Entertainment Weekly profile on Temptation

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'162855\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 03:57 PM\']
Up to AUS$10,000; and it costs $15 to play.
[/quote]
Does Ed haggle on it? I remember at the start he didn't haggle on ANYTHING, and then I picked up some episodes a little later where he was making deals on the Gift Shops other than throwing cash on the pile.

/Houston, Hello!
//got nuthin'

[MikeK]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'162856\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 07:04 PM\']
[quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'162855\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 03:57 PM\']
Up to AUS$10,000; and it costs $15 to play.[/quote]
Does Ed haggle on it?[/quote]
The only times I've seen Ed lower the price is when multiple contestants are tied for the lead.

[BrandonFG]

In my four-part response to BMaurice, I actually meant were there any gameplay differences between the Barber and Perry versions, but a quick Wiki search shows very minor differences. Mea culpa on that one.

/144
//Gross!

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'162860\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 06:36 PM\']
/144
//Gross!
[/quote]
Teehee. Line O' the day?

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'162856\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 04:04 PM\'][quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'162855\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 03:57 PM\']Up to AUS$10,000; and it costs $15 to play.[/quote]Does Ed haggle on it? I remember at the start he didn't haggle on ANYTHING, and then I picked up some episodes a little later where he was making deals on the Gift Shops other than throwing cash on the pile.[/quote]Out of the two years worth of episodes, I think I've seen him lower the price to $14 once, and one other time he threw in a previously passed-over gift shop item to entice the leader to have a go. I have not once seen a Dutch Auction for the Vault, since in either case someone was ready to play at the mention of "It'll cost you $15 to play..."

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'162768\' date=\'Sep 4 2007, 11:37 PM\']And to Mr. Chris Lemon, if you're going to doo-doo all over my opinions next time, try and be less harsh![/quote]Erm, why? Given my dealings with you on two separate message boards, you haven't given us anything that demonstrates you understand what makes a good game show. From memory, you thought High Rollers, Blockbusters and Card Sharks would be improved if each was infused with cash prizes at the most inappropriate of junctures. You shoveled heaps of cash onto Sale of the Century's cash jackpot, and then made it less special by making it easier to achieve by an average of one show all told. Not to mention "Instant Cash Fridays," the "Winner's Board of Cash" that followed up shopping, and <timpani> the Century Round.

I could go on. But I won't.

If you want to be taken seriously, say some intelligent things. No free rides. Until then, expect to be regularly eviscerated after you post, trying to convince us that Todd Newton should get another hosting job. (Though you still have a ways to go to catch that one guy who thought that Sale of the Century would be improved if the main game from Nickelodeon Arcade was layered on top of the former.)

[quote name=\'BMaurice06\' post=\'162820\' date=\'Sep 5 2007, 11:40 AM\']1.  I thought the 80s version was great, but not exactly the most solid in the world; that title I think belongs to Aussie Sale during the Tony Barber era.  I just would have liked it more if the producer of Temptation came up with much harder material than just seemingly easy pop-culture questions.[/quote]Maybe we were watching different shows, but the original American and original Australian shows were very similar. Watching the Australian show where that one guy has his Lot Run cracked, I saw gift shops, fame games, the "cash card," a speed round...by the numbers, it's what we had. I'm genuinely curious to find out what differences you saw.

4.  Chip Clips were bad and Double Whammies were good IMO.

I don't think the Clip Chips were bad, as such. They didn't ruin the game in the way that "last card wins" did. But Double Whammies made an already silly game a caricature. For me, they were indefensible.