Nicholas Tan The second season of 500 Questions does provide some interesting strategy from the contestants and the cinematic quality of the design is intense.However, the game is incredibly slow-paced, mainly due to ridiculous number of time-wasters. Aside from the annoying number of "quick breaks," is it necessary for the host to blather between every question and to rattle off all of the correct answers in a battle question? We can SEE what question the contestant is on and how many wrongs there are the board, so it's useless to tell us what they are.Another problem is that the prize earnings are extremely low. Having each correct answer be only worth $1,000 doesn't provide a lot of tension; maybe if contestants earned a bonus for getting questions correct in a row, it would feel more exciting.Moreover, it takes a contestant to answer all 30 questions to bank money, which leads to rather extremely low payouts and takes way too much time. Many times, the contestant walks away with nothing. Who Wants To Be A Millionaire took less time to reach the $32,000 mark. Heck, Jeopardy is a better game show and it finished in 30 minutes.Worse, the likelihood of anyone reaching 500 questions, let alone half that, is improbable enough that the whole premise of the show is moot.

USN-Retired My wife, who was once invited to join Mensa, loves this show. But I don't get it. What quiz show allows a winner to only get about 70% of the questions correct and still wins? Ridiculous. Example: "What is the 4th largest city in the USA?" Answer? Rattle off all the large cities you can think of, as fast as you can in 10-seconds, and you are good to go. What kind of interesting game is this, where you can shotgun answers to get a hit? As for the challenger, he/she is completely powerless in most cases. It's not a matter of the challenger beating the reigning contestant. It's more about the reigning contestant undoing him/herself. The only power the challenger has is to choose a weak category in the XX situation. So, instead of stronger contestants surviving the contest with each round getting better and better, it's all about nothing.And, if I hear the host, Richard Quest, ask what happens if you get three X'es one more time…well, even my wife rolls her eyes on that.In closings, for me this show is about keeping the peace. I'd much rather go outside and scrub dirt off the driveway. In the end, I have to settle for a bitten lip.

abtanzer The game itself is actually quite addictive. What makes the game far better than "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" is the open ended nature of the questions rather instead of being multiple choice. I like the twists along the way such as the Battle round and the Top Ten(?) question where you have to get 5 out of 10 possible choices. The satisfaction of the game play is at the level of Jeopardy, the gold standard.The problem with this game is everything else.The show wants to use as its themes the idea of a gladiatorial battle between 2 players, creating a false friction that never develops. The challenger largely sits around and only occasionally gets involved, which is not that interesting to watch. It also rips off Millionaire's atmosphere of a dark, cold set with what the producers think of as tension-inducing music. All this is nonsense, and boring. It just makes me want to yell at my flat screen.The host, Richard Quest, is the worst game show host ever. Hi is entirely dislike-able, with an unctuous tone, dismissive manner, arrogance, and non- relatability. He likes to emphasize the genius nature of the contestants, which is also off-putting (these game shows like to cast smart people already). And he keeps hoping to create a new catchphrase by having contestants say they will be "Gone" if they miss a critical question. I get that the coldness and the snobby British accent are part of the tone the producers want to induce, but it is all nonsense that has to go.I would watch this show if it somehow ended up in syndication. I would get away from anything resembling "Millionaire" using warm, brightly-lit sets and I would hire a personable host (Aisha Tyler, I'm talking to you!). It would still need to be an hour long (takes a long time to get to 500 questions if anyone ever does it). The one change I would make in game play would be to have contestants get their winnings and a new challenger after 25 questions. (As it stands now, we meet a new challenger about every hour.)

atlasmb 500 Questions is a 7-day contest event. During that week, contestants--one at a time--try to answer questions in various categories. The questions are not multiple choice and there are no clues given. The variety of questions is good and they are not too obscure. If the player misses three questions in a row, he is gone.The mechanics of the game are somewhat obscure. The host explains the fine points as the show progresses, like what it means when "Battle" comes on the big screen. Did I mention that there is a second contestant? Yes, another "genius", as they are described, waits in the shadows for the main contestant to fail. On "Battle" questions, they compete head to head. Honestly, I cannot criticize the show for explaining the fine points during gameplay. It would be too boring to explain them all upfront.Some have complained that the pace of the game is too slow. By the second episode, I thought the pace was accelerating. This show is probably not for anyone other than trivia/quiz show fans.I have one criticism. I am not sure what happens if someone--unexpectedly--reaches 500 questions.