Dear Richard Osman
A couple of more thoughts about Pointless: As I've said before elsewhere,I think Pointless is a welcome addition to the quiz machine world.It seems popular,and any game that encourages people to put their money in and have a go can't be bad.However,I do wonder if it really qualifies as a game of skill - is it anything more than 'we've assigned some numbers randomly,try and guess what they are'? I could of course be doing the game designers an injustice and they've really asked 100 people for each category.If so,then what an amazing group of people they picked - their knowledge is so wide-ranging! (Although bizarrely selective,23 of them were able to name some random cosmonaut but no-one remembered Oasis recorded 'Whatever'.)
My second point is as follows (though I may have changed my opinion as I'll explain later): I was wandering round some Paragons today and I only saw one jackpot over £4,and sadly that was the machine I couldn't get on.The average jackpot I would say was around the £2 mark.I've said something like this before,but I don't think that's enough to encourage people to play,especially if it's next to a £100 bandit.What I'd like to see them do is not let the jackpot go all the way down to £0.50 and perhaps make it harder to win by having less pointless answers in the end game and/or updating the categories and assigned values regularly.
I've held that opinion a while,but I started to see a different point of view today.I had imagined that the low jackpots were mainly due to pro players,but I am starting to think that it's simply Joe Public playing it whatever the jackpot is and winning with a frequency that's enough to stop largeish jackpots (apart from the odd machine).And there's enough money going in to keep the games company happy if not the pro player.
So,in that case,why have a guaranteed jackpot of £5? No wonder the version with that prize structure is being removed from Games nets.I hope they do put a tweaked version back on though,that would be better than nothing.
My second point is as follows (though I may have changed my opinion as I'll explain later): I was wandering round some Paragons today and I only saw one jackpot over £4,and sadly that was the machine I couldn't get on.The average jackpot I would say was around the £2 mark.I've said something like this before,but I don't think that's enough to encourage people to play,especially if it's next to a £100 bandit.What I'd like to see them do is not let the jackpot go all the way down to £0.50 and perhaps make it harder to win by having less pointless answers in the end game and/or updating the categories and assigned values regularly.
I've held that opinion a while,but I started to see a different point of view today.I had imagined that the low jackpots were mainly due to pro players,but I am starting to think that it's simply Joe Public playing it whatever the jackpot is and winning with a frequency that's enough to stop largeish jackpots (apart from the odd machine).And there's enough money going in to keep the games company happy if not the pro player.
So,in that case,why have a guaranteed jackpot of £5? No wonder the version with that prize structure is being removed from Games nets.I hope they do put a tweaked version back on though,that would be better than nothing.
This game was always destined for failure. Sad though, cos Muddle is correct - the punters love it. Last night I saw someone on a Paragon playing it - JP was on £4.60.I went off to another pub, came back an hour later and he was still there! JP now on £6.20 and he had a full pint next to him lol. Went back this morning and he's obviously won eventually. God knows how long it took him.
Anyway, maybe if Gamesnet had just corrected their initial mistake immediately it could have lasted but they didn't and a few people made hay. They must have had an inkling it could have gone that way by the way they put up such a tiny JP. It was good while it lasted though. Now those big egg-shaped motherf**kers are back to being unplayable unless you count 'winning' £2 as a result. Serves them right. They do still have a Wordplay game there which isn't my bag but maybe some pros can still do ok on that, otherwise they're just a waste of time.
Anyway, maybe if Gamesnet had just corrected their initial mistake immediately it could have lasted but they didn't and a few people made hay. They must have had an inkling it could have gone that way by the way they put up such a tiny JP. It was good while it lasted though. Now those big egg-shaped motherf**kers are back to being unplayable unless you count 'winning' £2 as a result. Serves them right. They do still have a Wordplay game there which isn't my bag but maybe some pros can still do ok on that, otherwise they're just a waste of time.
Blimey paragoon,that's spooky,I had a similar experience that day too.Bloke playing pointless,jackpot on £4.60,went to another pub and then returned and he had a full pint and was still playing! I had the feeling that he was going to play until he won so didn't hang around.
To reply to cool,I am often muddled in my thinking and can ramble on,but to put my point succinctly: A game where at least £5 was available every play and that was popular with the punters has been removed.That's got to be a bad thing.
Given how popular it is with the punters though surely it will return to Games net in the other format.
To reply to cool,I am often muddled in my thinking and can ramble on,but to put my point succinctly: A game where at least £5 was available every play and that was popular with the punters has been removed.That's got to be a bad thing.
Given how popular it is with the punters though surely it will return to Games net in the other format.
Do you mean £1 a play to play? (a decent idea with a decent JP - like Colour OF MOney maybe?) Or 50p to play for a £1 JP? (no thanks!) Either way it's all over. Pointless was the dead cat bounce that finished the whole idea imo.cool wrote:Pointless one pound a play good value for money compared to fruit machines and many of the current shite quiz games.
-
David Healy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:14 pm
No one answered me back then, so I am going to claim a new record of £14.70. Any advances on that?David Healy wrote: One question - do we know what the maximum prize is? I saw one on a paragon at £11+ today (first time i have seen over £10) which went back to £5 once won. Is it like Eggheads (i.e. top prize of £20.10)? What is the highest seen?.
-
Topical2009
- Senior Member
- Posts: 130
- Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 8:39 pm
- Location: Oxford
-
tonkarentino
- Senior Member
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 9:19 pm
Can't beat that but had my first over £10 JP (£12.50) the other day. That was the only one I've seen showing more than £10. Is it possible that some are just set higher (at least to start with) when the games are updated? This £12.50 was on recently updated paragon...David Healy wrote:No one answered me back then, so I am going to claim a new record of £14.70. Any advances on that?
On a random wander around yesterday I found an old quiz machine with the likes of secret letter and a few other older games on there. Eggheads was there with a pot of £20.10 and I came within a single question of winning it on my first 50p! It sounded like a familiar amount when it failed to increase for the next few failed attempts, knew I'd seen it somewhere. Oh, and it's still maxed out now, doh!David Healy wrote:Is it like Eggheads (i.e. top prize of £20.10)? What is the highest seen?
Oh good, another Reflex.
-
David Healy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:14 pm
-
Lilly Satou
- Senior Member
- Posts: 111
- Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:59 am
- Location: 大和市、神奈川、日本
Seen these reset to 50p before. Back when I used to play them earlier I never realised I could click on RULES and it would show the pot. Had a 70p win there (which IOU'd the quid because I won it on 1st credit)
Worst was the one in Ilford where it would go up as usual but then if you went back to the menu, even if you hadn't won, it would reset. It was a Gamesnet and there was probably something wrong with it, not an evil chip. Worst shoelace tie ever. Current record is 10.10, which was shared with a mate.
Worst was the one in Ilford where it would go up as usual but then if you went back to the menu, even if you hadn't won, it would reset. It was a Gamesnet and there was probably something wrong with it, not an evil chip. Worst shoelace tie ever. Current record is 10.10, which was shared with a mate.
My, my!