|
|
Post by millionaireloveruk on Sept 25, 2016 11:30:59 GMT -5
Hi guys, I was thinking the other day about the games we currently have here at Millionaire Fans, and I feel that they're lacking a little. The RPG section is probably our most popular section of the site, and Daily Millionaire is also very popular. However, my sole problem with these is that they have run in exactly the same formats for a long time. There have been 60 RPG's and over 360 pages worth of Daily Millionaire now, but there never seems to be any real change in the way they are run. I know the format of each RPG tends to be different from the last, but there're only so many formats you can go through before you start repeating yourself. This list is made even shorter due to the fact that no one ever seems to have an RPG in the Shuffle format, which, although seems to be most people's least favourite, does shake things up a bit. Daily Millionaire is much the same, except there is never any variation in the rules or format, except the amount the question is worth, and occasionally the time you get to answer it. I did try to add a lifeline once, but it didn't exactly work very well... My question to everyone is, does anyone else feel the same way about the site games? Don't get me wrong, I love both of them, but I just think a third game to run alongside them, or an overhaul of the system(s) would be good for attracting new players into those sections, as it is becoming more and more common for the same players to participate in every single RPG. That isn't a problem, but might not necessarily be the best impression on any potential new players. I think a new game, or an overhaul of the current ones would encourage more people to join in and play, which in turn may well the discussion parts of the site a bit more active than they are at the moment. We consistently see 30 or 40 members logging in everyday, yet so few of them actually post anything. Some changes in our most popular section could see our community become much more active again. And yes, I know about the Creativity RPG's, but I'm referring to Millionaire games here, since this is a Millionaire Fan Site after all. Thanks for your time, and I hope to see some of your comments about what, if anything, we can, could, or should do about this. MLUK  |
|
|
|
Post by Gagamillionaire on Sept 25, 2016 13:34:58 GMT -5
I do feel the same way, yes. Daily Millionaire in particular could use an overhaul. Maybe wiping the slate clean and introducing a tighter format would help there. We could introduce theme weeks or months, where all the topics have to be from the same category, or having only a monthly leaderboard, with the leader winning a title they can select in their setting under the "Display group" option ("Monthly Millionaire" or something). As for the RPGs, the Hotseat format hasn't been tried yet, as far as I know. I guess that would be an organizational headache anyway. Other than that, do you have any suggestions for new formats, millionaireloveruk? I can't really think of anything that wouldn't be too hard to pull off. Ultimately, it's all a question of interest and participation. If the format is intriguing, I would be happy to participate, if my schedule allows it (which is mostly the reason why I haven't joined any RPGs in the past). millionaireloveruk: Can you still add a poll to this thread? That way we could find out who is interested at all and who isn't. |
|
|
|
Post by millionaireloveruk on Sept 25, 2016 13:41:29 GMT -5
Gagamillionaire, I've added a poll so that people can give their opinions that way as well, that was a good idea. In terms of new format ideas, I can think of some ideas I've had in the past that involve a tournament-like structure over 3 months or so. I'm on my phone at the moment, but I think I still have some ideas saved to my computer, if I can find them tomorrow I'll post them here.
|
|
|
|
Post by FinalAnswer19 on Sept 25, 2016 17:10:43 GMT -5
It would be worlds more helpful to us if, when you vote in the poll, you add your thoughts as to what could be added and/or changed, like Gagamillionaire did. Simply voting and saying "this needs to change" or "we need something new" isn't helpful to us. |
|
RegisFan
Administrator 
Game Show Host
Let's Play!
Posts: 4,494
|
Post by RegisFan on Sept 26, 2016 21:52:40 GMT -5
Please also keep these two points in mind:
1) Whatever ideas that you want to pursue have to be simple from an organizational standpoint. I've literally been there from the beginning, and the game projects that have been successful are the ones that are easy to operate and are fluid in the sense that no single person can wreck the experience via lack of participation.
2) Daily Millionaire has always been a member-run game. The staff oversees the RPGs and believe it or not they take a tremendous time investment. For every bit of front-end preparation (such as sign-up threads) there are mountains of PMs, flagged posts, stalled games, cheaters, and disappearing members to deal with on the back end. The result is a consistently high quality game, but I'm not sure that we want to make the same investment for Daily Millionaire. I'm also not sure that anyone actually wants Daily Millionaire to be regulated, as part of its draw is how casual the gameplay is. In fact, I think that any proposed changes could be implemented very effectively from the player level and modified as necessary.
|
|
Tim0n
Fan Games Pass Holder 
$8,888,888 winner on Daily Millionaire | 5th Anniversary €500,000 winner
Posts: 751
|
Post by Tim0n on Sept 27, 2016 12:11:26 GMT -5
Though I've not been involved in Daily Millionaire for a few years now, I do like the idea of adding themes to it. Not sure how easy "X week" would be to execute, but an idea might be to, say, run 4 different theme weeks in December, that way people have some time to prepara in advance?
Another idea is to set up a completely separate game which would work like this:
(1) The host announces the theme of that week, asking a different question everyday for 5 (or 6) days,
(2) The scores are added and the winner of that week is announced on Saturday (or Sunday),
(3) The winner then becomes the new host and chooses the next theme, asking the next 5 (or 6) questions,
(4) The theme and/or the host can only repeat after a number of weeks, probably between 4-6
Whether to do 5 or 6 questions per theme depends on how much time y'all think might be required for the next person to prepare.
|
|
|
|
Post by millionaireloveruk on Sept 27, 2016 13:04:30 GMT -5
Tim0n, I quite like that idea, and I could see it working quite well on the site. Here's an idea I recently thought of: To start with, there has to be 4 members who are designated hosts, who cannot play the actual game itself. The game begins with 2 weeks of 'Seeding' questions. This would involve the hosts asking anywhere rom 10-14 questions. (1 a day) Each question will be worth a different amount of points, and any member who gets it right will earn those points. At the end of the seeding weeks, the group of people who have played more than 2 questions will be split into 4 'ranked' groups. Anyone who has played less than 3 questions will be disqualified. After this seeding process is complete, and the groups have been sorted, the main gameplay begins. Every day for the next 8 weeks a different host asks a question that everyone who is seeded may answer via PM. After 24/48 hours, the host reveals the answer, and anyone who was right will win the points, at a value which is pre-determined at of an 8 day cycle, which also determines the hosting for that week. Lifelines will be available at a cost to the contestants, and only one each for the whole eight weeks. After the 8 weeks are complete, the winning members from each group plus the two highest losers go into the final, where they will play a series of Millionaire RPG's at the same time. The winner of these will be the Season Champion. ----- Extremely long winded, I know. An organisation nightmare, I know. But if there are just 4 or 5 dedicated members who wants to run the game, it may work. What does everyone think?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2016 13:32:20 GMT -5
Tim0n , I quite like that idea, and I could see it working quite well on the site. Here's an idea I recently thought of: To start with, there has to be 4 members who are designated hosts, who cannot play the actual game itself. The game begins with 2 weeks of 'Seeding' questions. This would involve the hosts asking anywhere rom 10-14 questions. (1 a day) Each question will be worth a different amount of points, and any member who gets it right will earn those points. At the end of the seeding weeks, the group of people who have played more than 2 questions will be split into 4 'ranked' groups. Anyone who has played less than 3 questions will be disqualified. After this seeding process is complete, and the groups have been sorted, the main gameplay begins. Every day for the next 8 weeks a different host asks a question that everyone who is seeded may answer via PM. After 24/48 hours, the host reveals the answer, and anyone who was right will win the points, at a value which is pre-determined at of an 8 day cycle, which also determines the hosting for that week. Lifelines will be available at a cost to the contestants, and only one each for the whole eight weeks. After the 8 weeks are complete, the winning members from each group plus the two highest losers go into the final, where they will play a series of Millionaire RPG's at the same time. The winner of these will be the Season Champion. ----- Extremely long winded, I know. An organisation nightmare, I know. But if there are just 4 or 5 dedicated members who wants to run the game, it may work. What does everyone think? I personally think that your idea is not bad but might be too difficult to set up in my opinion. Plus, I think that a simpler and easier game to set up, and as fun as the RPGs and Daily Millionaire, could be as good as your idea. |
|
|
|
Post by millionaireloveruk on Sept 27, 2016 14:08:38 GMT -5
I'd like to point out my idea was a very rough draft, open to any and all improvement people may have.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gagamillionaire on Sept 27, 2016 17:19:43 GMT -5
We need to keep in mind that any new idea should improve on the existing system(s). Any modification of the rules should make the game more fun or more exciting. At the same time, we shouldn't move too far away from Millionaire. No disrespect, but adding a whole elimination system like you suggested, millionaireloveruk , doesn't make the game itself more interesting for me. As we know from previous RPGs, once the game drags on for too long, it gets stale and people lose interest. I myself had an idea for a new format. It's a bit like Hotseat, only cooperative: Instead of one contestant playing the game, there are three (or more) contestants who have to cooperate to go all the way to the million. The host will provide the categories for all the fifteen questions beforehand. It's still just one person answering each question, but after a question is solved, the current contestant has to pick one of the other two for the next question, based only on the category and their knowledge of each other. The other contestants may not give any indication about which categories they like or not for the entirety of the game. All three contestans have to answer the same amount of questions (meaning 5 per person in a 15-question format). Only the contestant "in the middle" may openly deliberate the current question, decide on lifelines, give a final answer, or walk away. Obviously, there are several new lifelines that could be added to this Cooperation Format: Switch the Contestant, where the active player can put one of the passive players in the hotseat, when they thing they're the wrong person for the question Contestant Veto, where one of the passive players can veto the active player's final answer and instead select another answer (unlike Double Dip, only the the answer given by the vetoing contestant will count) Three Wise Men, where all three contestants can debate the question, or as an alternative, Ask a Friend, where only one of the passive players can be chosen. The "standard" lifelines can of course be added to these as desired. As usual, each lifeline can only be used once in the game, and all three contestants share the lifelines. There are several advantages to this format: it is adaptable to any existing format of Millionaire (except Hotseat), and adds a new dimension to the game. It's no longer only about what you know, it's also about who you know. It's a way to get to know each other a little better (I imagine the contestants introducing themselves before the start of the game, and say a little about their strengths and weaknesses). Of course, there are several issues, too. Firstly, we need three contestants for a single game, as opposed to one now. As the new rules allow new lifelines, the role of Lifeline Generator could be eliminated (Phone a friend can be replaced by Three Wise Men or Ask a Friend, and Ask the Audience could be scrapped. I realize the sacrilege I am commiting with this, but ATA isn't a great RPG lifeline anyway.). This, and just having one game per RPG instead of two, would not increase the number of participants. The waiting periods could increase, as there has to be a seperate contestant selection phase between every question. This problem can be reduced if the players assign themselves to all the questions at the beginning of the game. Alternatively, we could also introduce a Fastest Finger First round to determine who gets to choose their 5 questions first, who's second and who's third.). The whole thing kind of falls apart, too, if one of the contestants goes AWOL all of a sudden, but I suppose the rules could be adapted on the spot to accommodate this. I think this format could work. It introduces a community aspect, which fits the venue, but doesn't alter the core of the game. Also, most of the issues I can think of with it can be remedied. The only big flaw of the format is, I think, that there aren't enough people participating in RPGs right know to keep it fresh. If it were always the same three people playing, it'd get old really quickly. What do you guys think? Would you at all be interested in giving this format a try? Are there any other flaws I have overlooked? Do you have suggestions for improvement? I'd love to hear some of your opinions. As concerns Daily Millionaire, I like Tim0n 's idea to have one person ask all the questions for a week, and the highest scorer of the week to become the next host, but I'm afraid it requires too much commitment. That might scare people away. I would prefer to keep the current system of "whoever answered the last question correctly in the fastest time gets to ask the next," with the first person to ask a question that week choosing the question theme, or perhaps even a temporary rule change (e.g. building on millionaireloveruk's idea, PM Week, where all answers have to be sent to the host via PM to avoid cheating). I still think the leaderboard should be wiped clean at the end of every month (or at the end of every fourth or fifth week), to give enough time for the leaderboard to develop, without dragging it out for too long (Just look at the current leaderboard. It's full of members who don't play DM anymore - myself included.) |
|
|
|
Post by JCEurovision on Sept 27, 2016 18:00:16 GMT -5
We need to keep in mind that any new idea should improve on the existing system(s). Any modification of the rules should make the game more fun or more exciting. At the same time, we shouldn't move too far away from Millionaire. No disrespect, but adding a whole elimination system like you suggested, millionaireloveruk , doesn't make the game itself more interesting for me. As we know from previous RPGs, once the game drags on for too long, it gets stale and people lose interest. I myself had an idea for a new format. It's a bit like Hotseat, only cooperative: Instead of one contestant playing the game, there are three (or more) contestants who have to cooperate to go all the way to the million. The host will provide the categories for all the fifteen questions beforehand. It's still just one person answering each question, but after a question is solved, the current contestant has to pick one of the other two for the next question, based only on the category and their knowledge of each other. The other contestants may not give any indication about which categories they like or not for the entirety of the game. All three contestans have to answer the same amount of questions (meaning 5 per person in a 15-question format). Only the contestant "in the middle" may openly deliberate the current question, decide on lifelines, give a final answer, or walk away. Obviously, there are several new lifelines that could be added to this Cooperation Format: Switch the Contestant, where the active player can put one of the passive players in the hotseat, when they thing they're the wrong person for the question Contestant Veto, where one of the passive players can veto the active player's final answer and instead select another answer (unlike Double Dip, only the the answer given by the vetoing contestant will count) Three Wise Men, where all three contestants can debate the question, or as an alternative, Ask a Friend, where only one of the passive players can be chosen. The "standard" lifelines can of course be added to these as desired. As usual, each lifeline can only be used once in the game, and all three contestants share the lifelines. There are several advantages to this format: it is adaptable to any existing format of Millionaire (except Hotseat), and adds a new dimension to the game. It's no longer only about what you know, it's also about who you know. It's a way to get to know each other a little better (I imagine the contestants introducing themselves before the start of the game, and say a little about their strengths and weaknesses). Of course, there are several issues, too. Firstly, we need three contestants for a single game, as opposed to one now. As the new rules allow new lifelines, the role of Lifeline Generator could be eliminated (Phone a friend can be replaced by Three Wise Men or Ask a Friend, and Ask the Audience could be scrapped. I realize the sacrilege I am commiting with this, but ATA isn't a great RPG lifeline anyway.). This, and just having one game per RPG instead of two, would not increase the number of participants. The waiting periods could increase, as there has to be a seperate contestant selection phase between every question. This problem can be reduced if the players assign themselves to all the questions at the beginning of the game. Alternatively, we could also introduce a Fastest Finger First round to determine who gets to choose their 5 questions first, who's second and who's third.). The whole thing kind of falls apart, too, if one of the contestants goes AWOL all of a sudden, but I suppose the rules could be adapted on the spot to accommodate this. I think this format could work. It introduces a community aspect, which fits the venue, but doesn't alter the core of the game. Also, most of the issues I can think of with it can be remedied. The only big flaw of the format is, I think, that there aren't enough people participating in RPGs right know to keep it fresh. If it were always the same three people playing, it'd get old really quickly. What do you guys think? Would you at all be interested in giving this format a try? Are there any other flaws I have overlooked? Do you have suggestions for improvement? I'd love to hear some of your opinions. As concerns Daily Millionaire, I like Tim0n 's idea to have one person ask all the questions for a week, and the highest scorer of the week to become the next host, but I'm afraid it requires too much commitment. That might scare people away. I would prefer to keep the current system of "whoever answered the last question correctly in the fastest time gets to ask the next," with the first person to ask a question that week choosing the question theme, or perhaps even a temporary rule change (e.g. building on millionaireloveruk 's idea, PM Week, where all answers have to be sent to the host via PM to avoid cheating). I still think the leaderboard should be wiped clean at the end of every month (or at the end of every fourth or fifth week), to give enough time for the leaderboard to develop, without dragging it out for too long (Just look at the current leaderboard. It's full of members who don't play DM anymore - myself included.) I do agree on him, but it is better to keep Daily Millionaire just as it is. |
|
|
|
Post by millionaireloveruk on Sept 28, 2016 1:03:26 GMT -5
Would you like to elaborate on that extremely short point, JCEurovision? The pool I created is overwhelmingly saying that Daily Millionaire SHOULD be changed. Why do you think we should keep it? |
|
|
|
Post by MainitNaSilya on Sept 28, 2016 2:07:33 GMT -5
I think Daily Millionaire should have a little tweaking at least in how the answers of every player participating should be given out.
I like the idea of PM'ing the answer of every participating contestant to the Daily Millionaire "host" instead of publicly putting it here for some reasons like:
1. It avoids premature giving out of the correct answer before the host gives it.
2. It avoids giving out hints to players, especially to the late ones who will just rely on the "answer with the most explanation" or "majority answer" of those who have answered already before them. Especially by the fact that I'm seeing a lot of members answering the DM questions and they say, "I'll go with the majority and say..." or "I'll go with ... because it has the most sensible explanation" which spoils the fun and that's one reason why I'm very much utterly discouraged to participate in Daily Millionaire
3. Provided that they will not cheat, by resorting to looking up into references, by PM'ing the answer, they will really be encouraged to put on their thinking cap and do logical reasoning because they are not seeing any opponent's answers and do thinking of their own, like in the actual show.
The only thing that should be put into public display should be the ranking of the players and the question to be asked and the correct answer at the discretion of the assigned host.
I really like the idea of the "Themed Weeks" and the cooperation format is a bit intriguing for me despite seeing the disadvantages of it as well (like what was said, disappearing contestants and the like problems). If there are members who would be willing to participate and do a sort of a "pilot episode" to help us see if the format works for the community. If my schedule allows me and if that "pilot episode" is to be materialised, I'll be willing to participate and also I'm encouraging other members to think of improvements too if you can have.
|
|
|
|
Post by JCEurovision on Sept 28, 2016 3:56:01 GMT -5
Would you like to elaborate on that extremely short point, JCEurovision ? The pool I created is overwhelmingly saying that Daily Millionaire SHOULD be changed. Why do you think we should keep it? Oh? Then how come it is overwhelmingly voted when it has 10 votes against 8 votes and 2 votes? Also, if Daily Millionaire be changed, then all of the winnings will revert back to 0, because any reset or realteration shall result in all of the winnings reverting back to 0. I don't think Daily Millionaire be changed so that all players kept their winnings. If it changed to a new format, then we will start all over again. |
|
|
|
Post by Gagamillionaire on Sept 28, 2016 8:24:13 GMT -5
Would you like to elaborate on that extremely short point, JCEurovision ? The pool I created is overwhelmingly saying that Daily Millionaire SHOULD be changed. Why do you think we should keep it? Oh? Then how come it is overwhelmingly voted when it has 10 votes against 8 votes and 2 votes? Also, if Daily Millionaire be changed, then all of the winnings will revert back to 0, because any reset or realteration shall result in all of the winnings reverting back to 0. I don't think Daily Millionaire be changed so that all players kept their winnings. If it changed to a new format, then we will start all over again. It's 10 against 2. 8 people are voting for a new game to be introduced, so that doesn't say much about whether they want to keep Daily Millionaire or not. If anything, it says that they're not happy with it as it is. I don't see resetting the leaderboard as a bad thing. At least 80% of the people on it don't play DM anymore. I myself haven't played it regularly in two years, and nobody even got close to beating me. And it's the same for millionairefan28, whose last participation was three and a half years ago. I'm not saying this to toot my own horn, but to showcase how unrepresentative the leaderboards have become. Which brings me to my second point: For a while, we had our own little market crash on DM. People started giving away several millions of dollars for one question. Those who were active then, including yours truly, won buckets of cash. The Daily Millionaire Dollar has since regained its fictional value, and big payouts are much rarer now, but the Inflationaires are still high up on the board. I find it much fairer if the scores were reverted to zero on a regular basis (except GSK's $292, which shall outlive us all). JCEurovision: If you want to keep updating the old scoreboards, there's nothing stopping you. I always found it a bit of a pain. |
|
) I guess the next on will be Poland then...
