Oh no, not again.

Far too much of this ridiculous industry is less Dirty Donnie and more dirty money.

This pretty much sums up why my advice to Team Pinball - and by extension, any small group creating a new boutique machine in this day and age with limited resources - has been 'don't be, or call yourself, a manufacturer; position yourself as a studio instead'. Everyone roots for an underdog; everyone loves to follow what folks are creating when it's all about the passion. But the INSTANT money enters the equation, you've shifted the dynamic and placed yourself on the same pedestal as Stern, and the whole community will judge you that way. All the failures of recent years have done this without realising that as well as volume, Stern has impulse-purchase on its side.

TP and Riot both lost nothing, both have the potential to try again in a different fashion, but tarred themselves with the same 'manufacturing' brush at the worst moment for them with their first go. The *only* person to have absolutely nailed it with the public development of a small-run game in exactly the way they wanted it has been Scott Danesi - create something of interest, have the community on your side, and let the project build up its own demand if it deserves to. Mark Incitti is getting there too, but the sticking point is the license and the clash that may cause with the creative vision. Archer required a compromise, but ultimately didn't hurt it a bit. But TNA *only* became a production machine once people knew they really wanted it and in the form it was presented to them - plus Spooky is *right* on that sweet spot between 'studio' and 'manufacturer' and have made it their own. Anyone else wanting to have it both ways is playing with fire.

The obvious question then, based on past histories, is 'how long have things been building up to this?'