Author Topic: Say Hello to The Money Drop (Read 11106 times)

TLEberle · « **Reply #30 on:** November 19, 2010, 02:07:06 AM »

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'251226\' date=\'Nov 18 2010, 11:00 PM\'][quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'251225\' date=\'Nov 18 2010, 10:52 PM\'][quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'251224\' date=\'Nov 18 2010, 10:46 PM\']Maybe I don't understand the format, but if the prize declines in value, how is that not anticlimactic?[/quote]Because they're getting closer to winning something, and any wrong answer ends the game completely.[/quote]
Uh, OK. You must see something in it I don't.[/quote]Not really. With each correct answer you move closer to the finish line. If you hedge, your grand prize is smaller. What would be anticlimactic is if someone hedged 90-5-5 and it turned out that one of the "backup" answers was correct after all and the team is now playing for $50,000 instead of $900,000.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #31 on:** November 19, 2010, 09:22:09 AM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'251227\' date=\'Nov 19 2010, 02:07 AM\']Not really. With each correct answer you move closer to the finish line.[/quote]
But as Chris said, this is true in any ladder game. The difference in this one is that after every question, what you're playing for is at best the same amount of money, but usually will be less.

When the game begins, you're playing for A MILLION DOLLARS! Using your example above, you get the first question correct and hey, congratulations! Now you're only playing for $900,000! Woo hoo! You got the question right, and you lost $100,000!!!!!

Call it anticlimactic, call it counterintuitive, call it whatever cool adjective you want, but it violates a cardinal rule of game structure, at least as far as what American audiences have come to expect. Shows certainly have gotten on the air with a few of those cardinal rules broken in the past. Some have even been successful, though not many and never for very long.

Kniwt · « **Reply #32 on:** November 19, 2010, 10:45:19 AM »

For me, one of the fascinations with Million Pound Drop was that it was live -- and things happened. F-words got dropped (it's OK on late-night British TV, so no problem there), camera shots were rough and sometimes misfocused, and there was the hilarious blooper on the final episode of Series 2: In Question 8, the answers were Christina Aguilera and Britney Spears, and the question that came up on the screen was "Which of these was created first?" Davina recovered quickly and went to her cards for backup to get the actual question.

As so many have pointed out, the game itself is rather pedestrian. Knowing that an episode has been post-produced to ratchet up the emotion, tension, and all the other elements of a modern prime-time U.S. game show, the weakness of the game itself is likely to stand out even more.

colonial · « **Reply #33 on:** November 19, 2010, 11:48:51 AM »

Two things that I liked about the UK version of the show was that...

1) It was live
2) Contestants were recruited via social media sites

Those two aspects gave the show a bit of an early WWTBAM vibe to it -- aspect #2 due to the fact that it was essentially a show where anyone and everyone could audition for the show; You didn't have to be a "native of Los Angeles" to qualify.

That's nowhere to be found here. Fox could have done this on 10-second delay or same-day tape, but chose it to do it the way most modern game shows are produced -- heavily edited with tons of post-production.

I'll give the show a chance -- always watch at least one episode of every new game show that comes on the market -- and I hope it does well, but I have my doubts.

JD

Neumms · « **Reply #34 on:** November 19, 2010, 02:10:21 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'251233\' date=\'Nov 19 2010, 09:22 AM\']Call it anticlimactic, call it counterintuitive, call it whatever cool adjective you want, but it violates a cardinal rule of game structure, at least as far as what American audiences have come to expect. Shows certainly have gotten on the air with a few of those cardinal rules broken in the past. Some have even been successful, though not many and never for very long.[/quote]

Heaven knows you're right, but. . . there's the story that when it first came out, Monopoly violated 10 or 20 or 50 rules of board structure. Rules are made to be broken, as long as you do it consciously. Then again, it's not like Fox to put a lot of care into anything. This comes off like every other game show since "Millionaire," which then exposes the flaws.

You have to imagine that the first questions will be gimmies, so the stakes don't decrease too fast.

Fedya · « **Reply #35 on:** November 19, 2010, 02:36:51 PM »

[quote name=\'Kniwt\' post=\'251238\' date=\'Nov 19 2010, 10:45 AM\']For me, one of the fascinations with Million Pound Drop was that it was live -- and things happened. F-words got dropped (it's OK on late-night British TV, so no problem there), camera shots were rough and sometimes misfocused, and there was the hilarious blooper on the final episode of Series 2: In Question 8, the answers were Christina Aguilera and Britney Spears, and the question that came up on the screen was "Which of these was created first?" Davina recovered quickly and went to her cards for backup to get the actual question.[/quote]
Unless they're twins, the question does have a valid answer. ;-)

Brig Bother · « **Reply #36 on:** November 19, 2010, 02:52:05 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'251233\' date=\'Nov 19 2010, 02:22 PM\']Call it anticlimactic, call it counterintuitive, call it whatever cool adjective you want, but it violates a cardinal rule of game structure, at least as far as what American audiences have come to expect. Shows certainly have gotten on the air with a few of those cardinal rules broken in the past. Some have even been successful, though not many and never for very long.[/quote]

Yes, I said exactly this when the UK version began, but that hasn't stopped it being a relative success.

To put this in perspective, the show over here gets about 2m viewers for Channel 4. That's actually not all that much (it means 58m aren't watching it, for example), but they're good numbers *for Channel 4* in the timeslot, and it does especially well in the target young demographic. And it's cheap.

The US show seems to be throwing money at the format and making it less edgy and removing the exciting live aspect. Whether this is going to appeal to anyone remains to be seen, but I suspect it will do well enough (if unspectacularly so) that it will get another run when Fox have a gap that needs filling. I'm certainly not going round calling it *the* hot new format with those sorts of numbers, but it is selling in the way that Endemol formats often do.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #37 on:** November 19, 2010, 03:25:56 PM »

[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'251243\' date=\'Nov 19 2010, 02:10 PM\']You have to imagine that the first questions will be gimmies, so the stakes don't decrease too fast.[/quote]
Nope, it doesn't work like that (at least the UK version doesn't), because the point of the show is watching the players discuss and debate the question, plus you've got the "dramatic" reveal of the correct answer, all of which is out the window on a gimme question. In fact, of the UK games I've seen, I can only remember one that was even a standard trivia question (of four tyrannical leaders, which one was fictional?). All the others were, for lack of a better term, Greed-like, based on surveys or chronologies that virtually no one is going to know for sure, but about which you could make some logical guesses. The sample that FOX is using in its publicity -- What's the most popular side dish for Thanksgiving? -- is pretty typical.

DoorNumberFour · « **Reply #38 on:** November 19, 2010, 04:05:37 PM »

Personally - just the fact that it's not going to be live takes a lot of the appeal away for me. The live aspect of the UK version is what drew me to it, so I think I'll just be sticking with that.

Mr. Armadillo · « **Reply #39 on:** November 19, 2010, 05:03:10 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'251248\' date=\'Nov 19 2010, 02:25 PM\'][quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'251243\' date=\'Nov 19 2010, 02:10 PM\']You have to imagine that the first questions will be gimmies, so the stakes don't decrease too fast.[/quote]
Nope, it doesn't work like that (at least the UK version doesn't), because the point of the show is watching the players discuss and debate the question, plus you've got the "dramatic" reveal of the correct answer, all of which is out the window on a gimme question. [/quote]
In other words, you've just described exactly why there will be gimme questions.

Neumms · « **Reply #40 on:** November 20, 2010, 12:58:27 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'251248\' date=\'Nov 19 2010, 03:25 PM\']In fact, of the UK games I've seen, I can only remember one that was even a standard trivia question (of four tyrannical leaders, which one was fictional?). All the others were, for lack of a better term, Greed-like, based on surveys or chronologies that virtually no one is going to know for sure, but about which you could make some logical guesses. The sample that FOX is using in its publicity -- What's the most popular side dish for Thanksgiving? -- is pretty typical.[/quote]

Ewww! Crud!

One canny element of this formula, then, is that players are forced into staking money on "guess" questions. They avoid Greed's pitfall that to get to the top of their ladder, they had to keep finding kooks. It's fun and exciting to see the goofball once in a while--like Dan Avila or the guy who gave up $5000 on TPIR's Grand Game--but it gives you an icky feeling. DoND and WWTBAM both have ways to make the colossal wager a smart (albeit gutsy) bet.

vtown7 · « **Reply #41 on:** November 20, 2010, 03:40:02 PM »

Apparently Fox has already decided they like it:
So much so that they're double running it...

Ryan.

Jimmy Owen · « **Reply #42 on:** November 20, 2010, 04:00:58 PM »

[quote name=\'vtown7\' post=\'251295\' date=\'Nov 20 2010, 03:40 PM\']Apparently Fox has already decided they like it:
So much so that they're double running it...

Ryan.[/quote]
Liking it or burning it off? If I'm reading the article right, the show will follow previously aired episodes of "Glee." Musicals historically don't repeat well.

toetyper · « **Reply #43 on:** November 20, 2010, 04:31:23 PM »

just to clarify-- you must wager all your money on eveery question right?

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #44 on:** November 20, 2010, 05:24:35 PM »

[quote name=\'toetyper\' post=\'251303\' date=\'Nov 20 2010, 04:31 PM\']just to clarify-- you must wager all your money on every question right?[/quote]
Yes, it all has to be wagered on every question. You can spread it among as many answers as you want any way you want, except that one choice (the one you think is least likely to be correct) must be left vacant. You only keep the money you place on the correct answer, of course. Everything else goes bye-bye.

Again, this is how the UK version works. There are some rumors that the US version has been retooled in ways we don't know yet.