The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: Jeremy Nelson on May 05, 2025, 06:33:39 PM
-
It's been a minute since we've done a hypothetical.
You've been given one minute with the team at Price as they prep for next season, and during that minute, you can suggest changes to one pricing game. They could be quality of life updates, changes to physical appearance, adding a $10k bonus...whatever makes sense to you. What's your pitch?
Mine is simple. Start Pathfinder off by pricing all three prizes. Give the contestant some kind of insurance marker/pendant of life for each one they get right, then take them away as they misstep on the disco floor.
And while I don't think it needs the standard blue/yellow/orange color scheme so many games got refurbished with, I do think it needs a new coat of paint and a better floor font.
-
Set Hot Seat on fire. The end.
-
Start Pathfinder off by pricing all three prizes. Give the contestant some kind of insurance marker/pendant of life for each one they get right, then take them away as they misstep on the disco floor.
Except if a contestant gets all three prizes correct and then steps to the second and third digits in the price of the car without making a mistake, they've guaranteed themselves a win. So either the game ends awkwardly with the contestant celebrating without having finished walking the correct path (and the host having to explain why) or everybody has to wait while the contestant finishes walking the path -- possibly having to backtrack in the process -- before the foregone conclusion.
-
3 Strikes - give the contestant one of the numbers to start with. The contestant can choose which number (1st, 2nd, etc.). As Drew said the first time he ran this as host, "This game takes forever."
-
My longstanding suggestions were to update Grocery Game and Range Game for inflation's sake. They got to Grocery Game within the past decade, so now it'd be Range Game's turn. It's gone so long without changes, a $1000 rangefinder on a $4000 scale would be most inflation-appropriate. For someone who grew up with '90s shows, that's sort of eye-opening as to what the original intent of the game was.
-Jason
-
How about this: in Punch-a-Bunch, replace one of the mid-tier dollar amounts ($1000/$2500) with a "Punch Again for Double", which allows the contestant to do just that - immediately punch out another hole and win double what they find. It's a 1-in-50 chance at the outset to find it, and assuming they hadn't already punched out something they want to keep, would give them the chance to win up to $50K should they beat the odds and find the one $25K hole on the board after finding the double.
(It could even be 2-in-50 at the outset, but if by some miracle they find them back-to-back, the rule is that the double only counts once, not 4x. I'd rather keep it at 1-in-50 at the outset to eliminate that possibility.)
-
It's been a minute since we've done a hypothetical.
You've been given one minute with the team at Price as they prep for next season, and during that minute, you can suggest changes to one pricing game. They could be quality of life updates, changes to physical appearance, adding a $10k bonus...whatever makes sense to you. What's your pitch?
Mine is simple. Start Pathfinder off by pricing all three prizes. Give the contestant some kind of insurance marker/pendant of life for each one they get right, then take them away as they misstep on the disco floor.
And while I don't think it needs the standard blue/yellow/orange color scheme so many games got refurbished with, I do think it needs a new coat of paint and a better floor font.
Regarding Pathfinder, it saves time if the player doesn't NEED to price any of the three small prizes, so the way they have it now is just fine IMO. Besides, having some sort of "insurance marker" for each mistake would then make it too much like Penny Ante.
-
At the Big Wheel, the bonus spin is far too often an anticlimax. We can all see it coming: the wheel goes zipping past $1.00, but clearly doesn't have the momentum to get all the way 'round again. Drew keeps trying to play it for suspense, but anyone who's ever been home from school sick knows the wheel isn't getting past 0.85. It comes off as disappointing, but it should be a celebratory moment; the contestant has just won a bunch of money and entry into the Showcase.
So...spinning $1.00 only gets you a bonus spin, no $1,000 cash bonus. But...whatever you land on in the bonus spin gets multiplied out to a bonus in thousands of dollars. Land on a quarter, you win $2,500. 80¢ means $8,000. $1.00 reverts to being worth $10,000, and the two green sections are back to $5,000 each. Minimum prize, therefore, is still $1,000 for hitting 10¢, but it builds to excitement and suspense instead of "Oh well, you didn't win anything more."
-
3 Strikes - give the contestant one of the numbers to start with. The contestant can choose which number (1st, 2nd, etc.). As Drew said the first time he ran this as host, "This game takes forever."
I don't think the contestant should have any say WHICH number to give away, but it wouldn't surprise me if the show did decide to give away the first number each time to save time. I guess by including ALL the numbers, there's actually a better probability of numbers to pick vs. strikes. The "one strike in the bag" rule did SEEM to make the game easier to win, but really, in the end, you still end up with just ONE number and ONE strike in the bag, making winning a car 50/50.
-
I would have kept the goal of Grocery Game at $21 and allowed a win at $19.
Secret X—add a third item to price and a new board where the X can be anywhere in the middle row or middle column.
Aside from small fixes like tweaking the money amounts of the Let ‘em Roll cubes:
Rat Race has three nice prizes to price within $100. Each correct choice lights up one of four lanes—if a rat you back win you win the car and every prize priced properly. If not, win just those prizes.
Maybe a shock collar for Ten Chances and Time is Money for contestants who fail to get the lead out.
-
At the Big Wheel, the bonus spin is far too often an anticlimax. We can all see it coming: the wheel goes zipping past $1.00, but clearly doesn't have the momentum to get all the way 'round again. Drew keeps trying to play it for suspense, but anyone who's ever been home from school sick knows the wheel isn't getting past 0.85. It comes off as disappointing, but it should be a celebratory moment; the contestant has just won a bunch of money and entry into the Showcase.
So...spinning $1.00 only gets you a bonus spin, no $1,000 cash bonus. But...whatever you land on in the bonus spin gets multiplied out to a bonus in thousands of dollars. Land on a quarter, you win $2,500. 80¢ means $8,000. $1.00 reverts to being worth $10,000, and the two green sections are back to $5,000 each. Minimum prize, therefore, is still $1,000 for hitting 10¢, but it builds to excitement and suspense instead of "Oh well, you didn't win anything more."
I can almost see them doing that for the special nighttime run, but otherwise, it takes a lot of wind out of the bonus spin if any amount on the wheel wins SOMETHING. What they have now is just fine.
-
They did it for the charity week which was fun—I think it would have been neat during the golden anniversary that landing on 50 won fifty grand.
-
I would have kept the goal of Grocery Game at $21 and allowed a win at $19.
Secret X—add a third item to price and a new bboard where the X can be anywhere in the middle row or middle column.
Aside from small fixes like tweaking the money amounts of the Let ‘em Roll cubes:
Rat Race has three nice prizes to price within $100. Each correct choice lights up one of four lanes—if a rat you back win ps you win the car and every prize priced properly. If not, win just those prizes.
Maybe a shock collar for Ten Chances and Time is Money for contestants who fail to get the lead out.
I didn't think making the range $20-$22 was all that necessary. I haven't seen the show much lately so I don't know how many have fallen short of the original $21 mark to necessitate the change.
Regarding Secret X, do you mean that the secret X could also be in squares 4 and 6 if we're numbering the squares a la the original TTD bonus game? So that's 4 X's... well, if I placed all 4 X's in each corner, then that would be a guaranteed win... as opposed to now where if both X's were won, then there's just a 1/3 chance of losing. For me, the SLIGHTEST chance of losing makes the game more exciting. If the producers want a nearly guaranteed win, then the secret X would be in the center, as winning 2 Xs would be guaranteed providing the contestant placed both earned Xs in the corners. Seeing the game played many times, it seems the contestants' nature to leave the bottom square as the secret X is there less frequently than it is on the top or center, so to force a loss, the secret X would be at the bottom.
Incidentally, I've only seen ONE playing where a contestant placed both earned X's on squares 4 and 6 and still WON with the X in the middle. A rare and VERY lucky win.
-
I definitely agree with a time limit on Ten Chances. :10 for the first prize, :15 for the second, :20 for the car. I'm flexible on that.
Since fewer people write checks anymore, does Check Game really make sense for today's audience esp. given how young the average contestant is? It confused people going back to the 80s, and I don't imagine much has changed. But...I like the concept of the game, and the idea of the contestant having to more or less work in reverse to figure out the price. Maybe call it Cash Advance or Do the Math or something and just have them flat out state how much they want? Give them a snazzy touchscreen to punch in the numbers.
And not a pricing game, but maybe bump the DSW window to $500? We're now further away from the '98 increase to $250 than that was from the original.
-
The current typical distribution of Punch-a-Bunch is:
[1] $25,000 [2] $10,000
[4] $5,000 [8] $2,500 [10] $1,000
[10] $500 [10] $250 [5] $100
My suggestion to at least improve the drama a skosh: Make the values that aren't $25,000 or $10,000 part a range of different values from $100 to $7,500 instead of six values spread out across 47 holes, 35 of which aren't tempting.
-
I would have kept the goal of Grocery Game at $21 and allowed a win at $19.
I didn't think making the range $20-$22 was all that necessary. I haven't seen the show much lately so I don't know how many have fallen short of the original $21 mark to necessitate the change.
The change to Grocery Game was made in season 45. A quick look at seasons 42 through 44 shows the game had a win-loss record of 2-9, 3-6 and 0-9 in those years respectively. But had the range been changed earlier, those ratios would have improved to 6-5, 5-4 and 4-5.
Inflation affected that game suddenly, as season 41's record was 4-1.
-Jason
-
My longstanding suggestions were to update Grocery Game and Range Game for inflation's sake. They got to Grocery Game within the past decade, so now it'd be Range Game's turn. It's gone so long without changes, a $1000 rangefinder on a $4000 scale would be most inflation-appropriate. For someone who grew up with '90s shows, that's sort of eye-opening as to what the original intent of the game was.
The problem I would forsee with this is the precision of the scale. I assume the current scale is $1 for every 1/8 inch because that was the most manageable at the time to make, view on camera, and quickly adjudicate. Maybe with the advances in printing and cameras you might be able to get the scale down to, say 1/32 inch you still have to deal with the impact of the range being manually operated. You could also just change the scale so it's 2 or 5 per tick, but I feel like that feels also feels imprecise and displeasing.
I think my request would be to tweak Pocket Change to turn the zeros into nickels. It may only change the expected value of all 4 envelopes by 2 cents (from 1.19 to 1.21), but it may turn a loss or two into a win and makes bad luck feel slightly less bad (or a different kind of bad from drawing a 0).
-
Maybe call it Cash Advance or Do the Math or something
Hey!
(https://www.priceisright.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/do_the_math1.jpg)
Let me have my one significant contribution!
-
Okay so there is a game that goes by that name. This is what I get for not Googling. :P
-
My longstanding suggestions were to update Grocery Game and Range Game for inflation's sake. They got to Grocery Game within the past decade, so now it'd be Range Game's turn. It's gone so long without changes, a $1000 rangefinder on a $4000 scale would be most inflation-appropriate.
I'm reminded of the time we played "Gag Price is Right" in Palace. We played Range Game for a house, and kept the $150 range.
-
Start Pathfinder off by pricing all three prizes. Give the contestant some kind of insurance marker/pendant of life for each one they get right, then take them away as they misstep on the disco floor.
Except if a contestant gets all three prizes correct and then steps to the second and third digits in the price of the car without making a mistake, they've guaranteed themselves a win. So either the game ends awkwardly with the contestant celebrating without having finished walking the correct path (and the host having to explain why) or everybody has to wait while the contestant finishes walking the path -- possibly having to backtrack in the process -- before the foregone conclusion.
Then how about about a cash bonus for a perfect playing? This would offset being rewarded with prizes for making mistakes.
-
Spelling Bee - The walk away mechanic should escalate. Almost no one takes the money on the fifth card if they've flipped 4 already because they're already so deep. If the walk away grew, then it could make the end of the game more interesting. When they play the game for cash, it would make a world of difference because no one is taking $1000 (5 cards for guaranteed $5000, or risk it for $25000).
Instead of $1000 printed on the back of the cards, escalating amounts would be on the holding slots ($1000-$5000). Walk away before the first card is revealed, you get $1000 and so on. So if they get 3 cards, they could walk away with up to $3000, but they at least have to play the first two cards. And if they got an R (or N in W-I-N), then they have a more meaningful choice before deciding to flip the last card.
-
Then how about about a cash bonus for a perfect playing? This would offset being rewarded with prizes for making mistakes.
Speaking of a perfect playing this is what I've come up with............In Money Game, if the contestant picks the car numbers first and wins it, they get the total of the money from the cards they didn't pick.
-
20 years ago upon the first playing of "Pocket Change" I wrote about this potential tweak. Still think it would work.
You get 25¢ to start with, but the car costs 50¢ (and stays there). Getting a digit right means you pick an envelope, but getting it wrong means you forego the pick (the "cost" of the car stays the same). This way, you don't automatically pick five envelopes. Rearrange the distribution of the 22 envelopes so that 8 of them are 5¢, 6 of them are 10¢, 4 are 15¢, 2 are 25¢ (and an automatic win, since you'd have 25¢ to start with) and two zeroes, so that you don't get the automatic win for pricing every digit correctly.
This way, the game doesn't take six minutes (as yesterday's playing did). And Bob Drew can still milk the suspense, because if you have even one digit right you have a shot to win the car. A total idjit leaves the stage quickly (as he wouldn't even get an envelope).
-
Then how about about a cash bonus for a perfect playing? This would offset being rewarded with prizes for making mistakes.
Speaking of a perfect playing this is what I've come up with............In Money Game, if the contestant picks the car numbers first and wins it, they get the total of the money from the cards they didn't pick.
Haha, you read my mind! Was thinking the exact same thing after submitting my previous comment!
-
Great minds think alike!
-
Then how about about a cash bonus for a perfect playing? This would offset being rewarded with prizes for making mistakes.
Speaking of a perfect playing this is what I've come up with............In Money Game, if the contestant picks the car numbers first and wins it, they get the total of the money from the cards they didn't pick.
But these days that's not much of a bonus--the max possible would be $672. It's not my money, but how about the two highest-remaining pairs as a four-digit amount? Max possible $9998, that'd really feel like something.
-
I'd take $672, just sayin
-
Another one I was thinking of that's not likely to be won anytime soon - "Perfect" Plinko game, all the chips landing in the top spot, and your money is doubled.
-
Since fewer people write checks anymore, does Check Game really make sense for today's audience esp. given how young the average contestant is? It confused people going back to the 80s, and I don't imagine much has changed. But...I like the concept of the game, and the idea of the contestant having to more or less work in reverse to figure out the price. Maybe call it Cash Advance or Do the Math or something and just have them flat out state how much they want? Give them a snazzy touchscreen to punch in the numbers.
Somewhere, I mentioned going from a check-based game to a debit card-based game. You go to an ATM and can withdraw as much money as you want. If the amount of the withdrawal plus the price of the prize is within a range, winner. And in lieu of a giant oversized voided check, you get a giant ATM receipt.
-
"Double Cross" is a mess. Eliminate it.
-
Somewhere, I mentioned going from a check-based game to a debit card-based game. You go to an ATM and can withdraw as much money as you want. If the amount of the withdrawal plus the price of the prize is within a range, winner. And in lieu of a giant oversized voided check, you get a giant ATM receipt.
Jeremy and I were just chatting about this, except replace ATM receipt with a custom TPiR "debit" card. Maybe even print the contestant's name on the card after the show.
The more I think about it, the more I really love the idea of a giant receipt tho.
-
Somewhere, I mentioned going from a check-based game to a debit card-based game. You go to an ATM and can withdraw as much money as you want. If the amount of the withdrawal plus the price of the prize is within a range, winner. And in lieu of a giant oversized voided check, you get a giant ATM receipt.
Jeremy and I were just chatting about this, except replace ATM receipt with a custom TPiR "debit" card. Maybe even print the contestant's name on the card after the show.
The more I think about it, the more I really love the idea of a giant receipt tho.
i really don’t need more reminders that CVS exists.
-
Another one I was thinking of that's not likely to be won anytime soon - "Perfect" Plinko game, all the chips landing in the top spot, and your money is doubled.
Considering it hasn't been "won" once in 40+ years, it's like saying a team should get ten points for 70 yard field goal. That said, I'd just overhaul the game altogether.
Turn Plinko into a one chip game. Every small prize guessed correctly increases your multiplier by one. Overhaul the board to remove the zeroes to guarantee that the contestant will win something (they could even be $100 slots) and let that one chip fly.
-
"Double Cross" is a mess. Eliminate it.
I disagree--it's fine for what it is as a quick, easy-to-understand time-filler.
What I would change about it, though, is adding a "neutral" space for the indicators to rest in at the start of the game instead of on one of the answers. Something about the possibility of winning by doing nothing just never sits well with me in any circumstance.
-
"Double Cross" is a mess. Eliminate it.
Something about the possibility of winning by doing nothing just never sits well with me in any circumstance.
Switch? says "Hey"!
Back to Pathfinder, if you can correctly guess the 3 prizes for 3 extra chances before you start stepping, just have any unused chance become a $1000 bonus. No mistakes? $3000 and the car. Use all your extra mulligans? Car only.
-
"Double Cross" is a mess. Eliminate it.
I wouldn't necessarily call it a mess, but I kinda see how it feels like there's an extra step that makes it a little more complex than similar games like Switch or Flip Flop. Doesn't exactly hurt the game IMO, but there might be a tweak that could be made.
To Sam's point, maybe make the starting point the "neutral" value. In the below example, Drew says the Bahamas trip is currently set at $9,760 while ATL is $6,459. Have him preface by saying "Those are not the current values; what you must do is move the slider blah blah blah..." That still gives you a 1-in-3 shot of winning.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sov2eY9avnY
-
Turn Plinko into a one chip game. Every small prize guessed correctly increases your multiplier by one. Overhaul the board to remove the zeroes to guarantee that the contestant will win something (they could even be $100 slots) and let that one chip fly.
I think reducing Plinko to a one-chip game takes a bit of the fun out of it. It's enjoyable watching the chip drop, and seeing a variety of results from each chip is a good thing.
I like your idea of eliminating the zeros. I'd implement the layout occasionally seen on PiR94, with two top prize slots and three zero slots (or $100 if we're taking your suggestion.)