Talk:Estate of Panic

Clarification on time

The key point I'm trying to make here--and I think it's a valid one--is that it only took four minutes or so on the air, but we have absolutely no idea how long it took in real life. It could have been five minutes, it could have been twenty minutes. It's actually quite outside the norm to be told "You have this random amount of time" and not know exactly what it is. Samer (talk) 21:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The point is that it is irrelevant whether the balls in the vault drop every 1 minute, 3 minutes, 30 minutes, or at a random interval. The rule is that the contestant has until the 10th ball finishes its drop. The contestant may very well be told the amount of time it takes for a ball to drop, but it isn't necessary for the audience to know. You are confusing "game play" with "production". We can't indicate that the show is filmed over the course of four days in the game play section, as the number of days it takes to film the show is irrelevant to how each segment is handled and aired in the final product. Trying to avoid making an apples-to-oranges comparison, the contestants on Survivor are shown walking to Tribal Council this season. However, in production notes we learn that the contestants are driven there from their camps. This fact does not take away from the illusion of the the amount of time it might take for the contestants to arrive at Tribal, and it doesn't affect the audience's perception of the gameplay. SpikeJones (talk) 21:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

You seem to be taking a point of view that the only thing that matters is gameplay. I would argue that is not the case. I fail to see why production aspects have no place in this article. Samer (talk) 14:53, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

For the casual observer who is using the WP article as a way to understand the show, whether there is an explicit time period ("3 minutes per ball") or not ("balls will fall") is irrelevant. Let's use a better example -- contestants on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire and 1 vs 100 are seen on TV taking as much time as they would like before answering the trivia question. It appears, on TV, that there is an unlimited amount of time. In reality, there is a time limit that the contestants must answer within or else they forfeit (lose, etc). It's obviously longer than the quick-buzz Ken Jennings used on Jeopardy!, and allows time for the host to interact with the contestant while they share their thoughts on how they came up with the answer. The end result is that the viewer doesn't need to know that there is a 5-minute time limit*, as that has no bearing on understanding how the game is played. That information, however, could be placed in a WP section that covers the game's rules that the players must agree to before signing up. Similarly, the viewer's enjoyment of the show could be diminished if they were told that the balls fall every x minutes if the viewer feels that x is too much time, which is why that information isn't provided (and, perhaps, why they didn't use a blinky-red LED timer countdown clock). The show is based on phobias, and one phobia being dealt with is the unknown of how much time is available in the Vault. It could be, perhaps, that the balls are dropped by hand as the producers determine how good (or bad) the contestants are doing as a form of mental manipulation. Unless we know specifically what the situation is, we can't include speculative info in the article. As for the production aspects vs gameplay, the production section you added did not exist at the time, and there needed to be a distinct separation between the two. (*note - "5" was arbitrarily picked. Could be "10") SpikeJones (talk) 18:34, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I can't speak for 1 vs. 100, but, having seen the rules for WWTBAM (back when it had the call-in game), I can tell you that they made an explicit point of not having a time limit. And, BTW, if the suggestion you make (dropping the balls by hand at intervals of their choosing) were the case, that would be noteworthy enough to mention. (Moreover, at least from the first two episodes, the contestant does not explicitly need to keep track of the number of balls that have fallen.) Moreover, your claim that "Unless we know specifically what the situation is, we can't include speculative info in the article." is misleading--it is not speculative to say "The show does not say."

Also, I don't see why there needs to be a distinction between production and gameplay. Samer (talk) 20:33, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

There always was a time limit when you were in the hot seat of WWTBAM answering questions (rules from the show itself, not the call-in portion). Whether that was due to keeping the production on time or to restrict a player's time to think is a different question. The point is that even with a time limit of 2 hours per question, the show would be edited down to fit into a 30 or 60-minute episode. ("portions of the program not affecting the outcome have been edited"). From a verification perspective, you cannot say that there isn't a known timelimit for the balls to drop just because the audience isn't told whether there is one or isn't. Otherwise, we could add a statement that the snakes aren't poisonous and that the hissing sounds was added in post-production. We don't know that the snakes are or aren't poisonous...but to take a stance one way or the other is misleading to the casual reader. It is better to say that "there are snakes" rather than "there are snakes, but the audience isn't told whether they are or aren't poisonous, but it is possible that the contestants may or may not be told also during the filming of the scene". The former phrasing is prefered over the latter. SpikeJones (talk) 22:34, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

No, WWTBAM didn't, as you can see here.

More importantly, you seem to be misunderstanding my point: I am not arguing that there isn't a known time limit. What I am arguing--and it is not WP:CBALL to say--is that "the audience isn't told." I have seen such things stated on other TV show pages, where it is unclear how a particular plausible situation would be handled (because the announced rules were ambiguous). In any case, I'm not going to argue the point further, but if I do find a source that says how long things actually take, I will add that.

Since the link you offered for WWTWAM doesn't explicitly agree or disagree with either of us (no mention of time limits) and the latest season DOES have a fixed time limit on questions, I will respectfully suggest that we select a discussion example that (a) never made mention of a contestant's time limit on the air or in the credits, and (b) does have the fixed time limit listed in their available rules. Rules for 1 vs 100. This is a situation where the related WP article does mention the time limits that the rules explictly state, even though the audience is led to believe that the contestant has unlimited available time through editing. The WWTBAM WP article has no mention of time limits, as there is not citable source that can be referenced to say whether there are or aren't. Thank you for suggesting that you will find a source, as that is all WP editors ask for. SpikeJones (talk) 12:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

And, BTW, you still haven't addressed the issue of why there needs to be a separate production section, instead of just mentioning things offhand. Samer (talk)

Because the production of a show (any show) is significantly different from what is presented to the audience. Survivor's overhead shots of challenges is almost always of the challenge test runs, not of the actual challenge with contestants. This does not change the gameplay and shouldn't be in the gameplay section as it has no affect on what the audience perceives. As a production note, it answers the question of "how does Survivor film challenges without seeing any of the cameramen?". Similarly, The Amazing Race contestants must stay for 12 hours at each pit stop, but we (a) never see what time they actually physically arrived to verify that they are leaving exactly 12 hours later; (b) each team receives time bonuses due to production issues that could hold up the team, such as changing mic batteries or videotape in cameras; (c) on occasion, teams end up staying more than 12 hours at a pitstop for various reasons. The point is that this information doesn't affect the way the game is played, but are elements of the production process. Hence, why a different section is needed. SpikeJones (talk) 12:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

CO2 in the large balloons (ep. 5 room 2)?!

Where's a definite evidence that the balloons in room two were filled with (pure) CO2 and not with other compressed gases like air or nitrogen? I can only find one source and that's the forums of the show where a self-proclaimed "insider" "confirms" the "rumors" that the balloons were filled with CO2. Even there in the thread he doesn't give evidence more than "I know someone that knows that..." and there aren't much people that believe him.

If you read the wikipedia article about carbon dioxide you can find that even 4 % of CO2 in the air are immediately dangerous to life and health - and given the facts, that the ballons were big, the room was relatively small, and the cold (because it would have come out of gas bottles) carbon dioxide would accumulate on the floor (where the contestants mainly searched the money) I think the cance that a contestant would get too much CO2 would be too high for the producers to risk really using CO2. In this situation the contestants are under stress and do sports, so they breathe more than they would do normally. So all effects described would take effekt faster than under "normal" conditions, so it would be risky to add CO2 to this room. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.208.251.139 (talk) 18:55, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Here's the edit that included the CO2: [1] Just an ip address, no real user. 79.208.248.138 (talk) 17:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)