Spotted last night on a Gamesnet. Early indications are that the only difference is that the colour scheme is a little brighter and more garish, although it's not quite as bad as the Every Loser Wins II colour scheme. Other than that it seemed to play the same as the ItBox version but if last night was anything to go by it has not only been installed in 'non-pay' mode, it has been installed in the recent 'non-pay' mode, i.e. the one where the JP is circa 13,000 points. I may be wrong on this but the happy state of the other main games on the same box suggested I hadn't just been unlucky enough to get there soon after someone else had taken the free cash.
If I'm right I'd expect it to disappear off the front screen of the Gamesnets in record time as there's not a single punter out there that will be able to win even £1 and so it will soon be ignored.
Hell's Bells II
-
Istenem
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5918
- Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 2:42 pm
- Location: the nation's capital
- Contact:
well, if it is going to last, it will need punters to put their money through it. q.e.d.
it's the same with any game with lastability. e.g. bullseye survives because it is "all things to all men". imo a good game needs a hook.
for every pound you win, there are six people who have lost their 50p. for every tenner you get, 60 games have been lost by proles.
it's the same with any game with lastability. e.g. bullseye survives because it is "all things to all men". imo a good game needs a hook.
for every pound you win, there are six people who have lost their 50p. for every tenner you get, 60 games have been lost by proles.
nobody ever wins on those things.
-
donttellhimpike
- Member
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:14 pm
- Location: london
I've seen a couple more and they were in 'non-death' mode (I like that phrase!) but they were certainly hard, with the first £1 up about 2000-2400 points and my original concern is still the same, namely that the default setting is too hard to encourage any play from ordinary punters.
There is at least one other cosmetic change, apart from the new colour scheme, namely that the mountain background (which helps you work out how long your shots are before they land) has been removed.
There is at least one other cosmetic change, apart from the new colour scheme, namely that the mountain background (which helps you work out how long your shots are before they land) has been removed.
-
QuizMaster
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1254
- Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:40 pm
That assumes you have had the practice to consistently hit an average of 200 points per shot, which even with practice isn't exactly a given. For most punters this would be more like 15 questions.
I guess I'm basing my concern on the fact that I never see punters playing Hell's Bells, and indeed saw very little play on Caveman Capers. Obviously Bullseye, DOND and Monopoly have the benefit of familiarity but I would have thought the basic concept of these games would be more popular for punters and can only think that the fact that they find it very hard to win what for them is the magic £1 is enough to put them off.
I guess I'm basing my concern on the fact that I never see punters playing Hell's Bells, and indeed saw very little play on Caveman Capers. Obviously Bullseye, DOND and Monopoly have the benefit of familiarity but I would have thought the basic concept of these games would be more popular for punters and can only think that the fact that they find it very hard to win what for them is the magic £1 is enough to put them off.
I agree that Hell's Bells never got any punter play, but would beg to differ on Caveman Capers, where scoreboards are usually full up with punter scores. As Hell's Bells is certainly the easier game, this is somewhat odd, but is, I suspect, connected to the fact that ItBox never really put Hell's Bells in a good position (was it back screen from the off?) and also with the fact that unfortunately each machine was pre-loaded with a JP or near-JP prize which better players soon snaffled up.
I'd agree with QM that a 2k-ish starting target on HB seems pretty fair to me - I think getting 200+ on HB is materially easier than it is on Caveman Capers (although I'd like to re-check that with the absence of the mountainous background on HB2), although whether this will be enough to attract punters I doubt. What was the position from the £6 prize onwards? Was it pre- or post-chip i.e. did the distance between prizes become insuperably large after £6?
I'd agree with QM that a 2k-ish starting target on HB seems pretty fair to me - I think getting 200+ on HB is materially easier than it is on Caveman Capers (although I'd like to re-check that with the absence of the mountainous background on HB2), although whether this will be enough to attract punters I doubt. What was the position from the £6 prize onwards? Was it pre- or post-chip i.e. did the distance between prizes become insuperably large after £6?
Mr Picky says...
I've made the same point on here before but the scoreboard on these games is no real indication of anything - the fact that someone got a one-off shot of say 206.5 on Caveman or 215 on Hell's Bells doesn't tell you anything about whether they also took any money out of the game. Contrast this with Fantasy Football Quiz where the top end of the scoreboard can be a very good indication of how much money has been taken out of that game, particularly if a certain Peruvian-themed moniker appears.
There is also the added complication on Hell's Bells at least that there are in fact THREE scoreboards - called something like Daily Devils, Weekly Wallopers and All-Time Armageddonists - and you have to check each time which one your score is being added to.
Mr Non-Picky says that the answer to your more important question is that the game is definitely post-chip, i.e. the gaps after £6 are huge each time.
I've made the same point on here before but the scoreboard on these games is no real indication of anything - the fact that someone got a one-off shot of say 206.5 on Caveman or 215 on Hell's Bells doesn't tell you anything about whether they also took any money out of the game. Contrast this with Fantasy Football Quiz where the top end of the scoreboard can be a very good indication of how much money has been taken out of that game, particularly if a certain Peruvian-themed moniker appears.
There is also the added complication on Hell's Bells at least that there are in fact THREE scoreboards - called something like Daily Devils, Weekly Wallopers and All-Time Armageddonists - and you have to check each time which one your score is being added to.
Mr Non-Picky says that the answer to your more important question is that the game is definitely post-chip, i.e. the gaps after £6 are huge each time.
-
QuizMaster
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1254
- Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 12:40 pm
The scoreboards are indeed an irrelevance as to whether any money has been taken out of the game, but I pay scant attention to them anyway. They are for the proles.
Hell's Bells is miles easier to hit 200+ on as long as you wait for the right wind conditions, so in my view, it is 10 questions to the money, and about 20-25 questions to the £5. If you can't knock a £5 out of this in that setting, play something else. 2 try agains and a pass/reveal? Miles better than most games, for punters and pros alike.
QM
Hell's Bells is miles easier to hit 200+ on as long as you wait for the right wind conditions, so in my view, it is 10 questions to the money, and about 20-25 questions to the £5. If you can't knock a £5 out of this in that setting, play something else. 2 try agains and a pass/reveal? Miles better than most games, for punters and pros alike.
QM
Stupid punters. Telly all the week, screw the wife Saturday
I never made any point about the scoreboards being of importance in themselves (other than the point I made on the other thread about getting a top score on Capers, which was jocular as opposed to a serious point). Bells was (pre-chipping) an easier game than Capers for the following reasons:
(a) As initially issued, the questions were easier than those on Capers, although I think they chipped the HB question set a little since. That said, a virgin 54 with Bells has easier questions than a virgin Capers.
(b) Bells allows one to carry on a bonus pass or answer to the next game if unused, which allows 'hoarding' of bonuses between games (an important point).
(c) It is generally a fair bit easier to get two bonuses per game on Bells than Capers.
(d) It is a lot easier to score 200+ on Bells. This is relevant because it means you're progressing along the grid about a third quicker (assuming an average of 150 on Capers) than you would do on Capers.
However, I should have made clear from the off that all of the above are trumped, post-chipping of Bells, by the fact that getting more than £6 on Bells has been made so difficult, whereas this is not the case on a virgin Capers, which never got chipped.
(a) As initially issued, the questions were easier than those on Capers, although I think they chipped the HB question set a little since. That said, a virgin 54 with Bells has easier questions than a virgin Capers.
(b) Bells allows one to carry on a bonus pass or answer to the next game if unused, which allows 'hoarding' of bonuses between games (an important point).
(c) It is generally a fair bit easier to get two bonuses per game on Bells than Capers.
(d) It is a lot easier to score 200+ on Bells. This is relevant because it means you're progressing along the grid about a third quicker (assuming an average of 150 on Capers) than you would do on Capers.
However, I should have made clear from the off that all of the above are trumped, post-chipping of Bells, by the fact that getting more than £6 on Bells has been made so difficult, whereas this is not the case on a virgin Capers, which never got chipped.
Sorry, having typed that screed, I now realise why I confused you. I didn't mean to say that the scoreboard on Bells / Capers tells you anything about money taken out of the game (unless you see the initials of a known good player on it of course!). But I think it does give an indicator of money taken in - a scoreboard of nine or ten different names suggests to me at least that a game is being played by a number of different players. Too often on Bells the scoreboards I've seen have been me and two or three other players, indicating it's getting precious little punter play.