"Temptation" clears for fall

[Clay Zambo]

[quote name=\'pownster\' post=\'143009\' date=\'Jan 12 2007, 04:18 AM\']
Is it just me - or is there an obsession recently with having huge prizes available to win every night by whatever contestant on EVERY game show?[/quote]

Nah.  It's not just you.  And a lot of us (around here, that is) are sick unto death of it.

As for the rest of your well-reasoned, insightful comments: I just hope somebody at Fremantle NA reads them and takes them very much to heart.  No, that's not right.  I hope everybody at Fremantle NA reads them and takes them very much to heart.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'pownster\' post=\'143009\' date=\'Jan 12 2007, 01:18 AM\']
As an Aussie - I truly LOVE our version, it works really well, and I hope the Yanks don't mess it up!
[/quote]
As a Yank....I couldn't agree more.

[gsgalaxy82]

[quote name=\'pownster\' post=\'143009\' date=\'Jan 12 2007, 04:18 AM\']
As an Aussie - I truly LOVE our version, it works really well, and I hope the Yanks don't mess it up!
[/quote]

I actually wouldn't mind if they copied everything from the Aussie version, except the 10 in a Row played for $25,000 ($50,000A in Australia is the prize) each night, and the big prize is $250,000 cash or a growing jackpot of some sort rather then $500,000A in gold bullion. The set, keep the same, you can even keep the theme the same, makes no difference anyhow. I think it can be a hit if executed right.

David

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'gsgalaxy82\' post=\'143110\' date=\'Jan 12 2007, 08:05 PM\']I actually wouldn't mind if they copied everything from the Aussie version, except the 10 in a Row played for $25,000 ($50,000A in Australia is the prize) each night, and the big prize is $250,000 cash or a growing jackpot of some sort rather then $500,000A in gold bullion. The set, keep the same, you can even keep the theme the same, makes no difference anyhow. I think it can be a hit if executed right.[/quote]I really don't care what their cash jackpot is. (And the $500k bullion was gone by the end of 2005, for what that's worth.) If the show is done right, it is a quality product. The cash jackpot can start at $25k, $50k, $100k or a million bucks; that depends on the syndication company. I would rather that company be more concerned more about the show on the whole.

Referring back to pownster's earlier comment, I offer these two bits heard from Penn Jillette's daily radio program. One is the old standard I trot out that says the focus groups for Deal or No Deal were displeased when a contestant won less than $50,000. The other was after Identity had finished its initial run. Penn said, "And NBC really knows how to do game shows." Why do people play the Powerball? To win a metric load of money. (That's 1.072 imperial loads of money for you Yanks) Now that the bar has been raised by various game shows, the public expects big money. Which is unfortunate.

[TimK2003]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'143118\' date=\'Jan 13 2007, 04:40 AM\']
 Now that the bar has been raised by various game shows, the public expects big money. Which is unfortunate.
[/quote]

Yes and no.  Look at the 50's when the game show scandals brought the big money amounts down to a few thousand dollars -- people still watched game shows.

In the 70's when shows like Name That Tune and Jokers Wild had occasional $100K shows, people still watched the smaller payoff shows.

Same thing with the other decades.  Even today, you have Mo' Money Syndrome games like DoND cranking out 6-figure payoffs on a regular basis, but Family Feud is still chugging along and so is Lingo and they're not super glitz and most contestants don't see more than $20K in winnings.

Overall, if you're talking Primetime shows, yes -- Mo' Money is the rule.  But other game shows in daytime and early fringe people just want a show that is fun to play along with and it doesn't always have to be for OVER ONE MILLION DOLLARS AND 3 NEW PORSCHES OMGSOSLOLTGIF!!!

[Jimmy Owen]

But Sale has always been about glitzy prizes.  Would the game be just as good if they were playing for grocery items?

There is some more good news at NATPE.  Merv Griffin and Program Partners will be shopping "Let's Play Crosswords."  If launched, this will be the second Griffin game to start with "Let's Play."

[tpirfan28]

[quote name=\'TimK2003\' post=\'143135\' date=\'Jan 13 2007, 11:03 AM\']
Same thing with the other decades.  Even today, you have Mo' Money Syndrome games like DoND cranking out 6-figure payoffs on a regular basis, but Family Feud is still chugging along and so is Lingo and they're not super glitz and most contestants don't see more than $20K in winnings.

Overall, if you're talking Primetime shows, yes -- Mo' Money is the rule.  But other game shows in daytime and early fringe people just want a show that is fun to play along with and it doesn't always have to be for OVER ONE MILLION DOLLARS AND 3 NEW PORSCHES OMGSOSLOLTGIF!!!
[/quote]
You also have Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy.  Wheel's payout rarely breaks into the $70K range, let alone the $100K range with the bonus spin.  Jeopardy's still chugging along, and their average payout usually is between $17-22K, with some shows more, and some shows with winners not breaking $10K.

I wouldn't mind if the lot winner takes home $250K with everything (cash and prizes) for a nice extended say on the program.  J! winners usually seem to take $125K for six or seven days...which is a happy medium.

[Don Howard]

[quote name=\'Jimmy Owen\' post=\'143136\' date=\'Jan 13 2007, 11:12 AM\']
There is some more good news at NATPE.  Merv Griffin and Program Partners will be shopping "Let's Play Crosswords."  If launched, this will be the second Griffin game to start with "Let's Play."
[/quote]
With the first one being Let's Play Post Office starring The Shell Answer Man. Good memory, Jimmy.
And now, I quote The Stosh:
"Jack Kelly, Joe Garagiola and Jim Perry are all retired but MyNetworkTV viewers will see shades of Sale of the Century this fall".
Yes, Jack Kelly retired, all right. In 1992. Permanently. From life.

[rebelwrest]

We have all been excited about Temptation coming stateside.  We have also been crossing our fingers and toes and whatever else we can cross that Fremantle does not screw this great game up.  

However, I have been thinking about Reg Grundy.  Reg fought for years to buy the rights to the show, even putting on a knockoff in the 70s called Temptation.  Reg put a lot of work into $OTC and it paid off with 21 years on television and being considered Australia's best quiz.  I know that Grundy Productions is now part of Fremantle, and Reg lives in Bermuda, but was Reg Grundy ever brought on for consulting purposes for Temptation?

[DrJWJustice]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'143118\' date=\'Jan 13 2007, 04:40 AM\']
Now that the bar has been raised by various game shows, the public expects big money. Which is unfortunate.
[/quote]

Thanks to work considerations, I seldom get on here, let alone post these days.  Those who've been on here a while, though, will know that I don't necessarily agree with the Mo' Money Syndrome argument, but I will say that having a possible 6- or 7-digit payoff for every contestant per game is starting to get old.  Millionaire was special because it was a very rare thing to even offer such a prize before it aired.  Even then, how often does someone get to the jackpot question on that show?  Less often than I post here, I suspect.  

Nevertheless, if there is a game where Mo' Money Syndrome really does not apply, it's Sale of the Century/Temptation.  It was the big money quizzer of its day, and even today, winning $150,000 or more is still pretty respectable.  Anyone who has tapes of the Aussie version will remember that its introduction billed the show as "The World's Richest Quiz."  That might not reign true any longer, but it still needs the megaprizes for the format to work.  Even better, it actually requires a contestant to work for his/her haul and take some big chances in order to get there.  I look forward to seeing its US return, and hopefully, Freemantle will just do it the way the Aussies do it and leave it there.

[BMaurice06]

Okay, now that we're all excited about Temptation coming to America, allow me to present my idea on how Temptation USA should be done:

I would use the current jackpot format they have in the Aussie version, but I wouldn't let 7-day winners play the "10 in 60 Seconds" round at the end of the show if they decide to come back because I feel that it's pointless to do so; IMO it would evoke the impression that the show is simply shoving money up the champ's throat.  As for the cash jackpot itself, I'd adjust the figures to assure reasonably-high-but-budget-friendly stakes:

Base Value: $25,000
Day 1: $5,000
Day 2: $10,000
Day 3: $15,000
Day 4: $20,000
Day 5: $25,000
Day 6: $50,000

At that point, if the champion decides to come back, he/she could take home up to $150,000 or risk it to "go all the way" for all 5 prizes totaling around $100,000 plus up to $300,000 cash, bringing the potential grand total to at least $400,000.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'143396\' date=\'Jan 15 2007, 04:19 PM\']
Base Value: $25,000
Day 1: $5,000
Day 2: $10,000
Day 3: $15,000
Day 4: $20,000
Day 5: $25,000
Day 6: $50,000
[/quote]
Frighteningly, those numbers don't offend me. (is he actually getting it, folks?)

Killing Ten Right on the penultimate night is too complicated, though. Why can't you jury-rig those numbers to be able to play it one more time?

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'143425\' date=\'Jan 15 2007, 07:30 PM\']Frighteningly, those numbers don't offend me. (is he actually getting it, folks?)[/quote] As I do every morning before the trek down to the Family Business, I take care of my dad's dogs; specifically what comes out the ass end.

I usually get there at 11 or so. On this particular day, I couldn't see very well; I was squinting, and falling down and so on. I looked up, and wouldn't you belive it, the sun was in fact shining on the dog's ass today.

So who knows. Maybe he just picked some random numbers and got lucky. I'd sooner believe that than "I sat down, and rationally came up with a payoff schedule that satisfies the winners, the audience, and the budget," given what I know of the poster's history. (Last time out, he was going to have the Cash Jackpot increase by $25,000 every time a champion was defeated or quit with a prize. Or some hooey like that.)

Killing Ten Right on the penultimate night is too complicated, though. Why can't you jury-rig those numbers to be able to play it one more time?

I absolutely agree. The whole bonus is predicated on "continuing to play". Taking that away makes zero sense. Now, I didn't get it, but are those amounts bonuses for winning Ten Right? "Your jackpot was $25,000, now it's $30,000?" 'Scuze me while I fap. If they bother to include Ten Right at all, I'd be pleased. I'm not going to go on postulating about numbers because like everyone here, I don't have access to the budget.

[HYHYBT]

Why? No one has given me a reasonable answer as to why champions should earn more shopping money. If they only earn $55 on that day, then they should get $55. If that only gets them to $105, then, by golly, they have $105 to spend. I do not understand why some people here have this idea that people should be allowed to win the huge jackpot that much faster. The mind boggles.

The trouble is that the vast majority of the time, the winner is on their first or second day. So instead of the suspense of finding out whether they'll take the nice prize they've built up to or risk it for more, viewers get to sit through descriptions of prizes no one will have a chance at (because of the weekly rotation), followed by the contestant declining an ugly bracelet or somesuch. The shopping bonus fits best with the premise of the show, but it needs *something* more to it. This may not be it, but I'm glad to see they're trying something new instead of either leaving the shopping as it was or, as they tried twice before, replacing it with something that doesn't fit the show.

[BrandonFG]

Just thought of a "sinister" twist to the game that could help boost a player's daily total and get them slightly closer, without rushing the process.

Over the course of the tenure, any or all prizes that a contestant bought via instant bargain, can be "bought" back for the price they originally paid. If you lose the next day, it's bye-bye prizes. Think of it as a "refund".

So, for example, you have that new $2,500 HDTV you bought for $11, and the $1,000 trip to the Grand Canyon that you paid $7 for. Do you sell to get $18 closer to another prize? At least it involves somewhat of a risk.

If there's any flaws in this, blame it on me posting at 2:30 a.m. :-P

/If you like the idea, you know where to send the check.