WWTBAM Bored

So I watched this last night.

Quite frankly, I can't see how this will catch on...I can see it only as being entertaining for people who like trivia.

It takes far too long to get to any payoff, making the tension when you have two wrongs too artificial (you haven't really won anything unless you answer question 25, so who really cares?)

And to have to answer 500 questions in order to get the big payoff? No one's going to wait that long to see it happen.

Just MHO.

I didn't feel for either of the two contestants last night- I just enjoyed trying to answer the questions.

I felt really ripped off when I watched this show. I mean, the title is supposedly 500 Questions... but they got through only about 38 questions on the first night of what is supposed to be a seven-night event. Unless there are some unannounced speed rounds along the way, this show will probably ask only about 280 questions before it's over... and that's assuming it runs the entire seven nights and doesn't get the Rich List treatment.

Hell, Jeopardy! goes through at least 50 questions in a half-hour... but that's because that show doesn't have so many ungodly commercial breaks and unnecessary host spiels to build up the suspense.

I saw an interview with the host- he said something where they averaged 40 questions a night.

That's 280 questions...so pretty much that guaranteed nobody got the whole way through.

I have simple rules I use for predictors of how game shows will do. Successful ones will have

1) A simple premise

2) Good game play pace

3) A reasonable chance of some kind of a payoff per episode

4) The "big payoff" should be difficult but not impossible to attain.

This show violates all four of these.

Not to mention we may see 4-5 contestants the 7 nights- if we're lucky.

And if we see more that's because no one is winning any money.

If we're lucky?

Pastor Fireball wrote:but that's because that show doesn't have so many ungodly commercial breaks and unnecessary host spiels to build up the suspense.

And this is the thing- the false attempts to build up tension make the pace of game play even worse- and the tension is false because there's nothing real at risk because the possibility of any kind of payoff is so very low.

I love the CNN dude as host though- I've always liked him- he'd probably make an excellent game show host given the right vehicle.

Jeemie wrote:I saw an interview with the host- he said something where they averaged 40 questions a night.

That's 280 questions...so pretty much that guaranteed nobody got the whole way through.

?

Tonight's 200 questions runs two hours, as per Comcast on screen guide, so that's at least eight one hour episodes. It was originally scheduled to run nine nights but was later lowered to seven nights, so there could be another night where it is two hours.

I dunno. I rather enjoyed the whole show. Have to juggle Rockets and it tonight.

Beebs52 wrote:I dunno. I rather enjoyed the whole show. Have to juggle Rockets and it tonight.

I think trivia nuts will like it.

I doubt the average viewer will stick around for the whole thing.

Even the hub got into it. It was refreshing to not have to hear more than necessary about major backstories, yada yada. You may be right, tho, even if I'm not as big a trivia nut as I was.

I haven't see it yet. I TiVo everything. I was with my granddaughter Brittany last night.

There are two episodes tonight and last night's repeats on Saturday.

Beebs52 wrote:Even the hub got into it. It was refreshing to not have to hear more than necessary about major backstories, yada yada. You may be right, tho, even if I'm not as big a trivia nut as I was.

Oh I liked it too, even though I could never be a contestant on it. 10 seconds is too quick for my slow recall to handle.

And to try and know every act that was at the original Woodstock? Yowzers.

Or trying to recall quickly who were the last 8 presidents that were also state governors (I know a lot of Presidential trivia but in a battle round with a five second limit? No way would I be able to do that).

I know I'm not a typical network viewer, though.

Exactly. Even with the free association allowed I'd be standing there probably drooling.

Pastor Fireball wrote:I felt really ripped off when I watched this show. I mean, the title is supposedly 500 Questions... but they got through only about 38 questions on the first night of what is supposed to be a seven-night event.

I felt the same way about Windows 98. I never could get 98 windows open -- it'd crash after about the fifteenth.

Jeemie wrote:So I watched this last night.

Quite frankly, I can't see how this will catch on...I can see it only as being entertaining for people who like trivia.

It takes far too long to get to any payoff, making the tension when you have two wrongs too artificial (you haven't really won anything unless you answer question 25, so who really cares?)

And to have to answer 500 questions in order to get the big payoff? No one's going to wait that long to see it happen.

Just MHO.

I didn't feel for either of the two contestants last night- I just enjoyed trying to answer the questions.

What "big payoff" are you talking about? Maybe I missed it, but I never heard anyone say that there is a big payoff if someone answers 500 questions. As far as I can tell, the contestant just continues to earn $1000 per question correctly answered on the first attempt - if and only if he can clear the full board of 50 questions, and then move on to another board of 50 more questions. It is clear that no one will answer 500 questions during this 7 day event, but if someone hypothetically did that, as far as I can tell, that just means that they retire undefeated and walk away with a maximum of $500K, earned $1K at a time for each question correctly answered. So yeah, the stakes are very low, and so far after the first episode, no one has actually won anything yet.

I'd like to see them do something a little more rapid fire with the questions. Instead of 10sec per question, how about 60sec for 10 questions. Special questions pause the clock. If we can get the number of questions per hour up to 60 or 70, I'd be happy.

I actually like that they're not championing a grand prize. That has been, in my experience, a common complaint about recent game shows. They tout a grand prize that is virtually unattainable. 500 Questions isn't falling into that trap.

TheConfessor wrote:So yeah, the stakes are very low, and so far after the first episode, no one has actually won anything yet.

The current player has won $5,000 for answering question 25. That is money he cannot lose.

zachhoran1 wrote:

Jeemie wrote:I saw an interview with the host- he said something where they averaged 40 questions a night.

That's 280 questions...so pretty much that guaranteed nobody got the whole way through.

?

Tonight's 200 questions runs two hours, as per Comcast on screen guide, so that's at least eight one hour episodes. It was originally scheduled to run nine nights but was later lowered to seven nights, so there could be another night where it is two hours.

Per thefutoncritic, the finale is also a double-length episode:

5/28/15 (Th.) 8:00 PM ABC (#107-120) Episode 107
5/27/15 (We.) 8:00 PM ABC (#106) Episode 106
5/26/15 (Tu.) 8:00 PM ABC (#105) Episode 105
5/25/15 (Mo.) 8:00 PM ABC (#104) Episode 104
5/22/15 (Fr.) 8:00 PM ABC (#103) Episode 103
5/21/15 (Th.) 8:00 PM ABC (#102-120) Episode 102
5/20/15 (We.) 8:00 PM ABC (#101) Episode 101

Jeemie wrote:

Beebs52 wrote:I dunno. I rather enjoyed the whole show. Have to juggle Rockets and it tonight.

I think trivia nuts will like it.

I doubt the average viewer will stick around for the whole thing.

At least this is confirmation that I am not a trivia nut.

Because I thought that this was a worse show that Are You Smarter than a 5th Grader.

At least that show doesn't allow a contestant to just randomly guess as many times as possible within 10 seconds in order to get an answer right. (3 wrong in a row and you're out, my foot!)

There are so many things wrong with the show. The "on deck" contestant schtick is silly and wastes time since it only really is needed a few times per 50 questions, yet they waste much more time talkin gto that person during game play.

I must say it is wearing on me, too. The removal of wrongs is a bit capricious, too.

I'm not really watching but Mrs. Jaybee has been and it's within earshot. Maybe I've just picked the 'right' moments to take a peek but I've seen an awful lot of MAWGS in blue shirts.

Megan Rafferty Barnes who won 3 J! games a few years ago was on the tail end of tonight's show and

Spoiler

She'll be back on MOnday to see if the person answering 106 questions so far can get three in a row wrong

Appa23 wrote: At least that show doesn't allow a contestant to just randomly guess as many times as possible within 10 seconds in order to get an answer right. (3 wrong in a row and you're out, my foot!)

What's wrong with that? All games must have rules of play, and this seems like an interesting twist that we haven't seen before. Why does WWTBAM have multiple choice? Why does baseball allow a batter to have three strikes? Why does football allow a team four chances to get a first down? These are all just rules of the game. No difference with 500Q. I can think of lots of more legitimate complaints, especially how the rules are totally biased to favor the incumbent over the challenger. People bitched about Million Second Quiz, but at least it had a level playing field in each head to head match.

zachhoran1 wrote:Megan Rafferty Barnes who won 3 J! games a few years ago was on the tail end of tonight's show and

Spoiler

She'll be back on MOnday to see if the person answering 106 questions so far can get three in a row wrong

How'd she do on WWtBaM? How'd she do on WoF?

I just watched it. (Missed it last night-didn't know it had already started).

My review:

Questions-some are easy and some are difficult. Trivia nuts like me would love it. I knew Malala, Dr. Mudd, Linda Ronstadt, and the three bones in the ear.

I will be watching on Monday to see if Ogi can knock Dan out. The preview they showed had Rafferbee in it-that should be fun watching present and past BBs on TV.

Kazoo65 wrote:I just watched it. (Missed it last night-didn't know it had already started).

My review:

Questions-some are easy and some are difficult. Trivia nuts like me would love it. I knew Malala, Dr. Mudd, Linda Ronstadt, and the three bones in the ear.

I will be watching on Monday to see if Ogi can knock Dan out. The preview they showed had Rafferbee in it-that should be fun watching present and past BBs on TV.

It started on Wednesday. Tonight's was a re-run of Episode 1. They are scheduled to re-run Episode 3 (from Friday) on Sunday. Monday's will be new again.

Estonut wrote:

Kazoo65 wrote:I just watched it. (Missed it last night-didn't know it had already started).

My review:

Questions-some are easy and some are difficult. Trivia nuts like me would love it. I knew Malala, Dr. Mudd, Linda Ronstadt, and the three bones in the ear.

I will be watching on Monday to see if Ogi can knock Dan out. The preview they showed had Rafferbee in it-that should be fun watching present and past BBs on TV.

It started on Wednesday. Tonight's was a re-run of Episode 1. They are scheduled to re-run Episode 3 (from Friday) on Sunday. Monday's will be new again.

That'll save me a couple of hours. --Bob

TheConfessor wrote:I can think of lots of more legitimate complaints, especially how the rules are totally biased to favor the incumbent over the challenger.

This doesn't bother me, because (except for the first player and the successor to anyone who manages to answer all 500 questions) every incumbent starts out as a challenger. --Bob