Author Topic: The Pyramid (Read 89889 times)

TLEberle · « **Reply #90 on:** July 18, 2012, 02:04:43 PM »

Quote from: BrandonFG on July 18, 2012, 01:37:47 PM

I have none. They made at least 2 pilots that looked pretty damn faithful to what Dick Clark hosted 25-40* years ago, and it really sounds like they know what they're doing. I have no reason to believe this version will be too different from the '09 pilot recently linked to. Why are you so scared of New Pyramid? Seriously, you keep going on and on looking for reasons to dislike it. Relax, I don't think we'll get an Endemaul product. It won't be a carbon copy from 1982, but you can step off the ledge.

I think Dan'l is saying that if there's something that goes against his vision and ideology of what Pyramid should look like, one of the audience members should stand up during a break and bellow "Why wasn't there a Mystery Seven bonus during that half?" or whatever thing is missing/added to the proceedings.

Thunder · « **Reply #91 on:** July 18, 2012, 09:41:28 PM »

You'll notice he didn't specify "during a break".

Dbacksfan12 · « **Reply #92 on:** July 18, 2012, 09:49:55 PM »

Quote from: Dan88 on July 18, 2012, 02:42:45 AM

If they tape both front games of an episode first, prep the Winner's Circle celeb with the categories, retape reactions/explanations/whatever for no discernible reason, or have the anal judging of Donnymid...I'd say get out of dodge. (Or at the very least, voice your concerns.)

BINGO!!!

BillCullen1 · « **Reply #93 on:** July 31, 2012, 11:24:32 AM »

GSN started airing promos for The Pyramid today (7/31). It shows background shots of the set. From what I saw it looks good.

BrandonFG · « **Reply #94 on:** July 31, 2012, 11:40:33 AM »

On its Facebook page, Buzzerblog also posted an "Access Hollywood" interview. My work computer doesn't have sound, but the set looks great.

One difference that may make the purists cry foul: the front game and Winner's Circle big pyramids are one large screen, not six individual ones. Makes sense from a technological standpoint.

clemon79 · « **Reply #95 on:** July 31, 2012, 01:51:27 PM »

Quote from: BrandonFG on July 31, 2012, 11:40:33 AM

One difference that may make the purists cry foul:

OMG NO TRILONS I WON'T WATCH WHAAAAAARGAARBL.

Seriously, if that's the biggest thing "wrong" with the show, it's going to be friggin' awesome.

Matt Ottinger · « **Reply #96 on:** July 31, 2012, 02:47:07 PM »

Quote from: clemon79 on July 31, 2012, 01:51:27 PM

Seriously, if that's the biggest thing "wrong" with the show, it's going to be friggin' awesome.

Absolutely. My personal belief is that the biggest thing "wrong" about the show is going to be that the people they get won't know how to play it well. Even if they're reasonably smart (as opposed to the kids they got for Chain Reaction) the games won't look as good to those of us more familiar with the polished later runs of the original version.

Jeremy Nelson · « **Reply #97 on:** July 31, 2012, 02:55:37 PM »

Buzzerblog has posted a set report and interview with a couple of celebs.

-Pyramid shaped monitors. Snazzy.

-I like the new tiebreaker format- never thought about doing it that way before.

TLEberle · « **Reply #98 on:** July 31, 2012, 03:02:34 PM »

Quote from: Jeremy Nelson on July 31, 2012, 02:55:37 PM

-I like the new tiebreaker format- never thought about doing it that way before.

I like it too. I liked the urgency of the 80s tiebreaker, but I think this is also decent.

I'm confused about how the pass rule is different. A word is "out of play" if you pass, but you can come back to it if time remains? Are they treating it like Alphabetics, then, or does the receiver have to guess it with no more help?

Vahan_Nisanian · « **Reply #99 on:** July 31, 2012, 03:05:00 PM »

I can only hope the new tiebreaker format doesn't bring back the problem of resuming the show on the next episode. One look at that Sandy Duncan & Nipsey Russell episode from 1978 says it all for me.

TLEberle · « **Reply #100 on:** July 31, 2012, 03:12:36 PM »

Quote from: gameshowlover87 on July 31, 2012, 03:05:00 PM

I can only hope the new tiebreaker format doesn't lead to the show resuming on the next episode. One look at that Sandy Duncan & Nipsey Russell episode from 1978 says it all for me.

LOLWUT.

The tiebreaker format is "most in 30 seconds." I don't see any way that you would have spillover games.
/Wouldn't you just edit out the first tiebreaker?
//GSL, this is why people don't think too highly of you.
///twitch, twitch, K-Mart sucks.

clemon79 · « **Reply #101 on:** July 31, 2012, 03:12:57 PM »

Quote from: gameshowlover87 on July 31, 2012, 03:05:00 PM

I can only hope the new tiebreaker format doesn't bring back the problem of resuming the show on the next episode.

Some of us don't consider that a "problem."

Vahan_Nisanian · « **Reply #102 on:** July 31, 2012, 03:13:39 PM »

Well, one thing's for sure: I'm not gonna throw a fit over the new Pyramid board. I like having everything on one screen.

TLEberle · « **Reply #103 on:** July 31, 2012, 03:16:38 PM »

Quote from: gameshowlover87 on July 31, 2012, 03:13:39 PM

Well, one thing's for sure: I'm not gonna throw a fit over the new Pyramid board. I like having everything on one screen.

Praise God for that.

TLEberle · « **Reply #104 on:** July 31, 2012, 03:31:21 PM »

Quote from: Matt Ottinger on July 31, 2012, 02:47:07 PM

Absolutely. My personal belief is that the biggest thing "wrong" about the show is going to be that the people they get won't know how to play it well. Even if they're reasonably smart (as opposed to the kids they got for Chain Reaction) the games won't look as good to those of us more familiar with the polished later runs of the original version.

As someone who was the tender age of minus seven when the show debuted, I have this to ask:

How long did it take for the show to go from that phase of blindly groping to figure out the best way to play the game, where 11 could be a winning score, to the days where the game became how often could you get all seven, and scores of 19, 20 or 21 were commonplace enough that a score of 17 wouldn't hold up?