This certainly is more functional than other concepts you've shown us.
A point on production design before we talk aesthetics:
Is your player in the X position going to be able to see the board properly without craning his or her neck around the player in the circle position? I would recommend bringing both the contestant podia and the host podium (and their backing walls, for that matter) in at a tighter angle. This looks like everything's at 135-degree angles (think the top three segments of a regular octagon) and it should be set at 120-degree angles (think the top three segments of a regular *hexagon* instead).
Not only will this allow Player X to see the board unobstructed, but it will make your shots of the contestants and host when they are addressing each other (and the board) look better. Your current setup leads the participants almost to look behind them in order to see the board, and that's a very unflattering result when the only camera on them is directly in front of them.
I also feel that you've made the blandest part of your set the one the home audience will see the most - that is, the backing pieces behind the contestants, host, and board. By no means should those places be ultra-busy (see \"Price\"'s Hollywood mural design), but a solid color interrupted by the occasional silver/grey bar is uninteresting (see the current \"Pyramid\"). Perhaps some more thought could be put there.
Aside from that, it's just aesthetically not my thing, but that could just be my own taste. It instantly made me think of the \"Mega Man\" video game series, for some reason, which means it looks futuristic, I suppose - but in a cheesy late 1980's sorta way. I like the shapes of everything (especially what you did with the contestant and host entrances), but I don't know that I'd be able to handle too much of a stark grey set with oodles of blue and pink neon (which is what I assume that is). It's just not warm and friendly to me, and, after all, aren't we just gathering around to play a game of tic-tac-toe?
Back to the lines on the entrances - there is some value in design elements like that appearing to originate from something and then extend off to what might be infinity (the layers of clouds on \"Whew!\"), or that come from something else and end in something else (the rectangular arches on the '87 \"High Rollers\" set or the pyramids from \"$100,000 Pyramid\"), or even come from something else and end abruptly (the various set pieces on Super Password). Maybe it's just that these things tend to create depth. Maybe it creates visual interest (\"I'd like to take a look around that set and see where that begins/ends\"). Maybe it's just really, really Freudian.
