Wink's Big Numbers

[Chelsea Thrasher]

There was one MAIN flaw I saw with Wink's HR.  The mini-games.  They took a good several minutes that COULD have been used for gameplay, just to decide a prize for a column.  What's the Point

What I would have done, would be, quite simply, the same way Trebek's version did it (Sans Fishbowl):  3 Prizes up for grabs per game.  Any non-cleared prizes remain until next game.  Prizes stay until column is won.  Once there's 5 prizes in a column, nothing can be added TO that column until those 5 are cleared

[BrandonFG]

[quote name=\'Seth Thrasher\' date=\'Mar 14 2004, 02:51 PM\'] There was one MAIN flaw I saw with Wink's HR.  The mini-games.  They took a good several minutes that COULD have been used for gameplay, just to decide a prize for a column.  What's the Point

What I would have done, would be, quite simply, the same way Trebek's version did it (Sans Fishbowl):  3 Prizes up for grabs per game.  Any non-cleared prizes remain until next game.  Prizes stay until column is won.  Once there's 5 prizes in a column, nothing can be added TO that column until those 5 are cleared [/quote]
 I like the original Trebek format myself: each number bears an independent prize, and sometimes, one half of a prize (such as a car). Win the round, win the prizes...the only flaw I see is if you win the round, and 1/2 the car, you'd be SOL if you didn't find the other half, or if your opponent picked it up.

I'd only do mini-games if the game were self-contained.

[Ian Wallis]

I never could understand why "High Rollers" never fully found its audience. I always felt it was a solid game.

I agree with that.  Unfortunatly Wink's version was never seen in my area, but I do have about 12 episodes I've obtained via trades, and I think it's a great show that should have had a longer life.  It lasted three years in USA reruns so it must have had some sort of audience!

Some would argue that what really didn't help Wink's HR's pacing was the fact that the prizes changed each game. Unlike the 1978-80 run, the prizes would change with each game(and the carryover of prizes from game to game was discontinued as well), whether or not they were won.

That's the one thing I could change about it if I could.  If a prize (or column) wasn't won, they should have added to it like they did on Trebek's version.

Also, since the bonus game is a hard one to win, maybe $200 per number rather than $100 would have been better.  Having said that, I know that the amount of money wouldn't have changed the show, but seeing so many contestants get to $800 and not getting that last number leaves you wanting after a while.  It's a big jump from $800 to $10,000 for that last number!

[Mike Tennant]

[quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Mar 15 2004, 09:39 AM\']Also, since the bonus game is a hard one to win, maybe $200 per number rather than $100 would have been better.  Having said that, I know that the amount of money wouldn't have changed the show, but seeing so many contestants get to $800 and not getting that last number leaves you wanting after a while.  It's a big jump from $800 to $10,000 for that last number![/quote]
But that is exactly what made the $10,000 win so exciting.  If the consolation prize is too large (and they should be happy they got a consolation prize, unlike many bonus games which take away all earlier bonus game winnings if the player bombs out), then the win doesn't seem so impressive.  I think the Big Numbers part was the only perfect part of the show.  The other areas could have stood some of the suggested improvements in this thread, but I still liked the show and was sorry to see it go so quickly (although that did help me get a cheap copy of the home version very soon after the premiere).

[gsgalaxy82]

Comparing the two, I thought both were very good. Wink's though seemed to drag, but I wouldn't blame him for it. I think part of it were the little things. It took the buzzer a LONG time to get to buzz in, literally! Compared to Trebek's which had a fast as heck light. And the dice looked IMPOSSIBLE to roll right, compared to Trebek's which had rounded edges (and were a bit smaller). Wink's version had an AWESOME set and a great theme along with it. A new version would be awesome, with a huge video wall for the main game and huge numbers for the end game.

David

[alfonzos]

My apologies to Mr. Martindale but his memory of the High Rollers pilot may be fuzzy. (Then again, maybe a second pilot was shot on a CBS lot.) I witnessed the taping of the pilot at the ABC Network studios on Prospect Avenue in Hollywood. The local station used video of a runthrough for a series of reports on game shows.

I remember watching the rehearsal and seeing the glitzy set for the first time. Each number was about three or four feet tall.

Alfonzo Smith

[Brandon Brooks]

[quote name=\'alfonzos\' date=\'Mar 16 2004, 04:18 PM\'] I remember watching the rehearsal and seeing the glitzy set for the first time. Each number was about three or four feet tall. [/quote]
 That doesn't sound far fetched at all.  Remember guys, television cameras can make things look HUGE.  For example, Hollywood Squares' ain't tiny, but it is certainly not as humongous as it looks on television.  At most, the squares are like 18 feet tall.

Brandon Brooks