The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: BMaurice06 on March 27, 2006, 05:24:19 PM
-
I just thought all of the people on this board might want to take a look at what I think is the ultimate dream version of an international classic:
The New Sale of the Century
Host: Todd Newton
Hostess: Brooke Burke
Announcer: Burton Richardson
Basically similar to the Classic Sale Format.
Opening Spiel:
"From Hollywood, it's the world's richest quiz! And today we're offering (list prize here) worth (MSRP) for only (Sale price), (name of car here) for $540, and over $100,000 worth of prizes for only $650! All of that and a cash jackpot of (amount of day's jackpot) can be won only on... THE NEW SALE OF THE CENTURY!"
Front Game:
Three players start with $20 each; questions are worth +/-$5 each throughout the show. Instant Bargains, Instant Cash, and Fame Game segments remain intact as before, ending with a 60-second speed round.
Shopping Segment:
Similar to the original, albeit a few changes:
The winning score of a first-day champion determines the first prize offered; afterward, if the champ decides to play on, his/her total account also determines the next prize offered, etc. $540 buys the car offered that week, and $650 buys all of the prizes previously offered to the contestant during the time he/she was on the show. However, when a champion reaches the latter level, he/she can either take the prizes and leave or come back one more time to add the cash jackpot to his/her winnings. The jackpot now starts at $100,000 and increases by $5,000 a night until someone decides to go "all the way." If the jackpot is not won then, it continues to increase.
I know I've already posted something like this on Loogaroo's board, but this is strongly on my personal wish list of Game Show revivals and I would appreciate everyone's opinion. I tried to keep it simple without confusing the reader too much; it it doesnt work, my apologies.
-
I don't want to flame you too much, as your writing seems to show you had some thought and care into what you just did. But, point blank your "revival" can be summed up as:
Todd Newton hosts, Brooke Burke is the hostess, Burton announces, the cash jackpot starts at 100k and goes up 5k/day instead of the old system, and hey, here's my new opening spiel.
That said, it's not a bad template for a new version, but the jackpot is wayyyy too high. If we apply your dimensions to what the record jackpot was in the 80s (109k) that means the winner would have taken home $395,000 in your format. Yeeowtch.
I can sympathize with having a concept for a revival in your head and being excited about it. But even with my inner excitement, I know posting the rundown of everything I'd keep in place and what little I would change makes for little-to-no discussion. All you'll get is flames.
-Jason
-
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'114314\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 05:24 PM\']
The New Sale of the Century
Hostess: Brooke Burke
[/quote]
I'm in the tent already. And I wouldn't mind being in it with that fine divorcee. Someone break the news to Pat, would you?
Just get this darned show back on the air. This is one I don't believe GSN: TNFG would be able to afford, but man, I wish some syndicator with some bucks and some guts could come along and back this baby.
Please, though, don't let it resemble the trash that Robin Leach tried to hoist upon us last decade.
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' post=\'114326\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 07:44 PM\']
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'114314\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 05:24 PM\']
The New Sale of the Century
Hostess: Brooke Burke
[/quote]
I'm in the tent already. And I wouldn't mind being in it with that fine divorcee. Someone break the news to Pat, would you?
Just get this darned show back on the air. This is one I don't believe GSN: TNFG would be able to afford, but man, I wish some syndicator with some bucks and some guts could come along and back this baby.
Please, though, don't let it resemble the trash that Robin Leach tried to hoist upon us last decade.
[/quote]
Can someone elaborate on what made that dreck, dreck-y? I've never heard stories on format, etc.....
Do share, storytellers!
-
[quote name=\'Don Howard\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 04:44 PM\'][quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'114314\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 05:24 PM\']Hostess: Brooke Burke
[/quote]
I'm in the tent already.[/quote]
Please tell me that was intentional. Please?
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'114328\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 07:51 PM\']
Can someone elaborate on what made that dreck, dreck-y? I've never heard stories on format, etc.....
Do share, storytellers!
[/quote]
Don't know the full story, but do remember reading that they planned to eliminate Instant Bargains. Granted this was almost 10 years ago, so my memory is a bit hazy (damn alcohol). That right there kinda defeats the purpose of calling your show "Sale of the Century".
-
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'114314\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 02:24 PM\']
I know I've already posted something like this on Loogaroo's board, but this is strongly on my personal wish list of Game Show revivals and I would appreciate everyone's opinion. I tried to keep it simple without confusing the reader too much; it it doesnt work, my apologies.
[/quote]
This was an awful lot of typing to suggest a minimally-changed shopping format, a host who has yet to prove to be a good fast reader, a co-hostess who is way above the gig, and one of the most horrifying announcers in the business.
The rest is fine, but the rest....isn't new. I'm reminded of someone's review of Jim Cramer's stock picks. "He picked Google. My DOG could have picked Google."
In other words, you got trashed on Tim's board for this for a reason, and I suspect you will meet a similar fate here.
-
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'114314\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 05:24 PM\']
Announcer: Burton Richardson
Opening Spiel:
"From Hollywood, it's the world's richest quiz! And today we're offering (list prize here) worth (MSRP) for only (Sale price), (name of car here) for $540, and over $100,000 worth of prizes for only $650! All of that and a cash jackpot of (amount of day's jackpot) can be won only on... THE NEW SALE OF THE CENTURY!"
[/quote]
You forgot to add, "And heeeeere's the STAAARRRRR of our show, (insert lame one-liners here), TAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWD NEW-TUNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!" ;-)
Seriously though, I get the feeling that Newton would be good for a show like $ale. I get Jim Perry vibes from him when I watch him host Whammy. And really, what "proof" did we have that Jim Perry would be able to pull off the speed round so well?
-
[quote name=\'FeudDude\' post=\'114344\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 05:58 PM\']
Seriously though, I get the feeling that Newton would be good for a show like $ale. I get Jim Perry vibes from him when I watch him host Whammy. [/quote]
You do? I don't.
And really, what "proof" did we have that Jim Perry would be able to pull off the speed round so well?
We didn't. We have, however, seen Todd Newton read those types of questions. He would absolutely trip over himself.
-
[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'114318\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 05:58 PM\']
That said, it's not a bad template for a new version, but the jackpot is wayyyy too high. If we apply your dimensions to what the record jackpot was in the 80s (109k) that means the winner would have taken home $395,000 in your format. Yeeowtch.
[/quote]
Don't forget, $109,000 in 1984 dollars would be about $208,500 today.
On the other hand, $395,000 in 2006 dollars would be roughly $206,750 in 1984.
http://www.aier.org/cgi-aier/colcalculator.cgi (http://\"http://www.aier.org/cgi-aier/colcalculator.cgi\")
-
I definetly have no complaints of Todd hosting the show & I somewhat think Brooke would be a good hostess, but I have another choice. What would you think of Chris Harrison & Rebecca Mary?
If you would like you could have the value of the questions be doubled every 20 seconds in the speedround, that is if you want to or not?
And Please tone down the cash jackpot for crying out loud. $100,000 + $5,000 for every night not won? I don't think so. Keep it at the initial $50,000, and add $5,000 for every week it's not won. Because to me adding more for each night kind of lame. But that's just me.
Nice revival idea nonetheless.
-
[quote name=\'FeudDude\' post=\'114344\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 07:58 PM\']
Seriously though, I get the feeling that Newton would be good for a show like $ale. I get Jim Perry vibes from him when I watch him host Whammy.
[/quote]
Yeah, I can just hear him now calling the "Fame Game" board.....STOP at a VACCUUM that's gonna make you suck!
-
Well, on little old Yahoo Messenger, I and a few fellow game show geeks have a slightly altered version of Sale of the Century. Allow me to spell out the changes...as few as they may be, for your opinions.
Extended Speed Round - This is largely because people have to type answers and not use voice for answers due to tech issues...but the speed round is billed as, fittingly, The Century Round with 100 seconds on the clock.
The End Game is vaguely like shopping but goes differently. Hopefully you can follow this, as I tend to overexplain.
While the main game is played for money, the money has a different effect.
No matter what game total the winner has, he or she in essence plays for a designated endgame prize. Day 1 - The first prize in a lot, Day 2 a more expensive prize in the lot, etc. Day 5 - They get the car, if they so choose to leave, Day 6- The Lot, Day 7 - The escalating cash Jackpot (we go with $50,000 + $2,000 for every day it's not won) and the lot.
Where does the money come in, then? Ahhh, it becomes an extra temptation angle. Each day also is worth money. A certain multiplier for each day. It's your total main game score times the following multipliers in the following circumstances:
Day 1 - 5
Day 2 - 10
Day 3 - 15
Day 4 - 20
Day 5 - 25
Day 6 - 50
Day 7 - 100
A person could be tempted when they've amassed a high enough cumulative game total and a 20 or 25X multiplier to go with the cash, and the designated prize. It adds temptation.
Example: Alright, day 5...you've amassed main game cash and prizes totalling $12,500. You also have been fairly good to get this far and have amassed $475 Sale dollars in the main game. And, because it's day 5, you get this lovely (insert mid-high level car or SUV here) worth $33,000. Let's do the math...you can leave with not just $45,500 in game cash and prizes, but an additional 25 times your $525 Sale dollars, or $13,125. You could leave us right here and now with $58,625 in cash, car, and prizes...or you could risk it for the lot of prizes and a whole lot more money.
EDIT: In the end, for it to have its best effect, the multipliers might be tweaked to say 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 100, 200 or something to that effect, but it could also be created by making the main game +10/-10 in lieu of +5/-5.
-
Well, now that the cat was let out of the bag with this, allow me to chime in.
I think the revival version of $ale should be a mix of our 80s version and the Aussie version in the later years. The only changes I think are necessary are the following:
The Third Instant Bargain: There are three boxes, like the later years of our $ale. One box would be the Instant Ca$h jackpot ($1,000 +$1,000 for each day not hit), another box would contain a $15 money card, and the final box would contain the chance to win a car at the Winner's Board (the reason why to be explained later). The cost of the bargain would be the leader's margin over the second place player.
The Winner's Board: This is the bonus round I would revive, but with many changes. One, the car would be on the board on these three conditions:
(1) The winning contestant won with a score of $100 or more.
(2) The contestant who chose the chance in Instant bargain 3 is the winner, regardless of score.
(3) The champion wins game 6, thereby winning the car by default if the car has not been won already.
Second, there are only 6 prizes on the board (as opposed to the 10 in our version). Also, the contestant risks the prize(s) won in the previous day(s) to continue. In game 7, the contestant risks all the prizes to add $50,000 (+$2,000 for each day not hit). After win 6, however, the contestant is offered $10,000 to retire. That cash offering is forfeited if the contestant decides to move on.
The set As large as the NBC set, but as snazzy as the Aussie set.
The rest, I'd leave in the producers hands.
That is all.
The Inquisitive One
-
[quote name=\'FOXSportsFan\' post=\'114372\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 07:55 PM\']
Example: Alright, day 5...you've amassed main game cash and prizes totalling $12,500. You also have been fairly good to get this far and have amassed $475 Sale dollars in the main game. And, because it's day 5, you get this lovely (insert mid-high level car or SUV here) worth $33,000. Let's do the math...you can leave with not just $45,500 in game cash and prizes, but an additional 25 times your $525 Sale dollars, or $13,125. You could leave us right here and now with $58,625 in cash, car, and prizes...or you could risk it for the lot of prizes and a whole lot more money.
[/quote]
And has anyone on Yahoo Messenger actually been cowed and quit because of that? Because I gotta tell you, as someone who used to play on Palace and won the whole thing, a GIF of a car didn't exactly dissuade me from continuing.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'114376\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 11:22 PM\']
[quote name=\'FOXSportsFan\' post=\'114372\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 07:55 PM\']
Example: Alright, day 5...you've amassed main game cash and prizes totalling $12,500. You also have been fairly good to get this far and have amassed $475 Sale dollars in the main game. And, because it's day 5, you get this lovely (insert mid-high level car or SUV here) worth $33,000. Let's do the math...you can leave with not just $45,500 in game cash and prizes, but an additional 25 times your $525 Sale dollars, or $13,125. You could leave us right here and now with $58,625 in cash, car, and prizes...or you could risk it for the lot of prizes and a whole lot more money.
[/quote]
And has anyone on Yahoo Messenger actually been cowed and quit because of that? Because I gotta tell you, as someone who used to play on Palace and won the whole thing, a GIF of a car didn't exactly dissuade me from continuing.
[/quote]
Well, of course it's understood people play for nothing, I mean that's what the whole internet game thing is about...I'm saying it might add a little extra temptation if it was added to a revival of Sale in real life.
-
In my opinion, that's an awful lot to remember. When it comes to add-ons and bonuses, sometimes less is more.
-
[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'114314\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 02:24 PM\']
I know I've already posted something like this on Loogaroo's board[/quote] Because you tripped over yourself to give away truckloads of money, without thinking about how the game is improved. Make the game better first. You have still not gotten that right.
but this is strongly on my personal wish list of Game Show revivals
Why? Do you run a major network? Even a minor network? A public access station out of Aurora, Illinois? I'd love to see Blockbusters come back, but it's not gonna happen just because I post a revival of it.
-
[quote name=\'FOXSportsFan\' post=\'114377\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 08:31 PM\']
Well, of course it's understood people play for nothing, I mean that's what the whole internet game thing is about...I'm saying it might add a little extra temptation if it was added to a revival of Sale in real life.
[/quote]
And _my_ point is that outside of the trivia contest, playing Sale online makes about as much sense as playing DoND for funsies. And that anyone who plays online for fun who buys an IB or quits before they are either defeated or retired is an abject idiot. At which point, I ask: why not just play a straight trivia contest?
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'114387\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 09:20 PM\']
And _my_ point is that outside of the trivia contest, playing Sale online makes about as much sense as playing DoND for funsies. And that anyone who plays online for fun who buys an IB or quits before they are either defeated or retired is an abject idiot. At which point, I ask: why not just play a straight trivia contest?
[/quote]
That really is beside the point, Chris. Whether or not it's playable for funsies does not determine whether or not it'd work as a real game show.
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'114389\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 09:25 PM\']
That really is beside the point, Chris. Whether or not it's playable for funsies does not determine whether or not it'd work as a real game show.
[/quote]
Except I never made that point. I simply asked Jim whether anyone in his little Yahoo Messenger game was moron enough to bite on an IB or elect to win that GIF of a bedroom set in lieu of playing on.
I suspect I already know the answer, of course.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'114391\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 11:32 PM\']
[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'114389\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 09:25 PM\']
That really is beside the point, Chris. Whether or not it's playable for funsies does not determine whether or not it'd work as a real game show.
[/quote]
Except I never made that point. I simply asked Jim whether anyone in his little Yahoo Messenger game was moron enough to bite on an IB or elect to win that GIF of a bedroom set in lieu of playing on.
I suspect I already know the answer, of course.
[/quote]
That's why it's called Internet gaming. Just because you had a crappy time at one point partaking in such games, doesn't mean you should slam others who do just for the sake of your sorry ass getting a one up on someone.
Three words for you, sir: GET LAID ALREADY!
-
[quote name=\'cacLA8383\' post=\'114395\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 09:51 PM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'114391\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 11:32 PM\']
I suspect I already know the answer, of course.
[/quote]
That's why it's called Internet gaming. Just because you had a crappy time at one point partaking in such games, doesn't mean you should slam others who do just for the sake of your sorry ass getting a one up on someone.
[/quote]
....aaaaaand there's my answer. :)
And I'll point out that I had a GREAT time whippin' ass on y'all, despite the fact that some people got rather pissy that I declined the opportunity to put myself at a competitive disadvantage in return for a JPG of a recliner. :)
-
Carl, you really need to chill out.
Chris, the reason people play the game in the first place is to experience playing the game. Whether or not the players actually get prizes is immaterial. The whole point is to have a good time. Just because someone plays the game in the spirit intended even though there is nothing at stake does not make them an idiot. You should chill out as well.
-
If my buying an Instant Bargain puts me at $1 behind the leader, and I lose by a question, I don't think that's very smart. If I were to actually receive an upright arcade game or a new refrigerator, then I might be happy with how things turned out. If I merely get "score money" to put me on a leaderboard...not so much.
To drag this back on topic, what would be wrong with a static jackpot worth roughly the same amount as the prizes? If it's daytime, $100,000. Nighttime, $250,000. That would be a very suspenseful game... $500,000 or nothing.
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'114397\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 10:03 PM\']
The whole point is to have a good time.
[/quote]
Which, I repeat, I had. :)
Just because someone plays the game in the spirit intended even though there is nothing at stake does not make them an idiot.
Well, we disagree there. :)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'114396\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 11:59 PM\']
[quote name=\'cacLA8383\' post=\'114395\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 09:51 PM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'114391\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 11:32 PM\']
I suspect I already know the answer, of course.
[/quote]
That's why it's called Internet gaming. Just because you had a crappy time at one point partaking in such games, doesn't mean you should slam others who do just for the sake of your sorry ass getting a one up on someone.
[/quote]
....aaaaaand there's my answer. :)
And I'll point out that I had a GREAT time whippin' ass on y'all, despite the fact that some people got rather pissy that I declined the opportunity to put myself at a competitive disadvantage in return for a JPG of a recliner. :)
[/quote]
Well, I wasn't referring to the place you used to play games at, genius. Why don't you look on the last page and see the part where you slammed our YIM version of Sale.
[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'114397\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 12:03 AM\']
Carl, you really need to chill out.
[/quote]
Speaking of chilling out...... stop being parrot-like.
-
[quote name=\'cacLA8383\' post=\'114402\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 10:15 PM\']
Well, I wasn't referring to the place you used to play games at, genius. Why don't you look on the last page and see the part where you slammed our YIM version of Sale.
[/quote]
You're right. Let me correct that:
"...where I can put myself at a competitive disadvantage in return for the opportunity to read some text DESCRIBING a recliner."
There, fixed. :)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'114403\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 12:28 AM\']
[quote name=\'cacLA8383\' post=\'114402\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 10:15 PM\']
Well, I wasn't referring to the place you used to play games at, genius. Why don't you look on the last page and see the part where you slammed our YIM version of Sale.
[/quote]
You're right. Let me correct that:
"...where I can put myself at a competitive disadvantage in return for the opportunity to read some text DESCRIBING a recliner."
There, fixed. :)
[/quote]
Wow.
(I'm done now, I'll just go back to where I came from in this hole I call reality.)
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'114385\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 12:15 AM\']
Because you tripped over yourself to give away truckloads of money, without thinking about how the game is improved. Make the game better first. You have still not gotten that right.
[/quote]
- Argument here is that, in theory, the idea might work. However, as what seems to be the consensus on the board is saying...a little too far-fetched. You have to improve or bring about the gameplay first, then think about tweaking the payoffs to extreme levels.
- If I can say that if NIU had a gong show that gave away $10 instead of $512.76, then you'd think I'm either a cheapskate or an idiot. If I raised the stakes to $512,000,000.76, you'd think I'd be on crack. But the point of the matter is, if you would think of raising the stakes in order to bring in whatever, it may work, but if you're sacrificing the main points of what the game is truely about (in this case, a format that's worked obviously well for years), then its not worth tweaking. If you focus more on the payouts instead of the concept, your production company tanks.
(perhaps a simple K.I.S.S. works here, and no, I'm not talking about a smooch either)
- Jackpot-issue: I've not had the energy to even think about that, so I'll just throw in a arbitrary number: eleventy-billion dollars and a saturn sedan (why the hell not? replaces my P.O.S.)
- And if it was up to me, when it comes to instant bargains and such, if i'm playing off the winner's board, it'd make a lot of sense for me to hit the buzzer as opposed to if I'm forced with a threshold of $530/$640/$750. I don't want to force myself to stay an extra two shows just because I'm going to walk away with another $10K of prizes on top of the junk I'll already collect.
(and the one time I played on the palace $ale, never did I buy a bargain [but then again, I was trailing up until the 3rd fame game anyway...thank god for $25 money cards]...and as I recall, I lost by a single question with a score of $80 or 90)
Nyquil's flaring up, nitpick at will.
-Dave
-
And if it was up to me, when it comes to instant bargains and such, if i'm playing off the winner's board, it'd make a lot of sense for me to hit the buzzer
Aw, where were you when I did my post (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=10222\") on that subject? :)
-Jason
-
[quote name=\'cacLA8383\' post=\'114395\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 11:51 PM\']
Three words for you, sir: GET LAID ALREADY!
[/quote]
Kevin's right... you do seem a little more cranky as of late.
At any rate, I don't knock anyone's kicks. People think I'm dumb for saying this, but the feeling on being on a game shows far outweighs the money I won. The money goes; those memories are forever. And if people want to spend sometime role playing, good for them.
Brandon Brooks
-
Geez, if this is what I get proposing anything, then it ain't worth it...besides, to call a spade a spade what Chris Lemon likes/dislikes does not necessarily reflect the opinions of a television network (although more often than not, they very well should)*.
I was just using a template used on a netgame (gotta be careful to use that term), and was wondering if it might add any more intrigue to the real game. I wasn't expecting everyone to get so uppity and veer so far off the intended path. All parties better cool their jets, okay?
Chris, surprisingly there have been, to my knowledge a couple of people that have (I actually did once because I'd rather announce than play, so there's my dingbat reason). And, instant bargains are actually bought fairly often (usually at least once per game).
The whole netgame thing is all about fun...and here are a few of you turning into the Kennedy/Nixon debate. I mean cool it, for goodness sakes.
* - Just using you as an example, Chris, take no offense, please.
-
[quote name=\'FOXSportsFan\' post=\'114462\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 10:09 AM\']
Chris, surprisingly there have been, to my knowledge a couple of people that have (I actually did once because I'd rather announce than play, so there's my dingbat reason).
[/quote]
See, that's at least a reason, I can dig that. But if you're In It To Win It, there is just no reason why it's a smart strategic move. (I could also see doing it to prove a point, i.e. that you have the hubris to put yourself at that disadvantage and still win.)
And yeah, it's all in fun, and if you're just playing to goof around and don't really care if you win or not, sure, go nuts. But when I play a game, my goal (assuming that "having fun" is already taken care of) is to win, and my request is that my opponents give me their best effort in trying to deny me that goal. :)
-
I did, in fact, try to capture the true essence of the US version of the show (I've only seen clips of the Aussie edition on YouTube and elsewhere), but there were some parts of the various formats that IMHO didn't make much sense, so here are several explanations for my format.
1. The original shopping format on the daytime Sale actually offered the cash jackpot as a bargain. That, I felt, was a bit screwed up because logically speaking it's not right to buy money for money (unless you're trading two fives for a ten). That's why I favor the syndicated Sale's shopping format.
2. The Winner's Board I thought was also flawed. It seems passable to pick up a prize a day, but I prefer playing for a bigger prize each day (picking up a car so early in your championship run is to crazy IMO). However, I liked the idea of risking all of the prizes to try to win another game to pick up the jackpot, which is why I added that element to the shopping format.
3. As for the jackpot itself, I know it seems much but then again I favor higher stakes on game shows.
Hope this is understandable.
-
[quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' post=\'114457\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 11:52 AM\']
[quote name=\'cacLA8383\' post=\'114395\' date=\'Mar 27 2006, 11:51 PM\']
Three words for you, sir: GET LAID ALREADY!
[/quote]
Kevin's right... you do seem a little more cranky as of late.
[/quote]
Wow, just looking at that, I realized that you're right and that I have been kind of bitchy over nothing lately. My apologies to all.
-
[color=\"#000099\"]*point of clarification*[/color]
My question, as related to the Winner's Board, is this:
Say that you win a prize on day 1. If you come back the next day, do you risk that prize to earn another pick of the board, or are all of your winnings secure until day 10, when you risk all 10 for $50K?
-
[quote name=\'Strikerz04\' post=\'114535\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 08:40 PM\']
My question, as related to the Winner's Board, is this:
Say that you win a prize on day 1. If you come back the next day, do you risk that prize to earn another pick of the board, or are all of your winnings secure until day 10, when you risk all 10 for $50K?
[/quote]
On the American version, there wasn't a risk unless you played for 50K. When the Aussie version adopted the Board in '89, you risked your WB prizes every night, after clearing the board you could play one more game for the jackpot (not a static 50K). The board was considerably smaller also, with only about half the squares as the American version.
-
[quote name=\'cacLA8383\' post=\'114525\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 04:16 PM\']
Wow, just looking at that, I realized that you're right and that I have been kind of bitchy over nothing lately. My apologies to all.
[/quote]
Thank you for acknowledging it. That takes a big man.
-
[quote name=\'cacLA8383\' post=\'114525\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 06:16 PM\']
Wow, just looking at that, I realized that you're right and that I have been kind of bitchy over nothing lately. My apologies to all.
[/quote]
No big deal... happens to us all.
Brandon Brooks
-
Dear I hope they bring back $OTC, but can $ale have a proper bonus round?
Here's my idea
Bonu$ Money
A contestant is shown five answers and the host reads a clue to eliminate one of the answers. After four clues have been read, the contestant is shown how much score money is added to their total from the answer left on the board.
Values
first clue answer kept $5
second $10
third $15
fourth $25
correct answer kept $50
Any opinions
-
[quote name=\'rebelwrest\' post=\'114568\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 08:22 PM\']
Any opinions
[/quote]
Yes. Next.
-
[quote name=\'rebelwrest\' post=\'114568\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 10:22 PM\']
Any opinions
[/quote]
So they win...$50?
And I thought the 'Net Inquizition/Zooventure (hi, Dave) hour was a bad idea.
-
[quote name=\'rebelwrest\' post=\'114568\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 08:22 PM\']
Dear I hope they bring back $OTC, but can $ale have a proper bonus round?[/quote] They did. Or was it not what you wanted?
Here's my idea
<blibbety blah, blibbety bloo snipped>
So, you have now proven to us two things. One, that you have no class at all (posting a truly tasteless 'tribute' to Peter Tomarken.) Two, that you have no problem at all soiling one of the great game shows of all time.
Seriously, what is it with the people who can't let the final act be shopping?
-
[quote name=\'rebelwrest\' post=\'114568\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 11:22 PM\']
Dear I hope they bring back $OTC, but can $ale have a proper bonus round?
Here's my idea
Bonu$ Money
A contestant is shown five answers and the host reads a clue to eliminate one of the answers. After four clues have been read, the contestant is shown how much score money is added to their total from the answer left on the board.
Values
first clue answer kept $5
second $10
third $15
fourth $25
correct answer kept $50
Any opinions
[/quote]
...that makes absolutely no sense.
-
[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'114570\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 11:40 PM\']
[quote name=\'rebelwrest\' post=\'114568\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 10:22 PM\']
Any opinions
[/quote]
So they win...$50?
[/quote]
I guess that would be the reverse of "Mo Money Syndrome"
-
[quote name=\'rebelwrest\' post=\'114568\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 10:22 PM\']
Dear I hope they bring back $OTC, but can $ale have a proper bonus round?
<post edited for broadcast>
Any opinions
[/quote]
The nyquil's still talking to me, but what does that even have to do with the concept of the show in the first place?
I think at this point, if you win the lot, with that format, you should win a donkey.
yeah, I said it.
A Donkey!
-
[quote name=\'Strikerz04\' post=\'114589\' date=\'Mar 29 2006, 01:25 AM\']
I think at this point, if you win the lot, with that format, you should win a donkey.
yeah, I said it.
A Donkey!
[/quote]
That would make a real ass out of the contestant.
(Which way to the TTD room? The board makeover has me a bit backwards...)
-
[quote name=\'Modor\' post=\'114570\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 11:40 PM\']
[quote name=\'rebelwrest\' post=\'114568\' date=\'Mar 28 2006, 10:22 PM\']
Any opinions
[/quote]
So they win...$50?
And I thought the 'Net Inquizition/Zooventure (hi, Dave) hour was a bad idea.
[/quote]
Actually, my proposal was for the 'Net Zooventure/Everything Goes Hour.
And I might note that one person who is now a member of this forum actually volunteered to be a contestant when I made said proposal... with no indication that his request was anything but serious.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'114590\' date=\'Mar 29 2006, 01:46 AM\']
[quote name=\'Strikerz04\' post=\'114589\' date=\'Mar 29 2006, 01:25 AM\']
I think at this point, if you win the lot, with that format, you should win a donkey.
yeah, I said it.
A Donkey!
[/quote]
That would make a real ass out of the contestant.
[/quote]
There will be three donkeys to choose from.
One will be worth a nice prize.
A second will be worth a not as nice prize.
A third will be worth less than that.
At the climactic moment of choosing, the emcee will tell the champion, "Whenever you're ready, pick your ass".
-
OK, I don't normally do this, but here's my idea (well, not really my ideas, taken from some places)
I'd keep the main game pretty much like it was. I liked the idea Inquisitive one had with the three boxes like the Instant Cash. But I'd have one box have the jackpot, the other a $15 money card, and the third a nice prize (like in the Aussie version, but they used playing card suits).
Now for the end game (hopefully I won't be accused of mo money syndrome):
Part One: Ten in a Row
This is pretty much taken from the Aussie version, except it's played first. The player has 60 seconds to get 10 correct answers for a top prize of $100,000. With each correct answer, the player moves up a "ladder" (a la Weakest Link): $1K-$2K-$4K-$6K-$10K-$15K-$20K-$30K-$60K-$100K. The difference between this and the Aussie version is a player can stop before a question is asked (by hitting a button, like the bail out on the Wonderwall) and take whatever money they have.
Part Two: Shopping
Whatever money won (if any) is placed in the bank. This part is like the old version, they go shopping for prizes. The player can only play Ten in a Row if they've reached a new prize ladder. (Unlike the new Aussie version, the player must purchase the prizes with the main game winnings). The player may purchase the prize and take whatever money accumulated from 10 In a Row. This means that the first prize will no longer just be an automatic no. If a player wins $60K in Ten in a Row, that small prize looks more tempting. Same with later prizes. Obviously the prizes get larger, with trips, cars, etc. They will not play 10 in a Row when they reach the level of all the prizes. The final level is all the prizes, plus $500,000 cash (No Bullion here!), plus the money won in 10 in a Row.
I know, it's a lot of money, but if the Australians can do it, why can't we?!
David
-
Somebody else can take the issue of the actual figures involved, but you're creating a situation where somebody can run up the jackpot (or possibly more) before they get there, removing the temptation down the line. Plus, I personally would not be willing to risk two days worth of 10 in a Row if I did decently well just so I could nab a few high-end prizes. You may call this intrigue, I call it "a waste of all the prizes in the upper tiers."
-Jason
-
I should have clarified this, this is a bonus game before the shopping end game. The money on the board is added to the players score money. For example is a player has $500 and needs $540 to buy the car the contestant can hit the $50 and buy the car at that point. The game was designed to give contestants who won the game a chance at some extra shopping money, and maybe get to the jackpot faster.
The other version of this would have been whatever was picked off the board would be added to the cash jackpot. Three spots being $2,000, one being $5,000, and one being $10,000.
-
I should've also clarified that with an incorrect answer, the players ladder "resets" back $0. I was unaware of a rule change the Australian version had made, where they don't have that anymore. As for your points Jason, as I told you via AIM, the point is to kind of discourage players from going on...to an extent. The problem with the old version was, if they won a game, it was usually an automatic no if they wanted the first prize. But with a $60,000 "bribe" almost, a player could decide "Yeah I'll leave." But there's still enough to make them want to keep going if they so desire, because there's $500,000 cash at the end of the "rainbow" per se.
David
-
[quote name=\'gsgalaxy82\' post=\'114858\' date=\'Mar 31 2006, 07:24 AM\']
As for your points Jason, as I told you via AIM, the point is to kind of discourage players from going on...to an extent.
[/quote]
But as a producer, you don't want that. You WANT people going on, for two reasons: one, the continuity of a returning champion (and especially one who looks like he might be heading for a big payday) helps retain viewers (something GSN finally seems to be figuring out), and two, having players risk their prizes to come back saves you a BUNDLE in cash and prizes that you don't have to give away.
This, of course, doesn't stop the Mo' Money crowd, who bounces up and down in their chairs so long as someone can bolt with a big wad o' cash. It also proves why they will never work in the business.
-
Points taken Chris. But the big problem with the Perry version is it took all the excitement out from early wins. If a player won their first game, they never stopped. IIRC, only once when they offered a motorcycle did anyone stop. It gives them more incentive to stop As for the money, the only reason I used the values I used was because the Australian version uses those. The only difference is that version offers $500,000 in gold bullion and this one would be all cash.
David
-
[quote name=\'gsgalaxy82\' post=\'114867\' date=\'Mar 31 2006, 11:39 AM\']
Points taken Chris. But the big problem with the Perry version is it took all the excitement out from early wins. If a player won their first game, they never stopped. IIRC, only once when they offered a motorcycle did anyone stop.
David
[/quote]
They didn't stop too often on their first show. However, one week during the syndicated run saw THREE players retire on their first show with a motorcycle.
-
[quote name=\'gsgalaxy82\' post=\'114867\' date=\'Mar 31 2006, 08:39 AM\']
Points taken Chris. But the big problem with the Perry version is it took all the excitement out from early wins. If a player won their first game, they never stopped.
[/quote]
And my point (which despite your reply, you're clearly NOT getting, to absolutely no surprise on my part) is that this is very clearly built into the format. The excitement of an early win is not in what the new champion might do on the other side of those doors, it's in the PREVIOUS champion being dethroned.
Now, if you choose to call that a "problem", then that's certainly your option. But some of us actually do watch game shows for the engaging gameplay, and don't really care whether assloads of money are given away on every show.