The Points Mean Nothing: Difference between revisions
Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.2
m (revise quote template spacing) |
(Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.2) |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 8:
Regardless, points seem to matter less the longer a series goes on.
When the points don't matter due to the last challenge determining everything, it's a [[Golden Snitch]].
Akin to [[Scoring Points]] in video games.
{{examples
== Anime ==
* In the opening episode of ''[[Baccano!]]'', [[Cool Old Guy|Gustav]] and [[The Watson|Carol]] are [[As You Know|discussing the immortals]]. Gustav awards Carol arbitrary points for her observations. These points have no meaning in the rest of the story, nor do they come up again when the two make a later appearance.
Line 24:
== Live
* "Welcome to ''[[Whose Line Is It Anyway?
** The score recap the only time Drew did one: Wayne: Who knows, Brad: Who Cares, Colin: I forgot, [[Butt Monkey|Ryan: -73]]
** Averted on one occasion where the points actually ''did'' matter.
Line 33:
** In yet another episode, Drew simply brought in a ''tape recorder'' of himself saying "One thousand points!" Wayne stole it during a commercial break and overwrote the tape with himself chanting "My ass... my ass... my ass..."
** "You don't get points for this round instead you get the new mega-points. They are 25% bigger and worth 50% less".
** "One billion points to Colin. You hear that, [[Take That|Regis Philbin]]? [[Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?|One billion points.]]"
* ''[[Have I Got News for You]]'': This is a particularly bad (read frequent) offender: because of the amount of editing involved, the teams will end up with points without you seeing them answer the questions. Nobody cares about winning, but occasionally Paul will mention winning 26 of the series against Ian's 3. He has mentioned on commentaries being more competitive than Ian, even jumping in with an answer Ian was about to give (during Ian's team's turn) and getting the points, but the lack of clarity on the points hardly matters so long as its entertaining.
{{quote|'''Angus Deayton''': Good evening and welcome to the programme attacked this week by one viewer who wrote to complain about the random way the points are allocated, on the grounds that "the level of money wagered on the outcome of this show increases week on week". So our apologies to Mr. Joseph Wall of Newark, and one point to Ian. }}
** A particularly clear example of this came when Anne Robinson hosted and gave one of them points whenever the other mentioned her husband. Hell, for all we know they deliberately cause Ian to lose.
** When (famously rotund) MP Roy Hattersley had pulled out for the third time, at very short notice (and was due a [[Take That]] - he made a joke about when he finally did turn up) his place with Paul was filled in by a tub of lard:
{{quote|'''Ian:''' It is getting rather sad that I can't win against Paul when he's accompanied by a tub of lard and the questions are in a foreign language. (trails off laughing)
Line 43:
* ''[[Never Mind the Buzzcocks]]'': Captains have gotten moody about the random giving out of points in the past, moaning about giving over songs; perhaps the best examples are when the host deliberately prevents teams from winning. Donnie Tourette (a "punk") was mocked for caring about points, while Phill Jupitus once tried to end a game with zero.
** Mark Lamarr would give extra points to guests he liked, such as Jimmy Cliff. He also gave a bonus point to Billie Piper for insulting Westlife.
* ''[[QI]]'': rewards contestants with points based on how interesting they are (and deducts points for obvious wrong answers). Occasionally, the host will say they get points for it; but by the end, there are often looks of shock from the contestants over the score. Creator John Lloyd said that he himself doesn't understand the scoring system - they apparently just hire someone to sit in a room and record scores, and no-one knows quite what logic he uses, if any. One rule that is clear though, is that 10 points are deducted for an answer that "everyone knows" but is wrong, such as Sweden having the world's highest suicide rate <ref>
** Lloyd and co-creator John Mitchinson have also noted that for all the inexplicable scoring, people are very pleased to win, unlike on shows like ''[[Have I Got News for You]]'' where no-one except the regulars really cares apart from the very occasional guest (such as Bill Deeds, who according to Ian was furious with himself for not winning).
** Apparently every point can be explained if the panellists wish (and they have the right of appeal if they believe their score is wrong). They never ask, but it is correct.
Line 50:
*** He's actually won more times than any other panellist. But that's more to do with him being in every episode than with him being any good at the game; he only is a winner (or tied for the lead at the end) in about one out of eight episodes.
**** On three occasions (once each in series A, H, and I) his buzzer sound was the klaxon which goes off when a panellist is being penalised, so he lost ten points without even opening his mouth.
** Like ''[[Have I Got News for You|HIGNFY]]'' above, at least some of the apparent randomness of the points is due to editing down two hours of material into a half-hour broadcast - if someone gets forfeits or right answers during this time, their points gained in the half hour can vary wildly from those shown at the end (most recently a panellist ended up with a score of -15 despite seemingly getting no forfeits at all), but of course, they can't change the points for the edit. It becomes clearer in the extended editions, but one presumes that even more is lost from the original recorded length.
** Gets heavily lampshaded in series I episode "International" when they discuss points with Stephen basically pointing out nobody really knows how the system works other than the guys they pay to do it. Note that this is the very start of the show and when asked to recap the scores (before any questions), [[Bill Bailey]] (who first pointed this out) is winning by a whole 3 points...cue more mocking.
** A few episodes later, in a show about "Inequality and Injustice" they gave the scores before the quiz had started, and (similarly unfairly) refused to read out the ''actual'' scores at the end.
* ''[[Mock the Week]]'': Can be quite confusing with the mix of what the host finds funny and correctly answering the questions. According to [
** Lampshaded by host Dara O'Briain in one episode while introducing one round with "The winner is the performer I judge to have produced the best material, no, of course it isn't, it's random, stop e-mailing in."
** In addition, Dara never explains how many points are awarded, instead just says 'the points' or 'the winners of this round are...'
* Some Swedish examples are ''Snacka om nyheter'' (''Talk about news'') and ''Så ska det låta'' (''That's the sound of it'').
Line 60:
* Averted by ''[[A Question of Sport]]'' - while it is a celebrity panel show and is both funny and entertaining, the panelists are all sportsmen and women and therefore ridiculously competitive...
* On one occasion ''[[Spicks and Specks]]'' (Aussie music quiz/panel show) ended up with the audience with a considerable number of points for answering correctly.
** This has happened at least once in ''QI'', but mostly because the contestants tend to end up with negative points so a single point to the audience can "win" the game...
*** ''QI'' has even had a couple of moments when the audience have ''lost'' points.
* Aussie show ''[[Rock Wiz]]'' shows the current score at the end of each round, but points are awarded quite arbitarily, and this is often lampshaded by Julia Zemiro when one of the players complains about not getting points/the other team getting more points.
* Technically, the points ''do'' mean something on ''[[Around the Horn]]''...but they're completely prone to being randomly manipulated by the host in order to modify the outcome.
* ''[[That Mitchell and Webb Look
* [[Lampshaded]] in [[Charlie Brooker]]'s ''[[You Have Been Watching]]'' after Frank Skinner had won the episode by a large margin he title dropped this trope, leading Frank to get quite upset.
* The Australian quiz show ''[[Talkin Bout Your Generation]]'' takes this approach, to an extent (mainly to make fun of [[Butt Monkey|Generation Y.]]) The host, Shaun Micallef, often gives a bizarre number of points that are in no way relevant to the number of questions answered correctly in a round. One time a contestant actually traded places with Micallef and reassigned points between teams. The points are doubly irrelevant - the last round awards [[Golden Snitch|the number of points needed for any of the teams to win]].
** In addition, on one notable occasion the teams began trading points in an effort to close up the gaps. Other such antics with the points include Generation Y insisting on getting 5/8s of a point for one question. They got it.
* Norway's own news-mocker ''Nytt på nytt'' (''News in a new way'', but can be read as ''Again and again'') has some fun with this. Points are awarded (in a way), with even a counter visible...for those in the studio. The shots used in the aired version NEVER show the points, discreetly pushing them off-screen, so the viewer is left guessing to what the score is until it's (apparently) summed up and a winner (and the loser) is awarded with something funny and news-related.
* The only really memorable thing about ''Adam & Joe''{{'}}s game show parody "Quizzlestick" is its incomprehensibly complicated scoring system.
** Isn't that the entire point of said parody?
* ''[[Good News Week]]''. Just ''Good News Week''. The amount of points scored seems a little erratic, on the occasion a question gets an answer that is. This is attributed to the [[Rule of Funny]] however. It does keep clear track of points, but is extremely casual about how they are awarded. Host Paul McDermott can be talked into awarding points for answering questions which weren't asked, for incorrect answers which are vehemently defended, and generally whenever it's entertaining. On one particularly bizarre occasion McDermott ''won''.
** He also once handed out points to both teams after one contestant chased a member of the opposing team ''into and through the audience''.
* The apparently Canadian comedy show ''Kenny vs. Spenny'' constantly features competitions between the two fellows, but the whole idea of the show is how Kenny always rigs the competitions some way. In the odd episode Spenny wins, it's usually because the joke's still on him, e.g. {{spoiler|he races Canada's tallest stairs up by himself while Kenny takes the elevator.}}
* ''[[Chappelle's Show
{{quote|'''Chappelle:''' ''"'I don't know' is an acceptable answer! Even black people don't know that shit."'' }}
* ''[[Would I Lie to You?]]'' generally averts this as the points are awarded on a very simple and straightforward basis, although not all of the questions make it through to the edit so sometimes it seems like a team is on top yet loses because the points the opposing team scored were cut. Both team captains (particularly Lee Mack) are quite competitive about the scores and who has won which series (in a series 5 episode, David Mitchell defied the trope by saying he did feel a genuine sense of competition about the game).
** As of series 6 the producers are working out the final score from the edit and dubbing it on in post-production so the points reflect the half-hour highlights and not the full recording. Whether this has made the pointless more or less meaningful is debatable.
== Music ==
Line 94 ⟶ 93:
== Radio ==
* Mocked by ''[[I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue]]'', where the scorekeeper, the lovely and [[
** [[Lampshaded]] in one of the episode in 1997, where Humph, the chairman, closes one round with "It's just occurred to me that Samantha hasn't given us the score... since 1981."
** And yet, Humph frequently reminds the teams and the audience that "Points Mean Prizes!" Though we never hear anything more about the prizes either...
** Humph was actually using one of [[Bruce Forsyth]]'s catch-phrases. He called out, "And what do points mean?", to which [[Phrase Catcher|the audience shouted back]] "PRIZES!". Humph was then usually heard muttering something like "Pathetic". ("Now go and invade Czechoslovakia.")
** In earlier episodes, Humph would award points, but they never made sense and were never added up to a total. ("Right, well, it's level-pegging. We move on to...") Sometimes, he'd hand out points for grovelling, sometimes for ''not'' grovelling, points would routinely be reversed if someone on the leading team made an exceptionally lame joke...strangely enough, he stopped giving out points around the same time Samantha was introduced into the show.
* You might expect ''[[Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me!|Wait Wait Don't Tell Me]]'' to be like this, but it actually keeps a fairly rigid scoring system. Subverted in that the prize is essentially bragging rights for the panelist. What does matter is how callers
* ''The Debaters'', on [[CBC]] Radio 1, is a show where comedians debate various topics. "Points are awarded for facts or funny" (and occasionally removed), but the only thing that influences who wins is the audience's applause at the end of each debate.
== Video Games ==
* In ''[[Portal 2]]''
* [[Strong Bad's
* While hardly classifiably as a game, ''[[Plumbers Don't Wear Ties]]'' has the narrator giving you a score after certain scenes. To rub salt in the wounds, the highest you can possibly get is in the ''negative six figures''.
== Web Original ==
Line 113 ⟶ 111:
{{reflist}}
[[Category:British Media Tropes]]
[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]
| |||