The Game Show Forum > The Big Board
5 Least Favorite Current Pricing Games
Jeremy Nelson:
--- Quote from: Dbacksfan12 on December 16, 2024, 10:53:24 PM ---Plinko--The audience gets stupidly riled up for this, which I have not understood. This is a rare case where I think bumping up some of the lower slots would be helpful.
--- End quote ---
What’s bothered me about Plinko more is that they keep adding chrome to their already-chromiest game. Some time post-COVID they started playing a Dig We Must cut for every $10k win, which sounds so out of place. Also, it’s still the one game without a max winner. My idea of “small prizes increase a multiplier for one single chip drop” got lost in the mail somewhere.
--- Quote from: chris319 on December 17, 2024, 09:20:27 PM ---The few times I've seen "To the Penny", it seems awfully awkward and doesn't work visually.
--- End quote ---
It has a rule set more in line with a money tier game show than Price’s simplicity. Remove the “spend a penny to remove wrong answers” option and just charge one penny for every wrong guess.
TLEberle:
As much as I love Jeremy's Plinko idea you still have the chance of multiplying by a low amount, but those are the breaks. For a long time you had an 80% chance to punch a sub-$1,000 card and so be it.
I've come around after its first playing--I think To the Penny is a worthy successor to Penny Ante and a player can use strategy to move through the rounds. My only hangup is the name--of course it's to the penny, every grocery item is.
The great thing about TPIR is that with so many games you're bound to like at least something they do every day if you don't love all of it. And if you don't find at least something to like, I question why it would be tuned in.
Dbacksfan12:
--- Quote from: Jeremy Nelson on December 17, 2024, 10:25:15 PM ---
--- Quote from: Dbacksfan12 on December 16, 2024, 10:53:24 PM ---Plinko--The audience gets stupidly riled up for this, which I have not understood. This is a rare case where I think bumping up some of the lower slots would be helpful.
--- End quote ---
What’s bothered me about Plinko more is that they keep adding chrome to their already-chromiest game. Some time post-COVID they started playing a Dig We Must cut for every $10k win, which sounds so out of place. Also, it’s still the one game without a max winner. My idea of “small prizes increase a multiplier for one single chip drop” got lost in the mail somewhere.
--- End quote ---
That's not the worst idea I've heard. Out of curiosity, are you keeping the zeroes, or do they disappear at some point?
wdm1219inpenna:
This Plinko idea is intriguing.
Are you suggesting the game be played with just one chip total?
I've often felt that for each chip that is dropped, if it does not land into $10,000 slot that it should increase by $10,000, so a player with 4 chips could miss the center slot the first 3 drops but if the 4th chip landed in the middle, their cash total would be augmented to $40,000. THEN Plinko would be a far more worthwhile game!
I recall at least once a woman won all 4 Plinko chips and she ended up getting all zeroes. Perfect pricing and she won ZERO dollars. Yes she won the 4 small prizes, each worth less than $100, but for a huge cash game such as Stinko...but I imagine the powers that be on the show and CBS would never consider trying this idea. For one budgetary issues are considered and for another, so many past players of Plinko might feel slighted by the rule changes but that's just how it goes. Rule changes happen with games all the time.
Kevin Prather:
I'd sooner replace the $0s with $500s or something. Decide what you want the minimum prize for a five-chipper to be, and divide it by five.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version