Author Topic: Millionaire Changes (Read 57447 times)

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #45 on:** August 20, 2010, 07:01:23 PM »

Just reading this for the first time today, and I must say I'm ... disappointed. I think they're trying to change the game too much. This was a phenomenon at one time for a reason. They shouldn't mess with what works.

clemon79 · « **Reply #46 on:** August 20, 2010, 07:03:54 PM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'246193\' date=\'Aug 20 2010, 04:01 PM\']This was a phenomenon at one time for a reason.[/quote]
And that reason was "nothing like it had been done before."

Guess what's happened between then and now?

Ian Wallis · « **Reply #47 on:** August 20, 2010, 07:07:58 PM »

Quote

And that reason was "nothing like it had been done before."

Guess what's happened between then and now?

I understand your point but Millionaire was the original, has been on the air longer than any of the others and is still a recognizable "brand". I can understand making some changes now and then to "freshen it up a bit", but based on what I've read it hardly seems like the same game anymore.

clemon79 · « **Reply #48 on:** August 20, 2010, 07:20:24 PM »

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'246196\' date=\'Aug 20 2010, 04:07 PM\']I understand your point but Millionaire was the original, has been on the air longer than any of the others and is still a recognizable "brand".[/quote]
It'll still look like Millionaire. I promise.

/once again, people can't handle a little change

NickS · « **Reply #49 on:** August 20, 2010, 07:25:24 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'246200\' date=\'Aug 20 2010, 06:20 PM\']It'll still look like Millionaire. I promise.

/once again, some people can't handle a little change (especially when they haven't seen the actual changes yet)[/quote]

FTFY - not all people can't handle a little change.

/WHAT BUT I LIKED HASSELHOFF ON AMERICA'S GOT TALENT

clemon79 · « **Reply #50 on:** August 20, 2010, 07:54:48 PM »

[quote name=\'TeppanYaki\' post=\'246201\' date=\'Aug 20 2010, 04:25 PM\']FTFY - not all people can't handle a little change.[/quote]
Fair enough.

Quote

/WHAT BUT I LIKED HASSELHOFF ON AMERICA'S GOT TALENT

You haven't seen "irony" until you've seen Jeffrey Ross telling Hasselhoff his career is in the crapper. At least Teh Hoff can sing.

NickS · « **Reply #51 on:** August 20, 2010, 08:30:42 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'246205\' date=\'Aug 20 2010, 06:54 PM\']You haven't seen "irony" until you've seen Jeffrey Ross telling Hasselhoff his career is in the crapper. At least Teh Hoff can sing.

[/quote]

I haven't seen that part of the roast. I did, however, see Lampinelli's routine. Wow. A couple of jokes away from an Aristocrats-worthy performance (although the Hulk Hogan jokes were awesome).

ObMillionaire: I'm more curious than worried about the changes; I'll be tuning in to see how it goes, that's for sure.

GiraffeBoy · « **Reply #52 on:** August 21, 2010, 04:15:37 AM »

Format seems to feel a bit like DoND or the WoF Bonus Round. You don't know what you'll get for answering the question until later.

I don't mind the Jumps. When I was playing along with the WWTBAM Page-a-Day calendar some years ago, I used three passes for lifelines (couldn't pass on the last two questions). I found it fun.

I'm in the same boat with Mr. Lemon; I'm waiting to see how this goes.

--Charlie

/I'll actually miss the clock

Loogaroo · « **Reply #53 on:** August 21, 2010, 08:14:21 AM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'246200\' date=\'Aug 20 2010, 04:20 PM\']/once again, people can't handle a little change[/quote]

To be fair, this is not a "little" change. This is a major alteration to the show's payout structure, as well as a major cosmetic change to the show wherein the show's most iconic set pieces - the chairs at center stage - will be no more.

I'm not suggesting that the sky is falling, but I also don't begrudge anyone feeling a little queasy about the show's direction at this point.

clemon79 · « **Reply #54 on:** August 21, 2010, 11:58:02 PM »

[quote name=\'Loogaroo\' post=\'246215\' date=\'Aug 21 2010, 05:14 AM\']To be fair, this is not a "little" change.[/quote]
Fine. I'll FTFM:
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'246200\' date=\'Aug 20 2010, 04:20 PM\']/once again, people can't handle a ~~little~~ change[/quote]
Better?

Joe Mello · « **Reply #55 on:** August 22, 2010, 12:07:04 AM »

I agree with the above sentiments that this is not Millionaire anymore, but that does not inherently imply the show is down the toilet. It's interesting at the very least, though I would be really tempted to ditch AtA in favor of a 3rd Jump.

I think it's ironic that a show that was considered a pioneer is now, at least to my eyes, an amalgam of UK game show tropes from the past 3-5 years.

TLEberle · « **Reply #56 on:** August 22, 2010, 05:00:05 PM »

[quote name=\'Loogaroo\' post=\'246215\' date=\'Aug 21 2010, 05:14 AM\']I'm not suggesting that the sky is falling, but I also don't begrudge anyone feeling a little queasy about the show's direction at this point.[/quote]This is where I'm at. I really liked the first two years of the show, but understand why things like the reduction in the prize budget happened. But when you add in things like the clock, the Expert, the Tournament, the jiggering of the money, it comes off as throwing stuff against the wall to see what will get a momentary ratings bump, instead of sticking with the fundamentals. And if the fundamentals aren't doing it for you, maybe people are just tired of the show. I kept watching, because I like playing along with the questions.

Just because I'm suspicious of change doesn't mean I can't handle it.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #57 on:** August 22, 2010, 05:34:35 PM »

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'246250\' date=\'Aug 22 2010, 05:00 PM\']it comes off as throwing stuff against the wall to see what will get a momentary ratings bump, instead of sticking with the fundamentals. And if the fundamentals aren't doing it for you, maybe people are just tired of the show.[/quote]
Which is all well and good, but if the choices come down to "well, people are tired of our show, so we should cancel it and all be unemployed" or "well, people are tired of our show, so we should make some changes that keep us on the air", the precious sanctity of the format is not going to be a major consideration.

TLEberle · « **Reply #58 on:** August 22, 2010, 05:38:31 PM »

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'246251\' date=\'Aug 22 2010, 02:34 PM\']Which is all well and good, but if the choices come down to "well, people are tired of our show, so we should cancel it and all be unemployed" or "well, people are tired of our show, so we should make some changes that keep us on the air", the precious sanctity of the format is not going to be a major consideration.[/quote]Granted, but who actually raised their hand at the brainstorming session and said "We should take the chairs away and make everyone stand up during gameplay!". That isn't the format, that's putting a new hat on Malibu Stacy and hoping that all of the second-graders will buy it because she has a new hat.

It is completely possible that the shuffling of the money and questions, as well as the allowing a player to pass over a question could add layers of strategy and depth to what had been up until then a fairly uncomplicated quiz game. Maybe it will be a convoluted mess and by November they'll dismiss the idea as a terrible mistake. We won't know until then.

Kevin Prather · « **Reply #59 on:** August 22, 2010, 07:38:09 PM »

Somebody earlier in the thread said it pretty well, I thought. They said to the effect of "It sounds like a great game, but not Millionaire." Sure, it's not Classic Millionaire, and that's just gonna have to be accepted. If you divorce this new Millionaire from Classic Millionaire, it'll probably be a great game in its own right.