Deal or No Deal (U.S. and all international versions)

[Krom]

I figure that game shows count as kind of "proto-Reality shows", and I couldn't find a topic with yon serach engine, so I've created a topic.

The Aussie version was a huge "Who Wants to be a Millionaire" level hit. The U.K. version apparently is red hot right now. It's popped up in about 30 other countries in the past year or two, and yet the whole damn think is about opening suitcases. Discuss!

We could also talk about Howie Mandel and his OCD, or the fact that ton o' spokesmodels on the U.S. version look like an ad for FHM/Maxim/Stuff combined (for example, Bonnie-Jill Laflin).

[Icedout456]

It looks Good However I don't get the concept.

[Krom]

It looks Good However I don't get the concept.

Let's just say... it's a bit lame. The novelty is how much tension they can summon. The actual game? It depends on game theory and not much else. Plus hot models.

There's no knowledge necessary, no skill, and even the "guts" aspect is less about guts than pure luck. The show tempts them, but the power of the temptation ultimately is more about what they THINK still exists in the cases than real probability a smart person could predict.

It's worth watching in the short run... but after 1 week? Probably not.

The fact that this is popular with international audiences makes me mainly think that most of the world is filled with idiots. But I want to watch it for the train-wreck aspect and to see if its a real cultural touchstone or just hot air. I suppose there's also the human-nature aspect, but that ties into the game theory. And we can cheer for the hot models! Like Bonnie-Jill! I love her!

[Krom]

Wow. 15 minutes into the show and Howie FINALLY told a joke! "Bout time, glove boy...

[Krom]

The "strategy" here is that the offer the banker dude offers seems to depend on how good (or bad) what remains on the board is. There's some formula. If the big amounts get knocked out, the offers actually can go down and that's the point I guess.

So the "game theory" is the balance of "the sure thing" versus the hope for something better. I suppose a math wiz, if a contestant, might always be able to calculate the odds (some of the odds are simple, but it can get very complicated too--especially the part balancing the reward against the risk). Thrilling in the short run, but I have trouble imagining people watching this for YEARS, as apparently the Aussies have. It's got to get old.

In some of the other versions, apparently you get to see how they choose people. In this one we seem to only see the aftermath. Not sure if it makes a diference.

[AndythePlaty]

Very good show. I'm not sure I'd get bored with it, but I'm glad I TIVOd and could fast forward through the commercials.

Tonight I said "STOP" when the offer got to 9x,000 and was screaming it at 138,000. It's one thing to turn down 100k when there is a chance for a million but a 1 in 4 chance of 500k doesn't seem worth it.

[bluesboi]

I really enjoyed this show! When that woman was 138,000, I was actually yelling at the TV, "take the money, woman". Howie's "mini van" joke was kinda funny too.

[Krom]

I get that the tension is fun. I get that the models are hot (apparently the U.K. version skips the models originated in the Oz version). I get that there's a real human interest angle in seeing people win or lose. I even get that theoretically you could spend a lot of brain power trying to figure odds deeper than "5 suitcases, 1 good result" (figuring the cost/benefit of accepting a banker bid is a much more complex calculation).

But it's so passive for the viewer. Part of the fun of a game show like "Millionaire" is knowing the answer when the dummy on screen doesn't. This loses that--it's like "Joker's Wild" where all you are doing is watching someone pull a lever, except in this case the lever is a suitcase.

There's a mind-game going on, sure, but a lot of it is random and a lot depends on the host really hamming things up (and I don't think Mandel is doing a great job of that--at least yet).

Game theory is basically like watching people arguing a divorce settlement. You know what I'm talking about... two sides with opposing goals who offer bluffs and incentives to the other side to get them to weaken and yield. The problem is that THIS show's excercise in game theory is very repetitive. If this was "Let's Make a Deal" instead of "Deal or No Deal" at least there'd be some variety in the temptations and the offers.

[Qboots]

But it's so passive for the viewer.

Yup. Too passive for this viewer. I'll never be able to reclaim the hour I wasted on this show last night, but I'll be damned if I waste any more time on it.

Qboots out.

[CCL]

It's worth watching in the short run... but after 1 week? Probably not.

I agree with this. I already find the banker calling a bit annoying, and that's after one night. But for a few episodes it should be fine. It is interesting to see people try to figure out if they should go for it or not and trying to determine what would be my own stopping point. I think anything over 100 grand would have me yelling stop, unless there was a lot of little numbers left or whatever.
As for the models, do you think someone's speaking to Howie via an earpiece, reminding him who the models are? Because there is an awful lot of them!