Dealer's Choice

[alfonzos]

My friends at Home Game Enterprises pride themselves on realistic simulations of television game shows. The team's latest creation is the 1974 game "Dealer's Choice." The game played true-to-form as usual and when the game ended with a net loss in score for the players (we started with a total of 300 and ended with a total of 210) I had a epiphany. The problem with the gambling games in the show are the odds. The payoff for any bet is whatever the odds are. (Unlike Las Vegas where the payoff is less than the odds.) The game show would benefit from having payoffs that surpass the odds. A 3:1 reward for 2:1 bet, for example. Generally, the players would end the game with higher score than they began and give everyone the illusion of success. No real cash is involved since the players are betting virtual chips. Just increase the amount of chips for each prize and there is no need to increase the budget for the show.

[TLEberle]

The game show would benefit from having payoffs that surpass the odds.

1) Would it really? If all of the players know this, does it make a difference? If you can win three dollars against one by calling a coin flip it just means that everyone who gets it right is that much farther ahead than those who didn't.

2) Great guns. Have you told them?

3) Your phrase "the illusion of success" is telling.

[Adam Nedeff]

2) Great guns. Have you told them?

Yes he did. Reaction to the game when we played it Saturday night seemed rather mixed. I enjoyed it, but I just think that's the chance you take with any blind luck game; when the players do well, it seems like a good game. When they do poorly, it sucks. I don't know necessarily that changing the odds helps. That's one man's opinion, though.

[TLEberle]

I didn't say as much, but that was kinda my point. When the game has as much strategy as a round of Bunco or a scratch ticket you're at the mercy of whatever the device is, and it won't matter whether you tweak the odds to increase payoffs, give players more chips at the start of each round like in Balderdash, or do like Liar's Club and change up the odds in each round. I think the problem is that you're watching the outcome of a random event happen and cheering or booing based on that, and there's games that actually have you make decisions rather than just waiting for the right bingo balls to fall out of the tumbler. Start with Incan Gold and Can't Stop and roll from there.

[Clay Zambo]

Start with Incan Gold and Can't Stop and roll from there.

Can we please start with Can't Stop? I've been trying for years to come up with a TV format that doesn't seem like it was a Barry-Enright show that didn't get past the pitch meeting.

[TLEberle]

I beg your pardon. I was speaking to just the playing of the board game rather than trying to create a TV show/convention format out of it, especially when trying to make a viable format out of a box game undermines the point of the box game.

[parliboy]

Start with Incan Gold and Can't Stop and roll from there.

Can we please start with Can't Stop? I've been trying for years to come up with a TV format that doesn't seem like it was a Barry-Enright show that didn't get past the pitch meeting.

Then start with Incan Gold instead.  It's much more malleable to what you're trying to do.

[That Don Guy]

I disagree with this, for one simple reason; no matter what you do, if everybody bets big on the final bet and loses, you're going to end up with a "net loss" situation.  It's the nature of DC.  There's also the situation where, in blackjack, the house has a blackjack, so everybody (who doesn't also have a blackjack) also loses, and pretty much invariably, everybody bets the maximum of 50 in that game.

I do remember one game where we know the odds matched the payouts - the "suit wheel."

[Neumms]

There's also the situation where, in blackjack, the house has a blackjack, so everybody (who doesn't also have a blackjack) also loses.

Yeah, that's the problem with making a game out of ONE HAND of blackjack. Man, there wasn't much game play in the half hour.

Anyone know if the dice-rolling avoid-the-spade game predated the get-to-a-thousand-dollars Joker's Wild end game? It was dull that Barry & Enright kept using it over and over, but to think, they stole the idea to begin with.

[Marc412]

Anyone know if the dice-rolling avoid-the-spade game predated the get-to-a-thousand-dollars Joker's Wild end game? It was dull that Barry & Enright kept using it over and over, but to think, they stole the idea to begin with.

According to Wikipedia, DC debuted in January '74 and Joker went to Money and Devils the following May.

[TLEberle]

Yeah, that's the problem with making a game out of ONE HAND of blackjack. Man, there wasn't much game play in the half hour.

But what do you do? Have them play the same games several times in a row so that they can lose the chips faster? What they should have done is instead of betting is that you just win some amount of chips for each correct decision and play each game as a parlay. I don't know how fast you can do them, but having just the one hand of blackjack didn't feel very satisfying. They could do craps or more spins of the wheel and 7-8-9 loses.

[Neumms]

What they should have done is instead of betting is that you just win some amount of chips for each correct decision and play each game as a parlay.

Good idea. Hi-Lo worked well, although the name implies they'd guess high or low. Maybe the last game (the horse race?) involves wagering. It'd be like Final Jeopardy for dummies.