The Game Show Forum > The Big Board
Worst scoring flaw?
Jeremy Nelson:
--- Quote from: Ian Wallis on August 16, 2024, 12:43:41 PM ---Super Password's $100 puzzle is the first thing that comes to mind.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: SuperSweeper on August 16, 2024, 12:45:44 PM ---Body Language is what came to mind for me.
--- End quote ---
Y'know, I thought about both of these, Body Language specifically. But I argued against them if only because in both instances, it's paid practice until you get to the money that matters, which is still a very fair best 2 out of 3.
TLEberle:
--- Quote from: Jeremy Nelson on August 16, 2024, 12:37:01 PM ---Also, I don't like that a family on Feud who has a strong showing on the first two boards gets sandbagged by an anemic double point round by design. We did the work to get 172 points and now the Double round is only worth 110? Nah, give me a chance to win in 3 boards or just revert the scoring to S-S-S-D-T.
--- End quote ---
Much like how The $10,000 Pyramid settled into a pattern of two front games and two WC tries, it appears that Family Feud was willing to follow the pattern of Match Game and a game just ends when it does. A game where every question is at regular value could take a while to get to $200, but the double boards seemed to be heavier and have more obvious answers.
I'm not sure how long it would be tenable, and I think Hollywood Squares was the last show that was ok with "we ran out of time, here's what the board looks like" but Feud is not served well by the ramp-up to where you can win the match with just round four and sudden death.
Is it a flaw to where Canadian Reaction would have words in the fifth chain worth quintuple points or a way to keep games close? Is that more or less of a flaw than on Double Talk where you can win the $10,000 end game but lose out because your opponent won the $10,000 end game and also the $500 run-a-board jackpot?
Jeremy Nelson:
--- Quote from: TLEberle on August 16, 2024, 12:49:26 PM ---I'm not sure how long it would be tenable, and I think Hollywood Squares was the last show that was ok with "we ran out of time, here's what the board looks like" but Feud is not served well by the ramp-up to where you can win the match with just round four and sudden death.
--- End quote ---
The problem is in the change to the timing of the show. The format worked for a long time because they only played one board before the first commercial. By front loading the game, you render the second act completely useless. but if you went back to single/commercial/single/commercial/double-triple-sudden death, you can still have a winner in the double round, and you periodically bank content.
I'm sure what they're doing is down to a science- it just doesn't always make sense.
rebelwrest:
--- Quote from: Jeremy Nelson on August 16, 2024, 01:03:14 PM ---
--- Quote from: TLEberle on August 16, 2024, 12:49:26 PM ---I'm not sure how long it would be tenable, and I think Hollywood Squares was the last show that was ok with "we ran out of time, here's what the board looks like" but Feud is not served well by the ramp-up to where you can win the match with just round four and sudden death.
--- End quote ---
The problem is in the change to the timing of the show. The format worked for a long time because they only played one board before the first commercial. By front loading the game, you render the second act completely useless. but if you went back to single/commercial/single/commercial/double-triple-sudden death, you can still have a winner in the double round, and you periodically bank content.
I'm sure what they're doing is down to a science- it just doesn't always make sense.
--- End quote ---
I've argued that if Harvey Feud wants two single questions in act 1, they should raise the win condition to 400 points. This would A) make the double question not pointless (no pun intended) B) not have to switch out the question so a family doesn't go over 300 in act 2 (which has always rubbed me the wrong way).
Otm Shank:
Adding a criteria to the flaw with Body Language is all the scoring has nothing to do with the pantomime, the core element of the show implied by the title. The tiebreaker completely dispensed of the pantomime. (But that show really needed a restructure to take advantage of its positive attributes; the bonus round, for instance, was solid.)
I'm going to add Name That Tune/'80s with the 10/10/20/1 scoring system. It is possible for a contestant to name one tune in the all the front games of the episode and advance to the Golden Medley. If one contestant runs the table in the first two rounds, they have 20 points. In Bid-a-Note, that contestant gets boxed in on the auctioneering and winds up answering 3 tunes incorrectly. Now it's tied 20-20. Our slacker contestant finally rings in with "Zorba the Greek" or whatever oft-repeated tune and sends the other contestant browsing through the "lovely prizes offstage" with the host's warm sentiment "come back again sometime." Now, it never happened quite to that level, and I get that there was a desire to keep a trailing contestant in the game even if it was a runaway.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version