The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: Kevin Prather on November 18, 2007, 05:33:29 AM
-
Bet the topic got your attention...
I was toying around with PowerPoint today, and threw together something I had thought of in my head for a while. A set for the $1 Million Pyramid, if it ever happened. As always, I'd love any input you can give me, positive or negative.
Of course, a little bit of coloring was lost in converting these to jpgs, but the essence is there.
The $1 Million Pyramid. Quite reminiscent of the $100,000 Pyramid, but with some minor color changes. (http://\"http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/whoserman/1milpyr.jpg\")
As we go to the Winner's Circle, the red cyclorama in the back turns blue. (http://\"http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/whoserman/1milpyrtowc.jpg\")
During the $1 million tournament, the blue cyc turns black, and all the lights go down, except for the chasers, the trilons, the crown and three beams shooting up the pyramid. (http://\"http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/whoserman/1milpyrwc.jpg\")
The first tier is $100 apiece. (http://\"http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/whoserman/1milpyrwcinprog.jpg\")
The second tier is $250 apiece. (http://\"http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/whoserman/1milpyrwcinprog2.jpg\")
And the top category is $500. (http://\"http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a10/whoserman/1milpyrwcwin.jpg\")
Have at it!
- Kevin
-
The absence of scaffolding and strobe lights is very disappointing.
Good job, Kevin. :-)
-
I like it, and can definitely see what you're getting at... ;)
To complete the "updated retroness" *shall I trademark that phrase?* have a WOF-ish flooring (maybe even Millionaire-ish for the contestant area if you are out to blind people with your lighting BRILLIANCE), and it'll be great, IMHO!
Not that I think Donnymid's set was exactly horrible, either, it just needed to be lightened up a bit.
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'169825\' date=\'Nov 18 2007, 11:21 AM\']
(maybe even Millionaire-ish for the contestant area if you are out to blind people with your lighting BRILLIANCE)
[/quote]
Lighting brilliance that I don't have. :)
Thanks for the compliments!
-
Very nice, and the darkened set looks nice. I'd also consider maybe a purple or navy blue, along the lines of what Millionaire does for third tier questions.
Still, looks sweet!
-
I've created a website with the complete set, and a format. (http://\"http://www.freewebs.com/themilliondollarpyramid/index.htm\") The $1 million tournament is reminiscent of the $50,000 Pyramid.
-
You have it similar to how I'd run it, except for a few tweaks.
Have 3 players only be able to qualify, using the fastest WC time method. My big difference is, that, given there would be 2 games in a half hour, the first game can pit players A and B (the two fastest), for example. The winner, say A, would play the WC, and if lost, would play in the game's 2nd half, which would have A vs C, while B sits out until the next game. The winner of A vs C would go to the WC, and if not won, would play against player B at the start of the next episode. I would set a one week time limit for the WC to be won, before the opportunity is lost (or as an alternative: the million could carry over to the next tourney, with 2 million at stake, with the biggest WC consolation money winner for the tourney week being invited back, and only 2 normal players eligible from the next 10 weeks to play).
This way, I think it would be harder to get into the tourney, there would be no more coin flips, and each of the 3 players would get to play on a daily basis, meaning no more what I call "lucky shot" days, where the one sitting out doesn't have the chance to take on the prior day's winner, who has "momentum" going, and possibly somewhat of an unfair disadvantage. It also helps the players sitting out to not lose some of their own "momentum"...
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'169969\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 10:06 AM\']
I would set a one week time limit for the WC to be won, before the opportunity is lost
[/quote]
That would make for absolutely *horrible* television.
-
WHAT!? AN OPPOSITION THAT GOES AGAINST THE MO'MONEY LAW!? HOLY... jk
I suggested that rule because most GS's have a set number of episodes that are to be aired in a season, duh, and unless you set limits on the number of days the tourney can be (especially with the probable calibur of today's players), you could have spillover, unless you don't mind ending the season "unevenly." If one particular tourney takes 2 weeks (like some of the $100k's did), and more than one tourney in a season runs long, you might have a week or even 2 weeks of spillover at a season's end. This is, if you don't pick up at like "tourney qualifier week 9" at the start of the next season. I can just imagine how that host's spiel would go...
I also thought, correct me if I'm wrong, at first, that the $100k had a one week cap for the first tourney or season, IIRC. Either way, I still say cap it at a week. If they don't do it, too bad, NEXT!
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'169973\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 10:32 AM\']
I suggested that rule because most GS's have a set number of episodes that are to be aired in a season, duh,
[/quote]
Duh? I have NO problem throwing the idiotic "season" concept right out the window. That's just an excuse these days for a production to do a marathon taping blitz and then close up shop.
Duh. You, sir, are not in a position to be telling ANYONE "duh."
I also thought, correct me if I'm wrong, at first, that the $100k had a one week cap for the first tourney or season, IIRC.
You're wrong.
Either way, I still say cap it at a week. If they don't do it, too bad, NEXT!
Well, then you like creating horrible television. I'm doubting many folks are surprised.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'169984\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 03:05 PM\']
Duh. You, sir, are not in a position to be telling ANYONE "duh."[/quote]
And I suppose you are in the same position and have the god-given right to be telling others what is good TV and what is not? This coming from a person who actually considered Donny Osmond and many other qualities of the most recent Pyramid redeemable. Your opinion: fact. My opinion: laughable...
Face it Chris, your opinions, your "self-perceived facts" are no better, and no more worth in monetary value then mine, so don't try it. In the end, these are our own individual opinions, no more, no less. Until one of your ideas sells, you and I are in the same boat when it comes to our revival concepts, end of discussion.
Plus, any hint I'm detecting that you're trying to use that Wheel, a concept you despise, is my favorite show to try and enhance your argument I do not know good TV is ridiculous, and is only another example of one of your self-filtered "self-perceived facts."
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'169970\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 01:08 PM\']
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'169969\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 10:06 AM\']
I would set a one week time limit for the WC to be won, before the opportunity is lost
[/quote]
That would make for absolutely *horrible* television.
[/quote]
Didn't Donnymid do this?
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'170001\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 04:18 PM\']
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'169970\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 01:08 PM\']
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'169969\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 10:06 AM\']
I would set a one week time limit for the WC to be won, before the opportunity is lost
[/quote]
That would make for absolutely *horrible* television.
[/quote]
Didn't Donnymid do this?
[/quote]
Three days, another problem I had with the show. You just can't rush something that dramatic.
They seriously did not GET IT.
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'169999\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 01:11 PM\']
And I suppose you are in the same position and have the god-given right to be telling others what is good TV and what is not?[/quote]
Ah. So you get to have an opinion, as long as I don't get to have a contrary one. Gotcha.
This coming from a person who actually considered Donny Osmond and many other qualities of the most recent Pyramid redeemable. Your opinion: fact. My opinion: laughable...
Your recollection: poor. Please to be naming for me the "many other qualities" that I've found redeemable, considering my very public stance has always been that Donny himself was passable while every other aspect of the show sucked out loud.
In the end, these are our own individual opinions, no more, no less.
And you'd do well to read that again and think on it.
Personally, I'm completely willing (especially after this little tirade) to trust the rest of the board to decide on their own which way they want to fall on this issue.
I like my odds.
Plus, any hint I'm detecting that you're trying to use that Wheel, a concept you despise, is my favorite show to try and enhance your argument I do not know good TV is ridiculous, and is only another example of one of your self-filtered "self-perceived facts."
There are so many outright falsehoods in this statement that I'm not even going to bother wading through them.
-
And I suppose you are in the same position and have the god-given right to be telling others what is good TV and what is not?
Ah. So you get to have an opinion, as long as I don't get to have a contrary one.
Reading back through the post history, I believe you were the one that first said that started talking about me and horrible TV. I did not throw the first punch in this, sir.
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'170005\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 04:50 PM\']I like my odds.
[/quote]Glad to see you do, given that I don't see anyone compelled enough to make a post that supports your stance any more or less so than mine.
There are so many outright falsehoods in this statement that I'm not even going to bother wading through them.
Oh, so you actually are admitting to liking Wheel? *Marks date*
Getting back on topic, Kevin, one thing I forget to ask was exactly how the blue pyramid backdrops were going to be recreated on the show. Are they neon-ish, or just sorta ultra-brightly painted? Either way, they do look cool, and I think it definitely kicks the modern feel up a notch. ;)
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'170032\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 05:18 PM\']
Reading back through the post history, I believe you were the one that first said that started talking about me and horrible TV. I did not throw the punch in this sir.[/quote]
I did indeed. And how, sir (hey, as long as we're throwing faux-respect around, I might as well get in on the action) does that even remotely imply a denial of your right to an opinion?
You want facts? Here, I'll give you facts: The fact is that you're trying to turn "disagreeing with your opinion" into "telling you you can't have one." And guess what? I get to disagree with you, and there are two things you can do about it: 1) nothing, and 2) like it.
Glad to see you do, given that I don't see anyone compelled enough to make a post that supports your stance any more or less so than mine.
And that's fine, too. That changes nothing about what I said.
Oh, so you actually are admitting to liking Wheel? *Marks date*
Bob, show our contestant what he gets for reading that out of my statement:
http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/8686/failbobbarkerva7.jpg (http://\"http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/8686/failbobbarkerva7.jpg\")
Oh, and:
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/673/hairaftersk5.jpg (http://\"http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/673/hairaftersk5.jpg\")
Good day, "sir."
(And way to pretend that your completely unfounded accusations against me with regard to Donnymid never happened.)
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'169999\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 04:11 PM\']
And I suppose you are in the same position and have the god-given right to be telling others what is good TV and what is not?
[/quote]
Chris does not have a G-d-given right to anything on this board. He has the same moderator-given right that you have: to express an opinion. That right comes with certain responsibilities, but agreeing with your opinion is not one of them.
This coming from a person who actually considered Donny Osmond and many other qualities of the most recent Pyramid redeemable.
Please cite examples of Chris's defense of these "many other qualities." Since there are "many," you should have no trouble coming up with several examples.
Your opinion: fact. My opinion: laughable...
His opinion and your opinion are both just that: opinion. That said, he has explained the basis for his opinion, while you have chosen to react with anger that he does not agree rather than explain yours.
Plus, any hint I'm detecting that you're trying to use that Wheel, a concept you despise, is my favorite show to try and enhance your argument I do not know good TV is ridiculous, and is only another example of one of your self-filtered "self-perceived facts."
Please demonstrate (1) your evidence that Chris despises Wheel and (2) your evidence that he's basing his argument on the fact that you like it. I'd like to think you've learned something about evidence since, well, this (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=6428&view=findpost&p=66720\").
Are you a regular on the GSN boards? I know it's common practice there to state an opinion and demand that others agree with it in lieu of actually defending it.
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'170032\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 05:18 PM\']Glad to see you do, given that I don't see anyone compelled enough to make a post that supports your stance any more or less so than mine.[/quote]Fine. I will. Your idea is purely awful. Any production company that offers a "$1,000,000 tournament prize" and then reneges on it deserves all of the bad publicity that they are sure to receive. All of your "reasons" for doing so are idiotic, too.
The idea that a game show has to fit into cookie cutter seasons? <bzzt> Sorry, no sale.
To say that a group of contestants who is unable to conquer the pyramid within your predetermined time limit, under the hardest of conditions should then forfeit their chance at the top prize is just silly on its face. The whole point of why the $100,000 tournament is so great is that it could end after ten minutes, or two weeks. You never knew, so you had to keep turning in if you wanted to see who won the money.
Your idea provides the possibility of "Well, that's the last trip to the Winner's Circle of this tournament. None of you win the money, so we're back on Monday with regular games. Make sure to watch American Bandstand this weekend." You don't think that would be a colossal downer, instead of what a tournament final should be, an eight-cylinder adrenaline rush?
Your position is indefensible, which you have proven by arguing points that no one has brought up, instead of saying why your idea would be an improvement.
"What is argument by displacement, Alex?"
-
I, too, support "don't give away your big announced tournament prize at all = horrible TV".
Didn't Donnymid manage to have a new format for almost every tournament they did? I remember one where the top announced prize of $100,000 required winning two $50K Winner's Circles (and the contestant only won one), and another where the "dramatic" moment was Donny reading off who had climbed the pyramid the fastest. Crap on toast, all of it.
While I'm griping, I have heard it said more than once that Davidson Pyramid somehow ensured that every tournament would end, with a winner, within a week. Is that true?
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'170046\' date=\'Nov 19 2007, 07:17 PM\']Didn't Donnymid manage to have a new format for almost every tournament they did? I remember one where the top announced prize of $100,000 required winning two $50K Winner's Circles (and the contestant only won one), and another where the "dramatic" moment was Donny reading off who had climbed the pyramid the fastest. [/quote]Not quite. While they might have had more formats depending on the number of $25,000 winners, we only saw the 4 player and 6 players versions. And you do remember correctly; in the six player tournament, whoever had the fastest time would win the money, and in one case, it was the person waiting offstage to see if her time would hold up. In the other case, winning $25,000 to qualify, $25,000 to get to the finals would mean that a single $50,000 win in the final would create one (or maybe two!) $100,000 winners.
As you said, I shall have the excrement on whole wheat.
-
Thanks for the feedback. I've updated the website with new art, which includes the actual winner's circle. As far as I'm concerned, this is a complete set. Of course, I will be tooling with the format over time.
http://www.freewebs.com/themilliondollarpyramid/index.htm (http://\"http://www.freewebs.com/themilliondollarpyramid/index.htm\")
-
The best way to make a million-dollar Pyramid? The $100,000 version (the 1980's version, not Davidson's, and certainly not Donnymid) with mo money syndrome.
There.
To be perfectly honest, I think $100,000 is still big money for syndicated television these days... would anything higher even work? Or would it just look too awkward?
-
[quote name=\'TonicBH\' post=\'170088\' date=\'Nov 20 2007, 06:12 AM\']
To be perfectly honest, I think $100,000 is still big money for syndicated television these days... would anything higher even work? Or would it just look too awkward?
[/quote]
It's the Pyramid. If it's done right, it doesn't matter if it's played for 37 cents.
The thing is, though, if you're gonna call it "The $1,000,000 Pyramid", then you'd better give away $1,000,000 on a fairly regular basis, otherwise it smacks of taking advantage of a number without backing it up. (Much like the Weakest Link people loved to do.) The $100K show doing their tournaments on a six-week interval made that work. I think eyebrows would start to raise if that interval climbed above, say, two months.
-
Chris does not have a G-d-given right to anything on this board. He has the same moderator-given right that you have: to express an opinion. That right comes with certain responsibilities, but agreeing with your opinion is not one of them.
100% agreed. However, I was not the one who first started flaring insults about the other's opinion. My first reply to Chris, directly after his first post here, was not meant to be taken as criticism towards Chris, but MY EXPLANATION of why I felt that rule would be a viable alternative.
Please cite examples of Chris's defense of these "many other qualities." Since there are "many," you should have no trouble coming up with several examples.
I've seen him bash the writing (which, most of us agree, was horrible) and how the celebrities were lackluster (again, most agree). However, it is MY opinion that Donny was, himself, reason number 1 it was a bad revival. I believe I also remember lots of support for the 6 answers in 20 secs rule, which I didn't support. I understand why it was done, but it seemed way too awkward, especially with today's caliber of players. However, given the last topic about this was an extended time ago, it's not worth mine or any of our's times to go and search for it. However, I'm not out to say this could've all been fixed, or it was the most horrible revival attempt ever, because surely it was not, IMHO.
His opinion and your opinion are both just that: opinion. That said, he has explained the basis for his opinion, while you have chosen to react with anger that he does not agree rather than explain yours.
I did not react with anger at all to his disagreement with me. My reaction to him started upon the whole "horrible television" comment, which came out of nowhere. If you recall, Kevin disagreed with some ideas of mine a few posts back, and I respect those opinions. It is HIS revival, he should do it how he wants.
Plus, I DID explain my opinion why a one-week tourney could be an *ALTERNATE* plan (it wouldn't be my first choice either, which is why I called it an alternative). Again, if you read my posts. I said that it would be a way to lock down a certain number of episodes in a season of such a show, so that each season ends evenly. While ideally, many of us would love for all TV shows to run without the confines of seasons, that is currently an ideal opinion and a bit unrealistic, IMHO, and the writer's strike should remind us of that.
Please demonstrate (1) your evidence that Chris despises Wheel and (2) your evidence that he's basing his argument on the fact that you like it. I'd like to think you've learned something about evidence since, well, this (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=6428&view=findpost&p=66720\").
I'm not bashing Chris for despising Wheel AT ALL, I have many friends at other online places (not GSN) that vehemently hate the show, but his implication that I do not know good TV is "not a surprise" is obvious what is being implied towards.
Oh, BTW:
http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=168313 (http://\"http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=13934&view=findpost&p=168313\")
Lemme tell ya, it be pretty obvious he more than just dislikes the show! That is actually quite fine, as I'm not exactly wholly happy with the show right now, but I don't go all out and call it "utterly idiotic" which is IMHO quite degrading, even if it was used for a show that is as incredibly disliked around here as "friggin Studs." However, this is not the point of this faceoff or this topic, and I apologize to Kevin that his topic has become this.
As for the update, as I said to ya elsewhere Kevin, I love your set and the concept for your revival, and you're miles ahead of what Donnymid ever got to.
-
[quote name=\'TonicBH\' post=\'170088\' date=\'Nov 20 2007, 09:12 AM\']
To be perfectly honest, I think $100,000 is still big money for syndicated television these days... would anything higher even work? Or would it just look too awkward?
[/quote]
I won't say awkward, but don't give it away just for the sake of giving it away, and just because you advertise a huge cash prize (*cough*Donnymid*cough*). Make the writers write some compelling, challenging categories, and make the team work for the grand prize, whether it takes two days or two weeks. You cannot rush something like that in three days, then just say "Awww, no one achieved the feat, so...eenie-meenie-miney-mo...random player gets the dough! :D Kthxbye!!!1!"
$100,000 is still a lot of money, especially in daily syndication, and especially for a show guaranteeing this amount of money every six to eight weeks, that's plenty of money. The difference between Pyramid and shows like Millionaire, daytime Weakest Link, and the upcoming Deal in the Daytime is that the latter three shows OFFER(ED) up to a certain amount of money, but never guaranteed it. That was on the contestant.
One thing, I say just offer a flat $25,000 for non-tourney weeks, and fastest three wins qualify.
/sit down, Lesko.
-
[quote name=\'wheelloon\' post=\'170115\' date=\'Nov 20 2007, 01:10 PM\']
100% agreed. However, I was not the one who first started flaring insults about the other's opinion. My first reply to Chris, directly after his first post here, was not meant to be taken as criticism towards Chris, but MY EXPLANATION of why I felt that rule would be a viable alternative.
[/quote]
Calling your idea "horrible television" is hardly an insult. Unless, of course, you take disagreement with your opinion to be "insulting" in and of itself (that GSN board mentality again).
Please cite examples of Chris's defense of these "many other qualities." Since there are "many," you should have no trouble coming up with several examples.
I've seen him bash the writing (which, most of us agree, was horrible) and how the celebrities were lackluster (again, most agree). However, it is MY opinion that Donny was, himself, reason number 1 it was a bad revival.
In other words, your claim that he defended these "many other qualities" was, in a word, false.
Bryan Hayes (BMaurice06) has repeatedly insisted that Temptation is horrible merely because Todd Newton wasn't chosen to host. Most of us don't agree that Rossi Morreale is the worst part of the show, but that doesn't mean that we're "defending" Temptation; it means that the show has so many other problems that he's the least of them. Similarly, not agreeing with you that Donny Osmond was the worst part of Pyramid does not amount to a defense of every other part.
However, given the last topic about this was an extended time ago, it's not worth mine or any of our's times to go and search for it.
No, but it would be worth your time to stop putting words in other members' mouths and start checking your facts before you post.
I did not react with anger at all to his disagreement with me.
This is so flat-out ridiculous, I'm not even sure how to respond.
I'm not bashing Chris for despising Wheel AT ALL,
Straw man. I never said that you claimed he despised Wheel, I said you claimed that he despised the concept. Which, by the way, you did. (And for that matter, I don't ever recall him saying that he "despised" Wheel itself either. I'm pretty sure that he has more important things to despise than, well, any game show.)
Oh, BTW:
http://gameshow.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=168313 (http://)
Lemme tell ya, it be pretty obvious he more than just dislikes the show!
Again, he said that the show was idiotic, not the concept of the show.
However, this is not the point of this faceoff or this topic, and I apologize to Kevin that his topic has become this.
You should apologize not only for that, but for not actually reading and comprehending what others write before you comment on it, for making false claims as a result of that failure, and for trying to rewrite history.
Face it. You were outraged that Chris dared to disagree with you, and in your fury you overreacted, big time. It happens to all of us at one time for another; you'd do well to simply admit it and apologize.
-
I will approve of one concept of Wheelloon's - doing the tournaments one front game at a time instead of one day at a time. (Actually, I'd probably change the front game so that contestants can play until they lose their second front game, since I hated the "sure, it took two tiebreaker rounds to come up with a winner, but you weren't it, so goodbye" that would happen on the older episodes and the "Dick Cavett blew that last category in the Winners Circle, so you leave us with $750" of the 80s.)
I think the tournaments are a good idea, because of the guaranteed payout, but doing four a year could be pretty expensive. Maybe something like three mini-tournaments for an extra amount of cash and entry into the big tournament, which starts immediately after the third smaller one?
-
[quote name=\'Unrealtor\' post=\'170223\' date=\'Nov 21 2007, 10:37 PM\']
I think the tournaments are a good idea, because of the guaranteed payout, but doing four a year could be pretty expensive. Maybe something like three mini-tournaments for an extra amount of cash and entry into the big tournament, which starts immediately after the third smaller one?
[/quote]
Interesting idea, but what about what Chris said? That the million should be given away MORE often? Is there a happy balance?
-
I didn't say *more* often, per se. I said exactly what you did about a happy balance: you can't give it out so often that you blow out your prize budget, but at the same time if you spread it out TOO much, that $1,000,000 you are trumpeting in your title looks disingenuous.
-
I don't see what's completely wrong with the following system:
- three eight-week tournaments for $100,000
- winners of the tournaments play for $1,000,000
- Two $1,000,000 tournaments a season
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'170236\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 08:19 AM\']
I don't see what's completely wrong with the following system:
[/quote]
Then let me show you.
Two $1,000,000 tournaments a season
This.
-
[quote name=\'tpirfan28\' post=\'170236\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 11:19 AM\']
I don't see what's completely wrong with the following system:
- three eight-week tournaments for $100,000
- winners of the tournaments play for $1,000,000
- Two $1,000,000 tournaments a season
[/quote]
Again, you're giving away a guaranteed $2.3 million per season, not including the main game bonuses like "Super Big Mystery 7-11 minus 1 and sometimes 5", and umm, regular Winner's Circle wins. You put all that together for 200+ episodes, and you're looking at well over $3 million...in one season. Besides, 1) do you really think viewers want to sit through eight weeks of TV just to see someone win $100,000, and 2) putting a time limit on the tournament one of the things that made Donnymid such bad television.
My first point brings up my whole guaranteed money vs. offered money debate. Millionaire, Deal, and Power of 10 may offer $1 million per episode, but the chances of that happening are slim to none. And if it appears they're giving away too much money too soon, they can easily alter things to make it more difficult, because they're not guaranteeing anything.
With your biannual tournaments, you're setting yourself up for a Lesko situation, and I don't mean pretty nipples.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'170247\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 10:01 AM\']
Again, you're giving away a guaranteed $2.3 million per season, not including the main game bonuses like "Super Big Mystery 7-11 minus 1 and sometimes 5", and umm, regular Winner's Circle wins. You put all that together for 200+ episodes, and you're looking at well over $3 million...in one season.[/quote]
And this is the entire problem with the concept; yes, "The $1,000,000 Pyramid" rolls off the tongue nicely, and it's fun to draw sets and pretend you're the announcer and bounce up and down in your chair imagining obscene amounts of money being given away, but Brandon just pointed out the elephant in the room, since my knock was that twice a year wasn't often enough if that's what you're going to name the show, and Brandon's (100% correct) point is that a realistic prize budget won't even support *that*.
The sweet spot between not-looking-like-you're-trumpeting-a-false-number and fiscal feasibility just doesn't exist here, folks.
If you REALLY want to do something like this, you do not get to call it "The $1,000,000 Pyramid." Period. At best, you bring back the $100K show and title, and you have the $100K winners back once a year to play in a Tournament of Tournament of Champions Champions of some kind. And the very fact that I just used the phrase "Tournament of Tournament of Champions Champions" in a grammatically-correct fashion should tell you how silly the best-case scenario is.
-
Is it symbolic that I can no longer read the format? (I get the image from the home page and a message that I can't actually view the page.) Anyway, I thought it was going to be once a week, not a strip.
(tongue in cheek) Here's a format that you could reasonably call The $1,000,000 Pyramid and have a workable prize budget (for prime time). Over the course of an hour, two players play four games. The first time you win in the Circle, you earn $125,000. Each time after that, you double your winnings to that point. $125,000 x 2 x 2 x 2 = voilà, $1,000,000.
-
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'170266\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 03:23 PM\']
Is it symbolic that I can no longer read the format? (I get the image from the home page and a message that I can't actually view the page.) Anyway, I thought it was going to be once a week, not a strip.
(tongue in cheek) Here's a format that you could reasonably call The $1,000,000 Pyramid and have a workable prize budget (for prime time). Over the course of an hour, two players play four games. The first time you win in the Circle, you earn $125,000. Each time after that, you double your winnings to that point. $125,000 x 2 x 2 x 2 = voilà, $1,000,000.
[/quote]
I don't know, but somehow it would be boring for me to watch the same 2 teams of two play 4 games and 4 winners' circles.
You COULD make it a sort of Grand Game-esque payout:
10-100-1000-10,000-100,000-1,000,000
But you don't earn the stated amount for EACH correct, just the highest one you turn over.
-
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'170266\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 12:23 PM\']
(tongue in cheek) Here's a format that you could reasonably call The $1,000,000 Pyramid and have a workable prize budget (for prime time). Over the course of an hour, two players play four games. The first time you win in the Circle, you earn $125,000. Each time after that, you double your winnings to that point. $125,000 x 2 x 2 x 2 = voilà, $1,000,000.
[/quote]
Man, am I glad your tongue is in your cheek there, because between "two players play four games" and "the first win is worth $125,000", you might as well bring in Maury Povich to host it, too.
-
[quote name=\'DoorNumberFour\' post=\'170268\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 12:36 PM\']
You COULD make it a sort of Grand Game-esque payout:
10-100-1000-10,000-100,000-1,000,000
But you don't earn the stated amount for EACH correct, just the highest one you turn over.
[/quote]
No, you really couldn't. You REALLY couldn't.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'170270\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 12:39 PM\']
[quote name=\'DoorNumberFour\' post=\'170268\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 12:36 PM\']
You COULD make it a sort of Grand Game-esque payout:
10-100-1000-10,000-100,000-1,000,000
But you don't earn the stated amount for EACH correct, just the highest one you turn over.
[/quote]
No, you really couldn't. You REALLY couldn't.
[/quote]
If I'm reading that right, he's saying that getting 5 out of 6 categories in the WC is worth $100,000? $100,000 for losing? Good night.
[quote name=\'Jay Temple\' post=\'170266\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 12:23 PM\']
Is it symbolic that I can no longer read the format? (I get the image from the home page and a message that I can't actually view the page.) Anyway, I thought it was going to be once a week, not a strip.
[/quote]
You can't? It still works on my computer.
/Wow, I didn't realize the board automatically nested consecutive posts.
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'170271\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 03:47 PM\']
/Wow, I didn't realize the board automatically nested consecutive posts.
[/quote]
It does if the second message is posted within one minute of the first.
-
Here's the idea I had for a $1,000,000 Pyramid. I don't know how well it might work, but here it goes.
The front game would work as usual. Normal tie breaks would simply send the winner to the WC. Tie scores of 21-21 would pay $10,000 to the winner, unless 2 of these ties happened on the same day, in which case the second one would pay $25,000, regardless of who won the first one.
The bonuses would be the "Big 7" and the "Mystery 7". The "Mystery 7" would play for a prize (Fridays would always be for a car). The "Big 7" would be just as it used to be, except raising the $500 to $5,000. I think I remember hearing that $500 was the prize for that. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
As "whoserman" came up with, the WC amounts would be progressive. However, in a nod to the show's history, the amounts would start at $10,000 for the first win (you stay at a level until you win it). The second win would be $25,000, the third $50,000, and the fourth, $100,000. Yes, this eliminates the $20,000 version which occurred between the $10,000 and $25,000 versions, but I figured 6 progressions might be too many.
The fifth and final level would be a little different. If a player makes it through all 4 previous levels, within their five day limit, their fifth "level" would be the $1,000,000. This would be an aggregate total, so it would actually be worth $815,000. "Bonus money" from WC losses, "Big 7"'s, "Mystery 7"'s, and 21-21 tie breaks would not be aggregate. IOW, if you won 2 "Big 7"s, and the $1,000,000 level, you'd leave with $1,010,000.
In order to appropriately increase the difficulty for level 5, a hidden fourth row of four categories (they would already be on the board, the board would just "rise up" to reveal the fourth row) would come into play. The time would be increased to 100 seconds (keeping the 10 second per category average time in tact). If the team completed the whole Pyramid, the contestant would win the $1,000,000. The "loss money" would be available only be on the top "6" categories, and in the same amounts as usual, since their opponent would not have access to the bottom 4, and the WC score determines the champion.
If no contestant won the $1,000,000 during the first 6 weeks of play, the seventh week would start off with a "top 3 players" tournament, just like the $100,000 version. The three fastest $100,000 winners (or the highest amount won by at least three people if there were no "$100,000" winners) would "round-robin" with daily high scorer coming back on the next day. If a tie should be achieved, the player with the single fastest "7 in 30" time from that day would come back. This would ensure that the player who "loses" rotates out, instead of the possibility of someone getting "blocked" by continuous ties.
This time all 10 categories would provide bonus points (to decide high scorer of the day), and the only money available would be the $1,000,000 in the WC. The bonus cards would not play. However, the 21-21 tie breaks would still offer money. Of course, as in the regular games, if the $1,000,000 is won, it becomes that winner's aggregate total for WC money. It is not an additional $1,000,000. The tournament would continue until a winner was reached.
What do you think?
-
[quote name=\'PalCatIN\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 04:56 PM\']What do you think? [/quote]
"...and that's how you play. It looks like we're out of time now, so join us tomorrow when we'll play our first game. Be sure to watch: someone might win $25,000, then go to the winner's circle to play for TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS!!!"
-
[quote name=\'PalCatIN\' post=\'170280\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 07:56 PM\']
The front game would work as usual. Normal tie breaks would simply send the winner to the WC. Tie scores of 21-21 would pay $10,000 to the winner, unless 2 of these ties happened on the same day, in which case the second one would pay $25,000, regardless of who won the first one.
[/quote]
I like the 21-21 tiebreaker bonus, but the idea of giving someone $25,000 just because it happened twice in one show is crazy, esp. if they lost the first one. $5,000 is plenty for the winner.
As "whoserman" came up with, the WC amounts would be progressive. However, in a nod to the show's history, the amounts would start at $10,000 for the first win (you stay at a level until you win it). The second win would be $25,000, the third $50,000, and the fourth, $100,000. Yes, this eliminates the $20,000 version which occurred between the $10,000 and $25,000 versions, but I figured 6 progressions might be too many.
The fifth and final level would be a little different. If a player makes it through all 4 previous levels, within their five day limit, their fifth "level" would be the $1,000,000. This would be an aggregate total, so it would actually be worth $815,000.
I agree with Steve, there's just way too much going on for a half-hour show. I still like Kevin's original idea, one tournament, broken down into a seeding format. I think some of you are trying to be too overdramatic, just to give away the million. A simple, elimination tournament, changing nothing more than the difficulty of material is just fine.
-
I have to admit, I have a soft spot for the one part of that that I've thought of before--the progressive jackpot that requires you to clear each "rung" before it increases. Even if you make the top prize semi-insane, if you get the Pyramid format halfway right, at least you'll be awarding it to only the very best players.
But yeah, there's way too much "let's stop and explain" stuff going on in that idea overall.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'170291\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 08:39 PM\']I have to admit, I have a soft spot for the one part of that that I've thought of before--the progressive jackpot that requires you to clear each "rung" before it increases. [/quote]I thought that was the best part of the recent Hollywood Squares revival myself.
PalCatIN is greatly overestimating the tolerance of the average viewer to put up with special rules, one-off bonuses and extra stuff. Pyramid is best left ungilded. To make the $10/$25k thing as a 21-21 tiebreak is just silly. Awarding a car as a bonus because it happens to be on a Friday? Do you want to be the one who wants to explain why Jim just won a laptop instead of a Ford Ranger? I don't. Or why one particular winner's circle has ten topics and the others six? Again, not me. And I'm not even sure what you meant here: "Normal tie breaks would simply send the winner to the WC."
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'170294\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 11:13 PM\']
And I'm not even sure what you meant here: "Normal tie breaks would simply send the winner to the WC."
[/quote]
I didn't read through the whole thing (I've already learned my lesson with this particular poster) but that makes perfect sense to me: if the tiebreaker is breaking a 17-17 tie, as opposed to a 21-21 tie, there is no bonus.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'170247\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 02:01 PM\']
Again, you're giving away a guaranteed $2.3 million per season, not including the main game bonuses like "Super Big Mystery 7-11 minus 1 and sometimes 5", and umm, regular Winner's Circle wins. You put all that together for 200+ episodes, and you're looking at well over $3 million...in one season. Besides, 1) do you really think viewers want to sit through eight weeks of TV just to see someone win $100,000, and 2) putting a time limit on the tournament one of the things that made Donnymid such bad television.
My first point brings up my whole guaranteed money vs. offered money debate. Millionaire, Deal, and Power of 10 may offer $1 million per episode, but the chances of that happening are slim to none. And if it appears they're giving away too much money too soon, they can easily alter things to make it more difficult, because they're not guaranteeing anything.
With your biannual tournaments, you're setting yourself up for a Lesko situation, and I don't mean pretty nipples.
[/quote]
Simple Solution:
Give the Million away in Temptation Dollars!
aw heck, let's go into overdrive:
One Million Temptation Dollars **AND** a whole lotta love!!
;-P
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'170296\' date=\'Nov 23 2007, 02:12 AM\'][quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'170294\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 11:13 PM\']And I'm not even sure what you meant here: "Normal tie breaks would simply send the winner to the WC."[/quote]I didn't read through the whole thing (I've already learned my lesson with this particular poster) but that makes perfect sense to me: if the tiebreaker is breaking a 17-17 tie, as opposed to a 21-21 tie, there is no bonus.[/quote]Haw. The one thing out of that entire post that makes sense is the one that my brain couldn't assimilate.
-
Why do we even need to do Million Dollar Pyramid in the first place? Has America really become so desensitized that we can't just do The $250,000 Pyramid and otherwise keep the same format we all know and love?
-
[quote name=\'Mr. Armadillo\' post=\'170402\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 11:47 AM\']
Why do we even need to do Million Dollar Pyramid in the first place? Has America really become so desensitized that we can't just do The $250,000 Pyramid and otherwise keep the same format we all know and love?
[/quote]
Because ONE MEEEEEELION is a big exciting number that makes people who don't actually have to budget it bounce up and down in their chairs.
-
First off, let me say that I'm not a fan of hypothetical formats, in general. I think it brings out two groups of people : A: The absolutely oblivious to how game shows should be run, and B : The folks who love to ram their dreams down their throats...
That said, I'm hypocrittically going to post my idea:
I may be in the minority, but I never was a fan of tournament play for a prize that was advertised on every show. Sorry, I just didn't like it then, and I certainlly didn't like it with Donny's wacky format.'
My suggestion is based on the ability to be able to play for a Million dollars anytime, any episode, throughout the year.
The Million Dollar Pyramid should be a one hour show, in which three full games are played, padded for celebrity endorsements, home viewer games, and tie-breakers (just in case).
A player comes on, and wins the front game, he goes to the Winner's Circle. The more times he/she gets up the pyramid, the more money he wins, on a ladder system.
1st Time : $50K
2nd Time : $100K
3rd Time : $250K
4th Time : $500K
5th Time : $1 Million
NOTE : This money is not cumulative. Win the next level, that's what you have won.
He misses? He gets a flat $1000/box.
There are two rubs here. One is: Instead of two players per episode, you are on a strike system. 2 front game losses, and you're done (think Classic Concentration). That way, if you get stuck with lousy celeb partner Jillian Barberie, you play again with Betty White.
But here's the big rub : Every time they scale the pyramid, they have a decision to make. They can quit with the money they've accumulated, or come back and play another front game. If they do NOT win a chance back up to the circle, they lose half their Winner's Circle winnings. That adds the drama for the audience to root on a player that does well and scales the pyramid multiple times.
There. Classic pyramid meets today $1Mil mo'money syndrome, yet doesn't just give the mil away for nothing. Good players are rewarded for their efforts, and not just in a tournament week. Promotions department can have a field day 12/months a year promoting big winners/riskers.
Have at it.
-
So I'm guessing it's five-wins retires undefeated? The only reason I ask is because it sets up the opportunity for a contestant to lose their first four Winners Circles, but still play for $1 million on the fifth try. On one hand, it makes for a dramatic game, on the other hand, it sorta rewards futility, even though it worked on so many other shows.
Other than that, I like it. A money tree actually put to effective use.
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'170414\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 06:42 PM\']
So I'm guessing it's five-wins retires undefeated? The only reason I ask is because it sets up the opportunity for a contestant to lose their first four Winners Circles, but still play for $1 million on the fifth try.
[/quote] The way I read it, you only go up the ladder if you win; hence, if you get to the top on the fifth day, you get the first rung $50,000.
-
Here's a question I'm not sure has been asked: while Sony was trying to get stations to sign on to Donny's Pyramid, Broadcasting & Cable ran a story that mentioned plans for a prime-time $1,000,000 Pyramid — if memory serves, on NBC — and an effort to get Steve Harvey to host. There was even a logo shown with the article. Do we know anything more about that?
-
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'170414\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 02:42 PM\']
So I'm guessing it's five-wins retires undefeated? The only reason I ask is because it sets up the opportunity for a contestant to lose their first four Winners Circles, but still play for $1 million on the fifth try.
[/quote]
But that's not what he said. I'm guessing he's going for play-'til-you-drop-or-win-the-million, and I read that as the ladder is climbed only upon a SUCCESSFUL trip to the WC.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'170428\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 06:58 PM\']
[quote name=\'fostergray82\' post=\'170414\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 02:42 PM\']
So I'm guessing it's five-wins retires undefeated? The only reason I ask is because it sets up the opportunity for a contestant to lose their first four Winners Circles, but still play for $1 million on the fifth try.
[/quote]
But that's not what he said. I'm guessing he's going for play-'til-you-drop-or-win-the-million, and I read that as the ladder is climbed only upon a SUCCESSFUL trip to the WC.
[/quote]
Got it. Thanks for the clarification (same to Dale), and sorry for the misunderstanding.
Carry on. :-)
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'170413\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 04:35 PM\']
A player comes on, and wins the front game, he goes to the Winner's Circle. The more times he/she gets up the pyramid, the more money he wins, on a ladder system.
1st Time : $50K
2nd Time : $100K
3rd Time : $250K
4th Time : $500K
5th Time : $1 Million
[/quote]
Did you base this system off the 2001 PC game? I only ask because your amounts are just ten-fold of the ones on the game.
Not that I'm knocking it- on the contrary, I like it. I always wondered how well that system would work on Pyramid.
-
[quote name=\'Robert Hutchinson\' post=\'170291\' date=\'Nov 22 2007, 11:39 PM\']
I have to admit, I have a soft spot for the one part of that that I've thought of before--the progressive jackpot that requires you to clear each "rung" before it increases. Even if you make the top prize semi-insane, if you get the Pyramid format halfway right, at least you'll be awarding it to only the very best players.
But yeah, there's way too much "let's stop and explain" stuff going on in that idea overall.
[/quote]
Much of the rule explanation would be off screen. There were always bonuses during the front rounds, which had to be explained, so really not much more explanation than has ever been required "on-air".
About the cars, there were often cars given away on "Mystery 7"s. Granted, they were "cheaper" cars, but they were cars none the less. If you can give away a car for 7 words in 30 seconds, surely you can give away $25,000 for 2 perfect games in the same day. I'm not saying the cars would have to be on Fridays, but it was just part of the idea I came up with. I'm also not saying it would have to be $25,000, but I thought that would be a nice way to reward better players, who might otherwise leave with very little if they didn't win their WC. It could just as easily be $10,000 each time. It was $5,000 each time back then, and if you're upping the money, might as well do it across the board.
As to the WC "money tree", each time you win a WC, you advance. Thus, an excellent player could reach the top of their tree in 2 shows by making both trips and winning both WCs on both days. (Day 1 win the $10,000 and $25,000; Day 2 win the $50,000 and the $100,000.) If they won the $1,000,000, that would retire them as an undefeated champion. That could happen as early as the first trip back on Day 3. However, they would be limited to 5 shows total, as usual.
I honestly don't think there's that much complication in the rules. The $20,000 Pyramid had a progressive jackpot scenario also. Sure, there's two extra steps, but it's not all that different.
-
[quote name=\'PalCatIN\' post=\'170449\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 07:58 PM\']
If you can give away a car for 7 words in 30 seconds, surely you can give away $25,000 for 2 perfect games in the same day.[/quote]
Cars are free, they are given to the production in return for the plug.
$25,000 costs, well, $25,000.
Meet my friend Mr. Lesko:
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3211/matmonbag2ec0.gif (http://\"http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/3211/matmonbag2ec0.gif\")
I honestly don't think there's that much complication in the rules. The $20,000 Pyramid had a progressive jackpot scenario also. Sure, there's two extra steps, but it's not all that different.
You are wrong.
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'170450\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 11:03 PM\']
You are wrong.
[/quote]
Well, if I'm wrong, explain how. It was $10,000 on the first trip, $15,000 on the second trip, and $20,000 on the third and any subsequent trips, was it not? Granted you didn't have to win to increase, because you left if you won, but it's a very similar concept, no?
-
Let me re-edit that:
I honestly don't think there's that much complication in the rules.
You are wrong.
-
[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'170413\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 02:35 PM\']First off, let me say that I'm not a fan of hypothetical formats, in general. I think it brings out two groups of people : A: The absolutely oblivious to how game shows should be run, and B : The folks who love to ram their dreams down their throats...[/quote]I don't mind the land of the hypothetical if people go in with reasonable ideas, and accept criticism well. That tends to not be the case around here. On the other hand, it's interesting (to me, of course) to contemplate how some people would jigger the Spoiler Snipe effect from Crosswords, or what have you. It's unfortunate that some people have to urinate in the punch bowl and ruin it for everyone else by throwing around nonsensical money amounts, broken/untested rule sets, and then being all uppity about being told why it's broken.
NOTE : This money is not cumulative. Win the next level, that's what you have won.
He misses? He gets a flat $1000/box.
I really like Pyramid. I tend to play that style of game at game nights given the chance. There is no way on God's green earth that I would risk $500,000 for a chance at double-or-nothing on a sight unseen board. Maybe if I was giving and had the chance to pre-look at the six categories. But even then I don't know. One missed reference and it's "one, two, three thousand dollars, back after this." All-in should be accompanied by having as much information as possible: it's why you likely won't have a winner on ...5th Grader or ...Lyrics. I think it would be fairer to have it as an actual ladder, instead of a series of cliffs that you would be flung over. Win, move a step up. Risk it and lose, and you move down.
For that matter, does the material get any harder as you waltz up the money tetrahedron? Or is a $50,000 winner's circle the same as one for the Big Fella?
Some things should not be played for stacks of cash. Pyramid is one of them. I think $100,000 for a tournament is plenty.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'170461\' date=\'Nov 25 2007, 02:34 AM\']There is no way on God's green earth that I would risk $500,000 for a chance at double-or-nothing on a sight unseen board.[/quote]
I think you misread the proposal slightly. First, what you're risking it on is actually the sight-unseen next main game, and then the ones following that--you don't have to win the very next Winner's Circle to get the million. Second, even if you fail, you leave with $250,000. That's double-or-half, not double-or-nothing.
-
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'170461\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 11:34 PM\']
It's unfortunate that some people have to urinate in the punch bowl and ruin it for everyone else by throwing around nonsensical money amounts, broken/untested rule sets, and then being all uppity about being told why it's broken.
[/quote]
Which I assure you I'm not doing. I'm taking every one of these comments to heart, and considering them for the proposal.
-
[quote name=\'whoserman\' post=\'170470\' date=\'Nov 25 2007, 10:01 AM\']
[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'170461\' date=\'Nov 24 2007, 11:34 PM\']
It's unfortunate that some people have to urinate in the punch bowl and ruin it for everyone else by throwing around nonsensical money amounts, broken/untested rule sets, and then being all uppity about being told why it's broken.
[/quote]
Which I assure you I'm not doing. I'm taking every one of these comments to heart, and considering them for the proposal.
[/quote]
You're not the one who was the target of that statement.