Improve One Pricing Game...

[Otm Shank]

This one is more aesthetics, but the zig-zagging Golden Road always bugged me, because the "road" on the floor was all over the place. I get the idea was to keep having the Big Prize visible throughout, and when cameras were larger, it was probably impossible to progress across the stage.

I originally thought the <$1 podium could be behind the turntable (with the ability to really bling out the start position). However, that puts the contestant at a weird angle to see the prizes (maybe it could work if they weren't right next to the turntable). With the jib camera, it seems like they could really show the "road" better as it progresses behind/in front of each door.

[Kevin Prather]

Two things always bugged me about Give or Keep: you weren’t actually “giving away” anything, and the “keep more than you give away” mechanic rewarded greed.

So, how about this:

(snip)

That reminds me of my great idea to fix Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy. The winner should be the one who lets the other players win the most money.

[Dbacksfan12]

So, how about this:
<snip>

Are you going to have a red kettle on the stage next to the game?

Your idea is overly complicated and doesn't make any real changes other than to assuage your feelings that it's "greedy" to complete the game's objective.

[JasonA1]

I think that's an overly harsh reaction. Using an extra person from the studio audience would at least be innovative, and the idea of why you want to give them better stuff is easy to explain. "If you give [him/her] more than you keep for yourself, then we'll reward your generosity with [the bonus prize]."

That said, I get more pause from whether or not it's worth all the time it would take from a modern episode to pick that person, explain the game, and play it the way they used to, all to give another person the types of items Give or Keep used. I think there'd be (unnecessary) attention placed on those prizes being desirable vs. games like Secret X where they're just a means to an end.

-Jason

[Joe Mello]

Using an extra person from the studio audience would at least be innovative, and the idea of why you want to give them better stuff is easy to explain. "If you give [him/her] more than you keep for yourself, then we'll reward your generosity with [the bonus prize]."

That said, I get more pause from whether or not it's worth all the time it would take from a modern episode to pick that person, explain the game, and play it the way they used to, all to give another person the types of items Give or Keep used. I think there'd be (unnecessary) attention placed on those prizes being desirable vs. games like Secret X where they're just a means to an end.

The solution to the time-sink problem is to make it an online giveaway like they sometimes do for one-bid prizes.