Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: 500 Questions  (Read 50962 times)

Matt Ottinger

  • Member
  • Posts: 12987
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #30 on: May 22, 2015, 10:07:00 AM »
Or...

"Alex, I'll take Classic Novels for $2000."

"OK, this is the fifth clue in the category.  You got one right, but three others went to your opponents.  It therefore doesn't appear that this is your best category, but we'll see what happens...after the break."
This has been another installment of Matt Ottinger's Masters of the Obvious.
Stay tuned for all the obsessive-compulsive fun of Words Have Meanings.

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27680
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #31 on: May 22, 2015, 11:05:37 AM »
Yeah, I've tried about two hours of this, and I am finding that the shortcomings of the game annoy me more than the chrome entertains me - and it's pretty clearly counting on the chrome to entertain me, because the game couldn't be any thinner if it were devised by an Olsen twin. I fail to see how they are going to ask 500 questions over the course of the series, much less one person's game, so why the hell do I care? (ESPECIALLY when the host keeps making a running joke out of the fact that There's A Lot Of Damn Game To Go Yet.) Am I supposed to care that they bank money along the way? If so, why not call the show Blocks Of 50 Questions?

It's just not good. It's not Set For Life-bad, but it's not good. I utterly fail to see how the glaring flaws in the format didn't keep this from being produced.

/ABC had a shot at Poker Face, ffs
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

BrandonFG

  • Member
  • Posts: 18544
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #32 on: May 22, 2015, 11:57:11 AM »
I think my bad idea is showing why shows should be fleshed out. I had what I thought was a simple fix, and I'm now seeing it works still be bad TV. :-)
"They're both Norman Jewison movies, Troy, but we did think of one Jew more famous than Tevye."

Now celebrating his 22nd season on GSF!

TLEberle

  • Member
  • Posts: 15892
  • Rules Constable
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #33 on: May 22, 2015, 07:09:31 PM »
"OK, this is the fifth clue in the category.  You got one right, but three others went to your opponents.  It therefore doesn't appear that this is your best category, but we'll see what happens...after the break."
And what isn't being mentioned is that all of Richard's lines are being delivered in a shouty and annoying voice all of the time. (For serious, his voice is just this side of Wendy Williams on the spectrum.) Particularly egregious is his trying to make a catchphrase of 'three wrong and you are gone.'

I'm not necessarily sold on all of the various improvements that I've heard around these parts, but it goes to show that a handful of TV watchers show more creativity and understanding of what makes a decent product than two guys who are paid to do same.

Other thing that I don't think has been touched on: how are people enjoying the questions? They seem to be right in the Jeopardy wheelhouse and certainly not "times ten." There were four times that the questions could have been toughened up but they weren't (particularly the ones where the correct answers were Suzanne Collins, Hershey, Penn., Sleepy Hollow and Dune), while others seemed to be quite a bit harder.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2015, 04:27:15 PM by TLEberle »
If you didn’t create it, it isn’t your content.

Matt Ottinger

  • Member
  • Posts: 12987
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #34 on: May 23, 2015, 09:26:21 AM »
Other thing that I don't think has been touched on: how are people enjoying the questions? They seem to be right in the Jeopardy wheelhouse and certainly not "times ten."

Yeah, the questions are fine.  A little generic, frankly, but there's nothing really wrong with that.  They're terribly overplaying the THESE PEOPLE ARE GENIUSES angle.  These are simply people who are good at trivia, which is frankly a welcome change-of-pace compared to most shows these days that cast interesting characters instead of good game players.
This has been another installment of Matt Ottinger's Masters of the Obvious.
Stay tuned for all the obsessive-compulsive fun of Words Have Meanings.

snowpeck

  • Member
  • Posts: 2063
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #35 on: May 23, 2015, 10:29:55 AM »
Not trying to say it's perfect, but I'm thoroughly enjoying the show. It's definitely the best new game in a while.
Co-owner, The Daytime TV Schedule Archive
My website: http://www.gregbrobeck.net
My board game collection: http://boardgamegeek.com/collection/user/snowpeck (recently passed the 100 mark!)

Unrealtor

  • Member
  • Posts: 815
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #36 on: May 23, 2015, 06:54:47 PM »
Now that I've watched the first four hours, I keep thinking that if you sent the exact rules of this game back in time to the 70s or 80s and made G-T or B&E produce them, it would probably be a beloved old classic among this bunch, but this particular version of the game doesn't work very well.

With the exception of how difficult it is for the challenger to unseat the champion, everything that's wrong about this show is a production decision that seems to be specific to the post-Millionaire era--the unnecessarily dark set, the slow pacing, the overloud and overcaffeinated host, the drama being ratcheted up too high over fairly low stakes.
"It's for £50,000. If you want to, you may remove your trousers."

pacdude

  • Member
  • Posts: 809
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #37 on: May 23, 2015, 06:58:45 PM »
It's a good game. It's a sub-par show.

TLEberle

  • Member
  • Posts: 15892
  • Rules Constable
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #38 on: May 23, 2015, 07:15:38 PM »
Now that I've watched the first four hours, I keep thinking that if you sent the exact rules of this game back in time to the 70s or 80s and made G-T or B&E produce them, it would probably be a beloved old classic among this bunch,
I vigorously disagree with this because any of the production companies of yore wouldn't have produced this, or at the very least they would have done so in such a fundamentally different way that you wouldn't be able to connect the dots between the two versions. Matt's right in that the contestants have shone through in a way that it is rare for prime-time game show contestants to do so (and I particularly love the no-selling of "why'dya pick that category?" because it's such a silly question) and Cory is right--what little scope there is to enjoy the actual game play is washed out by noxious producerial decisions.
If you didn’t create it, it isn’t your content.

Vgmastr

  • Member
  • Posts: 126
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #39 on: May 23, 2015, 08:58:20 PM »
I feel like this could be a good show if instead of the lame 500 Questions gimmick which no one will come close to getting to, speed the game up a little, make each episode self-contained and call the show 50 Questions instead.  Get rid of the strikes, and have the challenger always pick the category for the player in control.  Only the player in control can bank money, but on any wrong answer the challenger gets a chance to answer.  If right, they steal control of the game and their roles are reversed.  Whoever is in control after the 50th question wins the money they've banked and becomes returning champion.

Matt Ottinger

  • Member
  • Posts: 12987
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #40 on: May 23, 2015, 09:10:51 PM »
I feel like this could be a good show if instead of the lame 500 Questions gimmick which no one will come close to getting to, speed the game up a little, make each episode self-contained and call the show 50 Questions instead.  Get rid of the strikes, and have the challenger always pick the category for the player in control.  Only the player in control can bank money, but on any wrong answer the challenger gets a chance to answer.  If right, they steal control of the game and their roles are reversed.  Whoever is in control after the 50th question wins the money they've banked and becomes returning champion.

I would watch this.  I would even let them keep their precious title by having a ten-game maximum for returning champions.
This has been another installment of Matt Ottinger's Masters of the Obvious.
Stay tuned for all the obsessive-compulsive fun of Words Have Meanings.

Fedya

  • Member
  • Posts: 2111
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #41 on: May 23, 2015, 09:58:26 PM »
The only real problem is that one player can get the first 49 questions right, screw up the last, and lose the game.  Kinda like Merv Griffin's Crosswords in that regard.
-- Ted Schuerzinger, now blogging at <a href=\"http://justacineast.blogspot.com/\" target=\"_blank\">http://justacineast.blogspot.com/[/url]

No Fark slashes were harmed in the making of this post

dscungio

  • Member
  • Posts: 198
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #42 on: May 23, 2015, 10:06:37 PM »
I feel like this could be a good show if instead of the lame 500 Questions gimmick which no one will come close to getting to, speed the game up a little, make each episode self-contained and call the show 50 Questions instead.

That's exactly what I was thinking.  There's a good idea for a game format there, but there are so many other things happening.  I could see this as a one-hour 50-question show on GSN.

I'm enjoying the show, but it'll never come back after this first run.

Get rid of the strikes, and have the challenger always pick the category for the player in control.  Only the player in control can bank money, but on any wrong answer the challenger gets a chance to answer.  If right, they steal control of the game and their roles are reversed.  Whoever is in control after the 50th question wins the money they've banked and becomes returning champion.

But then you get into the problem with Australia's WWTBAM: Hot Seat: The person who is in the chair for the last question is all that matters.  Player A may run the table and get 49 questions right, but if he's wrong on #50 and Player B answers it, then he's the big winner after answering just one question.


EDIT: Maybe he's suggesting that each player has their own bank that they carry with them when they switch?  If so, then my last statement means nothing and Player B gets $1,000 only.



Dean

clemon79

  • Member
  • Posts: 27680
  • Director of Suck Consolidation
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #43 on: May 24, 2015, 01:52:05 AM »
EDIT: Maybe he's suggesting that each player has their own bank that they carry with them when they switch?  If so, then my last statement means nothing and Player B gets $1,000 only.

...and the right to play again, which is almost as offensive.
Chris Lemon, King Fool, Director of Suck Consolidation
http://fredsmythe.com
Email: clemon79@outlook.com  |  Skype: FredSmythe

Neumms

  • Member
  • Posts: 2446
Re: 500 Questions
« Reply #44 on: May 24, 2015, 01:59:44 PM »
What exactly is the significance of the 500 questions?

I love Bruce Forsyth. This guy's no Bruce Forsyth. A tip for him--it helps your catch phrase to have some alliteration.

They make a big deal out of it being tougher because it's not multiple choice, but then, it's the first quiz in which you can keep spitting out wrong answers until you hit the right one. And that's neat, but if it's correct enough to wipe away your strikes, it should be correct enough for money, too.