Nice work!

WHAT! No Gilligan's Island
Something wrong there!

yay! Great work!

Reviews will always be problematic because of the financial interests of owners of machines but I think these are some good steps.

I like it. Only exception I think would be something dramatic like bop 2.5 versus original. Just food for thought.

Thanks Robin - so much cleaner now.

And welcome Gottlieb Spirit to the top 100!

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

Just let me say thanks for all you do here Robin, it would be my pleasure.

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

Check out the custom list tab and various tab at the top of the top 100 page. You can divide it up many different ways.
Oh, I just checked. The custom tab is currently not working.

Robin; great work.

Oh, that will be very cool when functioning.

I think it would be cool to create a custom result of "accredited" reviewers.

Looks great Robin.

Much needed change, great work!

Awesome change. Thank you for doing this.

Great job Robin! Thanks for listening!

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.

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.

Great job! I love it. That's a very smart solution!

Maybe the Em section could have the 2/4 players combined also. ??
Edit. I guess that's a little tougher due to different named games.

Woah the last time I checked the top 100 TWD was in position 95 ish

If you scroll down on the ratings page for a game, there are two history graphs available.

https://pinside.com/pinball/archive/medieval-madness/ratings

Pinside is the most advanced "forum" and rating site I've seen. Thanks for all the hard work Robin! The below is a great example of the awesome tools available here.

TWD is a good game to use this feature:
https://pinside.com/pinball/archive/the_walking_dead/ratings

You can see the pinside conversations happening in the ratings.
Phase 1: Initial release, high praise
Phase 2: Trending downward. People waiting on code update and complaining about pop sending the ball SDTM
Phase 3: Trending upward. Code updated. People learn to live with or tweak pop exit.
Phase 4 ??? We will see.

Great work guys!

You could combine Centaur and Centaur II. They are the same game. Thanks for the updated ratings. I prefer this method.

Thanks for making this much needed change.

Much better, Thanks!

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...

Great changes Robin. Even though it is just a list of opinions, this seems like a much better way to address putting them together.

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?

looks like some nice improvements to make the list more valid/accurate/representative.

thanks robin and martian

what i would like to do (or to know) and this is the question of TexasJustice, is it possible in the custom section to get a ranking with selecting only a date range ratings? for exemple, i would like to have the top 100 of ratings from 2010 to nowadays. Possible?

Speaking to my point above, I think it would be awesome to create a custom top 100 that only calculate the last X reviews of a particular title, or perhaps the last 6 months (user choice) of reviews for each title. Would give a much more relevant chart as to how people feel about the games today (relatively speaking).

It would be cool to see what percentage of pinside collections contain that game. this way you can gauge the popularity vs game rank for some cool analysis.

-c

Thank you Robin for all your hard work! Pinside is one of my favorite places to visit. Great job!

Are previous rankings from before today back adjusted to fit this new model? i.e. if I look at what a game was ranked at in June 2011 - is using this new model or the previous model for its data point?

Regardless, NICE UPDATE!

Bump,Azmodius: Thank-you,You ROCK !! Really fine job!!!

awesome

awesome

do you plan for the update to carry over to the specific sub list such as by manufacturer? As now the top 20 Stern pins are represented by like 12 pins and their various clones.

Much needed change.

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

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

Great jog Robin and staff and to the Pisiders that take your time to come up with good ideas to incorporate. This site rocks overall!

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.

Same goes for replay vs. add-a-ball versions. Same game, different reward for "winning".
Example: Lucky Hand Jacks Open Lucky Card are all the same game but appear on the EM top 100 in positions 1 and 22.

Nice work.

The game play differences make that problematic I believe. They're just too different imo.

Shouldn't this list actually start at #174? The Em top 100 ends at #173.
This list is like the NCAA Invitational, amirite?

Great job!!! I really appreciate all of your effort, time and work you do for Pinside.

Everyday I get some type of information to improve my collection and play.

Thank you

Thanks Robin! These are much needed changes.

I would suggest two further changes for the future:

1) Increase the minimum number of reviews needed to qualify to be in the top 100-- with games that don't have a lot of reviews, a single person who gives a game very high ratings can "move the needle".

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.

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.