What if they used a car as a prop on Cliff Hangers?

[brtsimpson142]

It just change for the sake of change guys, and not a very well thought-out change at that.

(And yes, please let's not be giving Mikey any more bright ideas.)

[lance99]

Real car + massive prop + Grand Canyon = ....

/c'mon people, think BIG

As bad as that sounds, ther would actually would try to do something to that effect

And NO it would not work. Why try to fix something that is not broke!

[brtsimpson142]

And NO it would not work. Why try to fix something that is not broke!

I'm still asking myself that same question about Hi-Lo's old introduction shot.

[BD]

Except for one obvious difference:  since the prop was designed to specifically BE a car, it was nice to be able to display a truck when that's what the prize really was.  It was more accurate to show a truck image than a car.

Here, there's a mountain climber.  The mountain climber doesn't refer to or imply any specific kind of prize...it's just a mountain climber that could be climbing the mountain for a car or new bedroom set or a trip or whatever they choose to.  There's nothing remotely inaccurate about showing a mountain climber no matter what the prize could be.

Yeah of course but that's just how I personally feel. I don't think it's crazy for Hans to be riding something that's a means of transportation up the mountain that's the same as the prize being played for (as long as the prize itself is a means of transportation). It would be unnecessary though in my opinion just as how it's unnecessary for the money game to have a picture for when a car is played and when a truck is played (in my opinion).

[brtsimpson142]

It would be unnecessary though in my opinion just as how it's unnecessary for the money game to have a picture for when a car is played and when a truck is played (in my opinion).

Then your opinion is wrong.  As has been pointed out, Money Game is only played for cars and other forms of transportation.  The inlay of the car that goes with the logo is barely visible even in HD, and is something that complements the game without being a distraction.

The proposed change to Cliffhangers would be the opposite, a changing element that you just KNOW Drew would fawn over every single time.  It would cease to be purely decorative and would become a distraction.  Now add to that the varying prizes that Cliffhangers offers, and it becomes impractical, illogical, and as has been said repeatedly, unnecessary.  The game offers a car--Hans rides a car up.  The game offers a furniture set--Hans does what, exactly?  The game offers a trip--what does Hans do?

Sorry, but...no.  Dumb idea.  Quit trying to defend it as a logical suggestion because it very obviously isn't.

[BD]

Then your opinion is wrong. 

lol... just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it's wrong for me to feel that way. I mean we aren't talking about anything important.

As has been pointed out, Money Game is only played for cars and other forms of transportation.  The inlay of the car that goes with the logo is barely visible even in HD, and is something that complements the game without being a distraction.

But wouldn't you say that that's unnecessary compared to if they just had blank covers w/o a picture on them since Money Game is sometimes played for things other than a car?

The proposed change to Cliffhangers would be the opposite, a changing element that you just KNOW Drew would fawn over every single time.  It would cease to be purely decorative and would become a distraction. 

I doubt it would be a distraction for me. It would probably be handled by Drew for the first few playings in the same manner as he makes mention of pricing games getting redone. He would probably say something like "Look at Hans!... He's in your..." and then he wouldn't mention it anymore the more it becomes the norm.

Like I said I doubt it would be a distraction for me. I would more than likely see it and say "Ok..." and nothing else. I wouldn't say "The game's officially ruined" or anything to that effect.

 

Now add to that the varying prizes that Cliffhangers offers, and it becomes impractical, illogical, and as has been said repeatedly, unnecessary.  The game offers a car--Hans rides a car up.  The game offers a furniture set--Hans does what, exactly?  The game offers a trip--what does Hans do?

lol, that's why I said as long as the prize is a means of transportation, I don't see a problem with it. On days in which it isn't (the prize is a trip or furniture), I feel that Hans should just climb up by himself.

Sorry, but...no.  Dumb idea.  Quit trying to defend it as a logical suggestion because it very obviously isn't.

lol, I said that I wouldn't mind it for when the prize is a means of transportation since in that case it would be logical in my opinion.

Also, don't reply to me in that tone, especially if you can't even accurately state how I would feel and/or what I meant.

[CBSpromoman]

As has been pointed out, Money Game is only played for cars and other forms of transportation.  The inlay of the car that goes with the logo is barely visible even in HD, and is something that complements the game without being a distraction.

But wouldn't you say that that's unnecessary compared to if they just had blank covers w/o a picture on them since Money Game is sometimes played for things other than a car?

But that's the whole point:  they don't.  They have the car already there.  It's a design element of the game that refers to a SPECIFIC prize.  If all they had was blank covers, then I'd agree completely that it'd be unnecessary to add them.  But they've added them already, so now it DOES make more sense to offer different images.  This is especially true when Money Game is played for a sailboat: it looks silly to have a car icon when the game is being played for a boat.  It wouldn't look silly if there was no icon at all, but that's apparently not an option on the table.

It doesn't look silly at all to have Cliff Hangers played for a car or anything else because there's absolutely nothing on the game prop that indicates the nature of the prize.  As such, it's unnecessary to add a prize-specific icon for certain playings and not all of them.  The game plays fine as is: it's not about a car going over a cliff, it's about a mountain climber going over a cliff.  No need to muddy the waters.

[BD]

But that's the whole point:  they don't.  They have the car already there.  It's a design element of the game that refers to a SPECIFIC prize. If all they had was blank covers, then I'd agree completely that it'd be unnecessary to add them.  But they've added them already, so now it DOES make more sense to offer different images.  This is especially true when Money Game is played for a sailboat: it looks silly to have a car icon when the game is being played for a boat.  It wouldn't look silly if there was no icon at all, but that's apparently not an option on the table.

Okay and that's what I meant.

Again, I think you guys are misunderstanding me. I never said that this would be a good idea and have said many times that it would be unnecessary. It's just that I personally feel that it isn't "crazy".

It doesn't look silly at all to have Cliff Hangers played for a car or anything else because there's absolutely nothing on the game prop that indicates the nature of the prize.  As such, it's unnecessary to add a prize-specific icon for certain playings and not all of them.  The game plays fine as is: it's not about a car going over a cliff, it's about a mountain climber going over a cliff.  No need to muddy the waters.

But how would him being in a car change the gameplay in anyway? Once again, I agree that it's unnecessary but I don't see how the game would be ruined. The game would still be about trying not to make Hans go over the cliff.

Looks like I'm playing a litte bit of "devil's advocate".  

[CBSpromoman]

Again, I think you guys are misunderstanding me. I never said that this would be a good idea and have said many times that it would be unnecessary. It's just that I personally feel that it isn't "crazy".

It doesn't look silly at all to have Cliff Hangers played for a car or anything else because there's absolutely nothing on the game prop that indicates the nature of the prize.  As such, it's unnecessary to add a prize-specific icon for certain playings and not all of them.  The game plays fine as is: it's not about a car going over a cliff, it's about a mountain climber going over a cliff.  No need to muddy the waters.

But how would him being in a car change the gameplay in anyway? Once again, I agree that it's unnecessary but I don't see how the game would be ruined. The game would still be about trying not to make Hans go over the cliff.

Who's misunderstanding who?  When did I say that the game would be "ruined?" 

I didn't. 

I said it was an unnecessary change.

[LiteBulb88]

Definitely not the craziest thing suggested before.

When that's the standard being applied, you know you're in trouble.  This is a bad idea.

[brtsimpson142]

Looks like I'm playing a litte bit of "devil's advocate".

When that's the standard being applied, you know you're in trouble.  This is a bad idea.

See LiteBulb88's post.  This case has been dismissed.

[Todd]

See LiteBulb88's post.  This case has been dismissed.

How? All the both of us were doing was defending the OP for the ridicule that was completely unwarranted. A simple "no" would have sufficed; not a "this is the craziest thing ever!!!!".

[GrandGame1440]

I have to throw my two pennies in here for a minute.  I used to post on this board quite a lot, it was actually the only message board I ever contributed to for the longest time.  For the most part I quit posting regularly in 2007 for two reasons...

1)  Bob left and I lost a bit of interest in the show (don't get me wrong, I like Drew fine but that's for another thread).

2)  The overwhelming amount of negativity and arguing over ridiculous minutiae details.

I understand this forum is geared for debates at times, but some people just take the show way too seriously.  Coming down on members for just contributing posts on a discussion board who mean no real harm or malice just seems a bit trivial.  No to mention the civility to new members on this board is quite lacking.  I may very well get banned or blocked as a result of my speaking out on this matter but, I felt it had to be done as some people just take the show to an extreme.

[pete1974]

Amen Brother!!......or Sister

[PriceFanArmadillo]

How? All the both of us were doing was defending the OP for the ridicule that was completely unwarranted. A simple "no" would have sufficed; not a "this is the craziest thing ever!!!!".

I admit I don't get it either.  Heck, I actually think it'd be kinda neat. 

Then again, I'm a pretty poor judge of...well, almost everything.