New Price Is Right Game- "Pay The Rent"

[retroTVfan4ever]

What do folks think of this new game? It seems misleading to me, in this particular case the player could not have won $100,000 no matter what she did. Looks to me like this game will need a little tweaking. I like the Rat Race game better.

[retroTVfan4ever]

I just re-watched the first playing of the Pay The Rent game on the Price Is Right website. The girl actually played the game perfectly, and the highest priced product was on top but it wasn't "expensive enough". They do give the player the option to stop and take the money they've won at a certain point, but any game where the contestant plays it perfect and can still lose is a poor game in my opinion. Misleading game, they make the player think he or she can win $100,000 but the game can still potentially be lost even if played perfectly. Bad game, it needs some tweaking or it should be discontinued.

[howilu]

I saw the first playing of "Pay the Rent" and to me it looks like a game that will be played infrequently or short-lived because it takes too long to play, depending on how far the contestant goes.

[AgentZero]

What do folks think of this new game? It seems misleading to me, in this particular case the player could not have won $100,000 no matter what she did. Looks to me like this game will need a little tweaking. I like the Rat Race game better.
Actually, the game could have been won. The contestant would have needed to do this (instead of the usual logic of low to high pricing):
Mailbox: Shampoo [$5.99] $5.99 total
Level 1: Cinnamon [$2.98] & Pizza [$3.49] $6.47 total
Level 2: Corn [$1.49] & Cleaner [$5.49] $6.98 total
Top level: Cat food [$7.30] $7.30 total

So, this would obviously be difficult to plan out when playing in front of a crowd, on television, for $100k. You know you need to place the most expensive item at the top since it won't be combined with another item. But the idea of placing the cheapest item at the 3rd level [$10k] is a little counterintuitive to what one expects from a TPIR game. The margin between each level is pretty small, so the contestant would really need to think about what each item costs, and which to pair [or not to pair when considering the first item]. I guess that not too many will be winning the grand prize in this game; probably the most mentally demanding game on the show IMO.

UPDATE: This guy explains it with diagrams! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaMEv4W2ZCU

[retroTVfan4ever]

OK, that explains it then. It makes sense that this would be a difficult game, they obviously want to make it challenging to win the $100,000 top prize. Folks who know their prices really well might have a shot to win this.

First thing to do is decide what the 5th highest priced product is, and place it in the mailbox.
Then decide what the 2nd and 3rd highest priced products are, and place them on the 1st level.
Then decide what the lowest and 4th highest priced products are, and place them on the 2nd level.
The remaining product should then be the highest priced one, it is placed on the top level.

This strategy may or may not work out every time, but that is the logic used in the example on you tube. Interesting, but I still like the Rat Race game better.

[BillCullen1]

Pay The Rent is a game that requires people to think, so it probably won't be won too often. The producers might want it that way. It's difficult to concentrate and think when the lights and cameras are on and 300 people are shouting out things. Also, the IQ of the average TPIR isn't too high, judging from the past few years.

[retroTVfan4ever]

In today's Pay The Rent game, if the player would have had the 2.89 item in the mailbox, and the .29 item on the 2nd level, she would have won the 100 grand.

Mailbox- 2.89
1st level- 1.49 + 1.69= 3.18
2nd level- .29 + 3.29= 3.58
Attic- 4.19

She had the .29 item in the mailbox and the 2.89 item on the 2nd level. That was the mistake, those two needed to be reversed.