Series, Teams, History, Behind the scenes etc. - all discussed here.

Was KM unfair?

es (definitely unfair)
ot sure
o (totally fair)
Total votes: 23

Level 2 Dungeoneer
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Posts: 127
Joined: 12 May 2004, 16:38

Re:KNIGHTMARE Unfairness

Post by keke »

Knightmare was always times.
Just depended on the quest you got.
Normally the earlier quests in a season are much harder than the later quests.
Knightmare game completion:
Level 1: 100%
Level 2: 8%
Level 3: 1%
User avatar
Fright Knight
Fright Knight
Posts: 1568
Joined: 25 Jul 2004, 10:33
Location: London

Re:KNIGHTMARE Unfairness

Post by JamesA »

keke wrote:Normally the earlier quests in a season are much harder than the later quests.
This is clearly evident when you consider the fact none of the first three teams in any series went on to beat the dungeon. Some of these deaths were justifiable (in the fact that correct clue items were left behind or riddles were answered incorrectly) but then you have team deaths who were unfairly robbed. Looking at the first three teams of each quest only, the ones that spring to mind are:

Series 3 Team 2
Although McGrew pleaded for mercy, there was no further hint from Treguard for example about the best way to go about this. As a result the team were killed off in the next room.

Series 4 Team 1
Unlike the winning quests, they was no clue as to which spell the team should use against Mogdred. I personally feel that BUT was far too vague, as to me the spell could mean almost anything, and in a former quest of the previous series (Series 3 Team 7) the team cast TRANSFORM to get past Mrs Grimwold and Festus.

Series 6 Team 1
The team were virtually still on the causeway and only because one of Matt's feet was just an inch off were they killed. This is explained in more depth on the Series 6 Causeway thread.

Series 8 Team 2
This has already been explained before, but I agree: why did the team need a sight potion to successfully get past the Corridor of Blades when this obviously wasn't required in past series?

I may have an overall look at all team deaths, to decide whether they were fair or not when I get more time.
Last edited by JamesA on 02 Apr 2007, 16:33, edited 1 time in total.
James Aukett
Creator of the Knightmare: 25th Anniversary Documentary
Posts: 18
Joined: 23 Mar 2007, 05:22

Re:KNIGHTMARE Unfairness

Post by chrysalis »

I have seen a lot of punishment after watching nightmare recently for getting 1 riddle wrong or taking one wrong item and I think that is too harsh.

I think nightmare should have worked like this.

Level 1/2 Allow one wrong item on each level and one wrong riddle, dont leave unpunished but just make it harder, eg. a item is needed to use the main entrance to level2 the team dont have it so instead of killing them off they have to go through 2 or 3 more rooms to get to an alternative entrance to level 2. Killing teams off for one wrong riddle is very harsh, on S3 I see some teams get the same info for 2 right answers as those with 3, likewise sometimes 1 right answer is treated the same as 2, whats harsh is sometimes for 2 right answers you only get very basic info. With merlin he asks 2 questions, if only 1 right I think a spell should be given but as punishment when meeting him again on L3 he should make it harder to get his help.

On S8 Team 1s death was very harsh as they had motley who just seemed to be completely useless, one wrong item on L1=death not fair at all.
Posts: 21
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 18:19
Location: Newcastle

Re:KNIGHTMARE Unfairness

Post by MrP »

The only way Knightmare could ever have been completely fair, in the strictest sense, would be if every single team had an identical quest and each gave it their best shot. Obviously this would be terribly repetitive television and as is the case with all game/quiz shows the creators simply have to do the best they can to make the challenges approximately equal in each case.

In situations of people being allowed to "cheat death" when it appears others were denied that opportunity, it might also be worth considering what might have gone on that didn't make the final edit - who knows how often teams that were harshly treated might have made almighty blunders that had to be cut from the programme? I'd imagine their general demeanour off-camera might play a reasonable part in determining whether or not the producers would be willing to cut them a little slack!
If this were really happening, what would you think?
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests