Ask Lemmy

Run the math again. This game should be called "Discounted Actuarial Tables: The Game Show." At any given point, average the remaining amounts on the board, reduce it by ten to twenty percent, and you'll have the "banker's" offer. Like, if the player is down to $200k, $1, and $1000, the offer will probably be something around $55k to $60k.

Over the long term, they get cost certainty and with some insurance they can run it like a casino and budget accordingly. It doesn't have to be rigged, and as someone else has said, American TV game shows are generally considered to be above-board in a "yes/no" sense due to the Quiz Show scandal of the late 1950s. However, this makes the game play for something like Deal or No Deal very, very boring, so they spice it up with fake drama and human interest.

At it's core, it's probably not fake, but for entertainment purposes, they are definitely going to milk any good back stories and get the audience pumped up.

The whole game is a long drawn out version of the Monty Hall problem.

Pick a box and either take a chance that you picked a high value box, or accept the known offer, which is the average of all unopened box values.

In the early days, game shows were sometimes rigged. Then laws were passed in the USA requiring fair play. So, no I don't think it's rigged. I don't watch the show often, but I have definitely seen people lose.

Pretty sure if it wasn't for service lobbies and break rooms, very very few people would actually know wtf Deal Or No Deal even is.

As to whether or not the game itself is rigged, I'd gue-- FUCK MY LUNCH BREAK IS OVER, GTG!!

How could someone rig this game? The value is in the cases and the contestant is picking which to open. Perhaps I don't understand what you mean by rigged?

I've watched a lot of DOND, and I think I've seen one person walk away with the million case, maybe 15 years ago. Maybe it was a replay or a highlights episode you saw? Most players just keep it safe and walk away with something before they have real money on the line.

They need people to win big - if someone really does win big that fuels the dream for everyone else who won't even get on the show but still dreams how their life would be better if they won big. They need most people to win something that looks big, but isn't "too much". The only people they want to lose are people that every viewer hates - and those people won't be selected to go on anyway. They don't want too many big winners as then winning big goes from a hype worthy event to another person got some money, but those big winners fuel the dream and keep the show alive so long as it doesn't happen so often it becomes a yawn.

Creating a game show is about the circular optimization: more viewers = more money from advertisers. Money can be paid in prizes or go to your pocket.

No idea about the honesty of the show, I just remember my mum being a big fan of it and always really wanting to see someone just go through the boxes in order of 1 to 22

Think of everything that goes into producing a show like that. Between set design/construction, cast/behind the scenes crew, and studio and equipment usage, the cost of the prize itself (especially what an average contestant actually makes) wouldn't exactly overshadow the whole budget. For bigger prizes, prize insurance is a thing. And yes, there are laws about this too.

I imagine they dont air every episode they shoot either. They could easily shoot way more than they need and milk the hell out of the good stories/good games

Not to be a downer, but I assume most things on TV like that are rigged.

It’s more fun to watch people win than watch them constantly lose. The whole point of a TV show is to get people to watch. I don’t mind if a game show is rigged, as long as it’s rigged equally in favor of all contestants.

Plus, if I remember correctly, Deal or No Deal only has one contestant at a time. Contestants aren’t competing against each other, so you can nudge the game in the contestant’s favor without screwing other contestants.