Chain Reaction...

[Moe Train]

Catnap, you saw our show too?  I think if there wasn't the interruption in the middle ("You just doubled your money"), and the few seconds between each correct answer, we could have tripled it.  Has anyone in the show tripled yet?

From what I remember, we doubled it with 20 seconds left.  Getting a few more would have been easy.

[FlashStash]

If reports on the GSN message board are to be believed, and they seem credible, the bonus round has been changed to make it 5 correct for double your money and 7 correct for triple your money.

I think the problem is with the word choice, not the number needed to win.  Look at the words used for CR vs. the words used for GO and you'll see a big difference in difficulty. "Running of the Bulls"?? Come on!

FS

[itiparanoid13]

I believe that is correct, yes.  GSN told me about two weeks ago that they are making changes, but they haven't confirmed as of yet.  However, I can see them changing the bonus structure.  Now if they could only fix the speed chains.  And betting round.  And host.  And set.  And music.  Hell, fix up StarFace a bit while they are at it.

[bandit_bobby]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the bonus round. It's just the contestants are dumb. See the current version of Family Feud and you'll see what I mean.

[itiparanoid13]

I should have put this in my post.  The old Chain Reaction was relatively far before my time, but I wanted to know: how often did teams capture all 9 right?  I'm just checking to see if it's the difficulty of the bonus or the stupidity of the contestants.  Or possibly both.

[FlashStash]

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'128326\' date=\'Aug 21 2006, 02:07 PM\']
I believe that is correct, yes.  GSN told me about two weeks ago that they are making changes, but they haven't confirmed as of yet.  However, I can see them changing the bonus structure.  [/quote]

Like i said, the structure's not bad, it's the difficulty level that's off, IMHO.

Now if they could only fix the speed chains.

No problem with the concept, although they are used as a reward for the easiest word on the board (the last one).  How about using them as a buzz in question BEFORE the chain to see who takes control?  Keep adding letters until one team gets it.

 And betting round.

Here's the problem.  In the original, you were playing towards a set score, so they used as many chains as needed until someone got to the score. Here, it's a fixed set of chains, so it doesn't work and leads to anit-climactic endings....anyone have any suggestions?

 And host.  And set.  And music.  Hell, fix up StarFace a bit while they are at it.

We get it, you don't like CR.  Of the 2 new ones though, it seems to be the favorite, but it's nice to see you admit there are flaws with the best original ever on GSN, Starface

FS

[itiparanoid13]

Hey, I've openly admitted it.  Chain Reaction is a much better game.  However, StarFace, to me, is just the better show if you take in everything else.  There is no excuse, in my mind, for Chain Reaction to be worse, show wise, than StarFace.  StarFace is incredibly cheap, boring, and repetitive.

Here's my issue with the speedchain.  It's not for enough money.  It needs to be at least more than what one word in the main puzzle is worth.  If they want to cheap out like that, just add another word to the chain.  Hell, just making the speedchain a buzzer type situation would be cool.  What they could do is make the winner of each chain do a speedchain, but they bet how much they want.  Then make the final round a buzzer speedchain type thing.  I probably crapped up the format even more, but oh well.  The betting round, I honestly don't know.  I appreciate they are trying to make the game more exciting, but it comes off as betting $100 until you know it, and then going for $500.  And no, I think StarFace is FAR from GSN's best original.  I place it way below Russian Roulette, Lingo, BallBreakers, I've Got A Secret, Whammy, World Series of Blackjack, and High Stakes Poker.

[FlashStash]

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'128339\' date=\'Aug 21 2006, 02:30 PM\']
I should have put this in my post.  The old Chain Reaction was relatively far before my time, but I wanted to know: how often did teams capture all 9 right?  I'm just checking to see if it's the difficulty of the bonus or the stupidity of the contestants.  Or possibly both.
[/quote]

Maybe James can post a bonus round on his Page o Clips so you can see one.  There was one there at one point but it is no longer there.

FS

[Joe Mello]

[quote name=\'itiparanoid13\' post=\'128339\' date=\'Aug 21 2006, 02:30 PM\']
I should have put this in my post.  The old Chain Reaction was relatively far before my time, but I wanted to know: how often did teams capture all 9 right?  I'm just checking to see if it's the difficulty of the bonus or the stupidity of the contestants.  Or possibly both.
[/quote]

I think it's more the stupidity of the contestants.  The format is supposed to be moderately difficult, but since you can count the number of doublers on one hand, I think this problem lies with the players.

Unfortunately, unlike other Bob Stewart shows, I don't see the contestants getting smarter as time goes on.

[clemon79]

Frankly, I think it's very telling. Given the options of a) having their contestant wranglers do more work and find better, equally telegenic contestants, b) selecting smarter contestants that might not be as pretty, or c) dumbing down the bonus game to meet their vapid television-friendly players, they chose option C.

[Joe Mello]

Another thing we forget to mention is that finding unisex teams of three isn't exactly easy.  That obviously doesn't help things along.

Boys v Girls is a nice concept, but it doesn't exactly lend itself to being longevous.

[tvwxman]

[quote name=\'Joe Mello\' post=\'128382\' date=\'Aug 21 2006, 07:03 PM\']
Another thing we forget to mention is that finding unisex teams of three isn't exactly easy.  That obviously doesn't help things along.
[/quote]
So , what you're saying, is that having 2 mixed teams of three would make the show better to you, and result in smarter players and bigger cash wins? Pul-leeze.

The biggest problem with the new rule is that it's going to result in Moe posting more about how his team deserved more cash, how they would have won more, and how they should be invited back for another chance since the rules are easier. The answers , if you're scoring at home, or if you're alone are : No you didn't , yep you would have, not you won't.

[Moe Train]

Is there any need for that?  I haven't said anything in a long time.  There's no need to keep taking potshots at me.  Yes, I knew about this rule change two weeks ago.  No, I'm not bitching about the change.  I had my fun on the show, and hopefully this new format will help in the success of Chain Reaction.

Give it a rest with your holier than thou attitude.

[WilliamPorygon]

[quote name=\'tvwxman\' post=\'128393\' date=\'Aug 21 2006, 09:44 PM\']
So , what you're saying, is that having 2 mixed teams of three would make the show better to you, and result in smarter players and bigger cash wins? Pul-leeze.
[/quote]

If they can find mixed teams that are smarter and play the game better than the unisex teams, then yeah.  But what they really need to do to find more good players is stop their "we can't have anyone who looks over the age of 40" policy.

As for changing the bonus round rules:  As much as I love the "two people asking a single question" game, if they aren't going to find teams who can play the bonus round well (and so far they don't seem to even care much if they can play the main game well) then they may as well just go back to something like the USA version bonus.

[PYLdude]

[quote name=\'Moe Train\' post=\'128395\' date=\'Aug 21 2006, 10:19 PM\']
Is there any need for that?  I haven't said anything in a long time.  There's no need to keep taking potshots at me.  Yes, I knew about this rule change two weeks ago.  No, I'm not bitching about the change.  I had my fun on the show, and hopefully this new format will help in the success of Chain Reaction.

Give it a rest with your holier than thou attitude.
[/quote]

Well, Moe, maybe if you didn't whore your appearance as much as you did, and act like a bigshot just because you appeared on a game show (much unlike Ken Jennings did), maybe people wouldn't have picked on you.