Author Topic: Family Feud question.  (Read 7000 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline WilliamPorygon

  • Walking the Golden Road
  • ****
  • Posts: 343
Re: Family Feud question.
« Reply #15 on: July 26, 2018, 03:48:06 PM »
Don’t know about Fast Money, but I have seen #1 answers in the main game worth less than 20. 17 sticks out in my head, but I can’t confirm it.

Looking through some answer archives, the lowest #1 I could find was 12 points for the question "We asked 100 women:  Name something you do just like a dude."
https://mstiescott.neocities.org/feud16_7.html - very bottom of the page

Honestly, this is one of the things that irritates me about the modern Feud:  since late in the Karn era the show has decided that if one family gets over 100 in the first two rounds, they will deliberately use a question where the top however many answers don't add up to enough points for that family to win even if they sweep the board in order to force the game to go to the triple round.  So if one family has, say, 160 after question 2, it's a pretty safe bet they'll ask something extremely open-ended where the top answer is worth less than 25 and everything on the board adds up to less then 70.

(Note that they don't do this on Celebrity feud though, because the commercial breaks are placed differently and their whole reasoning behind this is so they don't have to split Fast Money between two segments because they'd otherwise have nothing to do when the triple round would normally be played.)

Offline Kyle

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1802
Re: Family Feud question.
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2018, 01:53:47 PM »
The current version of Family Feud is so broken as an actual game. As stated elsewhere in this thread, games are never over in less than four questions, despite the fact that in a survey of 100 people, logically there should be enough points for a family to win by sweeping (i.e. playing the game well) three questions. This leads to infuriating situations where a family will have zero going into the triple question, win that round with a steal and then win the game by winning the sudden death question...

...which leads to the next broken aspect of the game - the sudden death question. Horrible. I understand why they have it because of the truncated time constraints but it's certainly a game breaking mechanic. If they wanted to get around that, another triple value question could be played with no more than three answers on the board and follow the old Dawson/Combs era rule of the question being read once and not repeated with three seconds to answer it. Round could be over in less than a minute.

More to the point, if they wanted to speed the game up, I'd be getting rid of the pass or play rule as was done on the Combs show. If you didn't want to play the question, why bother answering it in the first place? How much time is lost in the show on every question watching the families debate whether they want to play or not?

Then there's Fast Money. The producers of the current show have never been able to get this part of the show right AT ALL, either because the hosts they've had over the years are bad at hosting (Richard Karn was the worst offender) or because they force losses so often to prevent families from winning more than $40,000 or because they refuse to allow 200 points to be totaled up by one player or because they insist on wasting so much time explaining the rules of the round (Dawson and Combs were the best at getting the second player on stage and getting immediately into asking the questions).

And to further this rant about how much I dislike the current run of Family Feud, goes without saying that winning five dollars a point for losing at Fast Money is in desperate need of updating.

Also, have you ever noticed they use fake shots of the board during Fast Money? Take a close look at the fixed shot of the board next time you watch - where's the scoreboard above the main board? It's been completely edited out for some unknown reason.

Speaking of editing, the editing is so out of control on the show now that it's hard to accept any of it as genuine. How many times have they started the game and then they will cut to some interaction between Steve and a contestant that clearly took place before the game even started? (i.e. the Family Feud logo is visible on the board, Steve doesn't have the question card, etc.)

And these are complaints about the show that don't even include how lewd the questions/answers have become.

The truly sad part is Harvey probably gets paid millions a year to host this show for maybe seven or eight weeks a year and will soon eclipse Richard Dawson's tenure with it.

I hate this show, if that wasn't made abundantly clear. :)

Offline BillyGr

  • Taking a Bonus Spin
  • *****
  • Posts: 652
Re: Family Feud question.
« Reply #17 on: July 28, 2018, 07:32:13 PM »
Don’t know about Fast Money, but I have seen #1 answers in the main game worth less than 20. 17 sticks out in my head, but I can’t confirm it.

There was a Fast Money one for 22 just shown tonight (whatever they are re-running on a Saturday) - the other answer given was worth 20, though on the same question.

Offline Briguy

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1706
Re: Family Feud question.
« Reply #18 on: July 29, 2018, 01:18:31 PM »
Probably Steve cranking up the snark for the second player, stopping short of telling them they're playing for $5 a point at that point.

If it were possible to happen in the current version, I would imagine the same ... Steve coming up with some seriously fake scenario to make the contestant think the first player had seriously blown it, and then finally revealing they had won.

Brian

Offline Briguy

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1706
Re: Family Feud question.
« Reply #19 on: July 29, 2018, 01:58:24 PM »
Looking through some answer archives, the lowest #1 I could find was 12 points for the question "We asked 100 women:  Name something you do just like a dude."
https://mstiescott.neocities.org/feud16_7.html - very bottom of the page

Honestly, this is one of the things that irritates me about the modern Feud:  since late in the Karn era the show has decided that if one family gets over 100 in the first two rounds, they will deliberately use a question where the top however many answers don't add up to enough points for that family to win even if they sweep the board in order to force the game to go to the triple round.  So if one family has, say, 160 after question 2, it's a pretty safe bet they'll ask something extremely open-ended where the top answer is worth less than 25 and everything on the board adds up to less then 70.

(Note that they don't do this on Celebrity feud though, because the commercial breaks are placed differently and their whole reasoning behind this is so they don't have to split Fast Money between two segments because they'd otherwise have nothing to do when the triple round would normally be played.)

I can defend why the producers might want to use at least four questions per game.

Playing time and on-screen time.

I know back in the early days of the Dawson Feud, when the winning score was 200 (and even during the years when 300 was the target), games were sometimes over in three questions. A dominant family could control every Face Off by immediately ringing in, getting the number one answer and sweeping each of the questions, never allowing the other family a fair chance; certainly in those games, two players never got to play, much less be on camera more than just saying hello to Richard.

(And I know there was at least 1-2 episodes from early in the run where those contestants of families who were blitzed were -- as Richard was going through his "thanks for playing, we've got nice gifts for you backstage" spiel -- quite visibly upset when they never got to play ... even if it was because their team wasn't fast enough and had the unfortunate chance of playing against a dominant family.)

Here, by having four questions and structuring the third so that one team can't reach 300 with just three questions, you at least give the other team at least one more opportunity to get in on a question. Not perfect, of course -- there's still the chance that a dominant family will blitz through and sweep to a four-question rout. But at least you give more opportunity for everyone to at least get in on at least one question.

And then, how do you fill the time that would have been spent on the Triple Round question? More snark from Steve?

Brian

Offline someguy23475

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1839
Re: Family Feud question.
« Reply #20 on: July 29, 2018, 05:27:30 PM »
There was one very early Dawson episode where they had so much time they actually brought out tomorrow’s opponents for a couple minutes! Luckily Dawson got better at stretching.

If Steve is so good, he should be able to stretch a couple minutes.

Offline goldroadfanatic

  • 2/22/2024
  • TPiR Alumnus
  • *
  • Posts: 8367
  • One Dollar!
Re: Family Feud question.
« Reply #21 on: July 29, 2018, 10:34:48 PM »
There was one very early Dawson episode where they had so much time they actually brought out tomorrow’s opponents for a couple minutes! Luckily Dawson got better at stretching.

From what I've seen in the early episodes, when the goal was $200, there was a lot of extra time in the show for Richard to interact with the contestants, and bringing in the following episode's challenging family was a way to use time. I don't know when they dropped this practice, but definitely before the goal was increased to $300.
"Cherish the past, accept the present, and anticipate the future.  They are listening to feedback wherever feasible, but they can't repeat the past."

Offline blozier2006

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 2020
Re: Family Feud question.
« Reply #22 on: July 29, 2018, 11:30:45 PM »
And I believe that's why they increased the goal to $300, to get rid of that extra time (same thing with the $400 goal). Something about Dawson using free time to basically get on his soap box, other staff members not liking it, thus the tinkering with the format to not allow Dawson so much talk time.