Idea for a new pricing game - “Add Two”

[ooboh]

By the end of this post, you will definitely understand why my game is called “Add Two.”

At its core, this game is simply determining the prices of five small prizes in order to win $22,222 in cash, and its money ladder has similarities to “Grand Game.” The game proceeds as follows.

The first small prize is presented with two potential prices for that prize. If the contestant picks the right price, then they win the small prize, and $2. We then move on to the second small prize. This time, there are a total of three potential prices — the leftover option from the first prize plus TWO more new options. If the contestant picks the right price, then they win both prizes, and their $2 is increased to $22. We then move on to the third small prize. This time, there are a total of four potential prices — the two leftover options from the first and second prizes plus TWO more new options. If the contestant picks the right price again, then they win all three prizes, and their $22 is increased to $222.

This is where the stakes really start increasing. On the fourth small prize, there are a total of FIVE choices — the three leftover options and we ADD TWO more options. If the contestant picks right once again, they win the fourth small prize, and their $222 jumps to $2,222.

This is now where the similarities between “Add Two” And “Grand Game” lie. At this point, the contestant can choose to take their $2,222 and quit, or they can risk it on the fifth and final small prize, which has SIX possible choices. If the contestant decides to go, and they are wrong, they lose the cash (but not the small prizes, as they will never be at risk). If they choose the right price, then they win all five small prizes and $22,222 in cash. Cue the clangs and whoops, and lower-third “$22,222” graphic.

This is my first ever pricing game idea, let me know what you all think!

[gamesurf]

Welcome to the forums!

There are some pretty clever ideas here. Carrying over the previous price is pretty original. I love the creativity there--it's a simple concept, but it's not one we've seen used on the show yet. And I like the commitment you've shown with the the "add two" idea. You've obviously put a lot of thought into that.

It's pretty obviously inspired by Grand Game.  You've got some good, original elements--you've just welded them to a basic skeleton that (by your own admission) isn't very original. While that isn't always a bad thing (a lot of games on the show offer different twists on the same basic idea), in this case I'm worried that the the "add a digit" element mirrors Grand Game's concept a little TOO closely IMO.

The other critique that it's too hard. You have a 1 in 720 shot of winning this game. ((1/2) * (1/3) * (1/4) * (1/5) * (1*6))

In Grand Game, three of the GPs are usually pretty easy. This is done on purpose--the producers want the game to build up to an exciting final decision. Here, the odds are stacked against getting any sort of exciting buildup--you have a 50/50 shot at ending it after the first selection and the contestants' odds never get any better. Unless you make the first four SP's extremely easy, it's going to be anticlimactic most of the time.

But you've shown some good, creative ideas that I'd love to see in a pricing game. I just think they'd be better served with a more original basic concept instead of creating Grand Game 2.0.

[ooboh]

Welcome to the forums!

There are some pretty clever ideas here. Carrying over the previous price is pretty original. I love the creativity there--it's a simple concept, but it's not one we've seen used on the show yet. And I like the commitment you've shown with the the "add two" idea. You've obviously put a lot of thought into that.

It's pretty obviously inspired by Grand Game.  You've got some good, original elements--you've just welded them to a basic skeleton that (by your own admission) isn't very original. While that isn't always a bad thing (a lot of games on the show offer different twists on the same basic idea), in this case I'm worried that the the "add a digit" element mirrors Grand Game's concept a little TOO closely IMO.

The other critique that it's too hard. You have a 1 in 720 shot of winning this game. ((1/2) * (1/3) * (1/4) * (1/5) * (1*6))

In Grand Game, three of the GPs are usually pretty easy. This is done on purpose--the producers want the game to build up to an exciting final decision. Here, the odds are stacked against getting any sort of exciting buildup--you have a 50/50 shot at ending it after the first selection and the contestants' odds never get any better. Unless you make the first four SP's extremely easy, it's going to be anticlimactic most of the time.

But you've shown some good, creative ideas that I'd love to see in a pricing game. I just think they'd be better served with a more original basic concept instead of creating Grand Game 2.0.

What I would do is create a large spread between the prices on the first prize (like $29 and $149, for example) to make the first prize blatantly easy to win. Then, as the money increases, the range between the possible prices decreases and decreases, to the point where the range between the six prices on the final product are no more than $7 each (like $29, $36, $43, $50, $57, and $64).