Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming  (Read 15016 times)

KrisW73

  • Member
  • Posts: 263
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #75 on: April 11, 2023, 10:08:43 AM »
Classic Concentration...no mechanical game board and a less than enthusiastic Alex Trebek.

Can we throw revealing the natural match on a wild card pairing into that as well?

carlisle96

  • Member
  • Posts: 273
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #76 on: April 11, 2023, 11:39:46 AM »
I certainly would

JasonA1

  • Executive Producer
  • Posts: 3028
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #77 on: April 11, 2023, 12:06:09 PM »
I can see why people who watched the original Concentration would like it that way, but having grown up with Classic Concentration, revealing the natural match made absolute sense to me. This might apply to a lot of stuff we hold sacred, because we saw it on the original version of a show, that's actually a toss-up as far as show quality goes. FWIW, my wife vastly prefers Classic Concentration to Jack Narz Concentration, as well.

-Jason
Game Show Forum Muckety-Muck

Neumms

  • Member
  • Posts: 2389
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #78 on: April 12, 2023, 01:49:37 AM »
If I were to rip any changes to Concentration over the years, it would be calling three numbers on games during Narz’ version.

The changes for Classic streamlined the show. Knocking out a row of boxes was smart, and I can’t say that I missed seeing the abandoned halves of natural matches pop up.

Neumms

  • Member
  • Posts: 2389
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #79 on: April 12, 2023, 01:54:23 AM »
Then, money ladder the Winner's Circle. First time, 10K, Second 25K, Third 50K, then 4th (and future until you win it) 100K.     There. Now you have a daily $100K Pyramid that rewards good players…

That’s what $20,000 Pyramid did and penalized good players by paying the lowest prize for nailing it on the fewest trips.

TLEberle

  • Member
  • Posts: 15622
  • Rules Constable
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #80 on: April 12, 2023, 01:55:27 AM »
I think Matt is saying the prize increases whether you win or not and you stay on as long as you win the front game, so think Jeopardy ‘78.
Travis L. Eberle

tvwxman

  • Member
  • Posts: 3867
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #81 on: April 12, 2023, 07:15:07 AM »
I think Matt is saying the prize increases whether you win or not and you stay on as long as you win the front game, so think Jeopardy ‘78.
Correct.  I mean, you can force them to win first to advance up the money ladder, but what's the point ? Move em along quicker for better payouts. It's not like $100K now doesn't have mo' money syndrome .

I never, ever, understood the premise of making a player win 3 games to go for the $20K prize, especially when it meant retiring once you won $10 or $15K.
-------------

Matt

- "May all of your consequences be happy ones!"

aaron sica

  • Member
  • Posts: 5726
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #82 on: April 12, 2023, 07:53:40 AM »
My mom loved the original Concentration, and I remember her not being a huge fan of the car game on CC. I do remember her once telling me she once got a puzzle with only one square revealed - "A penny saved is a penny earned".

Back to the original topic at hand, I think TNPiR94 falls under that category for me. I absolutely loved the 1985 syndie version (it was, and still is, quite awesome to see a different host at the helm plus I've always been a huge Tom Kennedy fan) but I thought 94 strayed too far from the concurrent daytime version for my liking.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2023, 09:16:07 AM by aaron sica »

Stackertosh

  • Member
  • Posts: 365
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #83 on: April 12, 2023, 10:22:52 AM »
My mom loved the original Concentration, and I remember her not being a huge fan of the car game on CC. I do remember her once telling me she once got a puzzle with only one square revealed - "A penny saved is a penny earned".

Back to the original topic at hand, I think TNPiR94 falls under that category for me. I absolutely loved the 1985 syndie version (it was, and still is, quite awesome to see a different host at the helm plus I've always been a huge Tom Kennedy fan) but I thought 94 strayed too far from the concurrent daytime version for my liking.


I would've loved to see TNPIR94 kept the bidding rounds. I thought Doug did a good job hosting the show he looked like he was having fun hosting. Tom Kennedy did an amazing job hosting the show there was an interview of him and he briefly talked about hosting and learning the games.

SamJ93

  • Member
  • Posts: 798
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #84 on: April 12, 2023, 11:47:37 AM »
Can I offshoot this just a bit and say Trader Bob and the Phone Home Game?  Watching them on the retro channel (frequently it seems) exposes them as a bit.....dull?  Trader Bob looked neat but basically becomes anticlimactic and Bob's fairly consistent DON'T SHOW THE PRICE all the time is annoying.  Phone Home sounded creative but playing it out there's nothing there.  Good interaction to have an at-home player, but still.

I felt the exact same way about the trio of "lost" pricing games--Finish Line, Shower Game, Telephone Game--that hadn't been seen since first run, until Winc. posted video clips of them in 2014. Finish Line was just awkwardly executed with the way Bob was forced to stall for time while the gate moved down the track. Shower Game was barely even a game, and Telephone Game was just boring as hell.
It's a well-known fact that Lincoln loved mayonnaise!

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27574
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #85 on: April 12, 2023, 02:25:49 PM »
I never, ever, understood the premise of making a player win 3 games to go for the $20K prize, especially when it meant retiring once you won $10 or $15K.

Well, let's see if I can boil this down into the very simplest language for you:

Bob Stewart was cheap. :)
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

Eric Paddon

  • Member
  • Posts: 880
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #86 on: April 12, 2023, 04:57:24 PM »
And if it took you fifteen times to finally win $20K, you were by then just "rounding up" and losing all the bonus money you'd accumulated along the way which was another sign of cheapness.

Steve Gavazzi

  • Member
  • Posts: 3284
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #87 on: April 12, 2023, 05:44:30 PM »
And if it took you fifteen times to finally win $20K, you were by then just "rounding up" and losing all the bonus money you'd accumulated along the way which was another sign of cheapness.

I can't imagine that this ever would have come into play, given you'd have to lose the Winner's Circle at least 40 times, but if your winnings were rounded to $20,000 no matter how long you took, what would have happened if someone managed to collect $20,000 worth of consolation money?  Would they retire?  Would they get to keep trying to win?  Did they just not have a rule, assuming they'd never need one?

SuperMatch93

  • Member
  • Posts: 1616
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #88 on: April 12, 2023, 08:15:42 PM »
And if it took you fifteen times to finally win $20K, you were by then just "rounding up" and losing all the bonus money you'd accumulated along the way which was another sign of cheapness.

I can't imagine that this ever would have come into play, given you'd have to lose the Winner's Circle at least 40 times, but if your winnings were rounded to $20,000 no matter how long you took, what would have happened if someone managed to collect $20,000 worth of consolation money?  Would they retire?  Would they get to keep trying to win?  Did they just not have a rule, assuming they'd never need one?

Given that $20k was ABC's limit at the time, I imagine they'd retire. And theoretically it could happen as soon as seven shows if each had a $500 big 7 win, two $1,000 perfect-21 bonuses, and two $400 WCs.
-William https://dekochunterzz.bandcamp.com/
"30 years from now, people won’t care what we’re doing right now." - Bob Barker on The Price is Right, 1983

wdm1219inpenna

  • Member
  • Posts: 202
Re: Shows you really looked forward to seeing, but found underwhelming
« Reply #89 on: April 15, 2023, 04:39:04 PM »
My biggest problem with Davidson's '94 Price was the real potential that nobody would win anything.  Even on a day when the real Price is Right has all 6 pricing games lost, no money won during the Showcase Showdowns and a double overbid in the showcases, at least 6 prizes are still being won and given away!

With Davidson's version, all 3 pricing games could be lost and the showcase lost too.  Who wants to watch 30 minutes of nobody winning anything at all?