Your opionion is wrong too. Panzer has spoken!
And I don't have a gb.

This is the only problem with this thread. People start making fun of each other's choices. Reminds me of the good ole days of Nintendo vs sega arguments. Both were great systems, each slightly different in their own way. We're comparing 2 totally different pins here. Two totally different tastes. We shouldn't be bashing each other, but bashing that dang slimer or orks instead. It's a hobby about games. I enjoy threads comparing pins as long as it's people talking pros and cons, and playing experience. Not when it turns into mocking or degrading others personal preference. I like both and can only afford one of these 2, so I want to get hands on experience reviews that are unbiased.

Played both, really depends on what themes you like and style of play. I'm in on ghostbusters premium.

How did it play?

Hey...it is a pretty cool game

image_(resized).png

Lol...

If pinball machines were intended to be pieces of art, TH would win. But, they're not... MOST people want them to be fun to play as well.

Almost everyone that's played GB has commented positively on how fun the game is.
Almost everyone who has something positive to say about TH talks about how fun they HOPE it MAY BE..... In the future.

If people can't see that HUGE difference.... then no amount of logical discussion will change their minds.

Hobbit, slow and floaty. If you like pop up targets then this game has a ton. I found hitting the pop up trolls from the playfield fun. The third flipper is kind of a waste, almost never used it. The problem is there's no exclusive ramp to hit for the third flipper.

Ghostbusters, fast with numerous shots - some easy, many hard. Game times are much shorter than the hobbit. The only downside I found was out lanes were vacuum cleaners. Kind of reminded me of Iron Man there.

Overall I had more fun with GB and I really like the theme. Hobbit has a slight edge on art package, but I love what zombie yeti did with GB.

Operators are going to love it!

I can live with the gap not sure about vacuum cleaners for outlanes..... dog is definitely not coming near that machine

Almost everyone that's played GB has commented positively on how fun the game is.
Almost everyone who has something positive to say about TH talks about how fun they HOPE it MAY BE..... In the future.
If people can't see that HUGE difference.... then no amount of logical discussion will change their minds.

Completely ridiculous post. Not only do you make many assumptions, but you conclude that the only LOGICAL conclusion is yours. These are all subjective opinions, largely based on emotion. You trying to make someone's definition of "fun" as something logical is absurd.

I played Ghostbusters many times at MGC. I didn't really enjoy it at all, neither did my wife and kids. On the other hand, we all enjoyed Hobbit a lot, enough that we want one someday. Just one man's opinion.

lol... ridiculous why, because you emotionally disagree?

Sure, they are "subjective opinions"... (is there such a thing as an 'objective opinion')

And, *Im* not defining anyone elses concept on fun. Im making a simple observation that MOST (not ALL) of the feedback about GB has been positive. And an observation that TH feedback has been more mixed, and furthermore, many of those that are giving positive feedback about the pin comment about how they have faith the code will improve it (many from people who've waited 2-3 years for this game).

If you'd like to disagree with that observation, feel free, but I think its fairly accurate.

No matter what JJP releases the feedback will be more mixed. If they had released the exact version of GB that Stern released the feedback would also be more mixed. JJP feedback transcends the actual game.

TH is not quite as bad as the movies were... Back when the movies were relevant which they are not. The movies were more forgettable as well.

I have played TH but not impressed.

Another good point for TH is that with such a high price point they can sell half as many GB Pros and make the same money so that is good for JJP. This is a silly thread... Hard to say nice things.

I have not played GB but I can't imagine how it could possible be worse.

Ha, true!

Kiss was a really fun game too the first 20 times I played it. Literally bought it 5 games before I got sick of it and realised there is no substance.
I think both pins are trying to achieve different things. GB looks like instant fun, like kiss, but does it have the legs to stay in a collection and provide years of fun? Check back in a year!

The hobbit is already fun IMO but everyone knows what Keith is capable, and licking their lips over the potential.
IMO Dwight doesn't have a 'masterpiece' pin yet like lyman and Keith do. GOT is great, again... Check back in a year.

Of course it's all up to the owner! Ironman to me doesn't have much substance for a long term pin but people love it and keep it in their collection. So like others have said... Just play both enough to make up your own mind.

That was pretty funny right there.

Nobody was more shocked than me. I bought the VE on a whim planning to push it back out the door three months later. But it can provide pinball satisfaction in less than 3 minutes. No other game I own provides so much so brutally fast. And then it breaks your heart.

I agree, he doesn't have a masterpiece. But GOT might end up being it for him. It came out of the gate VERY strong. I almost ignore the fact that Steve R designed it, because that game is really all about the software to me. But you're right, time will tell.

Tron? + 2 minutes, more satisfaction and no heartbreak

I consider STTNG a masterpiece and Dwight is listed as the lead programmer on IPDB.

I have Tron right next to my IM. Love them both

zodiac is a fun game tho. better than it looks.

Out of curiosity, how many of you guys walk into a friends home, and tell him that his collection is "wrong" because it's not the same as yours?
Idiots. All of you.
Except the guy who called the third flipper on Hobbit vestigial. He's a genius.

Im guessing EXACTLY the same number of people who walk into a friends house and call them an idiot when you disagree with them.

net_toughguy_(resized).jpg

I would never say that. I would say "Hey your games all suck," or "Jesus you buy this shit?" or even "Still collecting D listers eh Tamoore?"

I poke fun and call friends idiots all the time -when I think it's warranted.
All in good fun. I'm just saying that this whole thread is just a bunch of guys telling each other that their opinions are wrong.

By the way, where'd you get my picture?

You are describing Pinside as a whole

Well, based on what Ive seen in the pinside forums so far:

The quality control edge goes to GB....

It seems that people get upset if you like one machine and hate another..to me all machines are great!!! Just some are better than others and we all have are favorites...no one person likes all the same machines...as for me I like the look of the hobbit more than the game play,it is fun, large t.v screen is awesome, I don't spend much time looking at any screen so the big t.v is a waste but real nice and stern should go color lcd ,but smaller screen and get with the times....havnt played g.b yet but the playfully looks more fun than wozs or th ..getting a premiumn g.b but will play pro b for I buy....can't we all just get along....

that's sounds about what I do. Or I do like to throw out the "cookie cutter" comment for the B/W (or stern) DMD snobs.

is that the way the new leg protectors look?

that cabinet looks pretty. makes me want to put that game on the end of the line where you can see it. so awesome, it's not littered with text.

I've played both very briefly.....so my "initial" impressions are open to change down the road.

GB - Fantastic art, cool layout, tight, brutal.....I want one. For a NIB it offers great bang for your buck.

TH - Also a gorgeous game. Has more of a "wow" factor to the uninitiated. Played better than I thought it would...I had a lot of fun on it.....don't want one. Why you ask? #1 Price VS Performance GB kicks it's ass.....it just does when you factor in the cost. #2 My initial fear looks to have come to fruition....long ball times. It's why LOTR left and won't be back. It's why IM is one of my all time favorites. Hobbit was really fun but to own it and really get to know it would end up turning into very long games, which isn't really my cup of tea (and also why WPT ended up leaving). So far the only slowish game I can stand to have longer games on is WMS IJ.

DMD vs LCD - No contest, the LCD on JJP games looks fantastic and really gives it major "crowd appeal" vs it's rivals. Funny thing is I almost never see the screen when I'm playing

if you never see the screen while you play then you need a friend!

I would throw out some of your lines in someone's house...although I'd never set foot in a home with X-Files or SF2 in principle alone.

One thing I don't quite understand, a game with typically long ball times can usually be made more difficult. On Hobbit, I expect removing the center post, outlane posts and increasing the sling shot power would greatly decrease the ball times.

As long as the game still offers satisfaction in mode completions, multiballs and mini-wizard modes, wouldn't it still be fun and similar to a game like IM that has a simpler rule set?

One issue is a good balance between completing everything and game difficulty. The typical thing people rooster around here is "I have my game set up 14% with astroglide on it and removed the flippers and outpost lanes" etc.
That's great, and it will shorten ball times, but do you still have a chance to get to wizard modes and complete modes etc?

I could see it that way anyway...long ball times don't bother me personally; I like games being diff'rent.

Take a game like LOTR. If you make it more brutal like IM, you may not get to Valinor, but I think you would still be able to complete modes, play the multiballs and get to Destroy the Ring, which is more than some games have to offer.

shit most of us can't see valinor on a normal setting and setup the way it should be. I've had 45 min games and still only came about 85% of the way there.

As others have mentioned IM was designed to be brutal, it was also designed so that you can reach most of the wizard modes in a very short period of time if you play well enough. I don't think I've had a single game over 15 minutes (Average is probably 4) on IM and I've done pretty much everything except see DODMB.....which most mere mortals will never see.

On LOTR I had one game go over 2 hours, I had more games than I could ever count go over an hour. Yes I could have set it up harder but then you won't get very deep and see some of the cool modes. It's designed to be deep and designed to take time in order to see those deeper items (much like TSPP). For many people that's a great thing, I'm just not one of them.

But is there really much of a difference between not getting to some of the cool modes because the game is set up hard, or the cool modes not being there like in IM?

I think you can get to Destroy the Ring in 15 to 20 minutes if you concentrate on it.

I'm sure you can, is that the best thing to do though? I don't know LOTR well enough to comment, but it's like TZ. People say TZ is too easy to "beat the game" by getting to LITZ. Sure, you ramp/slot all day and get there pretty quick...of course you lose all the points you would have gotten just to get to LITZ, which doesn't have a lot of points.

You can get there in 15 minutes WITHOUT concentrating on it.

i've never heard TZ referred to as easy. It's one of those games you can get LITZ and the very next game your lucky to get 30 million. It can be very unforgiving.

I think it is a big difference. I want to see what the game has, and I think LOTR would be frustrating if the games were short as IM. Games play as long as they should play. Making it more brutal just to be brutal isn't that much fun.

And you can destroy the ring a lot faster than that. Just work on starting the multiballs, and as soon as it starts, dump the other balls. It is a fun way to play it late at night. A quick DTR and you're done. No modes, no nothing but start and dump out of the multiballs.

Yes

I'm finding it difficult to put what I'm thinking into words.

It seems like there are people who only like short games. Some games come that way from the factory, like IM and it's sounding like GB too.

But I think some games that people dislike solely due to the long ball times can be set-up for short ball times and still be very fun.

If you think of DTR as the ultimate objective on LOTR and remove the outlane posts to toughen it up, ball times should be short with the occasional break through game, providing a similar experience as other short ball time games.

This strikes me as a good thing as game set-up can satisfy both "short ball time" and "explore everything the machine has to offer" type players.

How so?