1 vs. 100 - NBC Game Show - Page 2

JasonK · #11 10-21-2006, 12:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Tuq,

Please stop creating these impressions in the minds of your readers.

Taking exception, and damn is my mirror filthy,

T. d A. y C.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop posting Jim Carrey pics.

RxCowBell · #12 10-21-2006, 12:16 PM

As some people have said, just like Deal or No Deal, there is almost zero chance that anybody will ever make it to the $1 million prize (unless they just bring in 100 cheerleaders and bodybuilders apparently). The genius of Millionaire was that it was entirely possible to see someone beat the game.

astroglide · #13 10-21-2006, 01:03 PM

i've seen a bit of 2 eps. i think the show sucks.

everybody runs it up to about 150-200k and quits.

the early questions blow.

the contestants are stupid enough to get excited when 40 people miss an answer when the prize is only $500 or whatever, when they should want them to go out on higher payouts.

the mob has to give their honest answers on a question, but can completely mislead on why they selected it.

the gaps are too long between questions, and there isn't a whole lot of tension.

it only seems like each contestant has 1 difficult choice to make.

sagat is pretty boring as a host, and tips it when he knows the contestant's answer was right/wrong.

i like deal or no deal way, way better.

DonkeyKongSr · #14 10-21-2006, 01:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
i like deal or no deal way, way better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was totally understanding each of your points before this one. Does anyone actually like that show? That is a game show that almost completely lacks the "game" part. It's about luckboxing your way to the biggest payout possible. Booooooring.

Oh, and like Deal or No Deal and just about every game show, this show is made for a DVR.

jstnrgrs · #15 10-21-2006, 01:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i like deal or no deal way, way better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was totally understanding each of your points before this one. Does anyone actually like that show? That is a game show that almost completely lacks the "game" part. It's about luckboxing your way to the biggest payout possible. Booooooring.

Oh, and like Deal or No Deal and just about every game show, this show is made for a DVR.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like deal or no deal because there is no "correct" answer. (the only real decision in the game is deal or no deal, and the mathematically correct answer is always no deal. However, since the game is played in the world, that is not what people choose).It sucks though because there is to much manufactured tension, and I find that boring. I rarely watch it.

You know what I think might be inteasting is deal or no deal with two players. They would play against each other with one being the banker and deciding what deals to offer.

recipro · #16 10-21-2006, 01:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I like deal or no deal because there is no "correct" answer. (the only real decision in the game is deal or no deal, and the mathematically correct answer is always no deal.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not really true. When you get down to four or fewer cases, often the correct answer is deal. For example, with 2 cases left, $1M and $100, they offered (or would have) $550k. I believe the deals get +EV around 4 cases left, a lot of the time.

snagglepuss · #17 10-21-2006, 02:02 PM

this is a terrible game show for retarded people, and i think retarded people will even subconsciously realize it is awful after a few episodes.

and haha at the jackass who was asked the roulette question.
"i know number 1 is red because odd numbers are red and even numbers are black. im 99% sure!". yes buddy, that is why there is a black/red bet and an odd/even bet.

this show sucks. it should be 4x as fast. the questions should be harder. they shouldn't be multiple choice. and the pay-levels should be prorated based on question # and people left so that there are logical money increases.

there should also be a "money-saver" type thing that can be used once, where even if you busto, you still win, say 50% of your prize money that you had at the time you used your saver.

Evan · #18 10-21-2006, 02:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I like deal or no deal because there is no "correct" answer. (the only real decision in the game is deal or no deal, and the mathematically correct answer is always no deal. However, since the game is played in the world, that is not what people choose)

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm going to file this post under "W" for WTF!

snagglepuss · #19 10-21-2006, 02:59 PM

evan,

obviously he meant "since the game is played in the real world" where not everyone has an unlimited bankroll and there is differing monetary utility for people. it is always +EV to no deal, but because of that people have to deal. what is so hard to understand?

Shillx · #20 10-21-2006, 03:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like deal or no deal because there is no "correct" answer. (the only real decision in the game is deal or no deal, and the mathematically correct answer is always no deal.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not really true. When you get down to four or fewer cases, often the correct answer is deal. For example, with 2 cases left, $1M and $100, they offered (or would have) $550k. I believe the deals get +EV around 4 cases left, a lot of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah this is why the game is dumb. Let's see cases of 1k/1m and a deal of say 200k or whatever. It would make for much better TV as they won't automatically take the deal and will gamble it up.