Three contestants, all between 11 and 14 years old, competed in this children's version of "Wheel of Fortune." Host Sidoni was aided by Cyber Lucy, a real-time, computer-animated "cyberhostess." The contestant chosen to start the round selects a category to a mystery word puzzle. While most of the rules were similar to the grown-up version, contestants played for points rather than cash. The wheel also contained a prize space and various penalty spaces "Loser," similar to "Lose-a-Turn;" and "The Creature," which worked just like the Bankrupt space. In addition, landing on a "Physical Stunt" space allowed the contestant to select up to three consonants by completing a stunt (examples might include using a catapult to feed plastic cubes to a dinosaur and throwing rings onto a pole from varying distances). The winner of each round kept whatever points he/she had accumulated; a short video, narrated by Cyber Lucy, often accompanied each puzzle (to fulfill the network's educational ... Written by
Brian Rathjen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
This show was okay. now if the prizes were better....
Wheel of fortune is everyone's game. and if it's everyone's game, then kids shouldn't be just getting a Gameboy or a Walkman as a prize. that's weak. they should be earning the same prize as everyone else. they should have gotten a shot at $25,000 or something like that. and if my memory serves, no one earned money, so what was the point of playing?
Now this game was played exactly like the original wheel of fortune, but unfortunately (no pun intended) there was a few differences. For example, bankrupt and lose-a-turn were called "the creature" (A weird pair of eyes would appear from under the wheel and eat up all your points.) and "loser". And contestants got to choose categories, plus at the end of every puzzle, that computerized chick, Lucy, would describe what the puzzle was. for example, one puzzle was semi-colon, and Lucy got to describe what a semi-colon was. you can watch the footage at "gscentral.com" of that puzzle being solved.
it was worth the watch, a good idea, but no one liked it since it was too cheap.
0 of 0 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?