Quoted from jgentry:

why is everyone always so up in arms over Dwight?

Quoted from JustLikeMe:

No, he doesn't. In September 2017 he posted the following on the Tilt Forums re GB code:
'I want to be clear. I consider the game to be finished. I think that the game is fun and interesting as is. But there is always room for improvement.'
So it's complete, but there are two inserts that don't relate to anything in the code - including the final wizard mode?
Don't see myself buying another game coded by him for this reason alone. I have faith in Lyman, none in Dwight.

Quoted from T-800:

I just hope the programmers don't tune into this forum too much, and if they do, I hope they have thick skin, as a lot of the topics and comments have to be really demotivating.

Quoted from JustLikeMe:

No, he doesn't. In September 2017 he posted the following on the Tilt Forums re GB code:
'I want to be clear. I consider the game to be finished. I think that the game is fun and interesting as is. But there is always room for improvement.'
So it's complete, but there are two inserts that don't relate to anything in the code - including the final wizard mode?
Don't see myself buying another game coded by him for this reason alone. I have faith in Lyman, none in Dwight.

Quoted from rosh:

Early on I decided to not number Houdini releases that way, since people look at .9 and say, "oh it is 90% done". I just label releases based on the build date.
I've been asked how do I know it is 'finished', and my general take is, it will be finished either when I run out of ideas or I get sick and tired of working on it. Having said that, the release that included the final wizard mode marked the completion of the major things planned, but that milestone certainly did not represent me being done, but that it has the major components and features intended. The last release was a lot of bugs fixes and feature adds where I now feel the game is living up to the vision I had for it and has no major flaws (well one bug cropped up that I want to address). However, that does not mean that I won't do more.
Although I am currently knee deep in Oktoberfest, I continue to add ideas and thoughts to my Houdini list. Now that I have one at home, I see things I'm just not totally happy with it, maybe something that did not work as I had envisioned, or maybe something that is just off, and I will also get new ideas on how to give things more pizzaz or even ideas for new rules. And while many of these things will likely make it into the game, that does not mean that I consider the current iteration has being incomplete, although I am sure plenty of you would find things that you feel make it otherwise.
As far as what else is this thread, I find it much of it amusing since most of the people here have no clue as to what is involved, what is happening, the challenges that exist, what the developers goals were, etc. I love when you can read two posts back to back, that state the exact opposite things about a game, and both believing they are right and the developer is wrong, since they did not do what you think should be done. The word 'polish' has become some catch-all used when someone feels the game is not compete in their mind or just does not do what they thing it should. The reality is you can take any machine ever made, and if you want, you can find something you can say is 'incomplete' or 'needs more polish', ultimately that is the eye of the beholder. Sure, sometimes a game is clearly missing things, but that is far more often the exception than the rule, despite what reading pinside might make you think. I am sure there are plenty of times the developers would like to do a little more on some of their machines, tweak a few things, add a few things, but the reality is, none of that is really going to change what matters. If you don't like the way the game shoots, if you don't like the reels more 'polish' is not going to change that. Some games you are going to like and some you are not. Some rules you will find fun and challenging, and some won't be your cup of tea. If some missing light show or sound call is ruining the game for you, I suspect there more to it than that. The great thing is there are so many machines to choose from, that you will certainly find ones you like (or you need a new hobby).
For all you guys who think you know what a polished game looks like, I encourage you to try. There are now great resources and technology out there to let you do your own machine, so, rather then spending time on here dissing designers and developers, go try it for yourself. Maybe you will create the next great game or more likely you won't even get one close to being finished, let alone giving it 'polish'. But what is likely, is that you will gain a new appreciation for what designers and developers do, and why a thread with this title and some of this content, is insulting to those who work their assess off to bring these machines to life.

Quoted from rosh:

I get you are teasing. I just think guys get way too focused on little things that don't really matter and let that stand in the way of enjoying a game or worse, let it get in the way of others enjoying it. I agree games should be complete and if a company says there is more to come, then they need to deliver on that. No game should leave an owner feeling it is incomplete. But getting hung up on insert that does not get used in game play or that the light shows are not wow enough, just seems to go a little too far. There is little doubt that Stern left some games feeling incomplete and certainly seems they have tried to correct that, but seems some of this stuff is beyond that, and again, a thread with a title this this is inappropriate, imho.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion on a game and if they want to say they think it needs more 'polish' that is their right to say so, but seems some guys take that too far and turn into something else, and that is what I object to. Just too much nitpicking at time, its pinball for crying out loud, some of these guys need to step back and just enjoy wonderful renaissance we are enjoying. Time is a constrained resource. Designers. developers, artist, animators, composers, etc. due as much as they can to make the best game they can with the time and other resources provided, and within the constraints that are given to them. Seems some guys here lose sight of that, when they look for some thing to pick at. I guess that is why most people in the industry don't spend time here. I was a collector before I was started working in this industry two years ago. I like to try to bring some of what goes on besides the scenes here since I know I enjoyed that. I also like getting feedback and idea, plenty of Houdini owners can point to things they suggested that made it into the game, but there are certainly times when I get why so many don't spend time here.

Hilton has not liked Houdini or AP from day one (and guessing me either for that matter). He seems to seek out opportunities to criticize us. I get that he does not like Houdini, he finds the shots are too tight and challenging, and seems to have never had a good game on it. He is certainly entitled to that opinion, but seems he looks to find reasons to rip on it to somehow justify his feeling about it. That is also his right, but I don't get why he has that need and what void he is trying to fill.
As many of you know I listen to feedback, whether positive or negative, sometimes I agree with it and will take action and sometimes I don't, but I will certainly listen. Some people people love Houdini and some don't, pretty much like every game. There are many folks on Pinside or who I know outside of it, who's opinions I respect, and that has not changed based on whether they like Houdini or not. However, some folks like to be bombastic and over the top, just to get attention or maybe they believe that their opinions are so great, that they need to be shared at every opportunity, and that all of the rest of us would be lesser for not having heard them, when in reality it is the opposite. These are folks whose opinions carry zero weight with me, whether about Houdini or anything else.
It is always easier to tear things down, then to build them -- which is also the case when doing a playfield swap .

I agree, bugs that are hit consistently and cause issue need to be fixed and I don't think Dwight or anyone else does not want to fix those. I have not met anyone in the industry who does not take pride in what they do, and want it to be as good as it can be (given the constraints, resources, etc.)
My point was there is great opportunity for folks to make their own games and doing so will give you far greater insight into what is involved and what goes on and will give them a new appreciation for what is in front of them. Talk to any custom game builder and they will tell you how it was far more difficult and involved then they had imagined. And I can tell you from personal experience going from custom to commercial, takes it up another notch.

Quoted from rosh:

I also find the double standard interesting. It is okay to criticize companies and the people who work there, but, god forbid someone from the industry comments back or disagrees, and it becomes "how dare you say something or disagree with the people who buy games".

Quoted from Rarehero:

I'm listening to the SWL Podcast, and Dwight explained that this is a more 90's style ruleset...simpler and more "feature" based than mode based...he said when you get to a wizard mode, that's "Level 1" - if you get it again it's "Level 2" ...so, don't think of the Wizard mode you'll never see like Valinor...sounds like it'll be more like Monster Bash where it's attainable for good players, but with something different each time you get to it. He also said Ball Save is off by default. So - this is meant to be more of an Iron Man/Tron kick-your-butt & play again game...so setting it up tough and steep will probably alleviate any "problem" if someone finds the game too easy.

Quoted from Rarehero:

Yes, this is the type of design I enjoy. New players can just have fun with the obvious stuff (shoot the characters and enjoy Multiballs) and still have fun and "understand it", seasoned players can dig into the nuance for satisfying scoring strategies. Looks great to me!

Quoted from TheArrrrrcade:

Technically it's in the audits too
[quoted image]

Quoted from jfh:

Listening to Dwight on the Munsters stream last night it’s clear he is passionate about the game. However, it was also clear that one of his goals was to make the game simpler (a throwback). There seems to be a bit of scoring complexity and options, but it’s basically collect 5 characters and jackpots and repeat and is a game designed to be played without ball save (though there is a ball save in the code).
It certainly doesn’t appear the game will have the depth of TWD or BM66, but that doesn’t mean the game won’t be “finished”. To me it looks like it will be fine on location even at the current code level (whatever that is) and it was clear the code wasn’t done yet. I do question whether it will be deep enough to keep an average to above average player in a home environment interested long term.

Quoted from underlord:

Hilton, what do think of TNA? Music sounds great but looks repetitive?

Quoted from pinnyheadhead:

My wife works for Fiserv and I check it out next time I follow her up on a trip. Thanks

Quoted from FalconPunch:

We have have Dwight coming on the head2head podcast his week for a super long interview where we read out all 214 posts above and record his reaction.

Quoted from underlord:

Man oh man, you just cannot help yourself. And you have no clue in titles. I’m joking, to each their own.
I’m making stuff up? I know what stays and what goes. If Dwight went above and beyond like you imply, either he’s just plain incompetent ( highly unlikely!)
Or he is a fan of shallow rules and done. ( I don’t know, I’m not his friend).
I’m not attacking the man, I’m questioning his shallow rule set and it’s long term replayability in a home collection.
Yours is set to private. What are YOU hiding?
Read post #220. He’s living it.