I've had a couple people ask me why I cancelled my order. If you want to know why keep reading. If you don't want to know, don't care or a closed minded fanboy, then stop reading now.
First, let me say that this doesn't have anything to do with not having the money available. I am very blessed to have a good
paying job that I work very hard at which allows me to have the disposable income to dabble in this hobby.
There are 3 main reasons that I cancelled my order.
1. Up until now, the most I've ever spent on a pin is $3300. I've got a HUO LotR in that range and a lightly
routed PotC at that price (yes, it was a while ago). So, while $8000 for a NIB MM is a great price considering what routed machines were going for, it is still a significantly higher price than I've ever paid for a machine before. Even though I pre-ordered on the spot at the announcement, I've come to my senses in the weeks since. There are other titles out there available today for a lower price that I would much rather own.
2. I have pretty strong reservations about the electronics package of this game. The manufacturer has a very
poor history making pinball machines. I have no doubts that the game will work fine out of the box and for the
short term. But, after scouring the photos and video that Rick has made available, I am concerned about the
long term reliability and ease of serviceability. I also suspect that troubleshooting is going to be quite an
endeavor from what I can see. A pinball machine is a pretty harsh environment due to the
amount of vibration the playfield sees (mainly from the solenoids). It takes a lot of knowledge to design for
that environment. Remember, even B/W had a steep learning curve for these conditions (ie: think trough
transmitter and receiver boards for example). From what I can tell from the pictures (very limited), they are trying to
use off-the-shelf stuff where they can which isn't likely to be designed to withstand vibration. I think it's
going to take quite a bit of time (or high usage on route) to flush out the reliability of the design concept
and implementation of mounting all that to the bottom of the playfield.
That said, I hope I am completely wrong and it's more solid than the original. There are other likely titles
to be re-produced in the future that are much more appealing to me than MM. Since this approach will also be
used for those titles, I would love to see it succeed. But, I'm not willing to be the guinea pig/beta tester
for the platform for $8K of my money
3. The final reason is likely to be controversial. I have a very hard time giving money to Rick and PPS right
now given how they've chosen to address the guys doing custom/improved rulesets of B/W games. These guys are doing what they are with no profit motive and purely for the love of the hobby.
I do understand the requirements of copyright holders to defend their rights or lose them. And it is true that,
in an effort to improve the marginal or unfinished code of existing games instead of totally reinvent them, they
were apparently using video clips from the original code. So, PPS could have chosen to make their efforts legal
by giving them a license to use it as long as they did not sell anything or make a profit. By issuing a license, they are takingsteps to protect their copyright while still allowing the projects to exist and continue. Instead, they have
chosen to say "you need to take that out". Is that within their rights? Yup, it sure is. Just like not buying their product is mine.
This opinion is purely mine and not that of the developers. I am specifically referring to the work done to create
Cactus Canyon Continued and Demolition Time. In these cases, the developers were either required to stop
distributing key pieces (needed to make their stuff work) or completely change what they had created. The work
they have done has only improved and continue to advance this hobby. It is only in Rick's best interest to
support these kinds of efforts.
I am really hoping that Rick and PPS reconsider their position.