Alright, some final words on Weakest Link US for now. We’ve already written quite a lot about the theory.
Pros:
- Jane Lynch is good.
- The set’s quite nice.
- Paul Farrer’s updated music is grand.
- I like having the questions on the screen.
- I like that there are picture questions.
- They didn’t “do” immunity. Phew.
- I see what they did with adding the top money from the previous round to the chain for the next round.
Cons:
- The quizzing needs to be speedier. If Anne Robinson was able to get through 25-27 questions in three minutes, you should be doing more than 16 in 2:30.
- The final vote is silly silly silly. The point of having the final round worth more money is to create the incentive to keep strong players on to build the bank, now there is… no incentive. I know they did this on the George Gray one as well, but at least it had the mitigating circumstance of having to wrap up in 22 minutes.
- But this is irrelevant, because Weakest Link where the top prize of a round is $500,000 is absolutely insane. There is no possible route to a chain that doesn’t feel stupid – either your early stages are worth so much you’ll rake it in banking after each question, or worth so little compared to the top prize nobody wins anything because you need to get more right than people probably will to be worth anything. Consider the rule of four, if they did a round like that in the UK, the fourth rung on the ladder would be £100,000, from a £10,000 start. For answering a question!
I think they could absolutely afford to be a bit more generous in the early rounds if they’re going to be a bit less generous in the later rounds. The first two, maybe four rounds should absolutely be played to the Rule of Four (with the reminder that in all versions of UK Link (except the Comic Relief special), by accident or design four questions = 20% of the target), multiples of:
$500 – $1,000 – $2,500 – $5,000 – $7,500 – $12,500 – $17,500 – $25,000
If they must play stupid money than I can accept a slower chain with more interesting gambling opportunities, although I’m still not sure how much I love it:
$5,000 – $10,000 – $25,000 – $50,000 – $100,000 – $200,000 – $350,000 – $500000
We know with the Rule of Four, and on a set chain with a double or triple round at the end, and with a 3:00 starting time, players usually won between 20-30% of the top prize – whatever it might be. With this extremely top heavy game, you’ll probably end up giving away a little bit more (but unlikely to be several hundred thousand dollars more, certainly closer to $100k than $300k) and have a more satisfied, happier audience. Most of the game will still be played on the lower rungs (because as we’ve previously suggested, basic probability suggests getting a large chain is extremely unlikely), at least the decisions are more interesting there.