On today's show, we again had the scenario where the contestant guessed the correct price on the first try for the first four items, leading to a default $25,000. Although it was a cool moment (albeit some of the oomph was taken out because Drew didn't recognized that that could be the final action right away), I felt less excited than if $20k was won on Time is Money or Hot Seat, or $16k on It's In The Bag.
Maybe it's because it's rare for those games to be won very quickly after one another? It took 40 playings for the full $20,000 to be won twice on Time is Money, and 20 playings for Hot Seat. But to counter that, I remember being more shocked when Bag started out this season going 2-0, and a bailout away from 3-0 for the $16k.
Maybe I'm not enjoying this game as much because the game is complicated to grasp, yet in reality, is very forgiving? Reading through the recap thread of TTP's premiere, most of the praise was because of its strategic nature. The only other games that had a lesser level of "strategy" were Barker's Markers, and maybe holding the Ace in the earlier playings of Card Game?
Although the optionality of actions makes it an interesting game from the player's perspective, in my head, there just aren't stakes until the contestant is down to 0 or 1 pennies, and when it gets to that point, the contestant is most likely going to bail out. If the show is going to continue to make the first item a freebie, I don't see how the contestant realistically bails out before spending at least one penny on the $6,000 value either.
Maybe the fact the game is generous isn't a problem. However, compared to other cash games in the same vein, Seat averages about $5,341 given away every playing (adjusting the two Big Money playings to the standard ladder), Time averages $5,226, and Bag averages $3,045 (again, adjusting the one time it was bailed out during BMW to the standard ladder). With the current rules, I don't see how TTP's average drops below $6k. Heck, I can only see one path to losing (the contestant makes it to the $12,000 level with two or pennies left, spends them both (or one and a wrong guess) to eliminate choices, and then whiffs on the 50-50.)
Currently, I feel it's a game that is to complicated to get attached to, but in reality, gives too much avenue for major money to be given away.
I remember when we were speculating how the game was going to be played from various press releases, user gamesurf suggested that maybe the game is played like Duel, where you cover up all the choices you think could be correct. If you don't cover the right choice, the game is over, but if you do, you lose any pennies that are covering wrong choices. I feel that would fix the game for me - the threat of one misstep causing an instant loss makes more sense to the audience, and it still allows for the strategy of playing perfectly the first four GPs instead of getting lucky in a 50-50 guess. I personally would want TTP's rules to be changed to that.
Am I crazy though? Maybe it should be just as easy as Back to '72, and I'm just a scrooge? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.
