The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: SimpsonGeek on June 22, 2003, 09:34:31 PM
-
This is a simple topic, take one of the many home game versions of game shows and review it.
Family Feud
(Milton Bradley) 1970's and 80's
Box Cover: B+
Nice simple picture of a fake host and families playing the feud. The question appears to be \"Name a male's name that begins with R\".
Game Materials: A
A very nice game board that looks just like the show, the only exception is that you pull a plastic tab across to reveal the answer instead of flipping it. Plenty of questions are included, more than you'll probably need.
Playability: A
Great, just like the show. Only problem is that you'll need plenty of people to play, which is tough to do at times.
Overall: A-
A very faithful adaption and MUCH better than the current game put out by Endless.
OK,Now you try....
-
Match Game '7x
MB--1974, plus two others
Cover: C
Decent enough drawing of a contestant playing the Audience Match.
Materials: B+
Points off for the weird looking celebrity board.
Playabilty: D-
baaaaaad. Just read the question and the answers. Not very fun at all. The only thing that keeps it from being an F is the fact that w/ the third edition and enough people, you could have some fun.
Overall: C-
The 60's game was better.
-
One oddity about the MB Feud home games is that the rules tell you to reveal the six given answers for Fast Money questions, a better idea is to keep the answers hidden, as done on the show itself.
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jun 22 2003, 06:46 PM\'] One oddity about the MB Feud home games is that the rules tell you to reveal the six given answers for Fast Money questions, a better idea is to keep the answers hidden, as done on the show itself. [/quote]
I agree, I always thought that was a pretty stupid rule. The way I figured it, if you gave an answer that wasn't among the six listed, you DESERVED the zero... :)
-
Family Feud
(Milton Bradley) 1970's and 80's
Playability: A
Great, just like the show. Only problem is that you'll need plenty of people to play, which is tough to do at times.
I remember playing a version with friends in the mid-1980s. There was one flaw: each game had only three rounds (two single and one double), so one strategy was, if the team that was ahead after two rounds controlled the third round and that round's score was less than what was needed to won, the players on that team intentionally struck out. (Given the way the game was laid out - one booklet with the \"game boards\" and one with the answers for the host - there doesn't seem to be an easy way around it. If the third rounds of each game were the same difficulty as the others, perhaps adding a \"winner-take-all\" fourth round would be best; having it after three pretty much makes the first two rounds meaningless.)
-- Don (side question: how many of the old MB games had the white $1000 bills?)
-
Wheel of Fortune
(Milton Bradley) 1975
Box Cover: C+
A very odd picture of the set with a host who looks british.
Game Materials: C-
A very primitive wheel includes a \"Buy A Vowel\" space and a \"Bankrupt\" Space is green. The letter board isn't much better, a non-decorated yellow chunk of plastic, which you put seperate letters in backwards, which at times can be very confusing to the host. Most of the prizes in this game are taken from the Price is Right game which was also out at the time
Playability: B-
Like the original Wheel started out. The \"Buy A Vowel\" wedge is very dull. This is also the only home version of Wheel in which you go \"shopping\" for your prizes after the round.
Overall: C
Like I originally said, It's just like the real Wheel started out, it started out dull but over time it got better. I suggest you buy one of the Pressman games.
-
[quote name=\'SimpsonGeek\' date=\'Jun 22 2003, 10:13 PM\'] The letter board isn't much better, a non-decorated yellow chunk of plastic, which you put seperate letters in backwards, which at times can be very confusing to the host. [/quote]
There *is* one advantage to the early Wheel game. Because the letters can be placed in the board individually, the host can actually come up with his own puzzles instead of being limited to the ones in the booklet, or the ones in the other companies' versions that are pre-made on large sheets you slip in.
My review is of Eye Guess.
This one was well thought out, implement-wise, with a plastic board and answer lids (which were originally used in another ancient MB game called Pivot), and everything could fit into the common MB long flat game box. Plus, the smaller cardboard lid that fit on the Q/A answer box for storage could be placed over the board and lifted so the answers could all be exposed at once for players to study, and it also came in handy for the host to place the question book in so no one could look at the questions that were on the other side on the book. The only debit was that the thick black lettering used on the STOP card combined with the yellow color of the answer lids made it easy for me and others to see where STOP was hidden in the bonus game. They should have reversed the colors (making Eye Guess yellow and the number lids blue or red), or at least rethought the color scheme and letter font for the STOP card.
Grade: A-
The box cover: The board and Bill Cullen pictured, and a near-accurate repro of the show logo--what more could you want?
Grade: A
The game play? It still holds up after all these decades. I know--I take it to a local group that meets every so often, and one of the ladies just LOVES it. She may not have even seen the show.
Grade: A
Overall grade: A
-
If you remember the MB-marketed Hangman game of the 70s(Hangman of course is the word game on which WOF is loosely based), are the tiles used in the MB 70s WOF games the same as the tiles used in the MB Hangman games.
-
The Hollywood Squares
(Milton Bradley) 1980
Box Cover: B+
A nice cover with a huge HS logo taking up most of the cover, few points off because of the odd looking celebs, but we'll get into that a little bit later.
Game Materials: D
The board is nothing like the show, so very cartoonish, nothing like the show at all. The static cling \"X\" and \"O\"s stop working after a while and fall off too many times. The only saving grace are the question booklets.
Playability: B-
Meh, it's OK. It would be much more fun with real celebs. Points off for no mention of a secret square.
Overall: C
The game board is the worst part of this game. If you want a good Squares game get the most recent one by Parker Brothers.
-
[quote name=\'SimpsonGeek\' date=\'Jun 22 2003, 10:13 PM\'] Box Cover: C+
A very odd picture of the set with a host who looks british.
[/quote]
How does one look British? Is it the teeth?
-
[quote name=\'tommycharles\' date=\'Jun 23 2003, 09:58 AM\'] How does one look British? Is it the teeth? [/quote]
That and their obvious disdain for the Dutch. :)
-
JEOPARDY (2003) by Pressman
Box Cover (B+):
Excellent box cover art, but the cardboard is very thin, so I don't recommend stacking anything heavy on top of it, for the serious box game collector's sake.
Game contents ©:
Only changes in this game, compared to all earlier Pressman editions are cosmetic, except for the use of the bigger money amounts in game. The gameboard console, which used to be red, is now BLUE. The sheets of answers (or clues), are printed black on white, with no overprint of \"JEOPARDY!\" on the sheets. The money amount slides, and those for DD and FJ, are once again thin cardboard, and the signaling snappers are all one color.
Playability (B):
Just wish the Daily Doubles were pre-selected, and not randomly by your choice, and that Final Jeopardy! used a different category, like on the show (and in the Hasbro/Parker Brothers version from 2000).
Overall (B-):
The Hasbro/Parker Brothers edition still stands as the best Jeopardy! home game ever made, IMO!
-
High Rollers (\"Based on the New Hit TV Game Show,\" which lasted, unfortunately, exactly how long?)
(Parker Brothers, 1988)
Box Cover: A
It's a bright, colorful photograph of a game in progress on the actual set, with the big numbers in the background and a nice depiction of the logo (though split up to fit on the box horizontally). Plus, it shows good ol' Wink!
Game Materials: A-
Very colorful, with box serving as dice table, stand-up board with little plastic shelves for the numbers, and nice (and numerous) prize cards. There's no play money, just cardboard tokens to pay out for the Big Numbers and nothing to give out for winning mini-games (which are somewhat dull anyway). There are lots of questions, and the two-sided question booklet makes it possible for two people to play without an MC. Some clickers would have been nice, but they're not a necessity.
Playability: A
You can't get much closer to the real thing than this. The rules are clear, and they pretty much follow the show to a tee. The questions are very much like those used on the show, though they don't have the, um, charm of the ones in the first edition MB game (see Mr. Ottinger's Game Show Home Game Home Page for details). Even though there's no money on the line, it's still somewhat thrilling to beat the Big Numbers since it's not easy to do. (I should know. I just played this game the other day and \"won\" $10,000.)
Overall: A
It's a very faithful adaptation and does a lot for a relatively low cost. Of course, you don't get the nice photo of Alex Trebek with a 'fro on this one. . . .
-
The board is nothing like the show, so very cartoonish, nothing like the show at all. The static cling \"X\" and \"O\"s stop working after a while and fall off too many times.
MB also used the \"colorform\" Xs and Os for their 1988 HS game, and I had the same prob.
Chuck DOnegan (The Illustrious \"Chuckie Baby\")
-
And of course MB also Red, White, and Gold hexagons of the same type for their Blockbusters game in 1982.
-
The Hollywood Squares
(Milton Bradley) 1980
Box Cover: B+
A nice cover with a huge HS logo taking up most of the cover, few points off because of the odd looking celebs, but we'll get into that a little bit later.
Game Materials: D
The board is nothing like the show, so very cartoonish, nothing like the show at all. The static cling \"X\" and \"O\"s stop working after a while and fall off too many times. The only saving grace are the question booklets.
I vaguely remember playing a HS home version somewhere around 1972, and it was a little different. I think it worked like this: there was a plastic gameboard where the nine squares had compartments to hold piles of cards, and a place to write in the names of celebrities (in pencil, presumably). There were a number of decks of small question cards (with the answers on the back); a deck was selected, and the cards divided among the nine squares. The game played like the TV version, although as there were only two of us there, there was no \"agree / disagree\"; either you answered the question correctly or you didn't. (I assume it was meant for additional players to be the \"celebrities\" and actually try to answer the questions.) Rather large plastic Xs and Os went onto the board to indicate who got what square. Also, some of the questions had stars on them; these were \"secret square\" cards (it was possible to have more than one in a game), and they were worth a $200 bonus in addition to $200 for each game won (which is what the NBC daytime version paid); first to $2000 won.
Speaking of older games, does anybody else remember something called Big Numbers: the High Rollers Game, released back when the show was on NBC? (I think Trebek was on the box cover as well)
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jun 23 2003, 12:48 PM\'] That and their obvious disdain for the Dutch. :) [/quote]
*checks Matt's website*
Ah yes, you can see it in his eyes.
-
ES Lowe, an MB subsidiary released two home versions of a High ROllers home game in the mid 70s with that moniker. Trebek appeared on the cover of those games. E.S. Lowe is the man best known for inventing the game Yahtzee.
The Squares board game in question came out in 1967 by Watkins-Strathmore, and is plugged on the 1968 NBC primetime episodes GSN shows. The second one came out by Ideal in 1974, the third Marshall era Squares game came out by MB in 1980.
-
Bruce's Price is Right-UK
Cover: a picture of Bruce Forsythe pointing, and the logo. Very attractive cover though! (B)
Game Materials: Lots of colorful cards for prizes, and 6 markers, but no pictures of anything! The Money though, is awesome! It's 2 sided, and in color! (B)
Playability: Here's what's different...with exception for some of the Higher/Lower and Bidding games, this game does not play like the TV show. But that's what makes it so cool. It's different. You buy stuff from various decades and try to sell it back in new decade, pending on a roll of the dice! (A)
Overall: A nice game. Good job from the Brits for being original!
A-
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jun 25 2003, 05:07 AM\'] E.S. Lowe is the man best known for inventing the game Yahtzee.
[/quote]
Wrong again, Zach.
E.S. Lowe might have MARKETED the game as Yahtzee, but he didn't invent it.
As the legend goes, a wealthy Canadian couple invented the game as a diversion to play aboard their yacht (hence the name.) Friends enjoyed the game and wanted a set of their own, so they approached Lowe in 1956 about having a few made as gifts. He licenced the game from them and it became what we know as Yahtzee.
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jun 25 2003, 07:07 AM\'] ES Lowe, an MB subsidiary released two home versions of a High ROllers home game in the mid 70s with that moniker. Trebek appeared on the cover of those games. E.S. Lowe is the man best known for inventing the game Yahtzee.
The Squares board game in question came out in 1967 by Watkins-Strathmore, and is plugged on the 1968 NBC primetime episodes GSN shows. The second one came out by Ideal in 1974, the third Marshall era Squares game came out by MB in 1980. [/quote]
Zach, would you mind staying on topic instead of dropping in your little factoids?
-
As the legend goes, a wealthy Canadian couple invented the game as a diversion to play aboard their yacht (hence the name.) Friends enjoyed the game and wanted a set of their own, so they approached Lowe in 1956 about having a few made as gifts. He licenced the game from them and it became what we know as Yahtzee.
With all the talk about High Rollers, I'm a little surprised Zach didn't check first at my specific page dedicated to those box games, which includes a paragraph explaining E.S. Lowe, and why some of the earliest High Rollers games had his imprint instead of MB's:
http://userdata.acd.net/ottinger/inside/ro...lers/index.html (http://\"http://userdata.acd.net/ottinger/inside/rollers/index.html\")
BTW, if anyone's curious why I haven't contributed mrore to this thread, you can read my reviews of dozens of box games on my website. Just click on the box on any of the index pages, and up will pop a page describing the game in detail.
http://userdata.acd.net/ottinger/games.htm (http://\"http://userdata.acd.net/ottinger/games.htm\")
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jun 22 2003, 08:46 PM\'] One oddity about the MB Feud home games is that the rules tell you to reveal the six given answers for Fast Money questions, a better idea is to keep the answers hidden, as done on the show itself. [/quote]
I got one of the last versions in early 1985 and found it odd that all the questions only had five answers. So, then what was the point of the other side of the board????
-
[quote name=\'Card Shark\' date=\'Jun 27 2003, 10:30 PM\'] [quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jun 22 2003, 08:46 PM\'] One oddity about the MB Feud home games is that the rules tell you to reveal the six given answers for Fast Money questions, a better idea is to keep the answers hidden, as done on the show itself. [/quote]
I got one of the last versions in early 1985 and found it odd that all the questions only had five answers. So, then what was the point of the other side of the board???? [/quote]
My guess is they were recycling materials-why make an all new board?
-
both sides of the board in the Feud game would still have to be used for Fast Money, even if the main game questions would only use one side of the board.
-
I'm shocked no one's done this one...
Sale of the Century
American Publishing Company, 1986
Box Cover: A
Simple black cover depicting three players playing the game in a small inset on the lower right hand corner, with the show's 1980's-era logo in big white letters dominating the rest of the cover. Rainbow-colored \"chasing lights\" trim the outer area.
Game Materials: A+
The game uses a \"traditional-style\" game board (i.e., a big colorful square cardboard playing surface, much like a Monopoly board) and six scoring markers to keep score. The prizes are simulated with five stacks of prize cards (of flimsy cardstock, unfortunately). They consist of three \"instant bargain\" decks, one $5, one $10 and one $15, consisting of eight cards each; one Fame Game deck of 14 cards; and one Winner's deck of 24 cards. The cards feature photos of the prizes being won. Also, there's a large rules/question book containing 120 \"rounds\" of questions. Each round is supposed to represent a full episode of the show, and contains 22 questions: twenty standard questions and two Fame Games; this is actually about two thirds of the questions asked on a standard episode of the show, not including the Speed Round, which the game also lacks. The game makes up for this by designating all of the eight questions after the second Fame Game as being worth double. But the distinguishing component of the game is the legendary Quizzard buzzer system, a simple, durable, electronic six-player player lockout unit. Sale was the first game to include a full-fledged electronic buzzer system, and the Quizzard was so cool, that stand-alone units featuring a random selection feature (perfect for [/I]Russian Roulette[/I]) and a simple 5-60 second timer were made.
Playability: A+
Very true to the television series. The reduced number of questions in each round allows several episodes worth of action to be played very quickly. This is important, since the object is to win the most money in prizes. Prize values are kept in $250 increments to make adding values quick and easy. Instant Bargains are offered when a player reaches the $35 space (where they are offered a $5 Instant Bargain card), the $45 space (where they look at a $10 card), and the $55 space (a $15 card is offered here). Correct answers to the Fame Game question earn a Fame Game Card, containing either a small prize, added to the player's winnings, or a Money Card, added to the player's score (unlike the show, where the values are $10, $15, and $25, the cards in the game are $10, $15 and $20). The winner of each round receives the top card from the Winner's deck, regardless of their current score, which simplifies things (as opposed to the Aussie version from which this game is adapted, whose Winner's prizes have variable costs), but because of two big prizes in the game, it can sometimes get a bit unbalanced. This is rare however, since the odds of getting those two cards are quite low. After a predetermined number of rounds, the player with the most money in \"prizes\" is the winner.
The Aussies knew they had a killer game on their hands, and made FIVE editions of their version of the game. Each version presumably included new prizes and almost certainly featured new questions.
Overall: A+
Say it with me, folks:
Best. Adaptation. EVER.
\"Game Show Man\" Joe Van Ginkel
gameshowman@winning.com
-
[quote name=\'Game Show Man\' date=\'Jun 28 2003, 05:13 PM\'] Say it with me, folks:
Best. Adaptation. EVER.
[/quote]
Except you conveniently overlooked a hole in the game big enough to drive a truck through: that $100,000 Cash Jackpot card. Between that and the $50,000 Jaguar, once either of those two prizes get won, the game is basically over. I can't give a Playability A+ to a game that can be rendered that imbalanced by two prize cards.
\"But if someone gets one, you can hope to get the other!\" Yeah, sure. And if you don't, if you \"only\" win a $25K prize, it might as well be worth $0. That is NOT an A+.
I'm not saying it isn't a great home game; it is, and I'm proud to own a copy. But if you're going to write a review, don't write a puff piece, review it warts and all. Honestly, in terms of accurately recreating the feeling of playing the game in the studio, the original Password home games (particularly the later editions with Lightning Rounds) come closer.
-
The Jag is worth $40K and the Cash Jackpot in $50K(at least in the game I owned, perhaps other copies of the game were made with a $50K Jag and a $100K CJ card)
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jun 28 2003, 06:12 PM\'] The Jag is worth $40K and the Cash Jackpot in $50K(at least in the game I owned, perhaps other copies of the game were made with a $50K Jag and a $100K CJ card) [/quote]
You know what, Zach? It really doesn't matter that much.
-
Card Sharks
(Endless Games) 2001
Box Cover: B
A simple cover with the CS '01 logo on it.
Game Materials: A-
What much more do you need other than cards, a board, and survey questions? Points off for the extra spaces in Money Cards.
Playability: A
Just like the classic show. Thank god they didn't use the CS '01 rules.
Overall: A
To me it's Endless's best adaption so far.
-
Password Plus
Box cover: A-
Good use of strong reds, yellows, and blues, with an attention-grabbing slight redesign of the show logo.
Game materials: B
A terrific board design that holds three puzzles at once, then easily slides the Alphabetics letters out for that part of the game. Also it's worth noting that they've replicated the set for the puzzleboard, an easy PLUS. Heh-heh...
Playability: B+
Loses a letter because it's not totally identical to the show's format (unless you use the Tom Kennedy $500 format, in which case, you can just use both sides of the game card, I suppose).
Overall: A
-
[quote name=\'SimpsonGeek\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 11:08 AM\'] Game Materials: A-
What much more do you need other than cards, a board, and survey questions? Points off for the extra spaces in Money Cards.
[/quote]
Freeze bars, perhaps?
Overall: A
To me it's Endless's best adaption so far.
I dunno about Endless. Maybe it's the rising spielfriek in me, but it seems they're so gung ho about getting these titles out, that they're not taking the time to do them WELL. The missing freeze bars and screwed-up Money Cards board are glaring mistakes, as is the single pricer in the TPIR set, and I don't think the Pyramid bits have improved since the 70's.
They would impress me more if they took some time and truly put out a neat game instead of going for the quick buck. I shudder to think of what their interpretation of $otC would look like...
-
WIN LOSE OR DRAW
Milton Bradley 1987
Materials: Nice and tidy. Small board, lots of pawns, and slick cards. The included paper is also good, each sheet emblazoned with the WLOD logo (we of course play with a dry-erase board). The puzzles are all phrases/cliches - so you don't have 5-second puzzles like \"doormat.\" Use your own pencil though, you'll find better at a putt-putt course. [ A ]
Playbility: Not like the show, but very simple and allows for plenty of fun drawing and guessing. Players guess and draw to earn one of each colored pawn, then try and land on a spade to earn the \"ace in the hole\" for a win. However, when a player does earn the four colors, they cannot win as a sketcher. This is flawed in part because people see it as \"strategy\" to not draw. Of course, if you really think about it, blowing your turn as sketcher (in the board game) means the phrase moves down to the next sketcher, giving the win/pawn to your opponents. [ A - ]
Overall: Lambasted this before I actually played it, but I love it now. Light years better than Pictionary. I hate finally getting my turn to draw and I get \"door.\" All-Plays were not warmly accepted by the calm who don't like racing the others for a word. [ A - ]
Quick questions for the group, slighty off-topic: when you play a drawing game, do you have an alternative surface instead of tiny pads of paper?
And when you play Charades in a party setting, how do you do it? I recently picked up a board game called \"Sound Off\" at the thrift store and it went over well. I can elaborate if asked ;-p
-Jason
-
I missed this topic, so here's my way of giving it a \"bump:\" with another review.
Who Wants to be a Millionaire
Pressman Toys, 2000
Box Cover: B
Simple, deep blue cover with the WWTBAM logo.
Materials: A
980 question cards (proportionally more for the easier questions, less for the upper tier stuff), five gold-colored plastic question card-holders, fifteen lifeline tokens, twenty PAF/ATA cards, and lots of play money (some of the coolest looking play money I've ever seen; ya just gotta love that Million Dollar Bill with the gold foil).
Playability: C+
It's a little hard to mess up such a simple format. The standard gameplay is similar to the show; it's how the Lifelines are handled that gets Playability rating marked down (assuming you don't like how they're handled; I myself like their handling of the lifelines). Each player is equipped with a card holder, three Lifeline tokens and a set of PhoneAFriend/AskTheAudience cards; one player is designated the host and uses the card holder to ask the questions, while the other players secretly choose their responses with their card holders. When a player taps either Phone a Friend or Ask the Audience, the other players (everyone for the AskTheAudience; one specific player for PhoneAFriend) then use their cards to secretly choose an answer, which may or may not be correct (the host also adds a card to the ones the other players pick; his answer must be the correct one). The possiblity of the other players purposely giving a wrong answer is the reason most folks don't like the use of the cards for the Lifelines; I myself happen to like the cards, since they add a new element of strategy to the game. Those not liking the Lifeline cards are invited to use the traditional format of the show: actually calling a friend for advice when tapping PhoneAFriend, and polling everyone in the room for AskThe Audience.
Overall: B
Whether you like the Lifeline cards or not, this game is still one of the better game show adaptations in recent years.
\"Game Show Man\" Joe Van Ginkel
gameshowman@winning.com
-
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 03:23 PM\'] [quote name=\'SimpsonGeek\' date=\'Jun 30 2003, 11:08 AM\'] Game Materials: A-
What much more do you need other than cards, a board, and survey questions? Points off for the extra spaces in Money Cards.
[/quote]
Freeze bars, perhaps?
Overall: A
To me it's Endless's best adaption so far.
I dunno about Endless. Maybe it's the rising spielfriek in me, but it seems they're so gung ho about getting these titles out, that they're not taking the time to do them WELL. The missing freeze bars and screwed-up Money Cards board are glaring mistakes, as is the single pricer in the TPIR set, and I don't think the Pyramid bits have improved since the 70's.
They would impress me more if they took some time and truly put out a neat game instead of going for the quick buck. I shudder to think of what their interpretation of $otC would look like... [/quote]
Do you really really need the freeze bars though?
-
actually calling a friend for advice when tapping PhoneAFriend
I've often wondered if anyone on the receiving end of a Phone-A-Friend call placed by someone playing the home game gets a bit steamed. Nice feature if it actually works, but I can all-too-easily picture someone treating a call like this as being two notches above a call from a telemarketer.
At least contestants on the TV show get to plan ahead and make arrangements and agreements to call whoever they know is an expert in a certain field.
-
The Price is Right 1986
Box Cover: B+
A Drawing of people on the wierdest price is right set ever..
Materials: A
Same old materials use for Other MB Games Except the Game is more colorful with a better design!! You gotta love the tiles!!
Playability: B+
It is fun to play with 3 or more people...But the when the showcase showdown is not there, then it is really fun. Nice Pricing games and prizes!!
Overall: A
The Better Price is Right Board Game!!
BTW: How is the New 2003 Wheel of Fortune Boardgame Like?
-
I think it's a fairly authentic drawing of the TPIR contestant's row/audience at the time in 1986.
-
Concentration a.k.a. Classic Concentration
Milton Bradley (Editions one through twelve and fourteen through twenty-five)
Pressman (Two versions, puzzles on scroll and puzzles on cards)
Endless Games (Two versions, red filtered gameboard and clear gameboard)
A faithful adaptation of the television series is all cases. To make the experience a duplication of the series one needs a gamemaster to verify a correct answer. That gamemaster should set up the gameboard so the most valuable prizes reveal the least helpful rebus pieces and vice versa.
The Milton Bradley edition puzzles were designed by Norman Blumenthal, the series producer, and the Endless Games edition puzzles were designed by Steve Ryan, the series puzzle designer.
Box lid: C , who plays the box anyway?
Materials: Milton Bradley: A, Pressman: B, no prize racks, Endless Games: A- everything is so tiny
Playability: B, it takes a long time to set up between games.
-
Pyramid
(Endless Games) 2003
Box Cover: B+
Different than the first cover planned, now it's a much bigger head shot of Donnie.
Game Materials: A
A pyramid that looks like the show, plenty of rounds, and the score pads on the board are fastened tighter.
Playability: A
A big improvement over the first Pyramid game done by EG, now you can alternate giving clues during the first round because the answers are covered by red print.
Overall: A
A big improvement over the first Pyramid offering by Endless. They fixed everything that they had wrong with the 1st
-
[quote name=\'zachhoran\' date=\'Jul 22 2003, 07:27 PM\'] I think it's a fairly authentic drawing of the TPIR contestant's row/audience at the time in 1986. [/quote]
Yeah; that was around the time of the syndie version...and they had those bronze-colored bars that one year...