [/quote]
Nor mini-nets UPN or WB.
I think the 10:00 scheduling is inspired.
Of course, we'll never hear the end of "How I Saved The Network .... Again!"
-
Perhaps one of the new lifelines would be a "wildcard" IE: use this to be what ever of the other lifelines you would like it to be. Also on 2 50:50s on a question: you would only be able to eliminate 2 answers ever from a question otherwise it isn't a 50:50 shot :-)
-Joe Kavanagh
I can't wait to see this :-)
-
[quote name=\'cyberjoek\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 02:42 PM\']I can't wait to see this :-)[/quote]
Me neither. Personally, I'm just hoping that ABC has learned not to spoil any big wins before they air this time....if we get any big wins at all, of course.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:02 PM\'] Super Millionaire [/quote]
Hang on just a second....did you invent that term or did the article use it and I missed it? Because calling it "Super Millionaire" just doesn't work, IMO. WWTBAM..nothing more, nothing less.
-
Regarding the scheduling...
As a guy who works for an ABC affiliate who knows that we desperately need help from the network to goose the 11pm newscast ratings... I commend ABC for FINALLY listening to the affiliates and programming Millionaire in the 10pm slot...
However, one of the successes of Millionaire the first time around was due to the fact that it was a show that families could watch and play together...Davies even said that having the lower tier questions did great wonders for children's self esteem , as they played the game on the couch with loved ones...
Having Super Millionaire would be great for the 10pm slot, but I can't imagine the ratings being as strong as an 8pm show....
Hey, it's better than I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here 2.
Matt (who predicts right now that we will NOT even see a question worth $5 Million, let alone get to the $10 Million tier, if the risk is to fall all the way back to 10 Grand)
-
[quote name=\'tommycharles\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 03:41 PM\'][quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:02 PM\'] Super Millionaire [/quote]
Hang on just a second....did you invent that term or did the article use it and I missed it? Because calling it "Super Millionaire" just doesn't work, IMO. WWTBAM..nothing more, nothing less.[/quote]
That's how they're already referring to it on the abc.com website.
-
I have GOT to get tickets for this. :-)
-
Great news!!
Aren't there still some primetime shows from the original run that never got aired?
-
[quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 12:42 AM\'] [quote name=\'NicholasM79\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:15 AM\'] [quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:04 AM\'] I also hope that the remaining $0 Winners from the Primetime show will be allowed to play on this version, so that they can go from ZERO to TEN MILLION! [/quote]
So they can have a chance to possibly bomb again with even more money on the line? Oh puhleeze. Time for some fresh contestants rather than bringing some back from the past that has so miserably failed. (Llama, anyone?)
The point of the show is to see real people win, not to see already failed contestants get a second chance at so-called "glory". [/quote]
I agree -- once you've had a chance in the Hot Seat, that should be it, for good. The llama special from the series run in '01 was neat to do once, but it shouldn't ever become a routine event. Then again, I remember the championships series where none of the millionaires repeated, and at least one (Dan Blonsky, IIRC), missed a middle tier question and left with only $1,000. [/quote]
Well, look at the first season on the Syndie show: They got EVERY last Llama to come back and win something. And EVERY LAST one of those Llamas won some money.
In the primetime version's first 2 seasons, There were 12 Llamas (One of them female), and only 5 of them made it to the hot seat.
On each of these Llama-Fests, the most money ever won by an Ex-Llama was $250,000.
So, see, some of the Llamas did change a bit.
-
[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 12:53 PM\'] [quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:03 PM\'] I'm a little surprised they'd displace 20/20 for WWTBAM, but c'est la vie. [/quote]
Barbara plans to leave 20/20 this fall anyway, so maybe this is preparation? Anyway, I'm kind of indifferent here. Will we actually see a $10M question? Don't bank of it. Greed had lots of players more content to leave with $200K than go for $2M. But I see one bit of scheduling shrewdness with placing all Super Millionaire shows at 10pm: since Fox does not program at that hour, they can't drop an extra American Idol or Simple Life in to face SM. Ratingswise, Thursday will be the night of keep an eye on the most, as SM will go against ER and Without a Trace (note that SM will not oppose Law & Order on Wednesday). [/quote]
Barbara Walters leaving 20/20? Hmm, that I didn't see coming.
-
I will wager that if you were able to split time into two separate continua and run two different versions of Millionaire:
1) This "Super Millionaire" format they're currently planning on going through with
and
2) Traditional "Millionaire" with 3 lifelines, the million dollar top prize, and a phone qualifying system that produces a lopsided number of schlubby white male contestants
... you would see the exact same reaction from the public. The changes the show is proposing will not wreck the show; they will merely distinguish it from the syndicated version. Funny how several of the same people dismissing the proposed changes out of hand this time are the same ones who were all over the idea (suggested here) of moveable milestones.
Either the American viewing audience is ready for primetime Millionaire again or it isn't.
-
Pardon me if these things were already clarified above or at some other time, but I have a few questions:
1) Does anyone know for sure if SuperMillionaire is going to use the Fastest Finger or not? I didn't see it mentioned in the article linked to at the start of this thread, but the Prof says it will have FF. (Although I think he only references the NYtimes article.)
2) Does anyone know how to become a contestant for this show? I went to ABC.com and they said the auditions are open, but the link they give only goes to the syndicated version and says the auditions are closed.
3) If they do use the Fastest Finger, does anyone know if that counts and an official "game show appearance" , as far as getting on other game shows go, if you don't actually make it into the hot seat?
Just wondering about these things.
-
Then again, I remember the championships series where none of the millionaires repeated, and at least one (Dan Blonsky, IIRC), missed a middle tier question and left with only $1,000.
As did Joe Trela, IIRC...and for those interested, GSN's currently up to the ToC in WWtBaM's run.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
There are still people in the syndicated contestant pool. Since taping has ended for this season on the syndicated show, they may tap into that contestant database.
I still say the phone game's the best way...brought in players who knew how to play the game and often left w/at least $32K.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...per_millionaire (http://\"http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=529&e=2&u=/ap/20040126/ap_en_tv/tv_super_millionaire\")
"The later start time may cost ABC a large family audience; one of the game's early appeals was as a show parents and children could watch together. "
Braun said the strength of ABC's current schedule is its comedies, leaving much room for improvement at 10 p.m. He was also concerned about competing with Fox's "American Idol" and NBC's "The Apprentice" if it was on earlier. "
-
QUOTE (tommycharles @ Jan 26 2004, 03:41 PM)
QUOTE (Matt Ottinger @ Jan 26 2004, 01:02 PM)
Super Millionaire
Hang on just a second....did you invent that term or did the article use it and I missed it? Because calling it "Super Millionaire" just doesn't work, IMO. WWTBAM..nothing more, nothing less.
Legally, they have to change the name of the show if the rules differ too much from the original, like Super Greed instead of Greed.
-
Legally, they have to change the name of the show if the rules differ too much from the original, like Super Greed instead of Greed.
Yes, I think we all fondly remember Super Snap Judgment.
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 06:55 PM\']http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...per_millionaire (http://\"http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=529&e=2&u=/ap/20040126/ap_en_tv/tv_super_millionaire\")
"The later start time may cost ABC a large family audience; one of the game's early appeals was as a show parents and children could watch together. "
Braun said the strength of ABC's current schedule is its comedies, leaving much room for improvement at 10 p.m. He was also concerned about competing with Fox's "American Idol" and NBC's "The Apprentice" if it was on earlier. "[/quote]
If they're going to be on for five nights, isn't it rather dumb to avoid every single popular show on the air? You can't just dodge every single show on TV that gets ratings in the hopes that yours are better... or can you?
IANATvExecutive, but wouldn't it be better to place it where your key audience will watch than to move it where they won't, simply in the interest of avoiding the other primetime juggernauts?
-
[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 06:48 PM\']
As did Joe Trela, IIRC...and for those interested, GSN's currently up to the ToC in WWtBaM's run.
[/quote]
They're showing the TofC on weekends only.
-
There's a German quiz remotely like Millionaire but for much less called "Das Quiz," and as the stakes increase, the *amount of possible answer choices* increases as well. This loses its luster around the 10th question on the show, when contestants have 11 answers to choose from (Clinton was the first president of the U.S.?) but might be something they've added to this version.
"Computer, please take away 3 wrong answers, leaving the right answer and two wrong answers."
Also, on the scheduling, 10pm is actually a brilliant move. Everyone said that kids watched the show with their parents and America Came Together Around The TV And Created World Peace, but kids aren't buying cars or anything AT&T sells.
Maybe Super Millionaire contestants will be the 10 fastest times on the Fastest Finger from the regular Regis run. Hehe.
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 06:55 PM\']
"The later start time may cost ABC a large family audience; one of the game's early appeals was as a show parents and children could watch together. "
[/quote]
Perhaps ABC may consider/is considering re-airing the Millionaire episode on ABC Family on a different day at a more family-friendly time.
-
[quote name=\'cyberjoek\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 02:42 PM\'] Perhaps one of the new lifelines would be a "wildcard" IE: use this to be what ever of the other lifelines you would like it to be. Also on 2 50:50s on a question: you would only be able to eliminate 2 answers ever from a question otherwise it isn't a 50:50 shot :-)
[/quote]
Just as long as Millionaire doesn't pull a Fremantle and use a "Clip Chip" as one of the lifelines, ala the recent disaster formerly known as Card Sharks...
...Or a "'Live' Travel Trivia" question about the prior day's episode, like on Regis & Kelly.
-
Perhaps ABC may consider/is considering re-airing the Millionaire episode on ABC Family on a different day at a more family-friendly time.
If ABC Family can reair The Bachelor, they sure could reair Super Millionaire. If they did an XYZ or popup edition, they would be even better.
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 05:07 PM\'] Legally, they have to change the name of the show if the rules differ too much from the original, like Super Greed instead of Greed. [/quote]
Huh? Or else they infringe on the rights of.....themselves?
I think you need to brush up on your copyright law. :)
-
According to Steve Beverly, it is a FCC regulation. I will try and find it.
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:21 PM\'] According to Steve Beverly, it is a FCC regulation. I will try and find it. [/quote]
Oh, well, yes, The Perfesser, of course, how could I have doubted you even for a second?
Two words: Card Sharks. Not even freakin' CLOSE.
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 10:21 PM\'] According to Steve Beverly [/quote]
I think that will possibly make Chris doubt you more. ;-)
-
http://www.tvgameshows.net/faqjune.htm (http://\"http://www.tvgameshows.net/faqjune.htm\")
"No, though the Paschal English elimination, which we commented on in a column, angered an awful lot of viewers and not just in his home regions of Atlanta and Columbus. Including the locale in the title of each Survivor game after the original makes each one a different program under FCC regulations. So, even if I or other viewers don't like it, Mark Burnett is free to alter his rules each time, as long as the show's title is changed. This was why when Greed changed its plateau structure for the May 2000 sweeps to eliminate the $500,000 level and add a $4 million peak, the show's title was temporarily changed to Super Greed. The change in the prize alignment potentially did alter player decision strategies."
-
[quote name=\'Speedy G\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 08:11 PM\'] If they're going to be on for five nights, isn't it rather dumb to avoid every single popular show on the air? You can't just dodge every single show on TV that gets ratings in the hopes that yours are better... or can you?
[/quote]
Part of getting ratings is watching out for other shows that might draw an audience similar to yours. And it's not as though they're hopscotching around the grids to avoid every popular show. They have good reasons for airing at 10pm, and AMONG those reasons is the fact that other popular reality shows air earlier in the evening. No big deal really. It's smart scheduling, and as Weather Matt said, it could significantly help the local affiliates' 11pm newscasts.
-
[quote name=\'Sues Z\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 05:49 PM\'] Aren't there still some primetime shows from the original run that never got aired? [/quote]
No, all of the original shows were aired.
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:28 PM\'] http://www.tvgameshows.net/faqjune.htm (http://\"http://www.tvgameshows.net/faqjune.htm\")
"No, though the Paschal English elimination, which we commented on in a column, angered an awful lot of viewers and not just in his home regions of Atlanta and Columbus. Including the locale in the title of each Survivor game after the original makes each one a different program under FCC regulations. So, even if I or other viewers don't like it, Mark Burnett is free to alter his rules each time, as long as the show's title is changed. This was why when Greed changed its plateau structure for the May 2000 sweeps to eliminate the $500,000 level and add a $4 million peak, the show's title was temporarily changed to Super Greed. The change in the prize alignment potentially did alter player decision strategies." [/quote]
Also evidence by them changing "Greed" to "Greed: The Series" after capping the top prize at $2 million, versus adding $50,000 every round.
-
[quote name=\'pyrawoman\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:09 PM\'] Pardon me if these things were already clarified above or at some other time, but I have a few questions:
1) Does anyone know for sure if SuperMillionaire is going to use the Fastest Finger or not? I didn't see it mentioned in the article linked to at the start of this thread, but the Prof says it will have FF. (Although I think he only references the NYtimes article.)
2) Does anyone know how to become a contestant for this show? I went to ABC.com and they said the auditions are open, but the link they give only goes to the syndicated version and says the auditions are closed.
3) If they do use the Fastest Finger, does anyone know if that counts and an official "game show appearance" , as far as getting on other game shows go, if you don't actually make it into the hot seat?
Just wondering about these things. [/quote]
1) Yes, they are using the Fastest Finger. The official press release says so.
2) We do not know yet.
3) It will probably be looked at as it was in the ol' prime time days. For Millionaire purposes, it only counted if you make the hotseat. But, it also depends on each individual show. I think other shows may consider an ROF appearance a Game Show appearance. I dunno.
-
[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:54 PM\']
There are still people in the syndicated contestant pool. Since taping has ended for this season on the syndicated show, they may tap into that contestant database.
I still say the phone game's the best way...brought in players who knew how to play the game and often left w/at least $32K.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby") [/quote]
I still say that argument is ridiculous. How is a three round set of questions more superior then a 30 question test? That argument never made any sense to me.
Tim :-)
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 10:28 PM\'] Including the locale in the title of each Survivor game after the original makes each one a different program under FCC regulations. So, even if I or other viewers don't like it, Mark Burnett is free to alter his rules each time, as long as the show's title is changed. This was why when Greed changed its plateau structure for the May 2000 sweeps to eliminate the $500,000 level and add a $4 million peak, the show's title was temporarily changed to Super Greed. The change in the prize alignment potentially did alter player decision strategies. [/quote]
I believe this is more speculation and extrapolation on Steve's part than it is about any actual FCC rule. Wheel of Fortune makes changes to the features of its game all the time. Hollywood Squares had a different bonus game just about every season. TPIR adds new games every year. Jeopardy doubled its dollar values. None of these shows had to change their names.
Survivor WANTS you to think of every season as a different series, so adding the location to the title is a part of marketing the show. It might very well be accurate to say that this makes it a new series according to the FCC, but Burnett would have been free to make changes to his show regardless.
Likewise, ABC will call this super-powered prime time show Super Millionaire simply to distinguish itself from the syndicated version, or for that matter the GSN reruns of the original.
-
Forgive me, I should know better, or shows don't want to follow rules, I don't know. The FCC is more interested in network cursing than game shows right now anyhow.
-
[quote name=\'TimK2003\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 08:58 PM\']Perhaps one of the new lifelines would be a "wildcard" IE: use this to be what ever of the other lifelines you would like it to be. Also on 2 50:50s on a question: you would only be able to eliminate 2 answers ever from a question otherwise it isn't a 50:50 shot :-)
[/quote]
I want to see a "Search the Net" lifeline. Give them 30 seconds with
"our friends at Google" and show us the screen as they search.
-
[quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 10:38 PM\'] [quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:54 PM\']
I still say the phone game's the best way...brought in players who knew how to play the game and often left w/at least $32K.[/quote]
I still say that is ridiculous. How is a three round set of questions more superior then a 30 question test? That argument never made any sense to me. [/quote]
My biggest problem with the syndicated show is that it's painfully obvious that they're NOT selecting the people who do the best on their 30-question test. If they were, they'd regularly be getting Jeopardy-caliber contestants and it only takes watching for a couple of days to see that this simply isn't the case.
So while I agree with your intuitive point -- a 30-question test ought to be better than a 3-question test -- the fact is that, for whatever reason, the caliber of game play was significantly better under the original rules than it has been with the syndicated show.
-
[quote name=\'petek66\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 10:43 PM\'] [quote name=\'TimK2003\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 08:58 PM\']Perhaps one of the new lifelines would be a "wildcard" IE: use this to be what ever of the other lifelines you would like it to be. Also on 2 50:50s on a question: you would only be able to eliminate 2 answers ever from a question otherwise it isn't a 50:50 shot :-)
[/quote]
I want to see a "Search the Net" lifeline. Give them 30 seconds with
"our friends at Google" and show us the screen as they search. [/quote]
Of course, I don't think a Google search will help them much on questions about what game show hosts have accidents in their pants or that classic game show "Hat Putato." :-P
ObGameShow: I'll go to the TTD90 room now.
-
[quote name=\'petek66\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:43 PM\'] I want to see a "Search the Net" lifeline. Give them 30 seconds with
"our friends at Google" and show us the screen as they search. [/quote]
And this is different from how a smart player works Phone-A-Friend how?
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:24 PM\'] Two words: Card Sharks. Not even freakin' CLOSE. [/quote]
That $&(*#! show was "Card Sharks" ?!? I didn't even recognize it as such. All it had going for it was a cool logo that's on the box game. Notice the box game follows the original format that worked not once but twice on pretty long network runs each occasion.
-
[quote name=\'Timsterino\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:32 PM\'] [quote name=\'Sues Z\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 05:49 PM\'] Aren't there still some primetime shows from the original run that never got aired? [/quote]
No, all of the original shows were aired. [/quote]
It's Winning Lines in 2000 and Let's Make A Deal in 2003 which didn't get all of their taped episodes televised, despite lies by the networks claiming they'd be shown.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 11:05 PM\'] [quote name=\'petek66\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:43 PM\'] I want to see a "Search the Net" lifeline. Give them 30 seconds with
"our friends at Google" and show us the screen as they search. [/quote]
And this is different from how a smart player works Phone-A-Friend how? [/quote]
I think his point is that the player in the Hot Seat would do the Googling himself, and we'd see the player's choice of search terms and the results the player got.
Being able to control your own Googling probably would be an advantage over yelling terms to a friend, hoping he makes the right choices and keeping up the pretense that it's just a smart buddy on the other end of the phone, all in thirty seconds.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 12:18 PM\'] I agree. I know shows like Greed and 21 taught us that $1,000,000 is now worthless*, but a $10 mil prize is just a bit too much, and seems like a severe case of Mo Money Syndrome. I know ABC needs ratings, but this seems a little desperate. (For the record, I hated the escalating jackpot, it made me feel as if Millionaire sold out)
*I'd still take $1 million. :-P [/quote]
Um, Chris Lemon, you remember the spat we once had about 'mo money syndrome'? I still stand by playing for $25,000 grand on a reincarnation of Password Plus, but I can DEFINITELY concede on this $10 million gig. Way too damn much money. As has been said before, Chuck offered the $4 millon question on Super Greed, and I remember the way he did it -- his voice practically said "You gotta be kidding me if you want to play this question!"
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:24 PM\'] [quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:21 PM\'] According to Steve Beverly, it is a FCC regulation. I will try and find it. [/quote]
Oh, well, yes, The Perfesser, of course, how could I have doubted you even for a second?
Two words: Card Sharks. Not even freakin' CLOSE. [/quote]
Three more words: Play the Percentages.
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:28 PM\']http://www.tvgameshows.net/faqjune.htm (http://\"http://www.tvgameshows.net/faqjune.htm\")
"No, though the Paschal English elimination, which we commented on in a column, angered an awful lot of viewers and not just in his home regions of Atlanta and Columbus. Including the locale in the title of each Survivor game after the original makes each one a different program under FCC regulations. So, even if I or other viewers don't like it, Mark Burnett is free to alter his rules each time, as long as the show's title is changed. This was why when Greed changed its plateau structure for the May 2000 sweeps to eliminate the $500,000 level and add a $4 million peak, the show's title was temporarily changed to Super Greed. The change in the prize alignment potentially did alter player decision strategies."[/quote]
Let's see... Play the Percentages, High Rollers (1974-76), Tattletales, and Dream House all changed the rules during their runs, and none had to undergo a name change. And let's not forget how many times The Joker's Wild violated "FCC regulations" in its first few weeks alone.
Eric, you did not cite the FCC regulation... you cited the Perfesser's claim that it's an FCC regulation. That's not the same thing. Try again.
-
I'm glad ABC gave game show fans hope for 2004!
They're calling it Super Millionaire. Guess they wanted to skip Millionaire + ala Pac-Man & Password
(Pac-Man, Pac-Man Plus, Super Pac-Man/Password, Password Plus, Super Password)
-
[quote name=\'GSWitch\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 08:31 PM\'] I'm glad ABC gave game show fans hope for 2004!
They're calling it Super Millionaire. Guess they wanted to skip Millionaire + ala Pac-Man & Password
(Pac-Man, Pac-Man Plus, Super Pac-Man/Password, Password Plus, Super Password) [/quote]
Off topic, but what the hell :)
EXCEPT: Midway did it in the other order...Super Pac-Man shipped BEFORE Pac-Man Plus did (both were 1982)
(This according to the History.dat file I have for MAME...and it's been pretty accurate so far... :))
-
Well at least The Reeg is getting the gig. Personally, I never did care for Meredith. She might be a good host for one of the new GSN shows, but not millionaire.
Wonder if they can get back the old 800# number? If so, GSN can stop putting the banner across it on the reruns(chuckle)
-
It has yet to premiere, so I'm gonna wait to pass judgement. I'm not too worried about the format getting screwed up to something bad, as this is Michael Davies bringing the nighttime show back, not Fremantle, obviously, judging by the payout structure (OK, so Feud, Whammy!, and TTTT 2000 turned out decent, but with what they did to MG '98 and CS 2001...).
-
OK, by what information I have gathered to this point is that this new incarnation is going to have updated graphics and updated music. Regarding those two items, what is so wrong with what was being used before? I mean, sure I can understand increasing the payouts (which I think are way too lofty), and altering title (as previously mentioned)... but I don't see the point of why these need to be changed. And I know people are going to bash me over the head with, "Oh trust Mr. Davies, he knows what he's doing"... but that still dosen't mean that everything the man does turns to gold upon first press of said ideas.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 10:41 PM\'] [quote name=\'GSWitch\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 08:31 PM\'] I'm glad ABC gave game show fans hope for 2004!
They're calling it Super Millionaire. Guess they wanted to skip Millionaire + ala Pac-Man & Password
(Pac-Man, Pac-Man Plus, Super Pac-Man/Password, Password Plus, Super Password) [/quote]
Off topic, but what the hell :)
EXCEPT: Midway did it in the other order...Super Pac-Man shipped BEFORE Pac-Man Plus did (both were 1982)
(This according to the History.dat file I have for MAME...and it's been pretty accurate so far... :)) [/quote]
I have a little question that you may or may not be able to answer:
Was the Pac-Man arcade game ever widely released? Even since childhood, I've always seen MS. Pac-Man, no Super, no regular, always the blue and yellow Ms. Pac-Man machine (even though you probably only see those nowadays in laundromats or pizza parlors). Matter of fact, I didn't even know there *was* a regular Pac-Man until I saw "Fast Times at Ridgemont High."
ObGameShow: $10 million is still too damn much for WWTBAM, so there! ;-)
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 11:32 PM\'] Was the Pac-Man arcade game ever widely released?. Matter of fact, I didn't even know there *was* a regular Pac-Man until I saw "Fast Times at Ridgemont High."
[/quote]
According to a couple sites I found, over 300,000 machines were released worldwide. So I'd say yes.
Even since childhood, I've always seen MS. Pac-Man, no Super, no regular, always the blue and yellow Ms. Pac-Man machine (even though you probably only see those nowadays in laundromats or pizza parlors)
Remember that Ms Pac Man came out as a conversion kit, in addition to being a standalone game. So a lot of those Pac Man machines were, well, gelded. :) So that might be why you don't see so many around today...they all had a sex change! :)
-
By chance, was there a "Pac Man All-Stars"?
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 02:13 AM\']By chance, was there a "Pac Man All-Stars"?[/quote]
No, according to the "Killer List of Videogames" site:
Killer List of Videogames (http://\"http://www.klov.com\")
-
[quote name=\'Robair\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 05:04 AM\'] [quote name=\'Terry K\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 03:38 AM\'] They're going to need a huge prize budget if they want to really pull this off because offering $10 million will have to be next to impossible to win (I say bring the people who won the million back to try for the $10 million, that would be fun) [/quote]
That'd mean less time for me.
But if they keep the material at the level it is, or just turn up the difficulty level slightly, it should be interesting to see how people fare with the middle questions. Still, getting the first five and escaping with $10K ain't too bad. That's like a good second place on WOF. [/quote]
On Meredith's WWTBAM, the 32 and 64k questions are incredibly hard, IMHO. Of course, I've been seeing few contestants get that far without using up all their lifelines.
-
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 10:20 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:24 PM\'] [quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 07:21 PM\'] According to Steve Beverly, it is a FCC regulation. I will try and find it. [/quote]
Oh, well, yes, The Perfesser, of course, how could I have doubted you even for a second?
Two words: Card Sharks. Not even freakin' CLOSE. [/quote]
Three more words: Play the Percentages. [/quote]
Oh, dear Lord. The changes made to those two shows were excremental.
-
[quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 10:10 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 12:18 PM\'] I agree. I know shows like Greed and 21 taught us that $1,000,000 is now worthless*, but a $10 mil prize is just a bit too much, and seems like a severe case of Mo Money Syndrome. I know ABC needs ratings, but this seems a little desperate. (For the record, I hated the escalating jackpot, it made me feel as if Millionaire sold out)
*I'd still take $1 million. :-P [/quote]
Um, Chris Lemon, you remember the spat we once had about 'mo money syndrome'? I still stand by playing for $25,000 grand on a reincarnation of Password Plus, [/quote]
$25,000 GRAND? If I'm reading that right, wouldn't that be two and one half times what the new ABC Millionaire is going to offer? Are you trying to tell us that you would stand by playing for $25 MILLION on a Password Plus remake (now that would be WAY too much for THAT show) but only $10 million is too much for Millionaire? In a way, you're contradicting yourself! You can't POSSIBLY be serious!
-
[quote name=\'Thad Dixon\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 09:21 AM\'] [quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 10:10 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 12:18 PM\'] I agree. I know shows like Greed and 21 taught us that $1,000,000 is now worthless*, but a $10 mil prize is just a bit too much, and seems like a severe case of Mo Money Syndrome. I know ABC needs ratings, but this seems a little desperate. (For the record, I hated the escalating jackpot, it made me feel as if Millionaire sold out)
*I'd still take $1 million. :-P [/quote]
Um, Chris Lemon, you remember the spat we once had about 'mo money syndrome'? I still stand by playing for $25,000 grand on a reincarnation of Password Plus, [/quote]
$25,000 GRAND? If I'm reading that right, wouldn't that be two and one half times what the new ABC Millionaire is going to offer? Are you trying to tell us that you would stand by playing for $25 MILLION on a Password Plus remake (now that would be WAY too much for THAT show) but only $10 million is too much for Millionaire? In a way, you're contradicting yourself! You can't POSSIBLY be serious! [/quote]
Methinks you're taking nitpicking to a whole new level.
Doug
-
OK, by what information I have gathered to this point is that this new incarnation is going to have updated graphics and updated music. Regarding those two items, what is so wrong with what was being used before? I mean, sure I can understand increasing the payouts (which I think are way too lofty), and altering title (as previously mentioned)... but I don't see the point of why these need to be changed. And I know people are going to bash me over the head with, "Oh trust Mr. Davies, he knows what he's doing"... but that still dosen't mean that everything the man does turns to gold upon first press of said ideas.
Well, he might turn the color scheme into a gold motif (that's what I've been picturing anyway). If anything, I'm hoping the new look will take a few steps away from the industrial look the original show and almost every single game show since then has adopted.
As for graphics, I'm curious about which ones will be changed. Besides the logo, will the veteran lifelines get a facelift? Will the money tree be altered? Will the question and answer box-thingy (what would the current design be called?) change?
I know that this and many other questions can't be answered now, but what theories do y'all have?
-
[quote name=\'petek66\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:43 PM\']I want to see a "Search the Net" lifeline. Give them 30 seconds with
"our friends at Google" and show us the screen as they search.[/quote]
Seeing as how spammers have started to figure out how to rig the search results on Google, a "Search the 'Net" lifeline would be pretty interesting...
Although they might run afoul with the FCC with some of the findings, but I'm not a college professor; Your mileage may vary*
*depending on tidal shifts, the previous day's Dow Jones average, and the metaphysical position of the driver. All taxes are the responsibility of the contestant. "Winners don't use drugs" -- William S. Sessions, Director, FBI
-
[quote name=\'Thad Dixon\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 10:21 AM\'] Um, Chris Lemon, you remember the spat we once had about 'mo money syndrome'? I still stand by playing for $25,000 grand on a reincarnation of Password Plus, [/QUOTE]
$25,000 GRAND? If I'm reading that right, wouldn't that be two and one half times what the new ABC Millionaire is going to offer? Are you trying to tell us that you would stand by playing for $25 MILLION on a Password Plus remake (now that would be WAY too much for THAT show) but only $10 million is too much for Millionaire? In a way, you're contradicting yourself! You can't POSSIBLY be serious! [/quote]
I must not be able to read, because I didn't see where he said that.
Brandon Brooks
-
[quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 11:15 AM\'] [quote name=\'Thad Dixon\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 10:21 AM\'] Um, Chris Lemon, you remember the spat we once had about 'mo money syndrome'? I still stand by playing for $25,000 grand on a reincarnation of Password Plus, [/QUOTE]
$25,000 GRAND? If I'm reading that right, wouldn't that be two and one half times what the new ABC Millionaire is going to offer? Are you trying to tell us that you would stand by playing for $25 MILLION on a Password Plus remake (now that would be WAY too much for THAT show) but only $10 million is too much for Millionaire? In a way, you're contradicting yourself! You can't POSSIBLY be serious! [/QUOTE]
I must not be able to read, because I didn't see where he said that.
Brandon Brooks [/quote]
I think his fascinating reasoning is that since 25 grand is $25000 that 25000 grand is $25M, yes?
-
Being able to control your own Googling probably would be an advantage over yelling terms to a friend, hoping he makes the right choices and keeping up the pretense that it's just a smart buddy on the other end of the phone, all in thirty seconds.
I'm quite surprised at the number of times a phone-a-friend will still be thinking, or won't give an answer before the 30 seconds runs out.
These phone-a-friends do know they have ONLY 30 seconds, don't they?
-
[quote name=\'Little Big Brother\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 08:33 AM\'] If anything, I'm hoping the new look will take a few steps away from the industrial look the original show and almost every single game show since then has adopted. [/quote]
I'm picturing a couple of easy chairs, a pitcher of gimlets, a nice fire....
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 12:21 PM\'] [quote name=\'Little Big Brother\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 08:33 AM\'] If anything, I'm hoping the new look will take a few steps away from the industrial look the original show and almost every single game show since then has adopted. [/quote]
I'm picturing a couple of easy chairs, a pitcher of gimlets, a nice fire.... [/quote]
And have some hot babe begin a striptease for each correct answer. Meaning that if someone is able to make it through all fifteen questions.........................
-
Two ideas for what they're worth -
For the last three or four questions, put your fate in your own hands. Do an old-fashioned revolving drum with 30 cards for each level - four levels, four drums. Draw out your own sealed question card. Give each question a number so Reege can tip off the control room for the graphics. Make the player think they had a hand in their final fate, instead of blaming everything on a question arbitrarily selected by the producers.
Maximum :90 to make your choice of answer. :60 would be cool - Talk about tension and anxiety. After all, if putting a play clock in football and basketball makes the action happen faster, why not here? We can all be anxious for the contestant together in real time.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 12:17 PM\'] [quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 11:15 AM\'] I must not be able to read, because I didn't see where he said that.[/quote]
I think his fascinating reasoning is that since 25 grand is $25000 that 25000 grand is $25M, yes? [/quote]
Yes, that's what he appears to be saying. $25 GRAND would be $25,000. But $25,000 GRAND would (taken literally) be $25,000,000.
What I can't tell is whether Thad himself was being serious, whether he cluelessly didn't understand what the original author obviously meant or whether he was just being sarcastic in a poorly executed effort to be funny.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:48 PM\']My biggest problem with the syndicated show is that it's painfully obvious that they're NOT selecting the people who do the best on their 30-question test. If they were, they'd regularly be getting Jeopardy-caliber contestants and it only takes watching for a couple of days to see that this simply isn't the case.
[/quote]
Matt: You're just plain wrong here. I can't vouch for the procedure during season two, but in the first syndicated season you had to pass the test before you even got to speak with a producer. The pool of potential players from which the producers picked (Peter Piper, eat your heart out) consisted of those players who passed the 30 question test.
I'll also point out that the play of Millionaire is significantly less forgiving than Jeopardy-- one wrong answer and you're done. I'm sure most contestants on Millionaire know more answers than it seems, but are really, really scared of blowing it and so use their lifelines poorly. That was certainly true for me.
The questions on the syndicated version are harder than they were in the Regis era, so comparisons to the Fastest Finger days are not on a level playing field.
That said, I'd agree that Jeopardy appears to set a higher knowledge standard for their contestants than Millionaire does. I think much of that is due to the nature of the games. Since Jeopardy is a competition, it's important to have good competitors who will create an exciting game. On Millionaire, each player stands alone and producers are perhaps more willing to have non-genius contestants who are entertaining in their own right.
- Peter
-
Since ABC has been given permission to rework on the music on Celador it would make it better if they re-introduce the original music cue for Final Answer (Going orange) as the original UK series had a special cue for the upper tier questions but it was only used 3 times before changing to the same cue for the rest of the questions this was down to time.
http://www.geocities.com/tpenery/finalanswer.wav (http://\"http://www.geocities.com/tpenery/finalanswer.wav\")
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 01:56 AM\'] According to a couple sites I found, over 300,000 machines were released worldwide. So I'd say yes.
Remember that Ms Pac Man came out as a conversion kit, in addition to being a standalone game. So a lot of those Pac Man machines were, well, gelded. :) So that might be why you don't see so many around today...they all had a sex change! :) [/quote]
Enjoying this off-topic moment........
Midway produced 96,000 units of Pac-Man total. Counting all the bootlegs (it was the most bootlegged game of all time) there probably was around 300,000 units floating around.......
Ms. Pac-Man was the most mass-produced arcade game of all time, with 115,000 units made, none of which were dedicated. They were all piggy-backed on Pac-Man (which helped Midway lose its license with Namco and why Namco now owns Ms. Pac-Man, even though they had nothing to do with its development.......)
ObGameShow: Who in the world would be crazy enough to go for $10Mil or $10K?!
Tyshaun
-
[quote name=\'Peter Sarrett\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 06:19 PM\'] [quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 09:48 PM\']My biggest problem with the syndicated show is that it's painfully obvious that they're NOT selecting the people who do the best on their 30-question test. If they were, they'd regularly be getting Jeopardy-caliber contestants and it only takes watching for a couple of days to see that this simply isn't the case.
[/quote]
Matt: You're just plain wrong here. I can't vouch for the procedure during season two, but in the first syndicated season you had to pass the test before you even got to speak with a producer. The pool of potential players from which the producers picked (Peter Piper, eat your heart out) consisted of those players who passed the 30 question test. [/quote]
Fair enough. I've never seen the Millionaire test so I don't have a frame of reference for it. Perhaps it's substantially easier than the Jeopardy one.
My larger point was comparing the Vierra-era (!) game to the Philbin-era one, and comparing the caliber of contestant who plays this version to the caliber of player who played the original version (i.e. the phone qualifiers). I agree with you that the questions are harder overall, but I also remain convinced that the caliber of player (again, overall) is just not as good in the syndicated version.
I know individual examples can be picked apart, but just to use the show that happens to be on as I type this, one contestant used his ATA lifeline to have 94% of the audience tell him hamburger is named for a city in Germany, and the next contestant had to ask for help on the $100 question. I find myself consistantly frustrated with examples like this on the syndie show in a way that I just don't recall happening with Philbin's call-in players.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 06:00 PM\'] one contestant used his ATA lifeline to have 94% of the audience tell him hamburger is named for a city in Germany, and the next contestant had to ask for help on the $100 question. I find myself consistantly frustrated with examples like this on the syndie show in a way that I just don't recall happening with Philbin's call-in players. [/quote]
The $100 question about tabloids could have passed for a $2k level pop culture based question I think. Definitely among the more difficult $100 questions I've seen(note that nearly a third of the voting audience got it wrong, too); it belonged as a low level question on the November pop culture week of shows.
-
First off, from reading Steve, I don't think the $320K is a Plateau in this version. You miss on Tier III, and you go home with $10K. There goes all the guessing.
I like seeing Millionaire back, and getting the Phone Game will get me a new phone, but at TEN TIMES THE STAKES??? Eh???
But BRING BACK THE PHONE GAME!
---------
Of course, here's another point: What kind of difficulty do you think we'll have here? I think even worse than the syndie version!!!
----------
And to Don's suggestion:
You sure you haven't seen "Who Wants to Be an Erotic Billionaire?" a few too many times??? ;)
-
Goongas: Re: Survivor...
He (Burnett) might have the right to do it, but it just seems he does it in the interests of screwing certain contestants. I still assert that, at best, he might only know that he's going to do a change or two each season.
-
My biggest problem with the syndicated show is that it's painfully obvious that they're NOT selecting the people who do the best on their 30-question test. If they were, they'd regularly be getting Jeopardy-caliber contestants and it only takes watching for a couple of days to see that this simply isn't the case.
So while I agree with your intuitive point -- a 30-question test ought to be better than a 3-question test -- the fact is that, for whatever reason, the caliber of game play was significantly better under the original rules than it has been with the syndicated show.
Exactly...the phone game, for the most part, encouraged prospective contestants to think fast and have some degree of familarity w/the show, particularly the FF round...rarely in the ABC days did you see a contestant use a lifeline on the first tier ($100-$1K) of questions, and now, it happens at least once a week.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
Exactly...the phone game, for the most part, encouraged prospective contestants to think fast and have some degree of familarity w/the show, particularly the FF round
Since the FF round is gone in the syndicated version, thinking fast is irrelevant. You have as much time as you need in the hotseat.
Not to sound like a broken record, but... the questions are harder. Now that Game Show Network is showing Regis reruns, it's really easy to watch old and new back to back and compare. In the Regis era, it was almost a given (ok, slight hyperbole) that you'd make it to $32,000 with all 3 lifelines intact. In the syndicated show, you're lucky to make it to $32K at all.
Which makes sense-- the daily show just doesn't have the same kind of budget to give away money that the prime time show had. So they rejiggered their writing to make it harder to advance up the ladder.
Since I was in the contestant pool, I watched syndie Millionaire very diligently in the first season and it was immediately obvious that they'd ramped up the difficulty. Perhaps the contestant selection process is less rigorous as well, but that's not the primary reason why people use lifelines earlier and don't get as far.
That said, I vastly preferred the phone game because it made me as a viewer much more emotionally connected to the show. The phone game was a meritocracy. I, like anyone else, could earn my way into the hotseat. The exposed nature of the contestant selection process made it a people's show.
-
Having taken both the J! qualification quiz, and the Millionaire quiz, I can say that the J! quiz is definitely tougher, for two reasons:
1. Millionaire is multiple choice, J! is fill in the blanks;
2. Virtually all of the Millionaire quiz questions are $32K and less questions taken from previous shows. If you've been a regular viewer of the show, you will have been exposed to all the answers at some point. This would make passing the quiz a lot easier, but doesn't necessarily indicate whether you'd be any good at answering actual questions on the show where you haven't seen the answer before.
As far as the point that Millionaire is tougher because one wrong answer and you're out, I have to disagree. First, it's multiple choice, so the right answer is in front of you. Second, you don't have two other people trying to buzz in ahead of you, so time isn't a factor. Third, you have the option to walk away with the money you've won and not answer the question. Fourth, if you hit a plateau, you're guaranteed at least that much money, which gives you a safety net for guessing the $2K and $64K questions. And finally, you do have lifelines, so you're not without help.
Millionaire's producers may well have decided to trade off contestant skill for their TVQ value. It's not clear to me that the two are mutually exclusive (see the ratings for the initial runs of Millionaire for proof of that), but it's their judgement call to make, as much as I might disagree with it.
-
First off, from reading Steve, I don't think the $320K is a Plateau in this version. You miss on Tier III, and you go home with $10K. There goes all the guessing.
Using Steve as a defense as anything does not hold up here. If Steve told some of the members of this board that water is made up of hydrogen and oxygen, they wouldn't believe him.
I disagree with Steve's interpretation, as I think he is misinterpreting the N.Y. Times Article (the link I posted at the beginning of this thread). The writer said something about the second level would trigger more lifelines, etc, and something to the effect of a question missed in the second level would drop you down to the first level winnings. I don't think the writer was talking about the tiers of questions, but levels of the game in the sense of the there being two levels, level one having three lifelines, level two adding three more.
We will find out in due time if I am right or not.
-
[quote name=\'leszekp\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 08:17 PM\'] As far as the point that Millionaire is tougher because one wrong answer and you're out, I have to disagree. [/quote]
I didn't say Millionaire was tougher, I said it was less forgiving. If I'm a Jeopardy contestant, I'll ring in and go out on a limb with a guess far more readily than as a Millionaire contestant, because the penalty in Jeopardy is far, far less severe. If Jeopardy contestants were knocked out of the game for incorrect answers, I think players would be much more hesitant about ringing in.
The severity of the penalty on Millionaire is why you don't see many contestants climb higher. Their confidence in an answer might be sufficient for a Jeopardy guess, but not for a Millionaire guess.
-
[quote name=\'Peter Sarrett\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 09:11 PM\'] Not to sound like a broken record, but... the questions are harder.
.......
Perhaps the contestant selection process is less rigorous as well, but that's not the primary reason why people use lifelines earlier and don't get as far. [/quote]
I think we see each other's basic points, but my perception is a bit different than yours, so my broken record skips in a different place.
I absolutely agree than the questions are harder. But when Hot Seaters are asking the audience on questions that consistantly get 90+% success rates, I have to point to the people in the Seat. That plus my own observations over time of other questions Hot Seaters need help with leaves me thinking that the quality of the contestants (which is to say the lack thereof) is a bigger issue than you're making it out to be.
WHY that's the case could be any number of reasons, and may have nothing at all to do with "phone game" vs. "no phone game". But I think it's every bit as important a factor, and in my mind maybe even more so, than the harder questions.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 08:35 PM\']
I think we see each other's basic points, but my perception is a bit different than yours, so my broken record skips in a different place.
[/quote]
Fair enough.
Part of my response is based on my own performance in the hotseat, where I blew a lifeline on a bonehead question at $300 but went on to do very well. I didn't use the lifeline because I was stupid, or even because I didn't know the answer. I regretted it the instant the words left my mouth. I used it because I was flustered.
Which leads me to a new thought. Perhaps it's not the missing phone game that's at fault here, but the missing ring of fire.
Contestants on the syndicated show are sequestered in the Green Room until they're on deck to go on air, and then they're below the stage where they can't really see the action. From the Green Room you're watching a monitor, but that's not the same as being on set in the ring of fire. I had no idea until I was in the hotseat of how nerve-wracking those first 5 questions would be because of the complete silence in the studio. I expected the jaunty music you hear on TV, and instead you could hear a pin drop. And it flustered me. Had I been sitting in the ring of fire during another contestant's run, I'd have been much more prepared for what was to come. I'd have been a lot more comfortable in the hotseat and perhaps had the poise to save the lifeline (which ultimately didn't matter in my case, but that's another story).
It's possible that part of the issue isn't so much the quality of the contestants as it is the acclimation process. Going to the hotseat from the Green Room is a much bigger jump than it was from the ring of fire.
<shrug>
-
I had no idea until I was in the hotseat of how nerve-wracking those first 5 questions would be because of the complete silence in the studio. I expected the jaunty music you hear on TV, and instead you could hear a pin drop. And it flustered me.
I think that when the show began, that music was heard in the studio. Is there no music heard at all, or is it just for the first 5 questions?
-
[quote name=\'Peter Sarrett\' date=\'Jan 27 2004, 09:25 PM\'] Going to the hotseat from the Green Room is a much bigger jump than it was from the ring of fire.
[/quote]
I'm not sure I'd agree with that...they're both nerve-wracking but in different ways. Sitting in the ring -- wondering if you were going to have a chance to do another FF, watching other contestants sweat for 20 minutes over an answer, watching technical problems get retaped, that sort of thing -- doesn't exactly engender a sense of calm and well-being.
-
[quote name=\'inturnaround\' date=\'Jan 26 2004, 01:08 PM\'] . Sure, some shows can't be played for $10 million (Password, Match Game, Body Language) [/quote]
Super Match Game 03 !
Host: "You've won $500 and we multiply it by 10,000 or $5,000,000 but you could double that stake on a lucky spin on the Star Wheel !"
(Contestant spins and lands on Patty Deutch)
-Joe R.
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:14 AM\'] I think that when the show began, that music was heard in the studio. Is there no music heard at all, or is it just for the first 5 questions? [/quote]
That would surprise me a great deal. Anyone who did the Regis show who posts here, feel free to correct me, but pumping that kind of audio out to a small studio like that (when there is really no necessary reason to - ambiance is for people watching at home, not the 200 or so people present at the show) is asking for all kinds of unpleasant feedback issues.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 12:08 PM\'] [quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:14 AM\'] I think that when the show began, that music was heard in the studio. Is there no music heard at all, or is it just for the first 5 questions? [/quote]
That would surprise me a great deal. Anyone who did the Regis show who posts here, feel free to correct me, but pumping that kind of audio out to a small studio like that (when there is really no necessary reason to - ambiance is for people watching at home, not the 200 or so people present at the show) is asking for all kinds of unpleasant feedback issues. [/quote]
I didn't have anything to do with the Regis show, but the way I've read it, the music is heard for the $2000+ questions, but not for the first five because they often edited out the "final answer" bit for those first five (it would have caused all kinds of uncomfortable skips in music).
-
TommyCharles is correct, as I have attended numerous tapings.
Also, the audio in the studio sometimes isn't good, to prevent feedback issues.
-
[quote name=\'tommycharles\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 12:24 PM\'][quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 12:08 PM\'] [quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:14 AM\'] I think that when the show began, that music was heard in the studio. Is there no music heard at all, or is it just for the first 5 questions? [/quote]
That would surprise me a great deal. Anyone who did the Regis show who posts here, feel free to correct me, but pumping that kind of audio out to a small studio like that (when there is really no necessary reason to - ambiance is for people watching at home, not the 200 or so people present at the show) is asking for all kinds of unpleasant feedback issues. [/quote]
I didn't have anything to do with the Regis show, but the way I've read it, the music is heard for the $2000+ questions, but not for the first five because they often edited out the "final answer" bit for those first five (it would have caused all kinds of uncomfortable skips in music).[/quote]
The first five questions cue is the most hummable of all of the background cues and the melody losses would be noticed if edited.
And once you get beyond the first five, the music's *supposed* to be distracting and stress-inducing to an extent (boom boom, boom boom...)--it's just that only the celebs ever complain about it while in the Hot Seat.
-
And have some hot babe begin a striptease for each correct answer. Meaning that if someone is able to make it through all fifteen questions.........................
Funny you should mention that...when Israeli WWtBaM crowned its first grand-prize winner 3 1/2 yrs ago, host Yoram Arbel made good on his promise to strip if that ever happened...wonder why Regis never tried that. :-D
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
Maybe because Regis would have un-saved ABC the moment that happened...
(And that clinches it -- you HAVE been watching "Who Wants to be an Erotic Billionaire?" much too much...)
-
[quote name=\'uncamark\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 02:44 PM\'] And once you get beyond the first five, the music's *supposed* to be distracting and stress-inducing to an extent (boom boom, boom boom...)--it's just that only the celebs ever complain about it while in the Hot Seat. [/quote]
Yet another reason why I loathe those "special" celebrity editions of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire and other shows. The stars think it's funny to mock the host, the game, the rules and the music. If they don't like it, let 'em go sell pencils on the street like the bums they are.
-
And only one celebrity contestant mocked Regis, and even dressed like him: DANA CARVEY!
When I saw the opening of Day 1 of Celebrity I, I just laughed!
-
If I could ever get past the fact that I was playing for more money than I would know what to do with, the music actually might do more to relax me than anything. Needless to say, they'd have a lot of editing to do if I could get that far.
Inhale... *dumm dumm* ... exhale.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 05:31 PM\'] Yet another reason why I loathe those "special" celebrity editions of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire and other shows. The stars think it's funny to mock the host, the game, the rules and the music. If they don't like it, let 'em go sell pencils on the street like the bums they are. [/quote]
The thing I can't stand about Celebrity Edition is the help that the others can give up to the $32,000 question. Why not just start the game at the third tier? They want to be taken seriously, and not as idiots, yet they get coaching through the first 10 questions...
In regards to Chuck's comment re: Israeli's Millionaire host, one ABC contestant noted that Max Tarrant kisses the female contestants should they win, and asked if Regis would do the same if she won. IIRC she won $32,000 (missed a Hitchcock question), and I think she still got a kiss from Reege. :-)
-
My favorite Celeb versions were Celebrity I, III and IV, the 2 Olympic editions, the Rock Star edition, and the Top of The Charts edition.
I hated Celebrity II because poor Norm MacDonald COULD'VE WON THE MILLION! He was about to say the correct answer and lock it in, and then bows out at the last possible second! Oh, the agony!
Heck, I don't like it when anyone walks away from the Million Dollar question, only to realize they were RIGHT to begin with (after they post-walking guess)!
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:56 PM\'] Heck, I don't like it when anyone walks away from the Million Dollar question, only to realize they were RIGHT to begin with (after they post-walking guess)! [/quote]
So you'd rather they make a blind guess, and risk $468,000? And don't tell me you wouldn't walk if you weren't 100% sure, because you're lying through your teeth.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:11 PM\'] [quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:56 PM\'] Heck, I don't like it when anyone walks away from the Million Dollar question, only to realize they were RIGHT to begin with (after they post-walking guess)! [/quote]
So you'd rather they make a blind guess, and risk $468,000? And don't tell me you wouldn't walk if you weren't 100% sure, because you're lying through your teeth. [/quote]
I WOULD walk if I didn't know the answer to the Million Dollar question period. If I'm not even 100% sure, I'd think it over before walking OR guessing.
And, if after I walk, my guess is wrong, then I'll be happy. If my guess is right, well, I'll probably be more unhappy than happy. (That is, I may be happy with $500,000; but I'll be more unhappy with the fact that I walked when I should've pulle the trigger!)
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 08:18 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:11 PM\'] [quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:56 PM\'] Heck, I don't like it when anyone walks away from the Million Dollar question, only to realize they were RIGHT to begin with (after they post-walking guess)! [/quote]
So you'd rather they make a blind guess, and risk $468,000? And don't tell me you wouldn't walk if you weren't 100% sure, because you're lying through your teeth. [/quote]
I WOULD walk if I didn't know the answer to the Million Dollar question period. If I'm not even 100% sure, I'd think it over before walking OR guessing.
And, if after I walk, my guess is wrong, then I'll be happy. If my guess is right, well, I'll probably be more unhappy than happy. (That is, I may be happy with $500,000; but I'll be more unhappy with the fact that I walked when I should've pulle the trigger!)[/quote]
Hey, I speak from experience on this one. You can go through life kicking yourself because you walked when you thought you *might* know the $1M, or you can be happy and grateful that you got $500,000. I go for the latter, because the former will drive you nuts.
-
What was interesting was Norm was about to go for it, but Regis talked him out of it.
But I think Tom hit it right on the head. $500,000 is not chump change. If you can get it, be happy.
-
[quote name=\'tomobrien\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 08:19 PM\'] [quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 08:18 PM\'][quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:11 PM\'] [quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 07:56 PM\'] Heck, I don't like it when anyone walks away from the Million Dollar question, only to realize they were RIGHT to begin with (after they post-walking guess)! [/quote]
So you'd rather they make a blind guess, and risk $468,000? And don't tell me you wouldn't walk if you weren't 100% sure, because you're lying through your teeth. [/quote]
I WOULD walk if I didn't know the answer to the Million Dollar question period. If I'm not even 100% sure, I'd think it over before walking OR guessing.
And, if after I walk, my guess is wrong, then I'll be happy. If my guess is right, well, I'll probably be more unhappy than happy. (That is, I may be happy with $500,000; but I'll be more unhappy with the fact that I walked when I should've pulle the trigger!)[/quote]
Hey, I speak from experience on this one. You can go through life kicking yourself because you walked when you thought you *might* know the $1M, or you can be happy and grateful that you got $500,000. I go for the latter, because the former will drive you nuts. [/quote]
And I saw your episode, Tom.
But when I try out for either version (since the ABC version IS coming back), I'll go by your strategy: It IS better to be safe than sorry, after all.
And here's something that I found about your show:
http://www.abc7i.com/millionaire/obrien.htm (http://\"http://www.abc7i.com/millionaire/obrien.htm\")
I've read the story numerous times, and still have nightmares about it, but I've gotten over it, or at least attempted to, anyway.
-
Oh yeah! Bob House came on just a couple rounds after you, didn't he? :)
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 09:42 PM\']
And here's something that I found about your show:
http://www.abc7i.com/millionaire/obrien.htm (http://\"http://www.abc7i.com/millionaire/obrien.htm\")
I've read the story numerous times, and still have nightmares about it, but I've gotten over it, or at least attempted to, anyway.[/quote]
Why have nightmares about it? I don't. You just can't go through life kicking yourself about it. Life goes on.
And yes, whos, Bob House started his run on my carryover episode. Very nice fellow.
-
OK. Sure, I'll get over it.
Bob House was pretty good, I must say. I also saw his two shows.
If his MDQ was YOUR MDQ, would you have nailed that one?
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 05:56 PM\'] I hated Celebrity II because poor Norm MacDonald COULD'VE WON THE MILLION! He was about to say the correct answer and lock it in, and then bows out at the last possible second! Oh, the agony! [/quote]
Oh, crap. Could've, would've, should've. DIDN'T.
He was doing his best Burt Reynolds on Celebrity Jeopardy during that appearance of his. Just a complete ass. I would have laughed mine off if he'd llama'd, actually.
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 28 2004, 11:00 PM\']Bob House was pretty good, I must say. I also saw his two shows.
If his MDQ was YOUR MDQ, would you have nailed that one?[/quote]
Yep. But hey, that's the way the proverbial Newton crumbles.
-
Think our future prize table's big ? You should see Turkey's:
1: 50,000,000
2: 100,000,000
3: 200,000,000
4: 300,000,000
5: 500,000,000
6: 1,000,000,000
7: 2,000,000,000
8: 4,000,000,000
9: 8,000,000,000
10: 16,000,000,000
11: 32,000,000,000
12: 64,000,000,000
13: 125,000,000,000
14: 250,000,000,000
15: 500,000,000,000
If you consider the Turkish Lira is quite bad ($1 US = 700,000 TL) then it doesn't seem to big, but WOW huh ?
The biggest winner ever walked away at 125 Billion
-Joe R.
-
Hmm, I remember on Mitch Groff's old site, that he talked about the Japan's version, and the top prize was 10 million Yen. And it HAD to be split between 3 PAF's, no questions asked.
I know for sure the 10 million Yen question was #15, and 7.5 million was question #14. If Mitch knows the rest of the money table, maybe he could help me out here.
-
I do remember Mr. O'Brien's run on Millionaire, and he did an amazing job.
Like you said, it is better to think about the fact that you have $500,000 coming your way than think that you could have had the million if you had pulled the trigger. I would only go for it all if I were 110% sure of my answer. Otherwise, it is not worth it.
By the way - this is to Mr. O'Brien - are you the same Tom O'Brien who ran the board on $ale of the Century for over $152,000 in 1987? If so, I truly am honored to hear from you.
The Inquisitive One
-
Heck, I don't like it when anyone walks away from the Million Dollar question, only to realize they were RIGHT to begin with (after they post-walking guess)!
Then you prolly won't like the fact that Australia's first two $500K winners had the right answer to the $1M question after they bowed out...as per Nine's official website, however, neither player (Dr. Trevor Sauer or William Laing) had any regrets.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
A few things to note...
I sincerely doubt we'll be seeing the phone game back in its original form anyway. I just wrote a 30 page paper on Millionaire for my Art & Entertainment Law class, and some significant litigation came out of that phone game. Some of you may remember Valleycrest coming under fire for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act because TTD devices could not be used to qualify, and individuals who wanted to be on the show physically could not enter the answers into the phone keypad quickly enough. Now, how these same individuals would be able to muster in the ring of fire on the show is beyond me. Of course, this is all moot since Regis' Millionaire was off the air before the case was ever decided. But, I'm sure this lawsuit remains in the back of the exec's mind when it comes to determining a contestant selection process for Super Millionaire.
Secondly, things are moving along on ABCs front. They've added "Super Millionaire" to their list of shows on their drop down menu. The webpage simply lists a new airdate and suggests contestant info will be available soon.
I, like the rest of you, am very excited. I'm hoping to get to a taping as well.
-Jay
-
[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Jan 29 2004, 02:38 PM\']
Heck, I don't like it when anyone walks away from the Million Dollar question, only to realize they were RIGHT to begin with (after they post-walking guess)!
Then you prolly won't like the fact that Australia's first two $500K winners had the right answer to the $1M question after they bowed out...as per Nine's official website, however, neither player (Dr. Trevor Sauer or William Laing) had any regrets.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby") [/quote]
And just like Tom O'Brien said on that link I posted: "Better Safe Than Sorry."
At least he, those 2 Australian winners, as well as Pat Thompson, and Mary O'Burke (the 2 women who were right on their post-walking guesses when they won $500K; Stephanie Girardi was wrong on her $1M question when she walked with $500K), didn't have to deal with what poor Norm MacDonald had to deal with:
Regis: "You said Greenbrier, yeah, you would've been right."
Norm (along with audience): "OHHHHHH!"
Anyway, Tom, have you gotten a chance to meet Robby Roseman yet?
-
[quote name=\'TheInquisitiveOne\' date=\'Jan 29 2004, 01:00 AM\']I do remember Mr. O'Brien's run on Millionaire, and he did an amazing job.
Like you said, it is better to think about the fact that you have $500,000 coming your way than think that you could have had the million if you had pulled the trigger. I would only go for it all if I were 110% sure of my answer. Otherwise, it is not worth it.
By the way - this is to Mr. O'Brien - are you the same Tom O'Brien who ran the board on $ale of the Century for over $152,000 in 1987? If so, I truly am honored to hear from you.
The Inquisitive One[/quote]
I wish! No, the nearest I came to that haul was picking up a lovely pressboard bedroom set on the first season of Trebek Jeopardy...
-
[quote name=\'JTFriends1\' date=\'Jan 29 2004, 02:26 PM\'] But, I'm sure this lawsuit remains in the back of the exec's mind when it comes to determining a contestant selection process for Super Millionaire.
[/quote]
I hope not. Far as I was concerned, that was all a bunch of ACLU-driven Grade-A CRAPPE when it came to light the first time.
It's a game of SPEED. If you can't push the buttons fast enough, TOUGH COOKIES.
Deaf people can't go on Name That Tune, either, or face down an Audio Daily Double. I don't remember anyone suing.
It was an obvious attempt for a group of disabled people to try to soak a few bucks out of a company that they knew was swimming in it, and I for one wish more people would stand up to that crap.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 29 2004, 05:11 PM\'] I hope not. Far as I was concerned, that was all a bunch of ACLU-driven Grade-A CRAPPE when it came to light the first time.
It's a game of SPEED. If you can't push the buttons fast enough, TOUGH COOKIES.
Deaf people can't go on Name That Tune, either, or face down an Audio Daily Double. I don't remember anyone suing.
It was an obvious attempt for a group of disabled people to try to soak a few bucks out of a company that they knew was swimming in it, and I for one wish more people would stand up to that crap. [/quote]
I remember when this lawsuit first arose, and it was brought up on ATGS. I remember making the argument that if the Phone Game was discrimination against the deaf, then radio call-in contests have been discriminating for the last 70 or 80 years.
Besides I don't see any blind people (ha...I made a punny) complaining about Wheel of Fortune.
-
I resent that remark fostergray82. Come to think of it, being blind does have some advantages. One one episode, Regis would read the question & the 4 answers in the FF round before the actual round begins to give a blind contestant a "slight" edge in that regard.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 29 2004, 05:11 PM\'] It was an obvious attempt for a group of disabled people to try to soak a few bucks out of a company that they knew was swimming in it, and I for one wish more people would stand up to that crap. [/quote]
Where will these asinine lawsuits end? That's what I want to know. Maybe I should sue Playboy magazine for refusing to allow me to pose as a centerfold--a decision for which you should all be grateful.
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Jan 29 2004, 04:43 PM\'] [quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Jan 29 2004, 02:38 PM\']
Heck, I don't like it when anyone walks away from the Million Dollar question, only to realize they were RIGHT to begin with (after they post-walking guess)!
Then you prolly won't like the fact that Australia's first two $500K winners had the right answer to the $1M question after they bowed out...as per Nine's official website, however, neither player (Dr. Trevor Sauer or William Laing) had any regrets.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby") [/quote]
And just like Tom O'Brien said on that link I posted: "Better Safe Than Sorry."
At least he, those 2 Australian winners, as well as Pat Thompson, and Mary O'Burke (the 2 women who were right on their post-walking guesses when they won $500K; Stephanie Girardi was wrong on her $1M question when she walked with $500K), didn't have to deal with what poor Norm MacDonald had to deal with:
Regis: "You said Greenbrier, yeah, you would've been right."
Norm (along with audience): "OHHHHHH!"
Anyway, Tom, have you gotten a chance to meet Robby Roseman yet? [/quote]
I know I am probably in the minority when I say this, but I would answer the million dollar question, whether I knew it for sure or not. I could live with losing all that money, but I could not deal with the fact that I could have had a million bucks but didn't because I didn't trust myself.
NOTE: When writing this, I currently have five bucks in my pocket, and even $32,000 would look real good.
I do feel kind of bad for Norm MacDonald, but in the end it was his choice to answer the question or not and he let Regis talk him out of answering. In Regis's defense, I have to admit that when Norm said "Greenbrier", he didn't say if he knew the answer or if was just guessing or anything.
-
[quote name=\'STYDfan\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 08:51 AM\'] I know I am probably in the minority when I say this, but I would answer the million dollar question, whether I knew it for sure or not. I could live with losing all that money, but I could not deal with the fact that I could have had a million bucks but didn't because I didn't trust myself. [/quote]
I certainly hope that you're in the *extreme* minority. When you're older, perhaps you'll learn that when you have nothing, $500,000 is a life-changing amount of money. Risking almost all of it for a 1 in 4 chance to double is a sucker's bet.
On the other hand, ABC hopes for contestants just like you to make their game more dramatic, and probably save them a few bucks in the process!
-
On a certain level i have to agree with STYDFan. Say you uesd a 50/50 and you were left with 2 answers. You are about 65% sure that one is right, but you just arent definite. Yes, $500,000 is life changing, but $1,000,000 is a hell of a lot more lifechanging. A 50/50 shot at $1,000,000 is the best odds for that much money out there. Now god knows i will never make the show or will never have that chance, but i would be under serious consiteration to take the gamble with a 50/50 chance for a million.
-
I'll agree that having it down to 50/50 changes things quite a bit. Still, since part of the issue seems to be how you feel about yourself afterwards, in a 50/50 situation consider which of the two would be worst: Feeling bad because you had half a million dollars in your hand but you threw $468,000 of it away or feeling bad because you COULD have had a million BUT YOU STILL HAVE $500,000!!!
I think a lot of you aren't comprehending the actual dollars that are involved.
-
Believe me I am comprehending the situation fully. Now most likely yes, i would stop with the money because it is an extreme amount, but I would have to think heavily with a 50/50 shot at it. If i had no lifelines, not a chance in hell i would gamble with 4 answers, but the 50/50 would make me deliberate over it greatly.
-
Believe me I am comprehending the situation fully. Now most likely yes, i would stop with the money because it is an extreme amount, but I would have to think heavily with a 50/50 shot at it. If i had no lifelines, not a chance in hell i would gamble with 4 answers, but the 50/50 would make me deliberate over it greatly.
I recall a contestant who actually left at $250k or $500k because all he had left was the 50:50 and he didn't want to use it because he would have been too tempted to risk what he had already. I think he's the only contestant to willingly leave with lifelines on the table.
As for going for question 15 with a 1/4 or 1/2 chance of getting it right, no offense but those of you who would go for it are nuts. Of course, I would be happy with $125k with anything beyond that being gravy (mmmmm, gravy....). Perhaps if I were financially secure going in instead of a college student, my perspective would be a bit different.
Also, I've heard the sound for missing the last question, and I don't like it, and I hope to never hear it in the context of a contestant losing $468k (or whatever total Super Millionaire comes up with).
-
Oh btw, i was watching Jimmy Kimmell last night and i noticed they started running the ad campaign for Super Millionaire already.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' date=\'Jan 29 2004, 05:48 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jan 29 2004, 05:11 PM\'] I hope not. Far as I was concerned, that was all a bunch of ACLU-driven Grade-A CRAPPE when it came to light the first time.
It's a game of SPEED. If you can't push the buttons fast enough, TOUGH COOKIES.
Deaf people can't go on Name That Tune, either, or face down an Audio Daily Double. I don't remember anyone suing.
It was an obvious attempt for a group of disabled people to try to soak a few bucks out of a company that they knew was swimming in it, and I for one wish more people would stand up to that crap. [/quote]
I remember when this lawsuit first arose, and it was brought up on ATGS. I remember making the argument that if the Phone Game was discrimination against the deaf, then radio call-in contests have been discriminating for the last 70 or 80 years.
Besides I don't see any blind people (ha...I made a punny) complaining about Wheel of Fortune. [/quote]
I didn't mean to offend you with that remark. I was making a comparison as to how ridiculous the lawsuit was regarding Millionaire. Maybe it was a bad analogy, but what I was saying was that it would be difficult for a deaf contestant to play, although they could have an interpreter use sign language, just as it would be difficult for a blind person to play Wheel of Fortune.
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 09:14 AM\'] I think a lot of you aren't comprehending the actual dollars that are involved. [/quote]
Matt';s so right here it isn't even funny.
To call $1,000,000 "more life changing" than $500K is simply idiotic. There is "life changing" and there is "not life changing."
I've been (not seriously, but if the right one came along) shopping for a condo lately. And with this comes all of the stresses that come with taking out a sick loan and working in a business where someone in India is champing at the bit to replace my salary with a bowl of rice. Man, if someone came down tomorrow and said 'You know that condo you were looking at? Here's a check. Go get it.' I wouldn't care if that check was for $150K or $1.5 million. The condo would be bought and paid for either way, and the load would be off.
(Of course I'd rather have the 1.5 million, but I can't even BEGIN to fathom the events that having the extra money would trigger. So If I can make the problems I have RIGHT NOW go away, or risk them for things I can't comprehend, I'm taking care of the existing problems every time.)
-
[quote name=\'STYDfan\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 08:51 AM\'] I know I am probably in the minority when I say this, but I would answer the million dollar question, whether I knew it for sure or not. I could live with losing all that money, but I could not deal with the fact that I could have had a million bucks but didn't because I didn't trust myself. [/quote]
Sorry...gotta disagree with this. The "life-changing difference" between $1M and $500K (after taxes) isn't comparable to the life-change between $500,000 and $32,000.
Walk from the $1M question and you're still left with a sizable chunk of change that can get you to early retirement, buy a nice home, put a kid through college or whatever.
Miss the $1M and you're left with...a midsize car, perhaps. An addition to your home. Nice vacations for a few years.
The first option is permanent life change; the second, temporary.
If you really think that it's worth $468,000 because you couldn't live with yourself...hey, be my guest.
-
It was worth it for me from $64K to $125K. I would have turned into a bitter man if I'd walked and my gut feeling about the answer was correct, so I pulled the trigger. For me, the difference between $32K and $64K was worth the peace of mind.
At $250K going for $500K, I was able to walk away cheerfully when I didn't have confidence in my gut feeling. The difference between $250K and $32K was far more significant.
As it turned out, I made the right choice. But damn, at times I wish I knew what my million dollar question would have been.
And when I'm a bit more rational, I'm glad I don't.
- Peter
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 09:31 AM\'] [quote name=\'STYDfan\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 08:51 AM\'] I know I am probably in the minority when I say this, but I would answer the million dollar question, whether I knew it for sure or not. I could live with losing all that money, but I could not deal with the fact that I could have had a million bucks but didn't because I didn't trust myself. [/quote]
I certainly hope that you're in the *extreme* minority. When you're older, perhaps you'll learn that when you have nothing, $500,000 is a life-changing amount of money. Risking almost all of it for a 1 in 4 chance to double is a sucker's bet.
On the other hand, ABC hopes for contestants just like you to make their game more dramatic, and probably save them a few bucks in the process! [/quote]
I realize what you're saying, but I still don't agree. The show is called "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?". Not a half-millionaire. Not a quarter-millionaire. A millionaire. I want to be a MILLIONAIRE, and I seriously doubt that I would be satisfied unless I at least tried to answer Question 15 correctly.
-
Looks like the quotes from SB's interview with Michael Davies made the big time....or, at least Page Six (http://\"http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=84&ncid=762&e=11&u=/pagesix/20040130/en_pagesix/milliondollarquestions\").
Of course, it probably won't effect the actual posting of the interview. How many times has part one or two of an interview never been posted?
-
I'm just glad that every article about Super Millionaire has made a point of mentioning the overscheduling of Classic Millionaire. Hopefully if this format is successful, ABC will take the hint.
-
Deaf people can't go on Name That Tune, either, or face down an Audio Daily Double. I don't remember anyone suing.
On that note, Harry Eisenberg's J! book mentions a legally-blind contestant who had the misfortune of getting a Video DD during her game...whatever her guess was, it was incorrect, but she took it very graciously.
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
[quote name=\'Little Big Brother\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 05:27 PM\'] I'm just glad that every article about Super Millionaire has made a point of mentioning the overscheduling of Classic Millionaire. Hopefully if this format is successful, ABC will take the hint. [/quote]
Don't think Lloyd Braun doesn't remember...because he does. He's gone on record as saying if SM succeeds, he's not going to make the goose-with-the-golden-eggs mistake again.
-
Don't think Lloyd Braun doesn't remember...because he does. He's gone on record as saying if SM succeeds, he's not going to make the goose-with-the-golden-eggs mistake again.
We'll see. The networks also said they weren't going to schedule a lot of reality tv this season.
-
In case anyone hasn't visited the site recently, Steve Beverly's "complete" interview with Micheal Davies is now available.
-
[quote name=\'STYDfan\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 04:00 PM\']I realize what you're saying, but I still don't agree. The show is called "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?". Not a half-millionaire. Not a quarter-millionaire. A millionaire. I want to be a MILLIONAIRE, and I seriously doubt that I would be satisfied unless I at least tried to answer Question 15 correctly.[/quote]
(checks your screenname)
So, I take it Pat Finn should have medics standing by for you? That show's not called Shop Till You're Done.
[quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 06:26 PM\']Harry Eisenberg's J! book mentions a legally-blind contestant who had the misfortune of getting a Video DD during her game...whatever her guess was, it was incorrect, but she took it very graciously.[/quote]
Forgive me for questioning the man, but I'm having a hard time swallowing that bit of trivia. There wasn't a single visual clue when Eddie Timanus was playing, was there?
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 03:29 AM\'] [quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 06:26 PM\']Harry Eisenberg's J! book mentions a legally-blind contestant who had the misfortune of getting a Video DD during her game...whatever her guess was, it was incorrect, but she took it very graciously.[/quote]
Forgive me for questioning the man, but I'm having a hard time swallowing that bit of trivia. There wasn't a single visual clue when Eddie Timanus was playing, was there? [/quote]
There was a legally-blind woman who was on J! back in the late '80s, IIRC. She got a Video DD with a picture of a drawing from Gray's Anatomy and had to identify the book it appeared in. From what I remember reading somewhere, she said the picture looked like spaghetti to her.
-
I've been (not seriously, but if the right one came along) shopping for a condo lately. And with this comes all of the stresses that come with taking out a sick loan and working in a business where someone in India is champing at the bit to replace my salary with a bowl of rice. Man, if someone came down tomorrow and said 'You know that condo you were looking at? Here's a check. Go get it.' I wouldn't care if that check was for $150K or $1.5 million. The condo would be bought and paid for either way, and the load would be off.
I have to agree w/Chris here...as it is, I'm currently looking to move into my own place, hopefully w/my new GF. If I somehow make it on this new Super Millionaire, my goal would be to win enough money to make this move feasible, and if I had, say, $500K in my hand safe and sound, only to be faced w/a $1M question whose answer I had even the slightest doubt of, you can bet I'd be saying "Thank you, and goodnight".
Chuck Donegan (The Illustrious "Chuckie Baby")
-
[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 11:14 AM\']I'll agree that having it down to 50/50 changes things quite a bit. Still, since part of the issue seems to be how you feel about yourself afterwards, in a 50/50 situation consider which of the two would be worst: Feeling bad because you had half a million dollars in your hand but you threw $468,000 of it away or feeling bad because you COULD have had a million BUT YOU STILL HAVE $500,000!!!
I think a lot of you aren't comprehending the actual dollars that are involved.[/quote]
I agree with itiparanoid here. I don't like the insinuation that just because I am young, I have no concept of the value of money. It doesn't matter if you're 17, 27, or 87, $500,000 is a LOT of money. At your ages, Mr. Ottinger, Mr. O'Brien, and Mr. Lemon, I can understand that you may be more risk averse, depending on your situation. I'm just that saying that at this particular stage in my life, I would not be ashamed if I missed the last question, seeing as how I would STILL have $32,000.
I know my view may seem strange to you, but it stems from what I think is one of the reasons Millionaire is so good, the constant What If? factor. I guess seeing so many people blow a chance to win more money because they don't have confidence is the only reason I hate the show sometimes. Like the contestant on today's Millionaire Bowl, for example. His gut, his Phone-A-Friend, and 2/3 of the audience said Florida State, so of course...he walks and loses a chance at $250,000 and more. That is the kind of contestant I could never identify with. The kind of contestant I love to watch are people like Kevin Smith, Nancy Christy, and Armand Kachigian. They all took big risks on Question 14 and won. Two of them went on to become Millionaires. Armand didn't answer the last question (even though on the promos in Michigan, he said he would risk it), but I don't remember if he would have answered it right or not.
Let me clarify one thing, though. I never said that I would GUESS on the last question. What I meant is that if Question 15 came up, and I thought that I knew the answer with some confidence behind it, I would go for it, even if I wasn't completely sure. I don't know what I would do on Super Millionaire, though.
I do agree with you on one thing Mr. Ottinger. Guessing on the $1 million question would be really stupid. Guessing on the $10 million question? Get the men in white coats ready.
-
[quote name=\'STYDfan\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 10:27 PM\']<snip>I guess seeing so many people blow a chance to win more money because they don't have confidence is the only reason I hate the show sometimes.
At your ages, Mr. Ottinger, Mr. O'Brien, and Mr. Lemon, I can understand that you may be more risk averse, depending on your situation. I'm just that saying that at this particular stage in my life, I would not be ashamed if I missed the last question, seeing as how I would STILL have $32,000.
[/quote]
You're certainly entitled to your opinion. Remember, though, that opinion is based on the perspective of sitting at home in your easy chair watching from that vantage point. As contestants from time immemorial have said, "It looks so EASY at home!" It does. When you've got Regis or Meredith sitting 5 feet away from you, and the lights, the music and hundreds of people watching you, it's hard sometimes to stick to that game plan you formulated in your easy chair. It's not always strictly a lack of confidence.
"At our ages"? Chris, Matt...get out your wheelchairs. I'll race you to the dining room for an extra helping of mush.
-
[quote name=\'Fedya\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 10:19 AM\'] [quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 03:29 AM\'] [quote name=\'ChuckNet\' date=\'Jan 30 2004, 06:26 PM\']Harry Eisenberg's J! book mentions a legally-blind contestant who had the misfortune of getting a Video DD during her game...whatever her guess was, it was incorrect, but she took it very graciously.[/quote]
Forgive me for questioning the man, but I'm having a hard time swallowing that bit of trivia. There wasn't a single visual clue when Eddie Timanus was playing, was there? [/quote]
There was a legally-blind woman who was on J! back in the late '80s, IIRC. She got a Video DD with a picture of a drawing from Gray's Anatomy and had to identify the book it appeared in. From what I remember reading somewhere, she said the picture looked like spaghetti to her. [/quote]
I thought it was more recent than that, but I'll back you up on the incident. I saw the ep myself.
-
BTW, Kachigian guessed wrong when he walked.
And hard to stick to your game plan? Sometimes it is, and sometimes it's not.
If you guys were to see ME in the hot seat (and it just might happen), obviously you'd expect me to stick to my game plan. For example, When I'm watching at home, and see that a contestant plans to use the PAF Lifeline, I always shout out: "Use the 50:50 first, THEN the PAF, that way, if you have to repeat ANY choices, you only have to repeat TWO instead of FOUR."
Why? Because, if you repeat all FOUR choices, you might end up taking more time on the clock. When you have TWO choices, you can repeat the choices and still have time to talk over the answers and the question.
This is one game plan that really can help you. Really.
-
So... you would burn an extra lifeline to shave 2-3 seconds off the clock when doing Phone-a-Friend?
Yeah, send me a copy of that fat check, dude.
-
[quote name=\'parliboy\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 10:38 PM\'] So... you would burn an extra lifeline to shave 2-3 seconds off the clock when doing Phone-a-Friend?
Yeah, send me a copy of that fat check, dude. [/quote]
Let me reiterate what I just said:
If you end up repeating all FOUR choices, you're taking more time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you may or may not have enough time to talk over the question and the choices.
If you end up repeating only TWO choices, you're taking less time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you definitely WILL have enough time (or more than enough) to talk over the question and the choices.
I am using this plan if, and only IF, I get into the hot seat.
If you don't like the idea of this when you get into the hot seat, that's fine. But don't say I didn't warn you!
(A bit OT: BTW, post 500 for me!)
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 11:42 PM\'] [quote name=\'parliboy\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 10:38 PM\'] So... you would burn an extra lifeline to shave 2-3 seconds off the clock when doing Phone-a-Friend?
Yeah, send me a copy of that fat check, dude. [/quote]
Let me reiterate what I just said:
If you end up repeating all FOUR choices, you're taking more time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you may or may not have enough time to talk over the question and the choices.
If you end up repeating only TWO choices, you're taking less time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you definitely WILL have enough time (or more than enough) to talk over the question and the choices.
I am using this plan if, and only IF, I get into the hot seat.
If you don't like the idea of this when you get into the hot seat, that's fine. But don't say I didn't warn you!
(A bit OT: BTW, post 500 for me!) [/quote]
How is "taking less time off the clock than you wanted to" any different from "shav[ing] 2-3 seconds off the clock"?
Your plan and your subsequent attempt to explain it are positively underwhelming.
-
On how many national and/or local game shows have you appeared, gameshowguy2000?
-
[quote name=\'parliboy\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 11:38 PM\'] So... you would burn an extra lifeline to shave 2-3 seconds off the clock when doing Phone-a-Friend?
Yeah, send me a copy of that fat check, dude. [/quote]
Don't you understand, Gene? You're also supposed to burn up the Ask the Audience lifeline at the same time. That way, the extra 2-3 seconds you save by burning up the 50/50 can be used to discuss how the audience voted. It's pure genius!
-
In my opinion, you should never use the 50-50 before another lifeline, as it can influence the audience/paf to guess at an answer. If the paf or audience really knows it, they will know it with 4 choices instead of just 2.
-
[quote name=\'SplitSecond\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 10:53 PM\'] On how many national and/or local game shows have you appeared, gameshowguy2000? [/quote]
Zilch.
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Feb 2 2004, 01:07 AM\'] In my opinion, you should never use the 50-50 before another lifeline, as it can influence the audience/paf to guess at an answer. If the paf or audience really knows it, they will know it with 4 choices instead of just 2. [/quote]
I totally agree, Eric.
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 09:42 PM\'] Let me reiterate what I just said:
If you end up repeating all FOUR choices, you're taking more time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you may or may not have enough time to talk over the question and the choices.
If you end up repeating only TWO choices, you're taking less time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you definitely WILL have enough time (or more than enough) to talk over the question and the choices. [/quote]
Yeah, you were high when you said it the first time, and yer high now.
Each of the lifelines has their own specific uses for their own specific situations. There is no way in HELL I am wasting a lifeline on a question begging for a Googling when I can save that lifeline for a big-bucks question that I have narrowed down to two choices, especially when with the new random-elimination system the odds are 66% in my favor that doing so will lock in a right answer.
If you don't like the idea of this when you get into the hot seat, that's fine. But don't say I didn't warn you!
You have as much right to use this gameplan as I do to think it's utterly ridiculous.
(A bit OT: BTW, post 500 for me!)
Quality, not quantity.
[That said, cue Also Sprach Zarathustra.]
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 11:42 PM\']If you end up repeating all FOUR choices, you're taking more time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you may or may not have enough time to talk over the question and the choices.
If you end up repeating only TWO choices, you're taking less time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you definitely WILL have enough time (or more than enough) to talk over the question and the choices.
I am using this plan if, and only IF, I get into the hot seat.
If you don't like the idea of this when you get into the hot seat, that's fine. But don't say I didn't warn you!
(A bit OT: BTW, post 500 for me!)[/quote]
So...let me get this straight. At $2,000, you blank out on a pop culture question (say, number of Julia Roberts' marriages or Britney Spears' bust size of the week) and you use the 50:50? That's a slam-dunk for the audience. Saving the ATA for the high-level questions makes good sense--assuming the tour group from the Association of Atomic Scientists happens to be in the audience that day.
Reading the answers to the PAF quickly and not stopping for extraneous chatter ("Hi, Dad!") can make the difference between 2 and 4 answers pretty much a wash.
And you can't assume that you and your PAF will definitely have time to discuss the question--they've been known to blank out, too.
-
[quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Feb 2 2004, 12:42 AM\'] [quote name=\'parliboy\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 10:38 PM\'] So... you would burn an extra lifeline to shave 2-3 seconds off the clock when doing Phone-a-Friend?
Yeah, send me a copy of that fat check, dude. [/quote]
Let me reiterate what I just said:
If you end up repeating all FOUR choices, you're taking more time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you may or may not have enough time to talk over the question and the choices.
If you end up repeating only TWO choices, you're taking less time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you definitely WILL have enough time (or more than enough) to talk over the question and the choices.
I am using this plan if, and only IF, I get into the hot seat.
If you don't like the idea of this when you get into the hot seat, that's fine. But don't say I didn't warn you!
(A bit OT: BTW, post 500 for me!) [/quote]
If you get an early pop-culture question that you do not know (or in my case a vocabulary question lol), use the ATA. 50/50 should always be saved for last as it is the most reliable lifeline (unless you have a really good googler). There is no reason to save ATA for after $32K (except for those rare occasions). Unless, of course, you know all of the questions from $100 - $32,000 and you do not need a lifeline.
I speak from experience when I say that a lot of the planning you may do will go out the window when you sit in that seat. You never know what kind of stack you will get and how you will react to it. I swore that I would not use a lifeline before $1,000 and that went out the window.
Tim :-)
-
[quote name=\'tomobrien\' date=\'Feb 2 2004, 07:44 AM\'] [quote name=\'gameshowguy2000\' date=\'Feb 1 2004, 11:42 PM\']If you end up repeating all FOUR choices, you're taking more time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you may or may not have enough time to talk over the question and the choices.
If you end up repeating only TWO choices, you're taking less time off the clock than you wanted to. This means you definitely WILL have enough time (or more than enough) to talk over the question and the choices.
I am using this plan if, and only IF, I get into the hot seat.
If you don't like the idea of this when you get into the hot seat, that's fine. But don't say I didn't warn you!
(A bit OT: BTW, post 500 for me!)[/quote]
So...let me get this straight. At $2,000, you blank out on a pop culture question (say, number of Julia Roberts' marriages or Britney Spears' bust size of the week) and you use the 50:50? That's a slam-dunk for the audience. Saving the ATA for the high-level questions makes good sense--assuming the tour group from the Association of Atomic Scientists happens to be in the audience that day.
Reading the answers to the PAF quickly and not stopping for extraneous chatter ("Hi, Dad!") can make the difference between 2 and 4 answers pretty much a wash.
And you can't assume that you and your PAF will definitely have time to discuss the question--they've been known to blank out, too. [/quote]
I have to disagree with gameshowguy as well. If your Phone-A-Friends really know their stuff, then they will know the answer with four or two answers. If you knew one or two answers that weren't right, you could simply not say them at all. That would be the same effect as the 50:50 without having to use it. You could also tell your Phone-A-Friends that you wouldn't repeat the answers. Maybe then they would listen more closely and you could save time that way.
One more thing, though. Don't underestimate the audience. I saw them help someone answer Question 12 correctly (about 60% of them were right) on the syndie version, and on Millionaire Bowl over 60% of the audience were right on Question 13, but the contestant didn't trust them.
-
I think this is the longest thread we've ever had in the post-Usenet days, no? I can't recall any other threads going to seven pages of posts.
-
One more thing, though. Don't underestimate the audience. I saw them help someone answer Question 12 correctly (about 60% of them were right) on the syndie version, and on Millionaire Bowl over 60% of the audience were right on Question 13, but the contestant didn't trust them.
If you are referring to the question about bikes for $125,000, I was in the audience that day (the show aired near Merle Glickman's show). I sat there amazed that the contestant would trust the audience and go for it (the percentage was 50-60%, I can't remember exactly).
However, that is a rare exception of the audience of being help after 32K. Of course, this is hard to prove because we don't see the audience vote on many questions after 32K.
-
I think the audience could be extremely helpful after the $32k question, if the right questions came up. There was a question worth either $125 or $250 asking how many stories tall the Statue of Liberty is. If I had the ATA there, I would most likely go with what the audience said, both because of the New Yorkers but also because there's a good chance the tourists in the crowd may have heard something about the Statue's height during their trip.
I also recall that the Millionaire after Kevin Olmsted (Bernie Cullen?) ATAed on question 15 before using the 50:50 (some question about what letter appears on commercial airliners or something like that) and I think he actually got a majority or a high plurality for the right answer.
-
[quote name=\'goongas\' date=\'Feb 2 2004, 01:00 PM\']
One more thing, though. Don't underestimate the audience. I saw them help someone answer Question 12 correctly (about 60% of them were right) on the syndie version, and on Millionaire Bowl over 60% of the audience were right on Question 13, but the contestant didn't trust them.
If you are referring to the question about bikes for $125,000, I was in the audience that day (the show aired near Merle Glickman's show). I sat there amazed that the contestant would trust the audience and go for it (the percentage was 50-60%, I can't remember exactly).
However, that is a rare exception of the audience of being help after 32K. Of course, this is hard to prove because we don't see the audience vote on many questions after 32K. [/quote]
I guess it happened more than once then. I was talking about the episode where the audience knew that m is the letter used to stand for the slope of a line. I think Meredith said something about him being the first one to answer Question 12 correctly on her series.
-
It was true when I played in the Hot Seat at Cal Adventure the first time.
I _H A T E_ using two Lifelines for the same question.
If you think the Phoner might know, then use the Phone first. He might at least be able to eliminate a couple right off or give a good idea.
Whoever suggests the 50-50 and then the Phone on the same question has NO CLUE how to play Millionaire.
I hope that, if I qualify for Super, your butt is in one of the other seats so I can go past you like you were standing still.
-
I'm not high on using the ATA (except as a throwaway) on Tier III -- I understand that there are cases (like the $500K Pokemon question) that it might help, but, in most cases, the questions are meant to be difficult enough that you might as well toss in for a four-way split.
I mean, if it's for straight 10X the stakes up the line and I had the ATA only left at, say, $5M, I walk and leave it on the table and take my $2.5M and smile.
-
[quote name=\'starcade\' date=\'Feb 2 2004, 07:05 PM\'] I'm not high on using the ATA (except as a throwaway) on Tier III -- I understand that there are cases (like the $500K Pokemon question) that it might help, but, in most cases, the questions are meant to be difficult enough that you might as well toss in for a four-way split.
I mean, if it's for straight 10X the stakes up the line and I had the ATA only left at, say, $5M, I walk and leave it on the table and take my $2.5M and smile. [/quote]
Why wouldn't you use it? Is it the same premise as the guy that left the 50:50 on the table, that you would be too tempted to go for it if the audience gave you a majority?
-
I'm not high on using the ATA (except as a throwaway) on Tier III -- I understand that there are cases (like the $500K Pokemon question) that it might help, but, in most cases, the questions are meant to be difficult enough that you might as well toss in for a four-way split.
Even on questions where the audience has been split (let's say 30-25-25-20), the higher percentage is usually the right answer.
But if I was sitting at $250,000 and not sure enough, I'd walk away too.