answer to the subject line.

No.

Normally I like cluttered games with stop and go action. I cannot get into this game. The shots it does have are unsatisfying. the munchkin land playfield is just boring. best part of the whole game is the witches castle mini playfield. Just to much surface area I think. Theme isn't the greatest either. Good first attempt tho. Ignited the color changing LED inserts which is nice in lots of games. Display is ok, but I feel it isn't used as well as it could have. Hoping hobbit is more fun. From what i've played so far, it's not either. But in all fairness, there have been a lot of changes since I played the very early proto.

to say WOZ is the best ever. You can't at this point. It's still to new. It's in the honeymoon stage. My AC/DC is older than WOZ and I still can't say it's best ever. I like it, but it takes about 5 years before the honeymoon stage is over and it starts to settle in where it really belongs. Time is the true test of a good game.

I agree. Look at CV. Took 10 years before that game got any love at all. Some games get lots of love early on and die out (avengers/xmen). Some don't get any love in the beginning and becomes diamonds in the rough years down the road (CFTBL, AFM, WH20)

To each his own. I live for that shit.

I don't get worked up when I argue. Most of the time i'm making myself laugh anyway. If anything it lowers my blood pressure, which is low to begin with.

since he doesn't list his collection, i'll just assume these are the only 2 games he has. hence the preference.

I don't think you understand what bang for your buck means, because I could list about 50 games that are better bang dollar for dollar.

I don't know why you guys are bitching about TZ. If you're going to pick on game that seems to be well liked but a cheap piece of shit. Pick on AFM. The econoline flagship of the B/W era. No game is made more cheaply and have less shit on it, than that game. It's like they looked around the warehouse and saw all the extra parts they had sitting around, and slapped a game together to clear out common part material.

I'm not saying it would be better. I'm just saying that out of all the B/W titles. AFM looks cheap. First time i've ever seen AFM. It was in a lineup of 5 games. Out of all the 5, I looked at it, and walked right by. Compared to , TOM, Sopranos, TSPP, MB, it looked very cheap. Kind of like RS looks in sterns lineup.

Even with more shit on it, the rules are still written for a 5 year old and still wouldn't like it. Because MB has the same rules and layout, and has a ton of shit on it, and still don't like it.

Which one has rules written for a 5 year old and which one doesn't? Which one looks like an empty playfield with nothing on it and which was actually looks like some thought was put into it?

If this isn't the damn truth to a tee. When everything is lit up, nothing is lit up.

I don't mind color, but when the whole damn playfield is lit, it's a little hard to know what you're shooting at. And if everything is a shot and does something, then might as well just shoot all over the place.

I have played more earlier code than new code, so i'll give it a second look and see if the light patterns, are more directly related to areas to shoot for.

I don't hate WOZ. Never did. But I don't love it either. It's a MEH game. If I had room for 50 games, I probably would not still own it. Room for 100, and it would be in my collection.