Author Topic: If Password returned, (Read 27333 times)

Chelsea Thrasher · « **Reply #15 on:** June 20, 2003, 07:58:12 AM »

These words have been repeated countless times on message boards, and probably in meetings when designing revivals:

Person A: The format is fine, *Except I'd change this this, and this*

Folks, if you've got things you wanna change/add/subtract, you obviously \"don't\" think the format is finel

I'd like to say \"Use the Super Password format, leave everything as was\", but there's one thing that's GOTTA be fixed. Change the name of the bonus game BACK to Alphabetics, Dammit. Other than that, IMO, SP had about the best format a Password version could have....

Robert Hutchinson · « **Reply #16 on:** June 21, 2003, 02:31:05 AM »

My opinion (varying very slightly): SP, with P+ puzzle scoring--that is, with every puzzle making a difference in the outcome of the game.

Brandon Brooks · « **Reply #17 on:** June 21, 2003, 03:18:46 AM »

[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' date=\'Jun 21 2003, 01:31 AM\'] My opinion (varying very slightly): SP, with P+ puzzle scoring--that is, with every puzzle making a difference in the outcome of the game. [/quote]
Pre-Kennedy scoring, you mean. This is a false statement, because all puzzles make a difference in the outcome of P+ and SP.

Brandon Brooks

clemon79 · « **Reply #18 on:** June 21, 2003, 03:30:38 AM »

[quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'Jun 21 2003, 12:18 AM\'] This is a false statement, because all puzzles make a difference in the outcome of P+ and SP.
[/quote]
How so? If the puzzles are scored $100 - $200 - $300 - $300, and game is to $500, then the game is a simple best of three, and the first puzzle is nothing more than a warmup.

Even if one of the later puzzles goes unsolved, it's STILL first-to-solve-two, ignoring the results of the $100 puzzle.

(Now, if I'm misremembering, and the puzzles scored $100 - $200 - $300 - $400, then I will eat my words, but even then it's dependent on either the $200 or $300 puzzle going unsolved.)

zachhoran · « **Reply #19 on:** June 21, 2003, 08:08:38 AM »

The scoring for SP was 100-200-300-400, and if a puzzle went unsolved, they played another puzzle for the same value. Gene would sometimes say in the end credits that an unguessed puzzle was edited out of the show, or words to that effect.

clemon79 · « **Reply #20 on:** June 21, 2003, 01:54:05 PM »

[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jun 21 2003, 05:08 AM\'] The scoring for SP was 100-200-300-400, and if a puzzle went unsolved, they played another puzzle for the same value. [/quote]
Okay, then I stand by my comments, the game was still first to solve two, if you ignore the outcome of the first puzzle.

DrJWJustice · « **Reply #21 on:** June 21, 2003, 04:21:03 PM »

[quote name=\'tom0930\' date=\'Jun 19 2003, 01:16 PM\'] The bonus round should be called "The Big Money Lightning Round" and played like Alphabetics...start the jackpot at $10k, add $5k to the jackpot each time it's missed.
[/quote]
What's wrong with calling the bonus round \"Alphabetics\"? Geez. we've got Pearson's Game Show Improvement Syndrome on here! Everyone wants to rework the game. The last several times Pearson tried that -- with maybe the exception of \"Family Feud\" -- they made the show worse. If it ain't broke, then don't fix it. There were very few changes between P+ & SP, the most notable being the scoring system and the addition of the Cashword. Look how long that revival lasted.

clemon79 · « **Reply #22 on:** June 21, 2003, 04:50:24 PM »

[quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' date=\'Jun 21 2003, 01:21 PM\'] There were very few changes between P+ & SP, the most notable being the scoring system and the addition of the Cashword. Look how long that revival lasted. [/quote]
Frankly, the change that I think improved the game the most was the swapping of partners after the Cashword puzzle. That helped eliminate the Pyramid syndrome of a good player being bogged down by a crappy celebrity partner.

Michael Brandenburg · « **Reply #23 on:** June 21, 2003, 06:08:46 PM »

Well, my two cents on this:

I'd go with the P+/SP format but I'd have the front-game played in a fashion that would have the players play to a specific time-point in the show (leaving enough time for an end-game for the winner), rather than a \"best-of-3\" or a specific dollar score (e.g., the \"$500\" amount that won a game on SP).

My suggested scoring:

No points for guessing a puzzle's \"clue words\" (as on P+/SP).

Scoring for solving a puzzle: In Games #1 and #2 on a given show, 100 points for solving the puzzle with one clue revealed, 80 for solving it with two clues revealed, 60 for solving it with three clues revealed, 40 for solving it with four clues revealed, and 20 for solving it with all five clues revealed.

For Game #3: Respective point values are 250, 200, 150, 100, and 50.

For Game #4: Respective point values are 500, 400, 300, 200, and 100.

If time runs out in a show before the fourth game is completed, play out the puzzle as a \"jump-in,\" revealing the clue-words one at a time (as in the \"$400\" main-game round on Farago's BtB '86); the first team to buzz in gets to guess the puzzle.

I'd go with the \"Alphabetics\" round as an end game (only one per show, and at the end of the program), but it would obviously have to be played for a fixed amount of say, $10,000, rather than the progressive \"jackpot\" that SP had.

Michael Brandenburg
(Otherwise, should make a good show to bring back.)

DrJWJustice · « **Reply #24 on:** June 21, 2003, 06:55:37 PM »

Michael Brandenberg's idea isn't bad at all. Slight changes like that do improve the game without adding so much that they take away from the essense of the game play. I'm not too keen on the $10,000 non-progressive pot. I'd probably kick it off at $25,000 minimum and increase it every time it's not won. I'd also rather see shows straddle, kind of like those damned soap operas -- wanna know how it turns out? Tune in tomorrow. As for the jump-in idea, the jury's out on that one as far as I'm concerned.

Brandon Brooks · « **Reply #25 on:** June 21, 2003, 07:08:22 PM »

[quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' date=\'Jun 21 2003, 05:55 PM\'] Michael Brandenberg's idea isn't bad at all. Slight changes like that do improve the game without adding so much that they take away from the essense of the game play. I'm not too keen on the $10,000 non-progressive pot. I'd probably kick it off at $25,000 minimum and increase it every time it's not won. I'd also rather see shows straddle, kind of like those damned soap operas -- wanna know how it turns out? Tune in tomorrow. As for the jump-in idea, the jury's out on that one as far as I'm concerned. [/quote]
That's \"mo' money\" syndrome. $10,000 isn't a bad haul for a win at a bonus game, and if there is returning champions, all the better.

Straddling's fine, but this game can well possibly be contained in a half hour.

Brandon Brooks

Clay Zambo · « **Reply #26 on:** June 21, 2003, 09:35:33 PM »

Re: Michael's suggestion for the last puzzle: Save \"All-Stars\" and the \"Password\" that followed it, buzz-ins haven't been a big part of \"Password\"--I'd kinda like to keep 'em out of this. How 'bout revealing puzzle-clues one at a time, giving the team in the lead a chance to answer after the first clue, then alternating 'til the puzzle's solved?

Variations/Adjustments: Let the team in the lead have the option to play first or second.

If there's a tie, the team who solved more Puzzles (or won more Passwords?) throughout the show plays first (or has the option).

Esoteric Eric · « **Reply #27 on:** June 22, 2003, 02:56:42 AM »

[quote name=\'DrJWJustice\' date=\'Jun 21 2003, 01:21 PM\']
What's wrong with calling the bonus round \"Alphabetics\"?[/quote]

The last time we discussed updating Password on ezBoard, I chimed in with my GameTweak (Patent Pending). I won't go into all the specifics, since it was looked upon as too complicated (and it was), but one of my ideas for the bonus was to not give the players the initial of each password, nor sort them alphabetically; calling it Alphabetics then wouldn't make sense, so I reverted to calling it the Lightning Round. (Hey, it's the most recognizable name for a bonus in GS history; lots of GS spoofs and even the occasional real GS use the term as if it were generic.)

Alphabetics (especially during the SP era) seemed a little too easy, so I proposed what amounts to finishing two classic LRs in the space of one.

(Bet Peter Lawford could have done it! 8=D )

Esoteric Eric, and may I just chime in here and point out that this is in fact my very first post to Invision? (Wait a minute... didn't I use that on Usenet? Oh, well...)

DrJWJustice · « **Reply #28 on:** June 22, 2003, 12:03:35 PM »

[quote name=\'Brandon Brooks\' date=\'Jun 21 2003, 06:08 PM\']
That's "mo' money" syndrome. $10,000 isn't a bad haul for a win at a bonus game, and if there is returning champions, all the better.

[/quote]
Two letters: B.S.

That's not \"'mo' money syndrome.\" That's inflation. Take a look at H2, especially the day when Peter Marshall hosted. Sheesh!

tommycharles · « **Reply #29 on:** June 22, 2003, 12:33:28 PM »

[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jun 18 2003, 10:47 AM\'] And you've made the same design error that many people before you have as well: you are penalizing a team for solving a puzzle early. [/quote]
Couldn't that just be called strategy? Either solve it as soon as you know it, or wait for more money with the risk that the other team might get it before you - seems o.k. to me.

Author Topic: If Password returned, (Read 27333 times)

Michael Brandenburg

tommycharles