Author Topic: Itís Time for Pricing Game Retirements  (Read 3777 times)

Flerbert419, tpirfan28 and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline rowlande

  • In Contestant's Row
  • ***
  • Posts: 105
Re: Itís Time for Pricing Game Retirements
« Reply #45 on: January 23, 2023, 09:31:26 PM »
Back in the day when there was a brief commercial break after the first pricing game it was common for center stage games to be played second. But now that is no longer the case. It's been years since many center stage games was played second.

Offline StacksOfCash

  • Outside in Line
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Itís Time for Pricing Game Retirements
« Reply #46 on: January 23, 2023, 10:04:58 PM »
I never understood the dislike for Back to 7x.

The products shown vary widely from the products shown in cliffhangers with price ranges going from $0 - $350, compared to cliff's products which range from roughly $0 - $70; and even then you rarely see products going over $50. I think the highest price I've ever seen was that lady who guessed $61 on Tableware on step 24 and ended up winning with the ARP being $62. interestingly enough, contestants seem to fare really well in BT7x even with the large range in prices resulting in a high win rate. I'd watch this over the predictable $20-30-40 wins in Cliff. Also as a disclaimer, I don't think Cliff should be retired because of this fact.

The theming of the game is also great since most people were born at a time where knobs on TVs weren't being made anymore. Stuff like this is what give the game its charm similar to grocery game's 1970s themed cash register - I hope that never changes. I think games like Check Out lost some of its charm when they removed the model manually dialing in the prices for each grocery item - as redundant as it may be.

At the very least, if they do end up retiring this game, the functionality for that TV and knob could easily be repurposed for Magic #.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2023, 10:13:00 PM by StacksOfCash »

Offline SeaBreeze341

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1542
  • Everyone knows the damn thing's not there!
Re: Itís Time for Pricing Game Retirements
« Reply #47 on: January 23, 2023, 10:32:25 PM »
The show is never retiring Cliff Hangers.  So there no cause for concern in terms of that.

That being said, I think you and I are the only ones that don't hate Back to 19-whatever.  I thought the concept was unique upon its debut.  It's decent from the classic cues to the concept of figuring out prices from back in the day.  However, it's a little more than okay for me.  I would not put it in my Top 10.  Sure the ranges varies more than Cliff, but really, and IMO, I think of Rat Race in terms of the ranges.  Despite the expansive range, it's been rather common that the first price is in the 0-50 range, with the second one a little higher followed by 200+ for the third.  So it's not too much of a big deal
"Times change; people change" -- Casey Affleck

Offline LFAT since diapers

  • Outside in Line
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Itís Time for Pricing Game Retirements
« Reply #48 on: January 24, 2023, 07:35:42 PM »
Back in the day when there was a brief commercial break after the first pricing game it was common for center stage games to be played second. But now that is no longer the case. It's been years since many center stage games was played second.

Since the show is heavily edited for time/staging, there's no stopping them (at least the annoying lack of a break in that spot shouldn't matter.)

Offline LFAT since diapers

  • Outside in Line
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Itís Time for Pricing Game Retirements
« Reply #49 on: January 24, 2023, 07:38:25 PM »
The show is never retiring Cliff Hangers.  So there no cause for concern in terms of that.

That being said, I think you and I are the only ones that don't hate Back to 19-whatever.  I thought the concept was unique upon its debut.  It's decent from the classic cues to the concept of figuring out prices from back in the day.  However, it's a little more than okay for me.  I would not put it in my Top 10.  Sure the ranges varies more than Cliff, but really, and IMO, I think of Rat Race in terms of the ranges.  Despite the expansive range, it's been rather common that the first price is in the 0-50 range, with the second one a little higher followed by 200+ for the third.  So it's not too much of a big deal

I love back to '7X. George reading Johnny's copy, the scaled-down model of the old set and the disco beat take me to my happy place.

Offline bonkers77

  • Walking the Golden Road
  • ****
  • Posts: 255
Re: Itís Time for Pricing Game Retirements
« Reply #50 on: Today at 04:43:28 AM »
Itís Time for Pricing Game Retirements:

HOT SEAT
To the Penny
Back to '73
Vend-O-Price
GRIDLOCK!
LINE em UP
DOUBLE CROSS

Online brosa0

  • Double Showcase Winner
  • ******
  • Posts: 1041
  • The answer is meat
Re: Itís Time for Pricing Game Retirements
« Reply #51 on: Today at 07:44:55 AM »
I wouldn't like to see any games retired at all, and in fact would prefer to see 7-8 retired games reinvented and brought back in addition.  Certainly, there are some games I'm not overly fond of, but I still don't mind seeing those games as part of a large rotation. 

I also believe every single game serves a purpose on the show, and the ones that have problems (i.e. all the retired games, plus current games that are too long, too hard etc) could all be fixed if the show's staff really wanted to fix them.  For example, the issue with Magic # having too wide a gap between the prices can be resolved by using the same solution Clock Game adopted years ago by offering two sub-$1000 prizes, then a larger 'bonus' prize.   The staging can be resolved by literally having a screen with the magic number between the two prizes (like Do The Math), so that it's more intuitive that the number needs to be between the two prizes.   To The Penny has an issue with its rules and money tree but that could be solved pretty quickly if they wanted to.   Hot Seat could be shortened by revealing the first two correct prices at the same time (given that a contestant has only ever once got less than two prices correct, and no one has ever bailed after the first price was revealed), and only starting the bail out decisions from the 3rd item onwards (i.e. only offer 2500/5000/10000/20000). 

The only reason I could understand for game retirements is storage space, but even then the show could consolidate some of the game props if really needed.  As a last resort, some games could share a monitor and just have different 'cover plates' that are quick and easy to clip on and off - similar to the early shows where several games shared Any Number's prop, just with different covers - to still make the games look distinct.  I'm thinking games like Take Two, Double Cross, the Rat Race monitor, Bonus Game, Pathfinder price display, even others like Money Game etc.  It also brings to mind Roger's comments on the storage space and that he'd much rather get rid of background set pieces before getting rid of games  for storage reasons given they are the core of the show.

I can appreciate Chelsea's argument for a wholesale cull of the games for a leaner rotation.  Coming from Australian TPIR where we had far fewer games at any one time, I love the extra variety of games in the American series.   It makes for an interesting exercise though and I could probably cull 15-20 games pretty easily as it's something I've often thought about with Australian TPIR - that is, what would be the best choice of 30 games for a half hour show (or 60 for full hour) if you were starting fresh, ensuring all the bases are still covered (fee games, car games, some quick games etc).   Some of the early classic games - Grocery Game, Range Game, Hi Lo, Clock Game, Temptation, Bonus Game - wouldn't make my list due to their rules and/or similarity to other, better games.
« Last Edit: Today at 07:48:16 AM by brosa0 »