(Topic ID: 298439)

Impose temporary ban on ratings for new releases

By Knxwledge

3 months ago


Topic Heartbeat

Topic Stats

  • 74 posts
  • 48 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 3 months ago by Knxwledge
  • Topic is favorited by 3 Pinsiders

You

Linked Games

No games have been linked to this topic.

    Topic poll

    “Impose ban?”

    • Yes, > 1 year 51 votes
      29%
    • Yes, ≤ 1 year 46 votes
      26%
    • No that's dumb 77 votes
      44%

    (174 votes)

    Topic Gallery

    View topic image gallery

    Top 100 (resized).jpg
    Trogdor100 (resized).jpeg
    F0AE5645-DF40-41BA-8F22-37E34430385E (resized).jpeg
    C041E5DD-28C1-4CAF-8C4F-803AEF5E09DE (resized).png

    There are 74 posts in this topic. You are on page 1 of 2.
    12
    #1 3 months ago

    Every new game hits the Pinside Top 100 list as soon as it's released (see Mando at number 1). I see a lot of people pumping the ratings up and getting stars, while a lot of people who have valid criticisms getting flagged. I think it would be best to impose a ban on ratings for new releases until they mature and the hype dies down. My initial thought was 6 months, but maybe to be in contention with the greats that have stood the test of time 30+ years, it should be longer... or maybe you think it's a dumb idea. VOTE NOW!!!!!

    #2 3 months ago

    my take: it doesn't matter and no one takes the ratings seriously i've learned

    also, gotta make sure your $8,000 investment was a good one, which is why new pins are rated high

    #3 3 months ago
    Quoted from Chet_Hardbody:

    also, gotta make sure you're $8,000 investment was a good one, which is why new pins are rated high

    I didn't wanna say it in my initial post, but yes, this is a big reason IMO. I don't care about the ratings either; play what you like. But right now they pretty much mean nothing. I think this fix could help a lot

    Do you have a Hardbody? Would suit your name

    #4 3 months ago

    And how would removing the ability of people to rank the newest pinball machines help drive traffic and participation to Pinside, which is the entire point of the ratings system?

    It wouldn't.

    If Pinsiders ran pinside it would be tits up in a month!

    #5 3 months ago
    Quoted from CrazyLevi:

    And how would removing the ability of people to rank the newest pinball machines help drive traffic and participation to Pinside, which is the entire point of the ratings system?
    It wouldn't.
    If Pinsiders ran pinside it would be tits up in a month!

    Is the rating aspect what really drives people to the site? I would have thought it would have been the buying/selling and discussion forum part. I don't mean this as a rhetorical question. I'm genuinely asking, because I'm no Pinside veteran. I'm not saying the quality of the game can't be discussed (obviously!)

    #6 3 months ago

    * I do think the current list is silly *

    That said, I would not wish to arbitrarily omit new games from being in the top 100 list.

    It is what it is... there are perhaps some adjustments to be made to the weighting, but can't make everyone happy, particularly when your goal is to boost the incumbants.

    #7 3 months ago

    We all get excited when we get a new toy. No game is a 10, and no game is a 0, so extreme voting should be moderated. Other than that, the game will eventually settle into it's rightful position....as they all do. Where is former number one TNA these days?

    #8 3 months ago
    Quoted from Knxwledge:

    Is the rating aspect what really drives people to the site?

    It is one of many things that drives people here, via google searches. Locking out the hottest new releases in the name of the impossible fantasy of somehow "perfecting the top 100" would be an inane decision from that standpoint, counterintuitive to the goal which is to bring in revenue.

    #9 3 months ago
    Quoted from CrazyLevi:

    It is one of many things that drives people here, via google searches. Locking out the hottest new releases would be an inane decision from that stand point.

    I think I would have to disagree, I don't think people unfamiliar with Pinside are typing "Stern Mandolorian ratings" into Google. The info/about page for the machine would still exist, the forum topics discussing it would still exist (hell, people could even make unofficial polls about the quality of the game if they wanted), it would still be able to be bought and sold. All I'm doing with this suggestion is trying to make the top 100 list more accurate, not stifle discussion or search results.

    #10 3 months ago

    I think a game should need 500 ratings to crack the top 10. Otherwise, it’s fair game.

    #11 3 months ago

    Who cares, ratings are rigged. Why is this such a big deal?

    #12 3 months ago
    Quoted from tilt-master:

    Who cares, ratings are rigged. Why is this such a big deal?

    It keeps people up at night and it's absolutely insane.

    #13 3 months ago
    Quoted from tilt-master:

    Who cares, ratings are rigged. Why is this such a big deal?

    I've pretty consistently thought and expressed that people should play whatever they like in spite of the ratings, but this "Why do you even care, bro?" argument is so lame. How are the ratings rigged? What would you do to change that instead of my suggestion? Let's have an interesting discussion here and not act like you're too cool for it.

    For me personally, most newer games don't grab my attention (look at my wishlist/collection). Most games in the top 100 are 90s or newer. My interests have no correlation to the Top 100 list, but that doesn't stop the list from being a joke. I have no horse in this race besides trying to make the forum better, and having an interesting discussion about it.

    #14 3 months ago
    Quoted from SLAMT1LT:

    We all get excited when we get a new toy. No game is a 10, and no game is a 0, so extreme voting should be moderated. Other than that, the game will eventually settle into it's rightful position....as they all do. Where is former number one TNA these days?

    If you remove 10 and 0, you'll get 9 and 1 instead.

    #15 3 months ago

    Look at the IPDB rating system. Eventually they even themselves out. A game takes a while to break in.

    Robin has said he’s working on this many times and soon we will see the new and improved system. It takes time to handle such a delicate beast.
    Once the new rating system is out we will see the floodgates open on “WTF THE OLD SYSTEM WAS FINE!! THIS IS TOTAL RIGGED CRAP AND I HATE IT! Here’s a poll agree with me that Pinside needs to change it back so I can pump and dump again!”

    #16 3 months ago

    Won’t happen.

    Even if you did you just delay the inevitable.

    #17 3 months ago

    If you are allowed to control the system this way the results would ve even more inaccurate than they already are.

    #18 3 months ago
    Quoted from RustyLizard:

    If you are allowed to control the system this way the results would ve even more inaccurate than they already are.

    I think they’d be more realistic

    It’s pretty lame that every single new game is the best game ever.

    Today’s example: “I wonder how good mando is?” (Checks rating)
    “WOW it’s got 10’s across the board!!!”

    Proposed example: “I wonder how good mando is?” (Checks rating)
    Pinside message: “Sorry, this game is too new for a fair rating. Check back in ## months”

    #19 3 months ago
    Quoted from mrm_4:

    I think they’d be more realistic
    It’s pretty lame that every single new game is the best game ever.
    Today’s example: “I wonder how good mando is?” (Checks rating)
    “WOW it’s got 10’s across the board!!!”
    Proposed example: “I wonder how good mando is?” (Checks rating)
    Pinside message: “Sorry, this game is too new for a fair rating. Check back in ## months”

    probably should be a minimum number of plays to rate a game but thats unverifiable.50 plays ?

    #20 3 months ago

    Here's my question. Why do people care so much? The lists are meaningless, and only as good as who actually does them, and does them honestly. Which...as we all know, isn't happening. Quit looking at them. I never do and my life is awesome.

    #21 3 months ago

    I like watching the new titles get their week or two at number one, then get shot down a bit, then stabilize. It's fine. Eventually the worthy titles stay up high, and the lesser titles stay down low. It's just not a problem.

    #22 3 months ago

    Games always find their place over time, I wouldn't worry about the temporary initial bump.

    #23 3 months ago

    For me it’s more about how long the rater not the machine has been around. I typically ignore ratings from new members and scan for well written views from longer term members, particularly ones that share my game priorities. I’m not putting down the opinion of new members and know some have been in the hobby a long time but overall it takes time/experience to gain perspective. I cringe at some of my early ratings.

    #24 3 months ago

    A list ranking pins is no different than a list ranking movies. It's all subjective, and not to be taken as fact.

    I'd like to make a list of the top 100 colors. I bet some shade of blue would be #1.

    #25 3 months ago

    There is no ratings integrity anymore. Too many douches trying to "protect their investment" with fudged ratings. They have ruined the Top 100.

    #26 3 months ago
    Quoted from hank527:

    I think a game should need 500 ratings to crack the top 10. Otherwise, it’s fair game.

    That's it - maybe 300 would be enough, but 500 surely would be better.
    It's really lame and boring to see any new game shooting up to number one.
    All of this could be stopped by a certain number of ratings for new machines, and no improved Pinside-system would be neccessary.

    #27 3 months ago
    Quoted from Chet_Hardbody:

    my take: it doesn't matter and no one takes the ratings seriously i've learned
    also, gotta make sure your $8,000 investment was a good one, which is why new pins are rated high

    Makes me laugh, the pin is a perfect 10!

    Also for sale 6 months or less after being rated.

    #28 3 months ago
    Quoted from pcprogrammer:

    Games always find their place over time, I wouldn't worry about the temporary initial bump.

    If a game is rated a perfect 10, impossible under the current system.

    #29 3 months ago

    Boardgamegeek uses a minimum number of ratings to calculate the overall Top 100/200/300. Board games start with a weighted average rating of five and, thus, they can’t break the Top 100 with only a handful of ratings.

    You still get the ‘early adopters rate everything 10’ phenomenon, but it has less of an impact and it requires a larger number of people to get excited about the new ‘hotness’. By the time a game has received a lot of ratings, it means a lot of people have bought and played it, which generally means it is - at least - quite good.

    Personally, I find the ‘overrating of new releases’ to be a problem. I wouldn’t have a clue how to choose a recent Stern machine because there are only a couple of places anywhere nearby to play them ‘in the wild’, and I’m not comfortable paying $6-9k in the UK for something I haven’t played to death first. If I can’t trust the ratings systems not to be dominated by ‘the new hotness’ either, I’m pretty screwed at that point.

    [NB: I am new to owning a physical pinball machine. We bought a Fish Tales during lockdown after we’d both played it to death on the Williams iOS app].

    #30 3 months ago

    I think more appropriate would be for older ratings to not be used in the calculations after a length of time (5yrs, 10yrs?), and only be included after new ratings.

    AcDc (IMHO) was as close to a 10 as was possible when it first came out, now however there are games that have surpassed that in terms of code, sound, display, etc. (again IMHO)

    How many people go back and lower their ratings of games they rated 5yrs ago to reflect their standing against all games now available?

    MB, AFM, TAF, TZ etc. can't stand up as well against as they do if they were rated now.

    #31 3 months ago

    Imposing this rule to improve the useless ratings system would be like giving a corpse a manicure.

    #32 3 months ago

    You can filter the ratings to see them different ways if you pick "Custom" ratings. If you select "Minimum Ratings Received" be at least 100, then 8 out of the top 10 are Bally Williams games, and only 2 recent games show up. This is probably a little more accurate, although it's very easy for a group of people to pump up one game.
    Maybe Pinside could add a few more options to the "Rating Period" choices. Right now, you can only exclude older games. If you could filter out newer games, that would achieve what the OP was looking for and allow people to see how games stand the test of time.

    #33 3 months ago

    I haven’t looked at the top list in years, it’s useless most of the time.

    How about 2 lists. Top games of all time and top games in the last 5 years, and it would take a certain number of votes to get into the all time list.

    How about the inability for one user to rate multiple games he same. Force them to pick, (eg. You can’t have everything you score as a perfect 10 you have to pick an order.)

    #34 3 months ago
    Quoted from WJxxxx:

    I think more appropriate would be for older ratings to not be used in the calculations after a length of time (5yrs, 10yrs?), and only be included after new ratings.
    AcDc (IMHO) was as close to a 10 as was possible when it first came out, now however there are games that have surpassed that in terms of code, sound, display, etc. (again IMHO)
    How many people go back and lower their ratings of games they rated 5yrs ago to reflect their standing against all games now available?
    MB, AFM, TAF, TZ etc. can't stand up as well against as they do if they were rated now.

    You are aware that I recently rated MM and AFM, right? I've played them both on the computer and in real life.

    I've also played TZ, CC, A:IQ, Batman '66, Metallica, AC-DC, Total Nuclear Annihilation, Space Station (online), Space Shuttle (real life), ST:TNG, No Good Gofers (RL and online), TAF, Alien Poker, Black Hole (online only), Stern Star Trek (online only) and GB (online only) and Embryon. I own Fish Tales.

    MM and AFM are very good shooters with relatively easy to understand rules - as, actually, is Fish Tales.

    I personally find TZ and TAF overrated because mechanical pop-up gizmos aren't nearly as impressive in 2021.

    The top-rated new Sterns have great lighting OOTB and incredible rules complexity but, if you actually want to shoot targets, they're no better (or worse) than the best Golden Age machines. I can definitely see the appeal if you're not especially interested in high score chasing, are interested in seeing new stuff constantly, and don't want the hassle of maintenance. Also, if you're a fan of licensed themes.

    It's not an age thing. I'm 41 and my son, aged four, loves online FH (no idea why).

    #35 3 months ago
    Quoted from SLAMT1LT:

    and no game is a 0

    Found someone who hasn't played Thunderbirds!

    #36 3 months ago

    Not an issue. Happens with every new release, and it eventually falls. Let the new titles and those who bought them have their day in the sun, it’s good for the hobby in the long run.

    #37 3 months ago
    Quoted from mrm_4:

    I think they’d be more realistic
    It’s pretty lame that every single new game is the best game ever.
    Today’s example: “I wonder how good mando is?” (Checks rating)
    “WOW it’s got 10’s across the board!!!”
    Proposed example: “I wonder how good mando is?” (Checks rating)
    Pinside message: “Sorry, this game is too new for a fair rating. Check back in ## months”

    Mando can't have 10's across the board because you have the ability to rate it differently.

    #38 3 months ago

    There is a rating system?

    #39 3 months ago

    I've never considered rating a game....seems like a waste of my time. But I can see how it would be fun to mess with the ratings when people care this much about nothing.

    #40 3 months ago
    Quoted from JodyG:

    Found someone who hasn't played Thunderbirds!

    Or hasn't played Whoa Nellie!

    #41 3 months ago

    Seems like everyone is referencing Mando, but Rick and Morty is at #2. It’s a fine pin, but it’s not the second best pin of all time. I say that being a huge fan of Spooky.

    I think the best “fix” is to just require a minimum amount of reviews before posting a score.

    #42 3 months ago
    Quoted from Krupps4:

    Seems like everyone is referencing Mando, but Rick and Morty is at #2. It’s a fine pin, but it’s not the second best pin of all time. I say that being a huge fan of Spooky.
    I think the best “fix” is to just require a minimum amount of reviews before posting a score.

    Time would help to "cool" ones feeling about ones purchase. Disabling the rating for a preset amount of time but allowing reviews would also help.

    People would have to articulate why a pin was good rather than just adding 10s like a monkey.

    -1
    #43 3 months ago

    I say every new game goes straight to #1 by default. That sure gets a lot of people worked up and generates more posts/traffic on pinside. If you just leave a bunch of old games in top 10, nobody cares.

    #44 3 months ago

    I use the top 100 as a guide only.

    I simply remove the titles that don’t rate in my opinion. I also check my judgement by looking at two behind it. Are they better or worse.

    It’s not that number one and number two are not good games. They are just not better than the two behind it.

    Rinse and repeat. I also use the whole shebang to make my want list, too.

    Again, I grain of salt the whole thing.

    C041E5DD-28C1-4CAF-8C4F-803AEF5E09DE (resized).pngF0AE5645-DF40-41BA-8F22-37E34430385E (resized).jpeg
    #45 3 months ago
    Quoted from Pablito350:

    A list ranking pins is no different than a list ranking movies. It's all subjective, and not to be taken as fact.
    I'd like to make a list of the top 100 colors. I bet some shade of blue would be #1.

    I like this analogy. Mando is Fast and Furious #9. Medieval Madness is the Godfather.

    #46 3 months ago

    People may be taking this whole thing too seriously. There is no "prize" for a high ranking. It isn't determining the seeding for the NCAA Tournament,

    This how I look at it...

    1- I ignore anything that is artificially high due to the low number of ratings (i.e. Mando LE, Rick and Morty standard, and etc). Look at the other versions in the group instead.

    2- Ignore the actual ranking and view everything in tiers

    Tier 1 Games from #1 to roughly IJ/TAF - T

    his tier comprises the games that most people would call #1. Not every game... but probably 80% of most players' #1 will be found in this tier.

    Tier 2 - Where Tier 1 leaves off to roughly Shadow/Funhouse
    Games that almost everyone likes, but not necessarily in the running for "greatest game ever"

    Tier 3 - From where tier 2 leaves off to roughly #100
    Games that are very popular, but generally, have some negative aspects that keep them from being elite

    Tier 4 - basically the next 100 or so

    Above-Average to average games - most people like to play them, but usually have some sort of drawback

    Tier 5 - Average to below-average - Between 4 and 5

    Mostly ignored games... very little love, but not bad enough to be remembered as terrible

    Tier 6 - The bottom - last 10% or so

    Games might be fun to some players, but there is a sizable group that has serious issues with them

    ***edit - I am adding this***

    My point for typing all of that... if you are looking at the list thinking there is some huge difference between #8 and #14, or #50 and #75 then you are fooling yourself.

    #47 3 months ago

    I never cared about the rating system. Who cares what others think play and enjoy the games you like.

    #48 3 months ago
    Quoted from Veemonroe:

    Boardgamegeek uses a minimum number of ratings to calculate the overall Top 100/200/300. Board games start with a weighted average rating of five and, thus, they can’t break the Top 100 with only a handful of ratings.
    You still get the ‘early adopters rate everything 10’ phenomenon, but it has less of an impact and it requires a larger number of people to get excited about the new ‘hotness’. By the time a game has received a lot of ratings, it means a lot of people have bought and played it, which generally means it is - at least - quite good.
    Personally, I find the ‘overrating of new releases’ to be a problem. I wouldn’t have a clue how to choose a recent Stern machine because there are only a couple of places anywhere nearby to play them ‘in the wild’, and I’m not comfortable paying $6-9k in the UK for something I haven’t played to death first. If I can’t trust the ratings systems not to be dominated by ‘the new hotness’ either, I’m pretty screwed at that point.
    [NB: I am new to owning a physical pinball machine. We bought a Fish Tales during lockdown after we’d both played it to death on the Williams iOS app].

    That rating system sounds much better. Those board gamers are pretty smart.

    #49 3 months ago

    I really don't follow the ratings. However, if the goal is to keep the newer stuff out of the Top 100 until the ratings become a bit more realistic, just make a category for the releases of the past year. After a game has been out in the wild for a year, it could then be moved into the Top 100. If people are obsessed with screwing with the ratings thinking that it boosts their value, they'd have less motivation to do so since they'd only impact a much smaller list of pins.

    I find it sad people would do this kind of nonsense just to boost the value of a game. Experienced collectors know better, but anyone new to the habit could get played by the deadbeats that do these kinds of things just to sell a pin.

    #50 3 months ago
    Quoted from NorCalRealtor:

    That rating system sounds much better. Those board gamers are pretty smart.

    Many are here on pinside. I would say you are 100 percent correct on their intelligence.

    I try to get in there and play, but I’m not so sure about my own intelligence. (Compared to the board gamers I know)

    There are 74 posts in this topic. You are on page 1 of 2.

    Hey there! Got a moment?

    Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside