This is why I re-review many pinball games. Sometimes things change and sometimes I am wrong. I am good with both because that is when I learn. Since this mention is focusing on MM I will reply with this game in mind. Medieval madness has been re-reviewed, twice. Unless a new version of the software comes out (@soren, can you help a pinhead out?!?) the scoring issue stays the same. The rest of the review is almost all 6’s across 5r board. The reason this game does not have 6’s is because of the said rules imbalance. All the sub6 scores on this rating are related to the effect that the rules have on this game design. If the games rules do not support the brilliance of the design, I will score them accordingly. This makes me wonder, did you even read what I wrote? Or did you dismiss what was said because you didn’t like the less than ideal score? If you did look at my review page, did you notice that there are no 10’s?

When I review a game I play it (some times there are multiple versions of the same game. I do take into account rule differences if they are present) and I pay as much attention to the rules as I do the playfield layout. Today, games are REQUIRED to have viable competitive rules or the game will not pass muster on the street. The influence of Competitive pinball means that games are now expected to have adjustments, polish tweaks and in a few cases complete re-writing of a game’s code if needed. This has been brought to us by brilliant competitive pinball players like Lyman Sheats, Keith Johnson and most recently, Keith Elwin. Earlier designers that were competitive players that made a difference like this in the early SS era are Steve Kirk and Jon Norris. Many of both Steve and Jon’s game are now being sought out by players due to this influence on their rule sets. Before, as long as a game didn’t have a flaw that kept it from earning on the street, once the game was out the door, the code was set and the team moved on to the production cycle. Keith Johnson in particular set the standard at stern with over a dozen revisions of code for a single game.

EM games are an older breed. Lots of people do not “get” EM games or dismiss them. Competitive players will call them “luck boxes”, but that’s usually when they lose on them. The pinball games of today are fast and furious in relation to older games. Just like older cars, airplanes and a whole bunch of other technologies. I enjoy older games for a number of reasons. A great EM game (Gottlieb El Dorado for example) will keep you coming back. I know this because I operate pins too. And in my EM locations (because I am that crazy), El Do always has the heaviest coin box! EM games will require techniques that are valid on both older and newer designs. I gather a greater appreciation of newer games and I also see how much the new games of today stood on the shoulders of previous pinball design giants. EM games are boring? Go find a collector who knows what’s up and go play some pinball with him. Observe, ask questions, learn. This was one of the best things about pinburgh. Banks of 4 games with a modern SS, early SS and an EM plus one more of the previous 3.

And every year I’d hear players complain about having to play older games. You are playing at pinburgh and all you can do is whine and complain... really?

Older games will hone your defensive playing skills. You will be able to anticipate more. You will see danger further up the field. You will develop techniques to defend from farther away from your flippers. On a game like 8 ball deluxe, firepower and many other games of that vintage or earlier, there are no safe shots. Successful shots are never fed to the inlanes with a ramp guiding the ball to a safe trap with certainly. Every unsuccessful and successful shot puts the ball in danger. Some people will complain that older games are too slow. Maybe for them. But some people like a slower game. Some of my favorite pinball moments were at parties I had at my home sharing my collection and seeing a grandfather playing a game with a grandchild at the same time. Right in the feels I tells ya!

There are lots of good reasons to collect and play EM games. They are relatively cheap. If they are complete, you can fix them. Inter webs learnin’ resources and parts are available on your wonderphone and home ‘Puter. The artwork is of another time when people’s tastes and sense of humor was different.

If you want to have fun, have fun. Try a tournament. Try a league. Start in the least experienced division and don’t care if you win or lose. But celebrate when you do. Make some new big kid friends and learn how to play more skillfully. Put that action in your bag of tricks. Before this plague hit us, I’d have potlucks at my home. Everyone had fun and only played when and what they wanted to. If they played at all. If you want to have fun playing MM with a competitive player, play a dollar game. Play for twenty dollars, heck, play for a nickel. It changes the game when the “stakes” are on the line. You may change the rules. Someone plays one handed, someone plays for a goal (start a multiball) someone plays for 2 balls and someone plays for 3. No you don’t have to compete. But I do want you to have fun. Heck I want everyone to have fun. And while I do have a prism that I see pinball through, I do so sight reason and intent. I adjust the sliders on my rating values higher for fun, playfield design and rules and lower them for say... cabinet art. These are just my opinions. But I want to make them the best I can. I want them to be honest and sincere about the playing experience in the hope that others can find what they are looking for in their own games. Sometimes I have difficulty quantifying what that is. I have to go with what feels right and of quality.

Go play what feels the most satisfying to you. For me, that game is Twilight Zone. I love the game. I love the theme and I am STILL finding new things, details, minutiae that just keep on giving since it was made in 1993. Don’t believe me, take a good look at the shot layout and flipper position on Iron Maiden. That’s right, iMaid is TZ with flow. Pat Lawlor’s game was so good, it had a baby! So if you want to, expand your pin-horizons. Play some games you didn’t think of and you might find something in there that you like. If you don’t, you still played pinball. Consider going to the pinball hall of fame in Vegas (post-covid), there’s a couple hundred EM games for you to try. If you play a couple hundred EM games and can’t find one you like, that’s your preference. Personally, I love them and I am more likely to find an older game that I have not played before as compared to a new one coming out today. To this, I have a little saying “If I play a pinball game I have never played before, automatic good day!” Go travel on a pinball adventure to a location/ museum or a pinball convention that is at least a few hours away when travel is safe again.

And if we ever do meet and if you aren’t careful, I’ll take that hundred dollar bill on the lockdown bar from you while playing Medieval Madness with a beer in my other hand...

With much pinball-love,

c2s

05969F5A-388B-4C11-88E0-A6B7419F0ED9 (resized).jpeg

Not at all. I do try to be thorough with my reviews and I take them seriously enough to explain the how and why of what I do. I know, too much seriousnesses. My hope was to create a response that advocates for pinball of all vintages. I am open to criticism and have even addressed specific games by other members. But sometimes, after review of a review. The review stands.

On a side note, Pinbot is a favorite Oursler design of mine and I miss playing it in the collection. But more than anything, I'd ask you to do what you love to do. And if that is to play pinball as you deem fit. Do that. If that means something old or something new, or more of what you know and love... do it!

If you ever head to CO, let meet know. I am happy to show you around.

c2s

IMG_20201231_184528229 (resized).jpg

Thank you for saying this. I sincerely appreciate it. It also makes me realize that in some small way, I am helping people out and maybe even making their lives better through pinball.

I recently took a better look at Diner and updated that review. I didn’t get the game as well as I should have when I first reviewed it. When an owner of the game took the time to show me what they did when they played it, I was able to grasp the game more completely and effectively.

I want to acknowledge collectors, players, shows, museums and organizations that keep these pinballs alive past their money making careers, for the love of the game.

I’m just passing that information along in the hope that other people will find value in this information with their search as well.

Happy hunting!

04DA4240-C1A2-4B4B-BBD9-1B1FC11F9E4E (resized).jpeg

A vintage by technology would help. There is a ratings by decade that goes back to the 70’s. That doesn’t help with a game from the 40’s, but it is an idea that has been partially implemented already. If the ratings could be stacked with qualifications for the search, it would be easier to find which EM wedgehead from the 60’s is the one people like the best (for me that’s a toss up between Central Park, Slick Chick and North Star). I will also readily admit to the fact that I rate games in relation to games of close vintage in consideration of my rankings. Is Star Wars DE a modern game with updated code (thank you pinballcode.com) and lots of bells and whistles, it certainly is. I’d still rather play a game of Surf Champ as compared to that design. All day long.

But this is just an opinion and hey, that’s just me.

The Ipdg.org has great search features. Simple and advanced. Items that could be considered in the searches would be interrelated to the game info might be:

Manufacturer info:
Date of manufacture
Manufacturer name
Number of players

Talent pool:
Designer
Programmer
Artist
Composer
Engineer
Version of the game example: 1/2/4/6 player or pro/premium/LE, gold/platinum/diamond etc...

Any other ideas robin ?

And if you update your old reviews, I’d ask you to not delete the old information. Keep it in there so people can understand how your progressed to your current view. At least, that’s how I see my reviews. It’s a story.

That is a good point.

However “fudging” can be abused as evidenced by the title of this thread. Even with this system in place that you are proposing, how would that hinder abuse? Even if it isn’t abusive, re-reviewed ratings would change in the 1-100 standings if the parts of the ratings (ie rules, when they are updated). How does the system stay true to the top 100 if your opinions evolve? If the 1-100 is a hard assigned rating, how do we accommodate these ideas? Does the user have to keep track of their top 100 manually?

How does this work?

This was an interesting read. I'd like to know more about how they realize this from the back end. The last scales at the bottom of the article address what many people here are complaining about in relation to score bombing.

https://www.metacritic.com/about-metascores