The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: BMaurice06 on July 17, 2006, 03:12:01 PM
-
Recently I've been toying with my own idea for another possible Pyramid revival. Basically I would revert the entire show back to the classic 100K format with two minor changes:
1. In the main game, to give the contestants a little bit of a challenge, I'd make it 7-out-of-7 in 25 seconds. Even back then, I thought it looked too easy to get 7 words in 30 seconds.
2. I would make the top prize in the tournament a growing jackpot, starting at the traditional $100,000 and adding $25,000 a day until somebody wins it.
-
Uh...yeah. If somebody knocks off a tough $100,000-level endgame in day 1, you're going to penalize them for not losing for five days straight, where a win would've been worth $225,000? Bzzt. Gong. Wrong answer.
-Jason
-
I wish people would stop posting with ways of enhancing a show if it were to come back.
-
[quote name=\'aaron sica\' post=\'124369\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 12:37 PM\']
I wish people would stop posting with ways of enhancing a show if it were to come back.
[/quote]
Especially this one, which WAS NEVER BROKEN.
Really. Every single "enhancement" to this show, from the day that Dick Clark stepped away from the podium, has made the show poorer. Davidson. "Double Trouble". "Gamble For A Grand". 6-in-20. Briefed celebrities. Hell, ALL of Donnymid. I haven't seen ONE SINGLE THING that made me say "wow, that would have been rad to see on the Clark show."
Now, I haven't seen a single thing in BMaurice06's nine posts to suggest that he's worthy of even a second of my time or consideration, but maybe someone else can take something useful out of this.
-
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'124362\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 03:12 PM\']
2. I would make the top prize in the tournament a growing jackpot, starting at the traditional $100,000 and adding $25,000 a day until somebody wins it.
[/quote]
You'd go broke
John
-
[quote name=\'jrjgames\' post=\'124372\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 03:53 PM\']You'd go broke[/quote]
. . . or learn in a hurry the importance of putting "Things That Are Red" in the top box around day 10.
I find progressive jackpots to range from "mildly irritating" to "oh god why". "Because you happened to come onto the show after the last 10 contestants stunk up the joint, you're playing for $50,000!"
Equal time moment: I was neutral on 6-in-20, considering the increased ad time. If Donnymid had had a better caliber of players overall, I think it would have annoyed fewer people.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'124381\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 03:16 PM\']
Equal time moment: I was neutral on 6-in-20, considering the increased ad time. If Donnymid had had a better caliber of players overall, I think it would have annoyed fewer people.
[/quote]
Honestly? Wouldn't change the fact that they freakin' broke the Winner's Circle. That's always been the corker for me.
-
I fully agree with not using a progressive jackpot. That's about the only thing I DIDN'T like about the $20K version, since it practically begged a champ to throw the first two Winner's Circles so that they could really cash in later.
I will side with the 6-in-20 rule not being a great killer to the show. It was a new challenge for the hardcores like us, and hey, a good number of us went to try out, just like they probably knew we would.
But that notwithstanding, you also have to consider that the quality of the players they DID get in the beginning cannot be faulted, either. Remember that this was the first new version of Pyramid in 10 years, so anyone that's not a hardcore like us has probably lost touch with it a little bit. Even if they watch it on GSN, it's only on a casual basis, so their playing skills were still not going to be as sharp. That problem started to correct itself in season 2, thankfully. But otherwise, it was as if we were back to 1973 all over again. That's what happens when a classic sits on the shelf for too long.
I would hope and pray that if anyone ever decides to give Password another go in almost any fashion, THOSE skills would not be lost. Then again... *shrug*
-
From BMaurice's post, I didn't see anything that would've made Donnymid better...just changes just to make changes. Why are so many posters so pressed about getting 6 or 7 words in :20 or :30? Honestly, other than being a purist, it has no lasting effect on the show, and the average viewer prolly didn't even notice that it was one fewer word. As long as I see two people trying to convey words back-and-forth, I'm cool with it.
That being said, it was still an unnecessary change. I'm not fully convinced that 7/:30 couldn't have been done on Donnymid. Twelve :30 rounds makes up 6 minutes of show time, add two minutes for the Winners Circles, and we're up to eight minutes. I still find at least 11 or 12 more minutes that could've been burned up for show time. To me, it seems like the producers just wanted to spend more time pimping the celebrities, and with the celebs changing everyday, it's understood, but stupid. Just have the same two for the whole week. That way, Donny's not rushing to cater to the celebs, and you could even squeeze in some returning champions. However, that was the least of my problems with Donnymid.
Let's see:
-Half-ass tournament where if no one got to the top of the Pyramid by a certain day, the fastest time would be the winner. Anti-climatic. Yeah, you might not want a tournament to go three weeks, but at the same time, it could also make decent ratings.
-"What Donny's Pants Zipper Might Say"
-Constant focusing on celebrities. I don't watch game shows for the celebrities, except for maybe HSq or Match Game.
-That damn set
The one thing Donnymid did a good job on was the tournament qualification. I felt that was actually kinda clever, but I still would've rather seen returning champs, and a week of celebs. That way, if you have a bad day, you could possibly come back the next day and redeem yourself.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'124384\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 03:46 PM\']
-"What Donny's Pants Zipper Might Say"
[/quote]
"I come down at the sight of Kristy McNichol." :)
-
I know it wasn't the most popular thing with this group, but one of the Donnymid changes I actually kind of liked was not giving away the (cumulative) $25,000 in the second trip unless the contestant won the $10,000 in the first. It didn't reward failure like the 20K format, and it wasn't based entirely on frontgame success like $25K/$100K was. Although, with the one-day-and-out format, it was rather a cheap way to do it.
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'124387\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 07:28 PM\']
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'124384\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 03:46 PM\']
-"What Donny's Pants Zipper Might Say"
[/quote]
"I come down at the sight of Kristy McNichol." :)
[/quote]
*cuckoo* No prepositional phrases! ;)
-
[quote name=\'Unrealtor\' post=\'124405\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 11:26 PM\']I know it wasn't the most popular thing with this group, but one of the Donnymid changes I actually kind of liked was not giving away the (cumulative) $25,000 in the second trip unless the contestant won the $10,000 in the first. It didn't reward failure like the 20K format, and it wasn't based entirely on frontgame success like $25K/$100K was. Although, with the one-day-and-out format, it was rather a cheap way to do it.[/quote]
I appreciated this somewhat, even though Donny would usually explain it incorrectly on-air. My ideal payouts there would be $10K for the first trip and, win or lose, $15K more for the second trip.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'124413\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 11:22 PM\']
I appreciated this somewhat, even though Donny would usually explain it incorrectly on-air. My ideal payouts there would be $10K for the first trip and, win or lose, $15K more for the second trip.
[/quote]
I've always thought that the whole "on your second trip it's worth _________" is a complication not worth having. It was goofy back on the $20,000 version--where it just seemed cheap that most of the time they weren't playing for $20,000--and it was goofy on Donny's. At least when the jump is from 10 to 25,000 it's significant, but still, I say figure out the prize budget and offer the same amount every time. (Except for tournaments, of course.)
-
Cullen Pyramid was total perfection. It's too bad it is not being shown anywhere. To anyone in charge of a revival-watch one of the Cullen shows and copy everything.
-
I seem to recall a Donnymid $100,000 tournament where they didn't even give away the $100,000!!!!! That bugged me a lot. For a revival, I would raise the dollar values and change the set but keep the general feeling of the Clark/Cullen Pyramids.
-
[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'124426\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 11:36 AM\']
Cullen Pyramid was total perfection. It's too bad it is not being shown anywhere. To anyone in charge of a revival-watch one of the Cullen shows and copy everything.
[/quote]
Unfortunately, they can't copy Uncle Bill. That alone means it will be tough to reach the level of "perfection" of his show. (I haven't seen a Cullen Pyramid since I was a wee lad and don't remember it at all, so I can't comment on whether it really was as good as it gets.)
-
The only thing I didn't like about Clark's '80s "Pyramid" was how much you could actually win in the Winner's Circle just didn't seem fair to a really good player. I mean, sure, it was $10,000 the first trip, and $25,000 the second, BUT, if you won both times, you only got the $25,000. HOWEVER, if you lost the first time, and won the second, you got the $25,000 PLUS any money you picked up when losing the first Winner's Circle. So, let me get this straight: a person who wins both times gets the same, or LESS, than a person who wins only the second time? Something about that doesn't seem right. I always thought it should've been, if you win both times, you get $35,000.
Donnymid pretty much did what I thought Clark's version should've done, but, trust me; it wasn't enough to keep me watching the show! And, hey; even this minor nitpick won't cause me to hate the Clark version.
If only I'd seen Uncle Bill's version instead of Davidson's...:)
Anthony
-
[quote name=\'Mike Tennant\' post=\'124430\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 09:19 AM\']
Unfortunately, they can't copy Uncle Bill. That alone means it will be tough to reach the level of "perfection" of his show.
[/quote]
I dunno that I agree. I think there are a number of hosts out there that would be perfectly adequate for this gig, provided that they don't dick with any of the rest of it. The Davidson show wouldn't have blown THAT much...if not for John Davidson. I'd be REALLY interested to see what Bob Goen could do with it, especially since he seems to be back in the game show business anyhow...
-
IMHO, The biggest flaw to 'every' version of the Pyramid was the bonus money structure, with the exceptions of the 10K (win bonus. win 10K. leave).
Bob's cheapness and wierd formatting structure either meant winning too early in your run penalized you (20K), winning one bonus and not the other penalized you (25K), winning bonus but not playing front game quick enough penalized you (50K) or winning bonus only one time penalized you (Donny).
If you're going to do the pyramid again for 25K, make 'every' run up to the top worth 25K. Whether or not you kick someone off after that is up to the producers.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'124433\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 12:19 PM\']
If you're going to do the pyramid again for 25K, make 'every' run up to the top worth 25K. Whether or not you kick someone off after that is up to the producers.
[/quote]
Here is the thing: If you try to do that, expect the budget to go by the wayside mid-season. $25,000 even in 2006 is a lot of money, and you're looking potentially at giving anywhere from $0 to $250,000 in a matter of a week. That's a bit much to give away, unless this is on a network.
The 80's Clark format had it the right way. I would take that format, use a "First time $10,000 second time $15,000" prize structure regardless if you won the first, and change the tournament from "Three people who got to the top of the Pyramid the fastest" to "Top three highest-scoring champions." Although that could be a bit problematic itself. Everything else would basically stay the same, even down to having a cool set and not something that looks like a Millionaire reject.
-
[quote name=\'TonicBH\' post=\'124441\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 04:46 PM\']
Here is the thing: If you try to do that, expect the budget to go by the wayside mid-season. $25,000 even in 2006 is a lot of money, and you're looking potentially at giving anywhere from $0 to $250,000 in a matter of a week. That's a bit much to give away, unless this is on a network.
[/quote]
Let's put it to the folks who have worked on a game show before (Chris?) :
What percentage of wins did the budget usually account for?
Of course you could 'potentially' give away a quarter mil, but you and I both know that is not going to happen. Wheel could 'potentially' give away a half mil in the bonus every week, and yet it doesnt come close.
And I disagree with $25K being a lot of money. In the 70s and 80s, that could be a years salary for most people, certainly lifechanging money. Now it's not even close.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'124442\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 03:52 PM\']
And I disagree with $25K being a lot of money. In the 70s and 80s, that could be a years salary for most people, certainly lifechanging money. Now it's not even close.
[/quote]
As a college student, it could pay off the majority of my student loans...which I'd take in an instant.
I'll ask you something else. Matt Ottinger wins the powerball, and he offers $25,000 to everyone on the board. You turn him down, because $25,000 isn't "a lot of money".
Somehow, I doubt you'd do this.
-
[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'124446\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 05:33 PM\']
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'124442\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 03:52 PM\']
And I disagree with $25K being a lot of money. In the 70s and 80s, that could be a years salary for most people, certainly lifechanging money. Now it's not even close.
[/quote]
As a college student, it could pay off the majority of my student loans...which I'd take in an instant.
I'll ask you something else. Matt Ottinger wins the powerball, and he offers $25,000 to everyone on the board. You turn him down, because $25,000 isn't "a lot of money".
Somehow, I doubt you'd do this.
[/quote]
You're missing my point. Hells no I wouldn't turn down 5K, 25K, or $500.
But the theory that $250,000/week giveaway on a game show would blow the budget, doesn't hold water because of inflation.
$25,000 as a prize for a tough show is a lot of money, but it isn't what it used to be,and doesn't go as far.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'124447\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 02:38 PM\']
But the theory that $250,000/week giveaway on a game show would blow the budget, doesn't hold water because of inflation.
$25,000 as a prize for a tough show is a lot of money, but it isn't what it used to be,and doesn't go as far.
[/quote]
I think it has more to do with the game shows of the early 2000s, where you could win $25,000 by doing far less than ever before. Twenty-one offered that much for winning a single game. "Greed" had that amount as the prize for the very first question. At least on "Millionaire" you still have to get through ten questions. I have zero problem with $25,000 as the grand prize for getting to the top of the Pyramid, and in fact I think other shows should adjust their prize structures rather than having Pyramid bending to fit the trend (here's looking at you, Wheel of Fortune)
-
[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' post=\'124431\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 12:27 PM\']HOWEVER, if you lost the first time, and won the second, you got the $25,000 PLUS any money you picked up when losing the first Winner's Circle.[/quote]
. . . really? I thought Bob "Augment the Total" Stewart just paid out a flat $25K there.
-
He did.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'124458\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 05:38 PM\']
[quote name=\'beatlefreak84\' post=\'124431\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 12:27 PM\']HOWEVER, if you lost the first time, and won the second, you got the $25,000 PLUS any money you picked up when losing the first Winner's Circle.[/quote]
. . . really? I thought Bob "Augment the Total" Stewart just paid out a flat $25K there.
[/quote]
I was always under that assumption too..I thought when a contestant won, say, both WCs, and the 7-11, Dick would say that player had won $26,100.
-
[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'124461\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 03:51 PM\']
I was always under that assumption too..I thought when a contestant won, say, both WCs, and the 7-11, Dick would say that player had won $26,100.
[/quote]
They did, but then, they always went out of their way to differentiate between "bonus money" and "score money". So the two don't really compare.
-
. . . really? I thought Bob "Augment the Total" Stewart just paid out a flat $25K there.
Oh, you're right. That's a big whoopsie on my part...:).
But I'll still whine about the fact that a person who wins only the second Winner's Circle gets the same as somebody who wins both! I tell ya, is that justice? ;)
Anthony
P.S. Oh, and, given the relative difficulty of the Winner's Circle, especially since both contestant and celeb really need to have their gears turning, I think $25,000 each time is a swell idea. I mean, how much per week was the $10,000 won on the original version?
-
I would have no problem with $25,000 for each conquering of the Pyramid, stay on until defeated in the main game. I'm sure some people I know would also like this, because they could make "Pyramid contestant" their second job.
The only change I'd make would be to double the consolation money on the Pyramid. Everything else including the "7-11" and "Mystery Seven" are fine as is.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'124371\' date=\'Jul 17 2006, 03:51 PM\']
Really. Every single "enhancement" to this show, from the day that Dick Clark stepped away from the podium, has made the show poorer... 6-in-20.
[/quote]
I do think 6-in-20 made the front game more interesting and more challenging.
Was it broke with 7-in-30? Well, no but getting 6-in-20 did add a bit more nail-biting action for me that wasn't present in the later episodes of 80s Pyramid when perfect games were very common. 6-in-20 was a nice new wrinkle...not because it "fixed" anything, but just because it made good game play stand out a little more. You really have to be on it to get 6 words in 20 seconds!
Saying that it made the show poorer was a strong statement that surprised me a little. I'd be interested to hear your reasons for putting it that way.
Donny's Pyramid had it's OKAY points, but they ruined the one thing that made (my personal opinion here) 80s Pyramid the best executed version of the best game show ever....THE WINNER'S CIRCLE. Had they gotten that right, I could have overlooked the other flaws.
-
I can't speak for anybody else, but I didn't like the 6-in-20 in part because it got the game backwards: the front game shouldn't be ridiculously easy, but it should be easier than the Winner's Circle -- and maybe help the celebrities look good, too. The Winner's Circle should then be the challenge.
Osmond's Pyramid reversed this, making the front game look very tough, and the Winner's Circle easy by comparison.
Also, 6-in-20 places a much higher premium on the material writers (yet another area where the Osmond Pyramid got it wrong). In the 70s and 80s, if you got stuck on a difficult word early on, it was usually possible to come back for at least a 4, or even a 5. Stick the wrong word early in the list under the 6-in-20 rules, and a team gets stuck with a 1 or a 2. This led to too many games which ended after five categories (and some that ended after four).
-
I've always thought that the whole "on your second trip it's worth _________" is a complication not worth having. It was goofy back on the $20,000 version--where it just seemed cheap that most of the time they weren't playing for $20,000--and it was goofy on Donny's. At least when the jump is from 10 to 25,000 it's significant, but still, I say figure out the prize budget and offer the same amount every time. (Except for tournaments, of course.)
Re the $20,000 Pyramid - would it have worked better if the first trip was worth $20k, the second $15, and the third and any thereafter $10?
-
[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' post=\'124680\' date=\'Jul 21 2006, 10:03 AM\']
Re the $20,000 Pyramid - would it have worked better if the first trip was worth $20k, the second $15, and the third and any thereafter $10?
[/quote]
Uh, no. How do you think it looks on TV to say "Hey, you get to play another game, and if you win, you'll be right back here in the Winner's Circle...but only for $10,000."
(Answer: bad.)
-
I'm honestly amazed that Stewart went with the structure he did for $20K Pyramid. What would have been better, IMO, for both his budget and for not keeping extra money away from the best players: every trip worth $10K, but you can win it twice before retiring. It's no more disingenuous to call that a "$20,000 win" than it is to call any of the syndie wins in the '70s "$25,000 wins".
-
[quote name=\'Neumms\' post=\'124423\' date=\'Jul 18 2006, 09:32 AM\']
I've always thought that the whole "on your second trip it's worth _________" is a complication not worth having. It was goofy back on the $20,000 version--where it just seemed cheap that most of the time they weren't playing for $20,000--and it was goofy on Donny's. At least when the jump is from 10 to 25,000 it's significant, but still, I say figure out the prize budget and offer the same amount every time. (Except for tournaments, of course.)
[/quote]
Exactamundo. My wrinkle, if the budget can support it: Play for $1,000 times your main-game score, excluding tie-breaker rounds. Either play every round all the way out, or have a stipulation for when you only need 1-2 on your last turn to win.
-
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'125591\' date=\'Jul 28 2006, 10:31 PM\']
Exactamundo. My wrinkle, if the budget can support it: Play for $1,000 times your main-game score, excluding tie-breaker rounds. Either play every round all the way out,
[/quote]
...which kills the dramatic finish...
or have a stipulation for when you only need 1-2 on your last turn to win.
If your rule needs an exception....c'mon, say it with me, class..."IT'S NOT A GOOD RULE!"