55

[nw6]

Hmmn, I might be being naive here, but a lot of IT Boxes around my area tend to be behind on the times when updating. I am guessing games are updated my a phone line, shouldn't they all be updated throughout the country?

In some pubs they are not permanently plugged into phone lines.

Anyway this new issue sucks. I'll have to find something more useful to do with my time.

[Properpro]

There is one new game of real interest here, but will it still be there come Issue 56?


Money goes in, too much might come out.

[grecian]

For the second time this year I've been on my hols when an ItBox update has arrived, and wasn't able to find the time to play this when away. I'll have to take a look Monday but if QM and Properpro are saying there's something worthwhile on there, that sounds very promising.

[Nil Satis]

I haven't spotted the Christmas cracker yet (any clues gratefully received! ) but did get to play a few of the new games and for two of them at least I'm afraid I'll have to go into full Scrooge McDuck mode:

Millionaire - "Celebrity Edition 2008"

This sucks more than a brand new Dyson. From the best mainstream game anywhere to this fiasco in just two years. The main changes are:

(i) you get one 'shot' at the Bonuses (i.e. unlike on the 2006 version you can't win one or two for getting some of the answers in order). If you do get the four answers in the right order you can then choose three from a set of four Bonuses, the new one being 'Switch' i.e. Pass. As an aside, given how closely linked this game is to the TV show, I wonder if they will introduce this new lifeline onto there?

(ii) there is a bias towards celebrity-based questions

(iii) some of the questions are based on a photo

All of these in themselves are fine, until you get to ...

(iv) you don't actually win the prize you achieve until you play a final game, which is something very tricky like putting four celebrities in date of birth order (and you don't get Charlie Chaplin, Marilyn Monroe, Brad Pitt and Lindsay Lohan ).

All in all it's a complete waste of time, and very very sad.

The Great Pretender

Another one based on a Chris Tarrant TV show (spot the link?) and I would be amazed if this one lasts into Issue 56, on the front screen at least. It's very dull, very tricky and (like that Mike Read Pop Quiz abomination) offers no feedback to the player in terms of which questions out of two sets of six you got right.


After The Grid is there some sort of new rule that says all new games based on TV shows have to be dross?

[nw6]

I haven't spotted the Christmas cracker yet (any clues gratefully received!

Well it's not "That's Entertainment" that's for sure.

I guess it's that Frog Frenzy thing

[rogerthymes]

It's very dull, very tricky and (like that Mike Read Pop Quiz abomination) offers no feedback to the player in terms of which questions out of two sets of six you got right.

I can't stand that! Who the hell wants to do a quiz where you can't foind out whether you get the answer rght or not?!! Utter stupidity.

[ggdr]

Have you changed your opinion on That's Entertainment then DMac? Earlier on in this thread you suggested it was worth a look. I did have a good run on it, but still dislike the way you can seemingly play all day for no reward.

[grecian]

Finally managed to have a play on an ItBox 55, although having to work late limited it to thirty minutes or so. At risk of annoying Cool, I'd have to agree with QM and aver that there is at least one payer in there. I'd say though that in terms of playability and chance of being a long-term payer, the payer doesn't have *much* potential. It compares poorly to TIOLI, for example, in terms of playability / intellectual challenge.

Without naming names, there's also some absolute dross in there, which is a shame after 54 produced (almost without exception) a crop of really playable stuff. To conclude though, ItBox has vastly improved over the last couple of releases, and it has really turned things around after a very dodgy patch around the middle of this year. ItBox is pre-eminently the cabinet to concentrate on at the moment and it's good for all of us and Joe Public alike that that's the case, given its sheer prevalence in the chain pubs.

[nw6]

Have you changed your opinion on That's Entertainment then DMac? Earlier on in this thread you suggested it was worth a look. I did have a good run on it, but still dislike the way you can seemingly play all day for no reward.

It's my/our sort of game so it's worth a look, but it's hard work. It'll be interesting to see how it settles down. 9 lives guarantees a decent run for your quid if nothing else.

[Nixxy]

Millionaire - "Celebrity Edition 2008"

This sucks more than a brand new Dyson. From the best mainstream game anywhere to this fiasco in just two years. The main changes are:

(i) you get one 'shot' at the Bonuses (i.e. unlike on the 2006 version you can't win one or two for getting some of the answers in order). If you do get the four answers in the right order you can then choose three from a set of four Bonuses, the new one being 'Switch' i.e. Pass. As an aside, given how closely linked this game is to the TV show, I wonder if they will introduce this new lifeline onto there?

Sorry to drag this back up - but I noticed when in America recently that on the TV version, they have 4 lifelines: The usual three, plus 'Swap The Question'.

They only get given the 'Swap The Question' bonus if they get to the £32,000 mark (or $50,000 I think it is in Yankeeland), so it's clearly something they've nabbed from across the pond to put into this latest release. If you offered me the chance to take that bonus instead of the rather useless 'Phone a Friend' bonus (you either know the answer or you don't!), I reckon I'd take it.

[grecian]

Sorry to drag this back up - but I noticed when in America recently that on the TV version, they have 4 lifelines: The usual three, plus 'Swap The Question'.

They only get given the 'Swap The Question' bonus if they get to the £32,000 mark (or $50,000 I think it is in Yankeeland), so it's clearly something they've nabbed from across the pond to put into this latest release. If you offered me the chance to take that bonus instead of the rather useless 'Phone a Friend' bonus (you either know the answer or you don't!), I reckon I'd take it.

I may be wrong, as I haven't seen the UK version recently, but has this been introduced in the UK as well? I know they've tinkered with the WWTBAM format in a number of ways lately; is this one?

I'd also make the point that the PAF bonus is more useful on the current and previous versions of WWTBAM than it was on original classic WWTBAM as it now involves 'phoning a computer generated friend who might or might not give you the correct answer.

Personally I continue to take the classic three lifelines on new WWTBAM (when I play it, which isn't often) of PAF, Ask The Audience and 50:50.

[Istenem]

i think the zlebs get to use CTQ but it costs them another lifeline.

if any of you have been on the show, do you agree with me that the ATA lifeline smells distinctly like fish?

you'd hope that a busload of grannies from the asylum would know about soaps but affairs of state (?)

but i've also not watched it deliberately for many years.

[grecian]

do you agree with me that the ATA lifeline smells distinctly like fish?

you'd hope that a busload of grannies from the asylum would know about soaps but affairs of state (?)

I think ATA probably has its use; it's for getting the answer to lowbrow early-doors questions which a decent quiz player might not necessarily know, but which Joe Public might very well do. The classic example is indeed soap operas: there seems to be virtually one such question every single game of WWTBAM and the audience is pretty useful on that kind of thing. Additionally I think that taking the ATA can mean being able to exploit the so-called "wisdom of crowds" phenomenon whereby a crowd of people are able to give a correct answer to a hard question that not many of them might know individually by some kind of mysterious osmotic process.

To my mind the 50-50 is least useful. So often one can narrow down an answer to being "one of two" in one's own mind; the 50-50 is usually judged carefully to leave those two plausible options and therefore adds nothing to what one already suspected anyway.

[Hexpert]

Playing WWTBAM the other day, I came to a question where I thought it was B or C. Took 50-50 and, lo and behold, it left B and C!

Then did PAF, they thought B and were 40% sure???

Being logical, I took this to mean they were therefore 60% sure about C and plumped for C. Game Over

Can only assume that the 40% was based on all 4 original answers???

[Mattb]

Not necessarily. You can be say 40% sure its something, then the other 60% could relate to anything else anywhere, not the other answer you were left with. Still a bit sneaky though!