Step up

[superballfan]

 I came across an episode of Price with a retired game of Step Up on YouTube and was wondering, would it work in todays game lists and would there be any changes to the format? Be gentle everyone.

[Punchboard91]

I always found the cash ladder confusing in the game - it took me a long time to figure out you received $3,000 for a perfect playing, and not the $1,500 shown at the top. If I were to change something, I would make it $1,500 as the top cash prize, gaining $500 each time.

[Nick]

I always found the cash ladder confusing in the game - it took me a long time to figure out you received $3,000 for a perfect playing, and not the $1,500 shown at the top. If I were to change something, I would make it $1,500 as the top cash prize, gaining $500 each time.

I don't see where that improves things, but where there could have been an improvement was in the explanation of the rules.  I feel Barker should have explained it this way:

"I want you to pick out the least expensive prize first, then the least expensive of the remaining prizes.  As long as the second prize you pick is more expensive than the first, you win both of those prizes and $500.  Then I want you to pick the less expensive of the two remaining prizes.  As long as it's more expensive than your last choice, you will win those three prizes and an additional $1,000.  Then, if you pick the most expensive prize of all last, you will win all four prizes, an additional $1,500, for a total of $3,000.  Now, if you feel that there are no more prizes left you can choose, you can always quit with what you've won."

Simple and actually guides the contestant towards the fact that they are supposed to choose in order from least to most expensive.  Barker only ever seemed to shoehorn this important fact in his explanation at the end having focused only on the progression of choices.  Yes, it should have been obvious that contestants should work from least to most expensive, but anyway...

[Superballer]

Truthfully, it was never really that exciting a game to me.  It's in the Bag, and in recent years Hot Seat, handle the progressive jackpot aspect of Step Up a lot better on their own to me. 

[Josh444]

I think the game would have worked much better if the cash ladder was the only bailout option (not the prizes) and you could only bail with the lit up amount (but could win all the cash at the end if right). Something like this:

Least Expensive Prize
—-BAILOUT 1 ($500)
2nd Least Expensive Prize
—-BAILOUT 2 ($1,000)
2nd Most Expensive Prize
—-BAILOUT 3 ($2,000)
Most Expensive Prize

[Nick]

I think the game would have worked much better if the cash ladder was the only bailout option (not the prizes) and you could only bail with the lit up amount (but could win all the cash at the end if right).

The problem with that is if contestants can bail only with the cash, the game would have almost never given away any prizes and probably would have been killed much sooner as a result.  By my count, the game was only won only ten times out of a total of eighty playings in it's nearly-thirteen-year existence.

The bailout option was redeeming for how difficult the game was insofar as that the setups typically didn't have a great disparity between the prizes' prices (or that they didn't look that different in price, in contrast with, say, Eazy az 1 2 3), and the added cash award was also justified by the difficulty, but again, I say the game was not nearly as difficult as it appeared to be and would probably have produced more winners had contestants been told directly to choose from least to most expensive.

[Mallory16]

I mean, I guess it would technically work, but I can't say I really miss it at all. A different 5-prize game, on the other hand... The game felt kinda' like a confusing mess (Bob always seemed to have trouble with the explanation), took forever to explain as it was, was rarely played even early in its life, and wasn't all that interesting a game to begin with... just didn't feel like it had anything going for it.

[SteveGavazzi]

I mean, I guess it would technically work, but I can't say I really miss it at all. A different 5-prize game, on the other hand... The game felt kinda' like a confusing mess (Bob always seemed to have trouble with the explanation), took forever to explain as it was, was rarely played even early in its life, and wasn't all that interesting a game to begin with... just didn't feel like it had anything going for it.

I never understood why they bothered creating Step Up in the first place.  It wasn't a bad game, but it wasn't something they needed in Season 30, and they never even tried to pretend otherwise.

[actual_retail_tice]

The reason it didn't work in Season 30 is also the reason it wouldn't work now-- with less airtime than ever, a game with 4 prize descriptions, a long explanation, compounded by re-explaining the bailout possibilities after every decision, which in addition is NOT a car game or a fee game, you could barely fit Step Up into a lineup.   

[C8]

I guess I am in a severe minority in that, while it was around, Step Up was one of my more loved games. I liked the ability for Bob to build the suspense and for contestants to have to think about their choices as they got more information.

Then again, Step Up is borderline the same game as Pay the Rent, a game I'm not so fiercely opposed to as many here are (for the same reason: suspense).

I think the points about it taking too long, especially in light of its win to bailout to loss ratio, would indeed make it game-non-grata today. Also, I agree the hosts had too much trouble explaining it, which is a shame, because in my mind it was a simple concept.

[Nick]

Then again, Step Up is borderline the same game as Pay the Rent, a game I'm not so fiercely opposed to as many here are (for the same reason: suspense).

I would think the opposition to Pay the Rent has more to do with its deceptive nature (at least back when they were only setting it up with one combination for the win and the least expensive item never being a correct first pick).  The objective in Step Up was always to choose from least expensive to most expensive, whereas in Pay the Rent that would appear to be the way to play when it was never going to get you the win.

As for suspense, I rarely found Step Up to be suspenseful as most contestants blew the win by the second or third pick.  It was frustrating to watch the game be almost never won simply because the MC never said directly to the contestants, "Choose in order from least expensive to most expensive".

[actual_retail_tice]

I guess I am in a severe minority in that, while it was around, Step Up was one of my more loved.

Not so severe of a minority; I liked Step Up, particularly because of how there were multiple possible outcomes and a pretty large potential prize package. However I am not all surprised that it didn’t last with current time constraints.

[JayC]

I never understood why they bothered creating Step Up in the first place.  It wasn't a bad game, but it wasn't something they needed in Season 30, and they never even tried to pretend otherwise.

My only guess would be it was felt another 4-prize with cash game was needed to replace Fortune Hunter.

[tpirfan28]

The game was alright but a bit kludgy, never mind the fact it can go very obvious way too quickly.

I never understood why they bothered creating Step Up in the first place.  It wasn't a bad game, but it wasn't something they needed in Season 30, and they never even tried to pretend otherwise.

Maybe they were trying to whack Buy or Sell?

[C8]

Maybe they were trying to whack Buy or Sell?

I can't think so. Swap Meet and Shopping Spree already covered the 4 prize game territory if that would be the reason. And mechanically, Buy or Sell is just Give or Keep with larger prizes and a cash bonus; not remotely like Step Up, which was more like akin to a descendent of Trader Bob.