It’s Time for Pricing Game Retirements

[Chelsea]

With your retool, how would someone playing that game know what to do (in other words, what would you have the player doing if they no longer had to have their check total and the price of the prize to add up to between two numbers in a range [this is how I'm reading you here])?

Clarification: Not fixed from game to game.  One playing might be $13000-$14000, another $7500-$8000, etc.

Same rules, just different target.

[b_masters8]

Clarification: Not fixed from game to game.  One playing might be $13000-$14000, another $7500-$8000, etc.

Same rules, just different target.

Oh, so basically, the range can change based on the kind of prize being played for, I take it.

[Briguy]

I understand that “every game is somebody’s favorite”, but there was an all time high in Season 50 where there were 79 pricing games in the active rotation. There are still only 1,140 pricing game slots each season, so a higher number of games means less playings for all and the continued pressure towards reducing run time means the shorter games need to get priority.

I would agree with Magic # and, to an extent, Check Game.

So few people understand the concept of Magic # and its recent setups are to a point where there's literally no challenge anymore. The game worked the best in the 1990s, when the prizes' prices were in the $1,500-$3,000 range, and often there was a spread of as little as $500 to as much as $1,000.

Now, it's just a guessing game, IMO.

Additionally, if the contestants actually thought about the prices of the items shown, there might be more success. Now, it's just a plaything and hear the pretty noises as the number finder goes up and up and up, and then down and down, then up and up and then down and down ... .

(BTW, what was the maximum number the display could show? Could someone – in theory – keep the lever in the "up" position for as long as they wanted and the highest number is an infinite (i.e., possibly tens of thousands) one?)

Check Game, you raise valid points. Fewer people these days still write paper checks, doing all financial transactions either electronically (e.g., automatic withdrawals for regular bills) or with credit/debit cards. It seems more contestants are understanding the concept of the game – write a cash amount which, when added to the ARP of that prize, will add up to between $8,000 and $9,000 – so the comedic aspect that Bob Barker used to go for, that is, do contestants really understand the game as he just explained, is no longer there, not that Drew ever used that kind of comedy in the first place.

[rowlande]

It's not the classic era anymore you really need to get in touch and wake up. The show is more compressed due to time constraints so quickie games like the ones you listed that you would retire are a necessity for the show. The days of Temptation, Ten Chances and Hole in one being played nearly every week are gone. There is a reason why so many quickie games debuted in the 90s increased commercial times. I pray to god someone like you never get in charge of TPIR. You had several games during the classic era being played as much as 40+ times at one point

[rowlande]

Retiring Shopping spree, Swap Meet, Danger Price and Eazy az 123 all at once would be asinine. It's not the 80s anymore television has changed and quickie games are a necessity for the show

[SteveGavazzi]

Retiring Shopping spree, Swap Meet, Danger Price and Eazy az 123 all at once would be asinine. It's not the 80s anymore television has changed and quickie games are a necessity for the show

You don't actually have any idea how often these four games get played, do you?

(Hint:  Not much.)

There is a mature way to have this discussion.  This is not it.  One more jab at Chelsea, and I'm banning you.

[ooboh]

(BTW, what was the maximum number the display could show? Could someone – in theory – keep the lever in the "up" position for as long as they wanted and the highest number is an infinite (i.e., possibly tens of thousands) one?)

I imagine it would have to be $9,999, since the display only holds four digits.

[rowlande]

 Im explaining to her how retiring that many games is a terriable idea. And that it's not a good idea to compare today's era of the show to the classic era

[OneBidTris]

You aren't really articulating the point though. The reason she wants to consolidate these games is so the games that remain are a batch that are strong, memorable, and would make a good rotation.

It's okay to have games that are getting played just about every week if they are rotated well and it can be tough to do that with so many games. We end up with streaks of 1Ps and 2Ps getting played 6 or 7 weeks in a row while others go missing for 3 or 4 weeks.  Not every game has to have a perfect rotation or get paired with as many unique games as possible, but it helps make sure people know what's up.

While I don't agree with all the game selections in that post, I think it's a fascinating thought experiment and I would love to see the show tackle a smaller list of 50-60 games.

They seem like they're doing an okay job with the games, but there's a couple extra games that I think they could retire and not have too many people lament its demise. Plus, there's so many short games already that we can still lose a couple of those and be okay.

Here's what I would want to take out:

1) Card Game

The show has been trying to figure out what to do with this game and that has meant making most of the cars expensive in this game. What this means is that if you don't get an ace, you'll be waiting a while to get to the range. It doesn't feel worth it for the amount of time it takes to play and would help the other car games breathe a little more.

2) Pick-a-Number

It's boring. There's other quick games that fill the niche bettter, and the set is still ugly.

3) Triple Play

I know, it's a big 3, but it's the least interesting one of them. It barely gets played and the game itself is kinda dull. There are other ways to drum up excitement than this and it's not worth it.

4) 1 Wrong Price

Again, other games that the niche better and this one's a little too simple and short for my liking.

5) Hot Seat

It's not my least favorite casher, but it's definitely the one that feels the most derivative and unnecessary. The game takes forever, the format's just a mishmash of other games, and it doesn't really feel like it has its own style. The intro gave it something and the time Drew takes reciting all the dollar amounts they could win could be used towards something better. Plus, we've added so many lately that we can take one out.

Everything has a reason as to what they would pick and how they do it and Chelsea's is very inspired. And you can make the rotations work even with time constraints. There's still plenty of classic era stuff that we still have today, and they don't seem like they're going to change that.

[Mr. Weatherman]

Another potential caveat to a mass reduction of pricing games: freeing up space in storage

I can only imagine how crowded the storage area for PGs is.  It would have to be a near logistical nightmare if not for the well-oiled machine of stagehands and other production staff working behind the scenes to make it all just…work.  Depending on how the production’s lease of their space at TV City is arranged, freeing up space might even translate to some level of cost savings by virtue of no longer having to lease as much of the building.  If that’s not possible, there are number of other ways the space could be utilized — such as for new props and/or to completely revamp some games to have a larger stage presence.  Regardless of ‘how’, more space could only be a positive thing for the production.

I’m on board with the idea, as improbable as it is to happen.  We get some of the wackiest lineups some days for the simple fact the show wants to fit certain games in as many times as they can. A mass exodus of the games that most commonly stink up a lineup in a hurry is fine by me.  Just don’t cut the games that are my favorites.

[SteveGavazzi]

Im explaining to her how retiring that many games is a terriable idea. And that it's not a good idea to compare today's era of the show to the classic era

I feel pretty safe saying that Chelsea has a better idea of how TV works than you do.

[MSTieScott]

I'm just going to point out that in the 51-year history of the show, only three quick games have ever been retired: Bump, Gallery Game, and maybe Shower Game, assuming that counted as a quick car game.

[rowlande]

It will probably happen. But if the games chelsea listed were all retired. It would cause several of the same games being played more than once during the same week. The game needs more quick games now than it did during the early 80s

[SeaBreeze341]

To be realistic, the chances that all 24 games within that list Chelsea posted are slim to none.  Even if it were the case, it's still easy to avoid having a pricing game show up more than once within a single week.  TBH, if it happens, that isn't too much of a big deal when it's rare.  I'll agree that having a number of quick games is important in today's era, but I have to disagree on the concept that we could see the same game or games every single week

[rowlande]

I meant to say that it will probably not happen