The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: sotcfan2004 on July 21, 2004, 11:09:10 AM
-
Well, for the past six months, I have been brainstorming about a new game show. I doubt I'll ever get it to air. I have yet to name it. Anyways, here's the skinny.
The show starts with five players. A board with 50 spaces is revealed. Each space contains a question worth between 1-5 points, or bonus spaces, which I will explain in a minute.
A clock is set at 3 minutes. The first player (determined by drawing numbers) picks the first square, and at that moment the clock begins counting downward. The point value is announced and the question is asked. Players will then have 3 seconds to buzz in. The first player to buzz in with the correct answer earns the points and control of the board. A wrong answer incurs a score deduction equal to the value of the question. Only the first player to buzz in may attempt to answer. In round 1, there are 3 bonus spaces:
-DOUBLE PLAY: When revealed, a question is asked. First to buzz in with the correct answer earns the opportunity to answer a second question. If they answer it correctly, their score is doubled. If either question is answered incorrectly there is no scoring penalty but the DP will be out of play.
-TAKE 5: A question is asked. First to buzz in with the correct answer takes 5 points from each of the opponents and adds to his/her score. A wrong answer incurs a 5-point scoring deduction.
-CA$H or CREDIT: A question is asked. First to buzz in with the correct answer will have the choice of $1,000 in guaranteed cash or 10 pts. This would be the only guaranteed cash of the game, as you will see in a minute.
At the end of 3 minutes, the lowest scoring player is eliminated. If necessary, a tiebreaker question would be asked.
Round 2 point values range between 5-10. The bonus spaces are as follows:
1 DOUBLE PLAY
2 TAKE 10s (same as TAKE 5, but 10 instead)
In this round, there is also a penalty space hidden on the board with no question attached. It is called the 'SILENCER.' Whoever reveals this space will be locked out of the game for 30 seconds.
Round 3 is the last round of regular play. If there is a returning champion, the two lowest scoring players are eliminated; otherwise, same as before. Points range between 10-15. The special spaces include:
2 DOUBLE PLAYS
2 TAKE 10s
2 TAKE 5s
1 SILENCER
MARATHON- Whoever reveals this space will have exclusive control of the board until they answer incorrectly, take more than 3 seconds to answer, or time expires.
Whoever is in the lead at the end of this round will go on to face the returning champion (if there is no champion, the two highest scorers will face each other in the final round).
FINAL ROUND
Same board of 50 questions. This time, the champ and challenger will tackle the same board separately. They will only have 90 seconds to amass as many points as possible. While the first player plays, the second is in isolation. The champ decides who goes first. The only bonus space in this round is a question worth 25 points. After both have faced the board, the player who racks up the most points becomes champion and earns a tough decision.
After winning their first game, the champ receives $25,000. They may take the money and leave, or give it back and return the next day to face off against the winner of round 3. A second win nets $50,000 and the same decision. A third win is worth $75,000, a fourth is worth $100,000. Any player who wins five games wins $1,000,000. Question is: would they be confident enough in their abilities to take the risk? Because, if they lose, they leave empty-handed. (except for money earned in CA$H or CREDIT)
Well, that's about it. Let me know what you think.
-
No play-along factor at all, aside from answering straight quiz questions, and you don't even have any kind of interesting gimmick for those. In fact, I don't see an interesting overall theme for this thing whatsoever.
There is nothing here that grabs my attention or makes me interested in watching this show at all.
-
I think that there are too many extras in your game. I think it would be a good idea to have the winner be the person who has control of the board when time expires.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 11:14 AM\'] No play-along factor at all, aside from answering straight quiz questions, and you don't even have any kind of interesting gimmick for those. In fact, I don't see an interesting overall theme for this thing whatsoever.
There is nothing here that grabs my attention or makes me interested in watching this show at all. [/quote]
My question to you is this: why does there always have to be a 'gimmick?' The whole premise of the show is that your winnings are not only determined by your correct answers but also by the risks you're willing to take. And, if you're really hungry for gimmicks, the bonus spaces are excellent examples, as they can alter the course of the game in an instant. A Double Play can give a struggling player a boost into the lead, as can a Take 5 or Take 10. CA$H or CREDIT provides an interesting dilemma: should you take the only guaranteed money in the game, or pad your score? A Silencer could stop a great player's streak dead in its tracks, thus giving the opponents an opportunity to move past him/her. The Marathon space has its pro- allows a player to come from behind without having to be the first to buzz in, and con- could result in a completely lopsided game.
This would not be the first show to come out that would be a pure test of knowledge (gee, remember Jeopardy!). The only thing about J! that troubles me is that it is not your everyday, average Joe that goes on there. You've got your professors, doctors, teachers, genius software engineers, but what about the little guy? There are an inproportionate number of Joe Schmoes out there filled to the brim with useless trivia. Why not give them an opportunity to capitalize?
And, as for you, clemon79, I've been posting on this board for a few months now, and you always seem to come around to say something negative about my posts. You must lead a very unhappy life.
-
[quote name=\'sotcfan2004\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 12:19 PM\']My question to you is this: why does there always have to be a 'gimmick?' [/quote]
If there is nothing to hook the viewer, he won't be interested.
And, as for you, clemon79, I've been posting on this board for a few months now, and you always seem to come around to say something negative about my posts. You must lead a very unhappy life.
While not wanting to speak for Chris; you; Sir; asked for feedack on your proposal. Chris gave you feedback...just because you don't like what he said doesn't make him a negative person.
-
[quote name=\'sotcfan2004\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 11:19 AM\']This would not be the first show to come out that would be a pure test of knowledge (gee, remember Jeopardy!). The only thing about J! that troubles me is that it is not your everyday, average Joe that goes on there. You've got your professors, doctors, teachers, genius software engineers, but what about the little guy? There are an inproportionate number of Joe Schmoes out there filled to the brim with useless trivia. Why not give them an opportunity to capitalize?
[/quote]
Maybe it's changed, but I don't remember occupation ever being a screening criteria for Jeopardy! What was important was that you had fast recall for facts and even for, as you call it, useless trivia.
Call it a "gimmick," call it a "hook," whatever...the previous posters' points are valid. There's no hook here that would interest a viewer, no overall concept that can be succinctly stated, and way too many "special squares."
-
[quote name=\'sotcfan2004\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 12:19 PM\']
My question to you is this: why does there always have to be a 'gimmick? [/quote]
Television was built on gimmicks. Sad but true. Every show pitch...games, sci-fi, talk shows...has a gimmick.
Your show has a gimmick...risk money to win big money, while staying ahead of opponents scores in a game with A LOT of pitfalls....
The question you have to ask yourself is : Is this gimmick worth watching? I don't think the answer is yes, but with a lot of fine tuning, I don't think the answer would be 'no' either.
Advice? Apply the KISS theory. Don't make the viewer go into sensory overload trying to keep up with the game!
-
Wasn't there a rule against posting original game ideas on the Forum?
-
[quote name=\'mystery7\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 02:36 PM\'] Wasn't there a rule against posting original game ideas on the Forum? [/quote]
Taking a couple of quick scans of the Eligibility Requirements, I didn't see anything prohibiting posting game show proposals.
Doug
-
[quote name=\'sotcfan2004\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 10:19 AM\'] And, as for you, clemon79, I've been posting on this board for a few months now, and you always seem to come around to say something negative about my posts. You must lead a very unhappy life. [/quote]
Oh, good Christ, how did I know this was coming.
You ASKED what we thought. If you didn't want the truth, then instead of posting:
Let me know what you think.
...you should have said "Please post and tell me how good this is, because I might go whining like a little snot if you have something bad to say about it."
This would not be the first show to come out that would be a pure test of knowledge (gee, remember Jeopardy!).
Jeopardy has possibly the two greatest gimmicks in the business: the answer/question format, and the concept of losing money for an incorrect answer. Take those both away, and it's crap, too. You have the second in your game, but now that it's been done, it's not original. And THEN you throw in rules like your Double Play that ask a question in play but DON'T penalize opponents for a wrong answer. (I realize SOTC did that on the Fame Game, but they also went to great lengths to present the FG as a seperate segment of the show outside of the regular questions.)
Have you playtested this at all? Is it a balanced format? I bet no, on both counts.
The whole premise of the show is that your winnings are not only determined by your correct answers but also by the risks you're willing to take.
And you reward neither by giving the high scorer at the end of the day $25 large, period, regardless of score. So it ONLY matters that the champion answer more questions than their opponents, not HOW many, and it doesn't even really matter there if they get lucky and hit the right squares. Also, the only people who are going to take your grand in-play are the ones so far behind that they have no chance of winning and would like to take home something along with their Turtle Wax. Anyone in the running is gonna take the 10 points. If they haven't fallen asleep at their podium in boredom yet. So much for your "interesting" dillemma.
I stand by my original rating: Not Scottish. And if it's Not Scottish...
-
This sounds like nothing more than a form of Jeopardy with too many additions. If you want a game that will last longer and work out, it needs to have a concept rarely done in games before. It could be an all new gimmick, or an all new form of questions, just something completely original will always help.
-
[quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 12:49 PM\'] [quote name=\'mystery7\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 02:36 PM\'] Wasn't there a rule against posting original game ideas on the Forum? [/quote]
Taking a couple of quick scans of the Eligibility Requirements, I didn't see anything prohibiting posting game show proposals.
[/quote]
There's nothing against it, but it's discouraged, both for potential theft of idea legal issues and the fact that the proposer usually gets their panties in a wad when they post a garbage idea and people tell them so.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 02:58 PM\'] [quote name=\'SRIV94\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 12:49 PM\'] [quote name=\'mystery7\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 02:36 PM\'] Wasn't there a rule against posting original game ideas on the Forum? [/quote]
Taking a couple of quick scans of the Eligibility Requirements, I didn't see anything prohibiting posting game show proposals.
[/quote]
There's nothing against it, but it's discouraged, both for potential theft of idea legal issues and the fact that the proposer usually gets their panties in a wad when they post a garbage idea and people tell them so. [/quote]
Ah, yes, just like the old Usenet days (I guess some of those FAQ still apply).
Doug
-
Without stiring the shit more than it is now on this topic...I did read the idea and not claiming to be an expert in creating games, but I have been involved in the development process...this is not the type of game that would sell today. Maybe 30 years ago you could get away with something like this...but not today.
Its sad but yes, everything needs a gimmick or a hook. Take out the concept of the host playing for his money in Win Ben Stein's Money and all it is is a game show with categories and questions...Take the grossness out of Fear Factor and it's like every other "stunt" show that's been done before.
Plus your bonus money would not appeal to a production companys pocket book Im afraid. I think they would frown on a player being able to walk away with $1,000,000 for simply winning 5 days in a row...just ask the Jeopardy people, the ones who still have hair on their head! ;)
But keep at it...Combination Lock has been around, in its NAME form, for 12 years now...I've pitched the current format for the past 5 years and now. all of sudden, people think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. I look back and read how it all started and I shutter at what I thought was a "finished" game. So keep at it!!
Hope that helped a little!
John
-
Constructive criticism's a thing o' wonder, ain't it? Here's a little more. No negative thoughts intended or implied.
Is the host going to explain how the bonus squares work before the game starts? If not, and the clock is running continuously for 3 minutes, that's gonna amount to a lot of time being taken away from the play of the game itself. Also, even a simple thing like asking, "Cash or credit?" can adversely affect the flow of an otherwise rapid-fire Q&A spree.
I agree with Chris that the Double Play should not only giveth, it should also taketh away. The penalty for an incorrect response should be something - maybe twice the value of the question?
$25 large isn't so large for a jackpot in an era when people who win $32K on Millionaire are regarded as losers. I think $100K steps would be a little more appropriate on the way to a million.
I don't mean to sound like I'm focusing solely on what's wrong with the game - just wanted to share observations. Constructively.
BTW, here's a link (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4407\") to the discouragement of new concepts. See the last post.
-
[quote name=\'Chris Lemon dated himself by saying\']I stand by my original rating: Not Scottish. And if it's Not Scottish... [/quote]
<buzz>
"What is, it's crap, Alex?"
[quote name=\'sotcfan2004\']This would not be the first show to come out that would be a pure test of knowledge[/quote]
But it's not even that. The special squares dilute the "test o' knowledge aspect of the game.
The whole premise of the show is that your winnings are not only determined by your correct answers but also by the risks you're willing to take
So did "Sale of the Century."
Not only do you not really have anything terribly new to offer, my first clue that this won't get off the ground is that you have no title, no one-sentence description, just a few paragraphs of an idea.
Usually, I'll come up with an idea while doing something else: playing darts, video games, messing around in the kitchen. Sometimes the idea works. Sometimes it doesn't, and I move on. This might be one of those where you need to move on.
-
[quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 01:49 PM\'] I've pitched the current format for the past 5 years and now. all of sudden, people think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. [/quote]
Do you actually have someone making a pilot of the new format?
-
[quote name=\'Dsmith\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 10:25 AM\']
And, as for you, clemon79, I've been posting on this board for a few months now, and you always seem to come around to say something negative about my posts. You must lead a very unhappy life.
While not wanting to speak for Chris; you; Sir; asked for feedack on your proposal. Chris gave you feedback...just because you don't like what he said doesn't make him a negative person.[/quote]
Would you rather hear that your idea sucks from Chris Lemon or from a potential buyer in a pitch meeting?
Hint: Hearing it from one is of far less consequence than hearing it from the other.
As for the idea, it's Jeopardy! with a couple of gratuitous fillips thrown in and the odd circumstance that the contestant doesn't have control over the category or question value.
-
[quote name=\'mystery7\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 12:36 PM\'] Wasn't there a rule against posting original game ideas on the Forum? [/quote]
No.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 05:07 PM\'] [quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 01:49 PM\'] I've pitched the current format for the past 5 years and now. all of sudden, people think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. [/quote]
Do you actually have someone making a pilot of the new format? [/quote]
some news coming soon ;)
John
-
[quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 06:46 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 05:07 PM\'] [quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 01:49 PM\'] I've pitched the current format for the past 5 years and now. all of sudden, people think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. [/quote]
Do you actually have someone making a pilot of the new format? [/quote]
some news coming soon ;)
John [/quote]
So, then, no.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 09:31 PM\'] [quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 06:46 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 05:07 PM\'] [quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 01:49 PM\'] I've pitched the current format for the past 5 years and now. all of sudden, people think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. [/quote]
Do you actually have someone making a pilot of the new format? [/quote]
some news coming soon ;)
John [/quote]
So, then, no. [/quote]
I didnt say that!
-
[quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 08:18 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 09:31 PM\'] [quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 06:46 PM\'] [quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 05:07 PM\'] [quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 01:49 PM\'] I've pitched the current format for the past 5 years and now. all of sudden, people think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread. [/quote]
Do you actually have someone making a pilot of the new format? [/quote]
some news coming soon ;)
John [/quote]
So, then, no. [/quote]
I didnt say that! [/quote]
If you can't say anything, then you're still in negotiations. Which means the deal ain't done yet. Which means you don't have a pilot.
It's moot, anyhow. I was merely curious.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 10:28 PM\'] [quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 08:18 PM\'] So, then, no.
I didnt say that! [/quote]
If you can't say anything, then you're still in negotiations. Which means the deal ain't done yet. Which means you don't have a pilot.
It's moot, anyhow. I was merely curious. [/quote]
man this is a tough room....never will understand the rudeness on this board...anyway...i cant say anything so we'll leave it at that!
John
-
Virtually every "How to Succeed in Hollywood" book has some variation on the following:
If you ask your date what he does for a living, and he says "I have a show in development", don't accept a second date with him.
That is to say, if you're working to get your shows on the air, don't expect too many people beyond your close friends and family to be impressed unless you show them an aircheck or a check stub.
-
[quote name=\'SplitSecond\' date=\'Jul 22 2004, 06:48 AM\'] Virtually every "How to Succeed in Hollywood" book has some variation on the following:
If you ask your date what he does for a living, and he says "I have a show in development", don't accept a second date with him.
That is to say, if you're working to get your shows on the air, don't expect too many people beyond your close friends and family to be impressed unless you show them an aircheck or a check stub. [/quote]
Im not looking to impress anyone on here...
John
-
After winning their first game, the champ receives $25,000. They may take the money and leave, or give it back and return the next day to face off against the winner of round 3. A second win nets $50,000 and the same decision. A third win is worth $75,000, a fourth is worth $100,000. Any player who wins five games wins $1,000,000. Question is: would they be confident enough in their abilities to take the risk? Because, if they lose, they leave empty-handed. (except for money earned in CA$H or CREDIT)
Geez, how bloated is the budget for this thing? Possible $25K for only winning the main game?
The game sounds too Jeopardy-esque for me, only with more segments, eliminations, and a clock. Why should I watch a Jeopardy clone when I could change the channel, or pop in a tape and watch the real thing?
Not as crazy as some of my ideas, though.
-
I like the concept, but would restructure the prize amount for the first three days.
Day 1--can leave with $10,000
Day 2--can leave with $25,000
Day 3--can leave with $50,000
Days 4 and 5 as proposed
There are two reasons. First, I think under the original plan, too many players would walk the first day with $25K. Second, coming back the third and fourth days offer considerable risk with little increased reward (for instance, risking $75K after three days to win an additional $25K on the fourth will not be appealing). With my revision, players would have the opportunity to at least double their winnings each successive day.
I like the idea of a big risk at the end, and we could certainly use more trivia-based game shows.
John Brocato
-
[quote name=\'jrjgames\' date=\'Jul 21 2004, 11:36 PM\']....never will understand the rudeness on this board.[/quote]
I'm with ya on that John...as of late, the board is reminding me more and more of ATGS. :-( While I have to say that it's VERY difficult to gauge one's true intentions by reading words on a computer screen, there are a number of crusty responses that I take as very rude and unnecessary.
My only concern is that this turns off potential new posters or makes us look stupid and immature to someone from the industry who may read the group and want to post interesting information.
If someone annoys you, can you not simply ignore their message? Adding cutting remarks only makes this place feel hostile IMO. The rest of us don't need self appointed police to point out a 'stupid' post. Should we not leave that up to Chris and Matt?
ITSBRY
itsbry@juno.com
-
[quote name=\'ITSBRY\' date=\'Jul 22 2004, 12:19 PM\'] If someone annoys you, can you not simply ignore their message? [/quote]
In theory, yes. In practice, one would like to think so, but it doesn't seem to be happening.
The rest of us don't need self appointed police to point out a 'stupid' post. Should we not leave that up to Chris and Matt?
Actually, Matt, Chris and I have been pointing out for some time now that there is no rule against "stupid" posts. Of course, once the Ignore User feature arrives, everyone can block "stupid" posts as he or she sees fit.
-
[quote name=\'SplitSecond\' date=\'Jul 22 2004, 04:48 AM\'] Virtually every "How to Succeed in Hollywood" book has some variation on the following:
If you ask your date what he does for a living, and he says "I have a show in development", don't accept a second date with him. [/quote]
If your date says he/she is an actor, ask "At which restaurant?"
-
I'm a producer. I'm producing business cards that say I'm a producer.
There's interest in a notion that I'm developing into a concept based on an idea I had that should be a project soon. I'm working with a big suit at a major studio and expect to have a green light for a development deal to gear-up for a pilot that should put me on the fast-track for a mid-season pick-up. Meanwhile, can I borrow $20?
Randy
tvrandywest.com
-
[quote name=\'dzinkin\' date=\'Jul 22 2004, 12:14 PM\']Actually, Matt, Chris and I have been pointing out for some time now that there is no rule against "stupid" posts. Of course, once the Ignore User feature arrives, everyone can block "stupid" posts as he or she sees fit.[/quote]
True...there is not. I roll my eyes at them sometimes too, but I don't feel it necessary to let everyone know that I did so (until now :-)).
There are tactful ways of behaving...that's all I'm saying. There is no reason for anyone here to be nasty to anyone else. If a poster is doing something inappropriate and they're called on it with half a dozen nasty remarks, what does that accomplish except cluttering the board with more crap?
ITSBRY
itsbry@juno.com
-
[quote name=\'tvrandywest\' date=\'Jul 22 2004, 02:51 PM\'] I'm a producer. I'm producing business cards that say I'm a producer. [/quote]
I thought your experience in producing was tending to David Ruprecht's produce section. [ducks]
BTW, the poster who started this thread has just won a tape of Free 4 All.
-
[quote name=\'GS Warehouse\' date=\'Jul 22 2004, 04:38 PM\'] [quote name=\'tvrandywest\' date=\'Jul 22 2004, 02:51 PM\'] I'm a producer. I'm producing business cards that say I'm a producer. [/quote]
I thought your experience in producing was tending to David Ruprecht's produce section. [ducks]
[/quote]
LOL. Love it.
Actually I only tell women I'm a producer in the hopes that we can rehearse reproducing.
BTW, the poster who started this thread has just won a tape of Free 4 All.
I'll have to ask Brian Conn at Balderdash if they finally got the stink out of that half of Tribune Stage 9.
Randy
tvrandywest.com
-
I'll have to ask Brian Conn at Balderdash if they finally got the stink out of that half of Tribune Stage 9.
Now it's just the occasional skunk under the building, unless we find some leftover rotting melons from Supermarket Sweep!