[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'170413\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 02:35 PM\']First off, let me say that I'm not a fan of hypothetical formats, in general. I think it brings out two groups of people : A: The absolutely oblivious to how game shows should be run, and B : The folks who love to ram their dreams down their throats...[/quote]I don't mind the land of the hypothetical if people go in with reasonable ideas, and accept criticism well. That tends to not be the case around here. On the other hand, it's interesting (to me, of course) to contemplate how some people would jigger the Spoiler Snipe effect from Crosswords, or what have you. It's unfortunate that some people have to urinate in the punch bowl and ruin it for everyone else by throwing around nonsensical money amounts, broken/untested rule sets, and then being all uppity about being told why it's broken.
NOTE : This money is not cumulative. Win the next level, that's what you have won.
He misses? He gets a flat $1000/box.
I really like
Pyramid. I tend to play that style of game at game nights given the chance. There is no way on God's green earth that I would risk $500,000 for a chance at double-or-nothing on a sight unseen board. Maybe if I was giving and had the chance to pre-look at the six categories. But even then I don't know. One missed reference and it's "one, two, three thousand dollars, back after this." All-in should be accompanied by having as much information as possible: it's why you likely won't have a winner on
...5th Grader or
...Lyrics. I think it would be fairer to have it as an actual ladder, instead of a series of cliffs that you would be flung over. Win, move a step up. Risk it and lose, and you move down.
For that matter, does the material get any harder as you waltz up the money tetrahedron? Or is a $50,000 winner's circle the same as one for the Big Fella?
Some things should not be played for stacks of cash.
Pyramid is one of them. I think $100,000 for a tournament is plenty.
