The Game Show Forum > The Big Board
Great short-lived shows
TLEberle:
I believe the title came from the winning line on a lottery ticket. France called it The Winning Number.
I think each of 2k21, Lines, Greed and Paranoia all had something to recommend.
Stackertosh:
Greed
Million Dollar Password
Sports Jeopardy
Whammy
Gsn The Pyramid was pretty good.
Chelsea Thrasher:
--- Quote from: BrandonFG on August 09, 2024, 01:27:04 AM ---For years I've said the show could scrap the first 20 minutes in favor of either a Ring of Fire play-in with seven to 10 players, or an elimination contest similar to 1 vs. 100 or The 1% Club, keeping the original 49 players.
With the former concept, you could prolly get two games in a self-contained half-hour. It may requires a name change tho...
--- End quote ---
Just spitballing an idea here: Basic show structure of Winning Lines (Horde Act 1, Big Seven Act 2, Wonderwall Act 3), except as an hour, and ditching most of the number-based conceits that started in the UK.
The 1 vs. 100 elimination bit for the opening 49ers. Start with the horde. Narrow it down to 7.
Each player that makes it to the seven wins a small cash payout. Maybe $100, maybe $500. Instead of "eliminate your opponent's number" you basically crib something akin to a multiplayer version of the Trivia Race from Trivia Trap. First to five or seven or whatever times well in run-throughs wins five grand that's theirs to keep (bumping up from the $2500 from the old series for inflation) and goes to the Wonderwall, played almost verbatim.
At the bottom of the hour, the top seven go back to the pool, and we do it again. If the same player makes it to the Wonderwall both games, they get an extra $5,000 bonus on top of the previous $5K x2 for the clean sweep, regardless of what happens at the Wonderwall either time.
Chelsea Thrasher:
I know the longer-lived Cullen run is beloved by many, and the UK edition went on for eons, but I've always had a massive soft spot for Bill Rafferty's version of Blockbusters. Rafferty was fantastic on both series he hosted around that time (along with Card Sharks), and although this is controversial, I actually liked both the switch to the 1v1 quiz and the way they solved the problem of the "advantage" (flip sides in round 2, 4x4 tiebreaker). It's a fundamentally different show than both Bill's run and the UK iteration, but I have the entire thing now and have had so much fun revisiting it.
Switching to the player-linked progressive jackpot mid-run was a fundamentally solid idea as well (if you haven't seen: A player's first trip to the bonus was worth $5K. If they lost, it was worth $10K next time, then $15K, etc...BUT unlike Super Password, etc. if that player lost, the jackpot automatically reset. (IE no profiting off past players failures).
Dbacksfan12:
--- Quote from: Chelsea Thrasher on August 09, 2024, 09:46:30 AM --- Switching to the player-linked progressive jackpot mid-run was a fundamentally solid idea as well (if you haven't seen: A player's first trip to the bonus was worth $5K. If they lost, it was worth $10K next time, then $15K, etc...BUT unlike Super Password, etc. if that player lost, the jackpot automatically reset. (IE no profiting off past players failures).
--- End quote ---
I respect your opinion plenty…so I have to ask…what makes this a “solid idea”? Win three straight times, you win $15,000. Lose two and then win…you’ve actually made out better, as you got the $100/correct answer in the losses plus the $15k.
My preference would have been playing for $5000 on the first win, $10k for the second, etc.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version