Hardest Game Show To Understand

[J.R.]

You're saying this to a person who's still employing random capitalization.

And the same person who crapped his pants over the existence of Michigan J. Frog...

I thought the rules of "Whew!" were massively confusing for a while and honestly tempered my enjoyment of it until I could finally nail them down.

[TLEberle]

I thought the rules of "Whew!" were massively confusing for a while and honestly tempered my enjoyment of it until I could finally nail them down.

What brought you over the hurdle? For all the times that I read the blurb in the Encyclopedia and the rule-by-rule sheet on Randy's web site, the whole thing didn't coalesce into a pile of awesome until I actually saw the game played on video. (That applies for Instant Reaction/Go, as well.)

[J.R.]

the whole thing didn't coalesce into a pile of awesome until I actually saw the game played on video. (That applies for Instant Reaction/Go, as well.)

That was it, watching the shows and paying closer attention to the game.

Would it be fair to say Wolpert had a bad tendency to make game shows for game show fans and not really the general public?

[whewfan]

It's been said that Jay Wolpert games took seemingly forever to understand. But I was able to understand Whew!, Hit Man, and Shopping Spree in no time.

One of these is not like the others.

Of those listed, I think the easiest to catch on to was Shopping Spree. It was fairly simple... Go shopping for items in "stores" for a total stranger, based only on the items on their clothing, then get the right items from each store in the shortest time possible. The bonus game was also quite simple. Using items on a wall, grab the right item associated with a famous person. Wait till You Have Kids, another Wolpert show, was also quite simple to understand, although not really interesting to watch. Parents are asked questions about parenting and try to match the answer of a parenting "expert" (Dr. Ellen Winters was the "expert" for the first season, but after some of her so called expertise was challenged by other experts and viewers, she was replaced in the second season) IMO the bonus round of WTYHK was the only exciting part, and Jay Wolpert knows how to do awesome bonus games.

[TLEberle]

IMO the bonus round of WTYHK was the only exciting part, and Jay Wolpert knows how to do awesome bonus games.

"Heads or Tails?"
"Heads!"
"No, wrong, Tails. Heads or Tails?"

[Matt Ottinger]

the whole thing didn't coalesce into a pile of awesome until I actually saw the game played on video. (That applies for Instant Reaction/Go, as well.)

That was it, watching the shows and paying closer attention to the game.

I think there's a difference, though, between watching a game that's hard to follow and reading an explanation that doesn't make sense until you see the show.  I show my students Go every year, and they instantly get it.  It is not a hard game to understand.

I will admit here, for the first time ever, that when 16-year-old me watched the premiere of Family Feud, I didn't understand how Fast Money worked.  For someone who understood the bonus round to the 1975 version of Password, this was infinitely embarrassing.

[Bryce L.]

The Debt Bonus Round still Confuses me to this day. I get winning the front part (get all 10 in 60secs). But it's when you lose that part is where things get confusing.

Just remember this:
A) Win part 1, and lose part 2, and you leave with $1,500.
B) Lose part 1, and lose part 2, and you leave with $1,000.

Could it be more clear than that?

[Bryce L.]

the whole thing didn't coalesce into a pile of awesome until I actually saw the game played on video. (That applies for Instant Reaction/Go, as well.)

That was it, watching the shows and paying closer attention to the game.

Would it be fair to say Wolpert had a bad tendency to make game shows for game show fans and not really the general public?

Depends on your view of a "bad" tendency. If you are specifically catering to a niche audience, then Wolpert's concept's are awesome. If you are trying to do a show that will be a ratings hit regardless of the demographics, not so much.

[clemon79]

I think there's a difference, though, between watching a game that's hard to follow and reading an explanation that doesn't make sense until you see the show.  I show my students Go every year, and they instantly get it.  It is not a hard game to understand.

I strongly suspect that the explanation most people are going on is the official-rules-by-legal-release that Randy posted on his site way back when, which absolutely would make the game confusing to someone who knew nothing about it otherwise, 'cuz legalese. I remember asking Mom to explain it to me ('cuz I was in school, of course) after the premiere, and she was able to get the point across in about two minutes.

[MikeK]

IMO the bonus round of WTYHK was the only exciting part, and Jay Wolpert knows how to do awesome bonus games.

"Heads or Tails?"
"Heads!"
"No, wrong, Tails. Heads or Tails?"

I know where you're going with this statement, but it was not a random event like a coin toss.  There was reasoning behind why a situation was OK or not OK.

[Bryce L.]

the whole thing didn't coalesce into a pile of awesome until I actually saw the game played on video. (That applies for Instant Reaction/Go, as well.)

That was it, watching the shows and paying closer attention to the game.

I think there's a difference, though, between watching a game that's hard to follow and reading an explanation that doesn't make sense until you see the show.  I show my students Go every year, and they instantly get it.  It is not a hard game to understand.

I will admit here, for the first time ever, that when 16-year-old me watched the premiere of Family Feud, I didn't understand how Fast Money worked.  For someone who understood the bonus round to the 1975 version of Password, this was infinitely embarrassing.

Just a minute... you got the 1975 Password end-game rules right off the rib? My hat's off to you, sir.
From personal experience, for a 12-year-old boy who read encyclopedias and did long-division problems just to pass the time, taking about 3 or 4 read-throughs of Chris Lambert's writeup of the 1975 Password rules to get them to sink in, was a bit of a humbling moment for me.
As said above, I tip my hat to you, Mr. Ottinger.

[Matt Ottinger]

Just a minute... you got the 1975 Password end-game rules right off the rib? My hat's off to you, sir.
From personal experience, for a 12-year-old boy who read encyclopedias and did long-division problems just to pass the time, taking about 3 or 4 read-throughs of Chris Lambert's writeup of the 1975 Password rules to get them to sink in, was a bit of a humbling moment for me.
As said above, I tip my hat to you, Mr. Ottinger.

Well again, reading about it and seeing it in action are two different things.  Let's not lose sight of the bigger point here:  I didn't understand how Fast Money worked.  This is not a hat-tipping moment.

[Bryce L.]

Just a minute... you got the 1975 Password end-game rules right off the rib? My hat's off to you, sir.
From personal experience, for a 12-year-old boy who read encyclopedias and did long-division problems just to pass the time, taking about 3 or 4 read-throughs of Chris Lambert's writeup of the 1975 Password rules to get them to sink in, was a bit of a humbling moment for me.
As said above, I tip my hat to you, Mr. Ottinger.

Well again, reading about it and seeing it in action are two different things.  Let's not lose sight of the bigger point here:  I didn't understand how Fast Money worked.  This is not a hat-tipping moment.

Fair point.

[MSTieScott]

You had to explain the $1m wedge and the Mystery Wedge? You couldn't just say "That's a special case, it'll get explained when it happens?"

The contestant actually landed on the $1,000,000 wedge, and since my friend reacted, "A million dollars?!?", I had to explain all the hoops (because Pat doesn't have time to talk through the full process, and to the casual viewer's eyes, the wedge is just sitting in front of the contestant like any other prize wedge).

And by that point, since we had gone through pauses for the $1,000,000 wedge and Free Play, might as well take the time for the Mystery Round, too.

(Discussing game shows with my friend was a look into how John Q. Public sees the genre. For example, he felt that $50,000 was an insufficient payout for a prime time game show, regardless of the quality of the game itself. Though he was able to identify excessive padding to fill an hour.)

[TLEberle]

Most confusing?  How about Play the Percentages.  Just when you think you had it figured out, they either change the rules/format/set or tinker with the bonus round every so often, I could never get it squared down permanently.

There might have been some confusing bits regarding money and winning, but in each case the game was easy to follow: what percentage of a polling group correctly answered the question, and the other version became Twenty-Five.

I think there's a difference, though, between watching a game that's hard to follow and reading an explanation that doesn't make sense until you see the show.  I show my students Go every year, and they instantly get it.  It is not a hard game to understand.

Over Thanksgiving, I hoodwinked my entire family into playing Go, and after ironing out the rules and procedures, everyone dug it. When I tried again on Christmas Eve with half the same people and half different, it went really badly. One never knows, do one.

I know where you're going with this statement, but it was not a random event like a coin toss.  There was reasoning behind why a situation was OK or not OK.

Aside from the credential thing, you're right, it was more than just dumb luck, but I didn't think it was all that exciting to watch those years ago, partly because you were trying to match an opinion, and you had nothing to go on. I suppose Match-Up would have been a better analogy.