So now that the Million Second Quiz is over...
I\'ve had discussions with co-workers and others about why the format of this show didn\'t work, and it brings about the easy format comparison to Millionaire. A few shows have tried to make this very specific sort of format work, where two contestants \"battle\" with multiple-choice questions under a set (limited) time limit. I can\'t recall a format that has done this well. When it\'s a single player against the house, it\'s an easy format (Millionaire), but adding a second player has proven troublesome. (I really liked Duel, for instance, but that show was not meant to be for any number of reasons.)
I thought this question would be a good way to frame the discussion: What are three things you would change to improve Million Second Quiz for a hypothetical season 2? Can changes be made to make this battle format work well on TV?
What are three things you would change to improve Million Second Quiz for a hypothetical season 2?
Good question!
I\'ll preface my response with this: The TV format, actually, was kind of cool. At first, the \"Double Dare\" mechanic seemed a little tacked-on, but, after watching some very close matches and some \"poker faces,\" I liked having unlimited \"Doublers\" present.
But, that does bring me to my first change:
1. Keep the doublers, but don\'t increase the point values of questions as time goes on. I didn\'t really like that questions at the end were worth way more points than those at the beginning, though I can see why that was done from a \"can he/she come back\" kind of thing.
2. Whatever is done on TV, should be done for the web-only games, too. I did enjoy watching the live feeds, but it was an extremely boring format, and, once someone got a 3-4 point lead, that pretty much meant the game was a foregone conclusion. At least, with the Doublers in play, it would have made those matches a bit more strategic and not just \"Person A, what was your answer? Person B, what was your answer?\"
3. I like the idea of some sort of consolation prize for those who get in the Money Chair, win a bunch of bouts, but never qualify for Winner\'s Row. Before, I had suggested $100/bout, but you could even do it based on time, say, $500 or $1,000/hour.
So, YMMV, but those are my three. Attack. ;)
Anthony
A) More cameras in the 23/7 feed. If this is going to be Big Brother-ish, have a way that you can isolate some of the drama if someone gets close to the fourth player on WR or if there\'s shenanigans going on in WR (i.e. plotting against Devin because he wasn\'t one of \"the four\"), some people might want to watch that versus pre-casting row.
B) Yes, more from a production standpoint, but if there weren\'t cameras fixated on each player\'s podium\'s to make sure that there wasn\'t a lock-in error, they need this. I know, I know, judges\' rulings are final but with all the videos on social media after the Hailey moment, MDQ comes back and says, \"welp, here you go\" with their video (and Brendan Shanahan cameo explaining why) and it\'s done. Over.
C) Simplify the game play. I go back to a twitter analogy: if you can\'t explain the rules in less than a tweet or two, it\'s probably too complex.
A) Instead of making qualification essentially \"score 3500 points on the app and we\'ll consider you,\" reach out to NBC affiliates and set up \"regional\" qualifications at area hotspots. Good promotion for the show and the affiliates, and can work at removing the \"New York-centric\" casting of the series.
B) Big Brother has a three-hour \"after dark\" show on TVGN. Why can\'t MSQ have a \"best of the online games\" on an NBC/Comcast cable channel? Put it on G4 or the soon-to-be Esquire Network. Perhaps use the NBC affiliate digital substations that broadcast weather loops and Antenna TV to show games as well.
C) One universal format for both online and television.
JD
By virtue of the \"c\'mon down and stand in line\" nature of the show, you weren\'t gonna get around this. And they obviously budgeted to fly in a single line-jumper per night, which makes sense, because there is no way I am going to fly in people to play online to next to no audience. Not worth the money.Good promotion for the show and the affiliates, and can work at removing the \"New York-centric\" casting of the series.
I never caught any of the online-only broadcasts, so I can\'t comment one way or another, and won\'t go into criticizing what so many others have. Therefore, I only have two suggestions.
1. Limit the number of doubles...I remember watching the second episode, where the contestant basically started hitting the double out of sheer desperation and hoping he could eventually catch up (he did...somewhat). While it wasn\'t a bad tactic, I would love to see more contestants use the doubles as a strategy, kinda like using the \"LONGSHOT\" on Whew! Give them 2 or 3, and maybe add an extra one during the last 30 seconds of the match.
2. Definitely offer an incentive for winning a match. I suggested $250/win, and a $100 consolation for runners-up. Maybe even $500/250, but the 250/100 is just fine IMO. $100 is still dinner in the city and a subway pass home or a tank of gas. :-)
1. The line jumpers. Something irked me quite a bit about the lady who line jumped and walked away with ~$270,000 because she was in the chair at the end and beat someone who had accumulated more than $250,000.
2. Getting ringers on the show. Going through the trivia Rolodex and attempting to get Ken Jennings plus other heavyweights in the trivia world sounds like the producers/the powers that be at NBC were grasping at straws to boost the ratings. Bringing in ringers kills off the \"anybody can play and win\" aspect, since apparently anybody can play, but if you did real well on Jeopardy! or Millionaire, it certainly helps your chances at getting an opportunity to play. One reason Millionaire was amazing back in the day was the \"anybody can play and win\" aspect. Getting a name player because you can <> good TV.
3. Get the rules down pat and in a coherent form before the cameras start rolling. I only watched the first episode and last night, as the confusing, almost arbitrarily tacked on rules on the premiere made it look like they didn\'t have their stuff straight before going live. The reasons I watched last night\'s show are I was curious how they were going to handle the ultimate payoff, and I can only take so much bland baseball and MSQ was the only semi-interesting option on TV. (Good job, maybe playoff-bound Indians, but you barely beat the 100-loss Astros in extra innings last night in your home park.)
1. Have the same time limit for each bout, except (maybe) for Winners Defense and the \"$2,000,000 tournament.\"
2. Don\'t give the person in the chair all of the Winners Row player\'s money if he wins a Winners Defense bout. It seems too easy to rig it so the people the producers/NBC want to be on Winners Row end up there; that\'s how the 1950s game show scandals started. I wouldn\'t be surprised if they saved the best woman they could find among the home players for the final line jumper spot in order to decrease the chance of having an all-male final four (\"oh, great, another knowledge/trivia event dominated by men - what a surprise\").
3. Get rid of stalling for time at the end - replace the last 100 seconds with a fixed number of questions (maybe increase the point value as you go through them - e.g. with 10 questions, the first four are worth 4, the next three 5, the next two 6, and the final one 7).
As for some of the other responses, I think \"limiting the number of doubles\" is going to be treated like the time the NCAA changed the basketball rules so that all fouls near the end of the game were 2-shot fouls; people aren\'t going to like it because it prevents comebacks. Maybe a rule along the lines of \"if you double and your opponent is correct, you can\'t double the next question (but if your opponent doubles it, you can double back)\" would work better, or perhaps the doubling player must also answer, and gets only the \"normal\" number of points if both players are wrong.
Oh, and can I throw in a suggestion (technically it\'s not an improvement as it didn\'t apply to the first season)? Don\'t have the Season 1 winner automatically advance to the Season 2 final (the way ABC Password and syndicated The Joker\'s Wild did in its tournaments). Maybe they can have him start the million seconds in the chair (which technically means he would be the first onto Winners Row as well when he loses), but he has to earn his way into the finals like everybody else.
Less behind-the-scenes stuff; more game play.
(Good job, maybe playoff-bound Indians, but you barely beat the 100-loss Astros in extra innings last night in your home park.)
Thankfully, Matt Carson effectively used his Doubler.
I was afraid I was going to have to pull out another Flashback \'82.
By virtue of the \"c\'mon down and stand in line\" nature of the show, you weren\'t gonna get around this. And they obviously budgeted to fly in a single line-jumper per night, which makes sense, because there is no way I am going to fly in people to play online to next to no audience. Not worth the money.I don\'t think your idea is a bad one necessarily, I just don\'t think the regionality of the game can be avoided.Good promotion for the show and the affiliates, and can work at removing the \"New York-centric\" casting of the series.
Okay, but what are you gonna do? A nineteen-year-old kid who by his own admission hasn\'t been away from his folks for more than a couple days at a shot up until a week and a half ago had a moment of immaturity.but it looked awful to have Brandon \"miss out\" on the $2.2 million bonus and be depressed about it, as opposed to elated at winning $330,000.
In regards to \"fixing\" the final, is it possible to do a game like this where there\'s no one singular winner?
Also, would it have been more or less preferable had Brandon just answered the questions instead of spamming the doubler?
I don\'t know what to do, and that\'s why I\'m not a TV producer.
It\'s the same thing as adding a car game to the Money Cards: five point whatever times out of seven it\'s gonna end badly and even if the champion won thousands of dollars what you remember is the fail horns and no joy.
Okay, but what are you gonna do? A nineteen-year-old kid who by his own admission hasn\'t been away from his folks for more than a couple days at a shot up until a week and a half ago had a moment of immaturity.Maybe I\'m reading the vibes wrong, but the vibe I am getting from the assemblage here is that they want to lay the blame for that at someone\'s feet, and I just don\'t see where you can lay it.but it looked awful to have Brandon \"miss out\" on the $2.2 million bonus and be depressed about it, as opposed to elated at winning $330,000.
A lot of these are winners, but I\'ll think a bit outside the box:
1) Fix the tiebreaker. Closest to the right number, single-question buzz-in, list question with multiple answers, even just keep on quizzing till someone misses, anything but the \"lock in the same answer 0.1 second slower than the other guy because there\'s no lock-in cue\" they used.
2) Keep the money count going AT ALL TIMES. If the guy is in the chair, it counts. Stop pausing it during union breaks and other instances when the player is still seated. If they have to take a break, then go ahead and stop the clock because he\'s not in the chair, but if his butt is planted there, there\'s no good reason not to keep the meter running.
3) Ditch Winner\'s Row. Have a top money winner for each 24-hour period (carrying over for whoever\'s in the chair at the end of each cycle), and then have each of them battling it out in the finals. Set up a single-elimination tournament ranked by earnings, with the top four fighting it out in the broadcast finale. Even if you don\'t pay every single person who gets in the chair, this increases the number of people who win something (while not really affecting the overall prize budget that much). It also eliminates the unfair advantage the Winner\'s Row creates, i.e. the opportunity to co-opt the score of another player and make it that much tougher for anyone else to get in the Top 4. (Seriously. By the end of the time, you would\'ve needed to spend 5 1/2 hours straight in the chair to get in WR - at the start, 2 1/2 hours would\'ve got you in no sweat.)
but it looked awful to have Brandon \"miss out\" on the $2.2 million bonus and be depressed about it, as opposed to elated at winning $330,000.
Okay, but what are you gonna do? A nineteen-year-old kid who by his own admission hasn\'t been away from his folks for more than a couple days at a shot up until a week and a half ago had a moment of immaturity.Maybe I\'m reading the vibes wrong, but the vibe I am getting from the assemblage here is that they want to lay the blame for that at someone\'s feet, and I just don\'t see where you can lay it.
You can\'t lay the blame anywhere. He\'s 19 and on a roll making a few hundred thousand dollars, and he crashed when he got a bad set of questions. Sure, it was a little immature, but whether it\'s a trivia night, an academic bowl, or a real game show, many of you have dominated other sets of questions and gotten a poisonous deck when it counted the most. It\'s a lot harder to smile and take a beating than some of the accusers would like to admit.
It is a lot harder to smile in that situation, but then it isn\'t once I realize I\'ve already won enough money to pay my way through school and probably have enough left over to buy a nice car. I may have lost out on an extra $2.3 million, but that\'s one hell of a consolation prize.
$330,000 is probably the most a single person is going to win this television season behind Andrew. That\'s a nice feat.
/I\'ll keep hoping for a Million Dollar Winner on Millionaire and Wheel
//and who knows what Price has in store this season.
Well, if it was a fait accompli, I probably would have asked Ryan to end the match and declare a winner rather than look like a spoiled child in losing. To fill time, run a slow crawl to acknowledge the question writers, for which it must have been a herculian task of keeping the questions coming, both on and off TV.
3 Changes I would make: Players keep the money they make while in the chair. You can adjust the amount per second if there are budget concerns.
Winner\'s row is derived from Chair dwellers
I would make it a TV-only competition.
Lots of others but I am limited by the question to three.
Well, if it was a fait accompli, I probably would have asked Ryan to end the match and declare a winner rather than look like a spoiled child in losing.
Winner\'s row is derived from Chair dwellers
As opposed to the random hobos plucked off the street that they used on the show.
I would make it a TV-only competition.
At which point it stops being The Million Second Quiz and becomes Two People Answering Questions For No Discernable Reason.
Winner\'s row is derived from Chair dwellers
As opposed to the random hobos plucked off the street that they used on the show.
I would make it a TV-only competition.
At which point it stops being The Million Second Quiz and becomes Two People Answering Questions For No Discernable Reason.
Well, the OP limited me to three changes. I would also change the title. :) The Million Seconds could be measured in increments of 30 or 60 minute shows. At the end of the million seconds, the winner\'s chair showdown would begin.
I would also change the title. :) The Million Seconds could be measured in increments of 30 or 60 minute shows. At the end of the million seconds, the winner\'s chair showdown would begin.
1,000,000 seconds is about 277 3/4 hours - that\'s over a full year of 5-day-a-week hour shows without repeats or pre-emptions.
I would also change the title. :) The Million Seconds could be measured in increments of 30 or 60 minute shows. At the end of the million seconds, the winner\'s chair showdown would begin.
1,000,000 seconds is about 277 3/4 hours - that\'s over a full year of 5-day-a-week hour shows without repeats or pre-emptions.
Sorta like what daytime tv used to be.
One change: Keep the 24-hours-a-day, million seconds deal, but play Concentration instead of the quiz. Heck, NBC already owns it. Players could actually win prizes--cheaper in the wee hours off air, and boats and cars in prime time.
This seems far more interesting for viewers than a money clock going up and zeroing out over and over again for ten days without anybody pocketing anything until, when payout time finally comes, it\'s totally overshadowed by an huge yet arbitrary sum.
First off you deserve what you get for responding to another one of Jimmy\'s random posts: isn\'t that true of any game show? That it is a game show because people are playing a game and winning stuff while it is shown on television for the entertainment of the folks at home?At which point it stops being The Million Second Quiz and becomes Two People Answering Questions For No Discernable Reason.
As for Brandon\'s actions/reactions/behavior at that moment he knew it was over for him, try to keep in mind that the kid certainly must have been both physically and mentally exhausted by this point...for him to act the way he did, to me, was not surprising under the circumstances...
Or maybe he is just a big ole baby all the time (JUST KIDDING...JUST KIDDING!)
As for any changes for any future series, I just have two...since such emphasis is placed on the whole time factor, find a way to time the game segments vs. commercial breaks differently so that somehow, each timed bout is played uninterrupted from start to finish...the constant breaks during the bouts was distracting for me and took away a lot of the intensity of the game.
And finally, about the line jumpers being \"surprised\" by the camera crews at their homes (or whatever location they happen to be), can we not all agree that NONE of those people were \"surprised\" at the moment that we home viewers were introduced to them by the local camera crews? I could be wrong but didn\'t it seem odd that all of the line jumpers were reasonably well-dressed at the time of their \"surprise\" (when, in reality, aren\'t most typical working people probably somewhat dressed down by that time of the evening), not to mention that it seemed a bit odd to me that most, if not all, of them seemed to have a whole bunch of people with them at that moment as well...I dunno...it all just seemed more than just a little bit staged to me...
As usual, I could be oh so wrong...
JakeT
not to mention that it seemed a bit odd to me that most, if not all, of them seemed to have a whole bunch of people with them at that moment as well...I dunno...it all just seemed more than just a little bit staged to me...
Having seen the primetime show and plenty of the web bouts.....
Allow the doubler for all bouts, but limit it to three per bout. Strategy will come into play here.
Make all bouts the same amount of time. If 400 seconds was a typical Winner\'s Defense bout, then all bouts should be 400 seconds. One thing that didn\'t make sense were all the 500 second daytime bouts, then the first primetime bout was 300 seconds.
I\'m not a fan of the Winner\'s Defense as it was formatted. I like the notion of subtracting the amount of the Winners\' Row money if they lose a bout, but not the whole damn thing.
I could go on and on, but you said three.
Also, I would presume that the winning \"Line Jumpers\" were vetted to confirm eligibility before their \"TV surprise\".
JD
This seems far more interesting for viewers than a money clock going up and zeroing out over and over again for ten days without anybody pocketing anything until, when payout time finally comes, it\'s totally overshadowed by an huge yet arbitrary sum.
I found MSQ not much different than a poker tournament in that regard. I have no problem with either, especially when the game show/reality competition genre already has plenty of \"One wins, too bad for the rest\" payout structures.
One of the frequent complaints about MSQ casting is that the show sought out contestants via open calls in several cities (Los Angeles, Las Vegas, etc.) as well as the website, then dropped the idea a few weeks before the premiere in favor of walk-in casting and Line Jumpers. IIRC, second-place finisher Brandon originally auditioned in Las Vegas, but had to audition again by showing up at the set that first day.
To clarity my idea about casting from an earlier post, let the audience believe they have a legitimate chance at making MSQ. An arbitrary number in a web game doesn\'t mean squat -- you could have a Glass Joe-style record in bouts and still make the show if you hit the 3500 number. Either do \"regional\" tournaments hosted by NBC affiliates nationwide or have an online game where actual W/L determines who advances. And if money is an issue, only offer a spot on the show as the prize -- the winner is responsible for getting there. And you can still do the \"random\" Line Jumper contest, plus walk-ins.
JD
not to mention that it seemed a bit odd to me that most, if not all, of them seemed to have a whole bunch of people with them at that moment as well...I dunno...it all just seemed more than just a little bit staged to me...If I\'m involved with that production at any level, there is no way I am throwing good money into rolling a live truck unless I *know* the people on the other end are going to be home and TV-ready.Do with that information what you will.(And yes, it\'s lame and it\'s always lame.)
Hey, I agree with you completely...I just wish it didn\'t seem so slimy and deceitful since the vast viewing audience actually does believe that these people were being surprised and the network/production company were solely responsible for devising and carrying out this thoroughly unnecessary deception...instead of the local crews \"sneaking\" up to the line jumpers\' doors, why not just have Ryan throw to the local guy/gal who is sitting with the line jumper so we could take a moment to get to know them, rather than play the \"OH MY!!! I AM SO SHOCKED! ARE YOU SERIOUS??? I AM GOING TO BE ON TV???\" game...
JakeT
the vast viewing audience actually does believe that these people were being surprised
I\'ll say this about surprising the Line Jumpers at their front door. That one line jumper (I believe she was the last one and was the won who beat Eric in his Winner\'s Defense bout) who took quite a long time answering the door certainly made it seem not staged for a couple of seconds.
not to mention that it seemed a bit odd to me that most, if not all, of them seemed to have a whole bunch of people with them at that moment as well...I dunno...it all just seemed more than just a little bit staged to me...If I\'m involved with that production at any level, there is no way I am throwing good money into rolling a live truck unless I *know* the people on the other end are going to be home and TV-ready.Do with that information what you will.(And yes, it\'s lame and it\'s always lame.)
Hey, I agree with you completely...I just wish it didn\'t seem so slimy and deceitful since the vast viewing audience actually does believe that these people were being surprised and the network/production company were solely responsible for devising and carrying out this thoroughly unnecessary deception...instead of the local crews \"sneaking\" up to the line jumpers\' doors, why not just have Ryan throw to the local guy/gal who is sitting with the line jumper so we could take a moment to get to know them, rather than play the \"OH MY!!! I AM SO SHOCKED! ARE YOU SERIOUS??? I AM GOING TO BE ON TV???\" game...
I watched one of the first \"surprise\" appearances, I believe during the first Sunday night football game. The lady they surprised had very little emotion other than \"Oh, cool...\"
If they called it anything but a surprise, I wouldn\'t have an issue. So while I agree with Jake, I\'ve since resigned myself to the idea that I\'m not their target audience. I guess I\'ll just settle for it being a mild annoyance. :-P
Just watching live, I was given the impression that potential Line Jumpers were aware of their status (wasn\'t there a milestone you had to beat?) but did not yet know they were contestants.
Yes, but anyone with an ounce of a clue in their head is going to say \"woo, I racked up 3500 points, I qualified. But wait, that wasn\'t really difficult to do at all, so there must be a LOT of qualifiers\" It certainly was not significant enough of a status for someone to make sure they were home between 8-9 EDT just in case Local Affiliate Flunky knocks on their door.Just watching live, I was given the impression that potential Line Jumpers were aware of their status (wasn\'t there a milestone you had to beat?) but did not yet know they were contestants.
This seems far more interesting for viewers than a money clock going up and zeroing out over and over again for ten days without anybody pocketing anything until, when payout time finally comes, it\'s totally overshadowed by an huge yet arbitrary sum.
I found MSQ not much different than a poker tournament in that regard. I have no problem with either, especially when the game show/reality competition genre already has plenty of \"One wins, too bad for the rest\" payout structures.
True--I hadn\'t thought of that. Did the World Series of Poker switch calling them \"dollars\" to \"chips\" at some point? At any rate, when a player loses at poker, the chips or dollars don\'t just disappear, we see them go to the winner.
the vast viewing audience actually does believe that these people were being surprised
Indeed. Which is why they still do it.
They were really poorly done, though. I suspect (hope?) the vast viewing audience thinks it\'s stupid. They either like the show well enough to keep watching, or the stupid starts to outweigh the enjoyable part and they turn the channel--and a lot of channels were turned from MSQ.
Even if they bought it, did it really make the show more exciting? Why couldn\'t the local sports guy go to the house without the phony surprise? Maybe he asks \"where were you when you got the call?\" and ends up with a genuine laugh and far better TV.
It\'s like the \"show us what\'s in the case...after this commercial\" crap Howie used to pull (and Brooke still did). Don\'t they want the viewer to like them?
True--I hadn\'t thought of that. Did the World Series of Poker switch calling them \"dollars\" to \"chips\" at some point?
WSOP calls them \"chips\". WPT still calls them \"dollars\".
I guess the difference is that MSQ has the whole \"You won the bout! And you won this money! ....but it\'s not yours yet.\" Imagine if WoF had only the top winner keep any money.
Imagine if WoF had only the top winner keep any money.
That\'s not so terribly hard to imagine, it just doesn\'t happen to be what we\'re used to.
For a lot of people here (not suggesting Kevin is one of them), these statements have zero equivalency.That\'s not so terribly hard to imagine, it just doesn\'t happen to be what we\'re used to.
I guess the difference is that MSQ has the whole \"You won the bout! And you won this money! ....but it\'s not yours yet.\" Imagine if WoF had only the top winner keep any money.
Or if on WWTBAM, Regis only paid out at the end of the two weeks. To Matt\'s point, that IS what we\'re used to. That\'s the expectation. Once Ryan got around to explaining it, MSG wasn\'t hard to understand, it was dissatisfying--despite giving away a ton of money in the end. Maybe if they counted seconds rather than the $10/sec, there wouldn\'t have been the letdown.
A 10-day, 24-hour-a-day game show is such an intriguing idea. If only it could be fixed.
Imagine if WoF had only the top winner keep any money.
That\'s not so terribly hard to imagine, it just doesn\'t happen to be what we\'re used to.
Here is my cure for Million Second Quiz.
Four bon vivants are seated at a desk. A civilian contestant enters and signs his name on a blackboard located upstage center. The contestant\'s occupation is revealed to the audience. The bon vivants attempt to determine the contestant\'s occupation by asking, in turn, a series of yes/no questions. Each \"no\" answer earns the contestant $5. 10 \"no\" answers result in a victory for the contestant who takes home $50.
There, that was easy.
Four bon vivants are seated at a desk. A civilian contestant enters and signs his name on a blackboard located upstage center. The contestant\'s occupation is revealed to the audience. The bon vivants attempt to determine the contestant\'s occupation by asking, in turn, a series of yes/no questions. Each \"no\" answer earns the contestant $5. 10 \"no\" answers result in a victory for the contestant who takes home $50.
Pffft, you kidding? That show wouldn\'t last the first season.
Each \"no\" answer earns the contestant $5. 10 \"no\" answers result in a victory for the contestant who takes home $50.
Each \"no\" answer earns the contestant $5. 10 \"no\" answers result in a victory for the contestant who takes home $50.
Why bother paying them money?
Simple. Because you can\'t give away cartons of Winston cigarettes on TV these days.
...but they\'d be easily to sell for more than $50 in lots of states.