This is great! Thank you!
Quoted from robin:. This goes for almost all Stern games with Pro/Premium/LE editions but also, for example, for games with special editions, such as The Addams Family and Lord of the Rings. We also decided to group together Medieval Madness with its remake.
However, what about JJP games? I'm not sure why TAF and LOTR have special editions listed but not JJP games.
Regardless, I'm happy about this change in general.
Quoted from drsfmd:2) I would suggest a small "blackout" window before new titles can join the top 100. It seems that almost every new Stern release jumps immediately into the top 10 from excited new owners before eventually falling to a more appropriate position on the list. Perhaps 90-120 days after release before the game takes a position on the list. It should still be possible to submit reviews for a game immediately upon release, just not to receive a spot in the rankings.
Thanks in advance for your consideration.
i think Stern games released in recent years occupy an extremely inflated position on the list overall, mainly due to collectors who bought them NIB and rated them during the honeymoon.
there's no good solution though, and the recent changes are definitely an improvement! the top 100 is inevitably a subjective thing anyway. instead of writing thousands of lines of complicated code to counteract human nature, it's probably healthier for everyone to just take it as is with a grain of salt.
Long overdue--nice work, Robin! I do think mof has a valid point that the LE owners have too much sway over the ratings, which should be addressed. Not much chance of anyone who popped for an LE dragging down the ratings with a bad review.
Quoted from Nokoro:However, what about JJP games? I'm not sure why TAF and LOTR have special editions listed but not JJP games.
I can't speak to the differences between the LOTR editions, but the TAF editions are different in ways that go beyond the cosmetic-- the scoring in particular fundamentally changes the strategy a player will take to accrue points. AFAIK, all of the differences across the WOZ editions are cosmetic, and none affect game play or strategy. Maybe someone else can chime in on LOTR.
Quoted from pezpunk:i think Stern games released in recent years occupy an extremely inflated position on the list overall, mainly due to collectors who bought them NIB and rated them during the honeymoon.
I agree. I was trying to be diplomatic. 
Quoted from drsfmd:I can't speak to the differences between the LOTR editions, but the TAF editions are different in ways that go beyond the cosmetic-- the scoring in particular fundamentally changes the strategy a player will take to accrue points. AFAIK, all of the differences across the WOZ editions are cosmetic, and none affect game play or strategy. Maybe someone else can chime in on LOTR.
Oh. I didn't know that about TAF. Well, if LOTR is the same, then never mind.
Quoted from drsfmd:I can't speak to the differences between the LOTR editions, but the TAF editions are different in ways that go beyond the cosmetic-- the scoring in particular fundamentally changes the strategy a player will take to accrue points. AFAIK, all of the differences across the WOZ editions are cosmetic, and none affect game play or strategy. Maybe someone else can chime in on LOTR.
but other games with actual gameplay differences are grouped together -- Game of Thrones Pro / Game of Thrones LE, for example. the Pro doesn't even have the upper playfield, the elevator, the kickback, drop target, and the ramps are a different configuration. and honestly i'm okay with them being grouped together.
Somebody mentioned above about only letting owners rate, what would be better probably would be a filter where you could say "what do current/previous owners say about the game". It would be helpful in my opinion as I would value owners opinions more than the general public.
Quoted from drsfmd:I can't speak to the differences between the LOTR editions, but the TAF editions are different in ways that go beyond the cosmetic-- the scoring in particular fundamentally changes the strategy a player will take to accrue points.
The TAF Gold edition ROMs can be used on the standard edition and vice versa. It's just a software revision. The gameplay is the same. I'd argue to say that on Stern games the difference can be more dramatic. For example many people likely reviewed TWD on early release software which sucked compared the latest version.
Please make sure my rating and review of Street Fighter II isn't counted as a troll vote. I really do dislike the game as much as the rating reflects!
Quoted from spiroagnew:isn't counted as a troll vote. I really do dislike the game as much as the rating reflects!
I would say it should be a valid rating
as long as you have some in depth comments
that back up your (extreme) rating,
be it good or bad.
Wait, MM is still number one??? I thought you were getting rid of "TROLLS!" votes?
Hahahahahahaahahahaha. Man, my jokes are on point....
Quoted from bitternerd:Wait, MM is still number one??? I thought you were getting rid of "TROLLS!" votes?
Hahahahahahaahahahaha. Man, my jokes are on point....
I guess that settles all the talk of the Williams/Bally games only being on top due to old, out of date ratings. Looks like the rankings haven't changed much at all.
Quoted from taylor34:Somebody mentioned above about only letting owners rate, what would be better probably would be a filter where you could say "what do current/previous owners say about the game". It would be helpful in my opinion as I would value owners opinions more than the general public.
that would be an interesting filter (but i don't think it should be the default).
Quoted from pezpunk:i think Stern games released in recent years occupy an extremely inflated position on the list overall, mainly due to collectors who bought them NIB and rated them during the honeymoon.
there's no good solution though, and the recent changes are definitely an improvement! the top 100 is inevitably a subjective thing anyway. instead of writing thousands of lines of complicated code to counteract human nature, it's probably healthier for everyone to just take it as is with a grain of salt.
They could implement an automated notification feature to rerate new releases after a period of time...a soft reminder like "It's been a year since you rated [game] and there have been some updates. Would you like to give your thoughts on the newest version?"
Something unobtrusive and not forced, of course. I would probably take action on that.
Quoted from taylor34:Somebody mentioned above about only letting owners rate,
That would be like going back 200 yrs ago, when only landowners could vote.
Just because you do not own the game, does not invalidate one's opinion on a game.
I know Bowen Kerins/Keith Elwin for example (and other top players) do not own a lot of games
but would trust their judgement more than owners.
I do agree that (some one that has only played a game a few times) rating
is probably not worth as much
as someone who has played it many dozens of times.
Quoted from aingide:They could implement an automated notification feature to rerate new releases after a period of time...a soft reminder like "It's been a year since you rated [game] and there have been some updates. Would you like to give your thoughts on the newest version?"
Something unobtrusive and not forced, of course. I would probably take action on that.
that is definitely a cool idea!
Thanks for the comments everyone, glad most of you like the update!
Quoted from hank527:I like it. Only exception I think would be something dramatic like bop 2.5 versus original. Just food for thought.
The grouping is done for games that we feel "belong" together. This is a bit of a vague description, but it really is how we approach this. It was specifically done to combat multiple entries for every single Stern release, for the Remakes too. We will probably group together some more games in the coming months. Keep the suggestions coming.
Quoted from Rascal_H:Very cool stuff. I still think the fun factor would be improved if there was a quick-vote option that somehow factored into the ratings.
https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/improved-ratings-with-more-data-points
I read that idea. And it's not a bad one. Time permitting, I might implement something like that. The same concept was used in the Apple App Store, back when I was still developing apps for it. As soon as a user would delete an app from his iPhone/iPad, Apple would ask the user to rate it. Obviously this did drag an apps rating down, because people who remove apps from their device don't tend to think highly of them.
Quoted from TexasJustice:I know I'm new to finally registering to this site, and late to the conversation, but for maybe down the road, I would actually like to see an additional feature where I could see the top 100 by yearly ratings. In other words, a way to allow all games to be rerated every single year. Not as the sole or default 100, but in addition to. I mean ya, sure MM might be number one with 1200 ratings over 12 years, but if you put it up for grabs again in 2017, where would it land by years end. I for one would love to know. That gos for every single game out there.
Having said that, the new way your doing the top 100 lifetime looks much better. Great job
It is called the Custom Top 100 and it is currently in maintenance. Coming back soon ... I Hope!
Quoted from pinmister:Thanks Robin I always thought the titles with several versions was inaccurate because the differences in gameplay is marginal. I had another idea to help improve the rating system, the idea is to have a minimum amount of votes to qualify. I am thinking there needs to be a minimum of 100 votes to make a title a contender for the top 100. How can King Pin even be on the top 100 with only 23 votes? Most people have never seen or played the machine. Meanwhile you have machines with over 1000 votes? Does not make sense to me.
I believe that the average of 15 approved votes is pretty solid. And then it will only receive more ratings and "settle into it's rightful place". We keep the number a bit low to entice people to rate a game. When a game is in the Top 100, it tends to gather more ratings quicker.
Quoted from pinmister:Also another thing I will add is that people should go back when they have the time and review their ratings. I know that personally I performed my ratings years ago and my opinions and ratings have definitely changed since then. I will eventually get around to going back and reviewing my previous ratings and update them as needed. I will also try and find time to rate newer titles I have not rated yet. I take the top 100 with a grain of salt because of the inaccuracies but some of these improvements will definitely help.
Thanks again Robin, keep up the good work.
Some kind or reminder might be nice, maybe after rating a game the system could ask you to quickly review your previous ratings? I'll give it some thought.
Quoted from Rando:Will you be doing the same for the EM Listing? For example many games are the same but can be for 1, 2, or players?
Jungle Princess same as Jungle Queen
Post Time same as Paddock
Etc...
This is not currently in the plans.
Quoted from frolic:The one problem, which I'm not sure if there is a solution for, is that initial "bad" reviews for a game, based on early code, still live on and push the game down.
Apple appStore works around this by grouping reviews by software release, but that may not be possible for pinball because people may not even know what version they played.
Maybe have review weight diminish in time for older scores, unless someone chooses to revisit their review every so often and republish?
I like that concept. Newer ratings weigh more heavily. Might also entice people to re-rate previously rated games.
Quoted from zacaj:Maybe another option here would be to only count ratings by people who've owned the game? King Pin may be pretty good, but I doubt most of the people who have played it have gotten enough time on it to give a real opinion, and I bet the situation is similar for a lot of games. Would also be very interesting to compare the ratings for all people vs owners only, I bet you'd get some interesting jumps
This has been suggested before, but I'm not in favour of the idea. I know many people who know an awful lot about pinball but hardly own any games themselves due to space constraints.
Quoted from mof:Pros and Cons to all changes in life.
* I appreciate the "visible" reduction of Stern machines -- where one title becomes two or three and clutters up the ratings.
* I am disappointed that now the "apparent" rating of a Stern has gone up, (and is roughly 95% controlled by LE owners.)
1. Wouldn't the most accurate rating be the weighted average between the LE and the Pro based on the # of ratings of each one based on the reviews of everyone?
5 LE votes @ 8 (40 pts)
10 Pro votes @ 6 (60 pts)
---------------------
Games gets a 6.66 (100 pts/15 votes)
2. I'd prefer to see when you expand the view of a pin, (rather than 1., and 2.) I'd prefer to see the actual rankings of each one, so for #21: #21 and #121.
As always, overall a positive...
-mof
1. The weighted average idea was of course considered, but we decided against it because we feel it's unfair if, for example, a remake would drag an original down. Or if a Pro edition would drag a great Premium/LE game down.
2. Grouped games no longer have an individual ranking. They all share the rank of the highest rated version of the game. It's up to the viewer to interpret this into something meaningful.
Quoted from pinwiztom:Did not see grouping of
Black Knight and Black Knight Limited Edition
Fire and Fire Champagne edition
Eight Ball Deluxe ( all three editions - different Cabinet versions)
Speakeasy (2P) and Speakeasy4 (4P)
Centaur and Centaur II
Big Bang Bar (Capcom vs later remake)
Harley Davidson (Sega/Stern) did 3 editions did it not
Then of course how to manage the EM version of Top 100+ (not an easy task)
With 2 Player vs 4 Player
(even though most have same Playfield layout & art work)
they do have different names and some times different artwork
(i.e. Solar City vs Target Alpha vs Canada Dry or Vulcan vs FireQueen)
whereas Big Indian vs Big Brave or Magnatron vs Duotron
4P vs 2P are virtually the same (except for minor differences on BG).
I think if the artwork package is completely different then keep ratings separate,
but if near identical artwork then group them together.
I know that a lot of players/collectors that rate Fire Queen as more desirable/better than Vulcan.
I think the single player AddABall vs Replay versions should remain separate
( as rules sets are different, especially on GTBs)
But then again some Gottlieb AAB USA versions vs Italian AAB versions
are near identical in artwork and rules set, but maybe some differences in novelty play scoring.
Though some WMS single players had Replay models like Paddock
that could be set to AAB and then have virtually the same rules set
as compared to the AAB/Novelty only version, like Post Time.
As stated above, our initial intentions have been satisfied by this update right now. We will be grouping some more games together in the coming months, thanks to great suggestions such as some that you outlined in your post, but it's not the plan to make this Top 100 list into something highly scientific. One of the requirements of grouping games is similar title/theme. For example, Shrek can not be grouped with Family Guy. Grand Prix not with Nascar. As such, many of the EM games will not be grouped either.
Quoted from drsfmd:Thanks Robin! These are much needed changes.
2) I would suggest a small "blackout" window before new titles can join the top 100. It seems that almost every new Stern release jumps immediately into the top 10 from excited new owners before eventually falling to a more appropriate position on the list. Perhaps 90-120 days after release before the game takes a position on the list. It should still be possible to submit reviews for a game immediately upon release, just not to receive a spot in the rankings.
Thanks in advance for your consideration.
Interesting idea. But, as outlined above, the early Top 100 appearance also has a great advantage. More exposure and more incentive to rate a game. Yes, it also caused some trolling, but we've got that covered pretty well now.
Quoted from pezpunk:thanks, Robin, this is definitely an improvement!
you mentioned that users who haven't logged in for a year and self-exiled users are not included in the rankings. are banned user scores also ignored? i can remember a certain user making dozens of accounts that got instantly banned, but on every dupe account he made sure to make the same trolly ratings on certain games.
Quoted from Nokoro:This is great! Thank you!
However, what about JJP games? I'm not sure why TAF and LOTR have special editions listed but not JJP games.
Regardless, I'm happy about this change in general.
To be honest, this has never been requested by anyone. I know Hobbit has an LE, a Smaug LE and a Black Arrow LE - but to be honest, aren't they all exatly the same? Just like Stern Premium/LE games which are also grouped.
Look, we could obviously make entries for every single version of a game, but the way Pinside is set up (with each entry having its own Game Archive page and upload section, etc etc. It just doesn't make sense.
I am considering adding a possibility to mark a collection item and note which version it is. But other than in that area, I do not really see much use for separating out every possible game version.
Quoted from o-din:Well, whatever you did, it didn't work. I'm seeing Aerosmith pro sitting all alone at #14.
I noticed that too. It is because the other "versions" of Aerosmith (Prem/LE) has not received enough votes yet and as such there is nothing to group together.
Quoted from Pimp77:I guess that settles all the talk of the Williams/Bally games only being on top due to old, out of date ratings. Looks like the rankings haven't changed much at all.
There have been some big shifts for some games. I mean 5-10 steps up or down is fairly big considering the number of ratings on some of these games. But no, you won't be seeing everything turned up side down. The list is pretty solid.
Quoted from aingide:They could implement an automated notification feature to rerate new releases after a period of time...a soft reminder like "It's been a year since you rated [game] and there have been some updates. Would you like to give your thoughts on the newest version?"
Something unobtrusive and not forced, of course. I would probably take action on that.
Yes, great suggestion! Possibly in conjunction with Rascal's idea at the top of this post.
Quoted from mof:Pros and Cons to all changes in life.
* I appreciate the "visible" reduction of Stern machines -- where one title becomes two or three and clutters up the ratings.
* I am disappointed that now the "apparent" rating of a Stern has gone up, (and is roughly 95% controlled by LE owners.)
1. Wouldn't the most accurate rating be the weighted average between the LE and the Pro based on the # of ratings of each one based on the reviews of everyone?
5 LE votes @ 8 (40 pts)
10 Pro votes @ 6 (60 pts)
---------------------
Games gets a 6.66 (100 pts/15 votes)
2. I'd prefer to see when you expand the view of a pin, (rather than 1., and 2.) I'd prefer to see the actual rankings of each one, so for #21: #21 and #121.
As always, overall a positive...
-mof
I still prefer to see the Stern Pro at one rating and the LE at the other. Grouping them is a step backwards in my opinion. The 2 games play differently hence why there is a large discrepancy with some of them like TWD for example.
Quoted from TBatti:I still prefer to see the Stern Pro at one rating and the LE at the other. Grouping them is a step backwards in my opinion. The 2 games play differently hence why there is a large discrepancy with some of them like TWD for example.
I would have liked to see what the top 100 looked like with The troll ratings out before grouping Stern games.
Grouping could only be an option in the custom section
Quoted from colonel_caverne:I would have liked to see what the top 100 looked like with The troll ratings out before grouping Stern games.
Any rating where someone rates a game as 1-4 out of anger for a game that is in the top 100 or a perfect 10 is generally a waste of time. They should all be removed.
Quoted from pezpunk:you mentioned that users who haven't logged in for a year and self-exiled users are not included in the rankings. are banned user scores also ignored?
Do we need to make a list of the Pinsiders that died to make sure to erase the record of how they felt on the top 100, or they just naturally fall off after a year?
EDIT: I mean I guess we know their votes aren't going to count so we can just dump them now?
Quoted from TheLaw:Do we need to make a list of the Pinsiders that died to make sure to erase the record of how they felt on the top 100, or they just naturally fall off after a year?
EDIT: I mean I guess we know their votes aren't going to count so we can just dump them now?
uh, why the hurry?
Quoted from TBatti:Any rating where someone rates a game as 1-4 out of anger for a game that is in the top 100 or a perfect 10 is generally a waste of time. They should all be removed.
I'm not sure those are always done out of "anger". There are some legitimate turds in the top 100... and others that are decent but shouldn't be anywhere near the spots that they hold on the list. Of course, YMMV-- there are some games I really like that get panned by the majority of pinsiders, and others that I thought were just terrible that some people hold up as all time greats.
Quoted from pezpunk:MMR gets a lot of 1 out 10 scores with comments like "ITS NOT THE ORIGINAL SO ITS CRAP". How is that a useful measure of how the game plays?
Owners of the original who are mad that the value of their machines dropped by 50%.
Quoted from drsfmd:Owners of the original who are mad that the value of their machines dropped by 50%.
the point is, regardless of who or why, they aren't useful or valid reviews of the game.
edit: it appears they were removed! cool!
Quoted from pezpunk:the point is, regardless of who or why, they aren't useful or valid reviews of the game.
Understood completely.
This is MUCH improved. Thank you for your hard work on this!
Quoted from pinwiztom:Did not see grouping of
Black Knight and Black Knight Limited Edition
Fire and Fire Champagne edition
Eight Ball Deluxe ( all three editions - different Cabinet versions)
Speakeasy (2P) and Speakeasy4 (4P)
Centaur and Centaur II
Big Bang Bar (Capcom vs later remake)
Harley Davidson (Sega/Stern) did 3 editions did it not
Also: South Park Sega and South Park Stern are the same game.
And... Nascar and Grand Prix are the same game.
But, Shrek and Family Guy are not!
robin ,
Is there a possibility for updating the Splash / Machine info to allow for hyperlinks?
https://pinside.com/pinball/archive/star-trek-the-mirror-universe
as I specifically wanted to provide links to the Star Trek Wiki and to the worklog for the pin.
Quoted from Dee-Bow:Still find it weird that aerosmith is already a top 20 game!
Of course it is--it's the newest Stern
Awesome. I like it... well, at least for now... I give the new rating system a 8.9/10 but it has the potential to go up once a few code updates are released.
Quoted from robin:To be honest, this has never been requested by anyone. I know Hobbit has an LE, a Smaug LE and a Black Arrow LE - but to be honest, aren't they all exatly the same? Just like Stern Premium/LE games which are also grouped.
Look, we could obviously make entries for every single version of a game, but the way Pinside is set up (with each entry having its own Game Archive page and upload section, etc etc. It just doesn't make sense.
I am considering adding a possibility to mark a collection item and note which version it is. But other than in that area, I do
That's fine. I was just pointing out that it is a bit of a descrepency -- to list some games separately that differ only by cosmetic features but not other games. There are a lot of cosmetic differences between a standard WOZ and a RR WOZ for instance.
Quoted from colonel_caverne:Why the 4 rating sections have disappeared in the rating menu of each pin?
is it possible to get back the detail of each rating pin in the ratings menu? i like to check ratings of Game design, Artwork, Sound and Other aspects, better than final rating.
thanks
Grouping similar tables is a nice feat. But the top100 will always been a totally unuseful and misleading list. People simply give top marks to their machines, especially the expensive ones. That's all about it. The valuable thing here are the reviews: read them and you can often perceive who is being honest and who is not, who is an expert and who is not, who has similar tastes to you, etc..
Everybody has different tastes, but if you want to know which ones are the top machines, speak in person with a collector or player with long experience.
Quoted from robin:The weighted average idea was of course considered, but we decided against it because we feel it's unfair if...a Pro edition would drag a great Premium/LE game down.
So instead we have premium/LE games dragging crappy pros up. Aren't there usually more pros sold than premium/LEs? So information on the pro would be more useful to more people? And frankly, if a pro is so stripped back that it would drag the premium/LE down, then the game deserves a low overall rating.
I'm all for clearing out multiple entries for the same game, just better not to do it by glorifying substandard pros.
Quoted from colonel_caverne:is it possible to get back the detail of each rating pin in the ratings menu? i like to check ratings of Game design, Artwork, Sound and Other aspects, better than final rating.
thanks
Sorry about that, it's back now!
Quoted from Circus_Animal:So instead we have premium/LE games dragging crappy pros up. Aren't there usually more pros sold than premium/LEs? So information on the pro would be more useful to more people? And frankly, if a pro is so stripped back that it would drag the premium/LE down, then the game deserves a low overall rating.
I'm all for clearing out multiple entries for the same game, just better not to do it by glorifying substandard pros.
I get your point. And of course, we considered that option too. We had to choose between several different design choices (group lowest, group average, group highest) and after much deliberation, we chose the latter. Our reasoning is that the Prem/LE is the best version of a game and the one representing the game best, as the designer intended it (although this is not always the case, some designers do it the other way around!).
I don't think this means we're glorifying the pro's. We are simply limiting the number of occurrences games can have in our Top 100. It is up to the viewer (you!) to open up and interpret the groups. In fact, you should be glad that those "crappy" pro's now no longer hold separate positions in the Top 100.
Personal note: I've never been a fan of the different versions myself. But Stern smartly caters to different markets at different price points and it's probably their raison d'être. So even though the pro models are "stripped back" (in my opinion sometimes for the better) versions, they are a necessary evil that kept (and keeps) pinball interesting for operators and thus alive.
Effectively grouping games makes the top 100 more visible with more different games. Otherwise, in ten years top 100 will be a top Stern game!
On the other side, pro and premium/LE play different, pro is a premium stripped out game that usually gets a better flow but less good gameplay.
I think the better is to get the availability to get the last ranking by option in the custom section and keep this new one on the main page. Just my opinion.
Quoted from robin:I get your point. And of course, we considered that option too. We had to choose between several different design choices (group lowest, group average, group highest) and after much deliberation, we chose the latter. Our reasoning is that the Prem/LE is the best version of a game and the one representing the game best, as the designer intended it (although this is not always the case, some designers do it the other way around!).
I don't think this means we're glorifying the pro's. We are simply limiting the number of occurrences games can have in our Top 100. It is up to the viewer (you!) to open up and interpret the groups. In fact, you should be glad that those "crappy" pro's now no longer hold separate positions in the Top 100.
Thanks for replying. I still don't agree that displaying the higher score provides the most useful information, but I can see where you're coming from in terms of being fair to the designers. And it's definitely better to have 100 unique games in the top 100 than 50 duplicates.
Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.
Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!
This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/announcing-an-updated-top-100/page/2 and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.
Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.
Bristow, VA
Alkmaar
Biscarrosse
Regina, SK
