I am still awaiting my MMR. Are you saying that there will be replacement inserts with diffusers in them? Who is going to change out the inserts. Gulp...

I don't think that's what he saying at all, I think he is saying they will install diffusers into the inserts that are already there.

Can you post a picture of your inserts? Maybe yours are fine so this solution works for you. I feel the other complaints are legit based on the pictures I seen. It's a shame as it sounds like they have no intentions on fixing the ink issue and will install diffusers as a work around instead.

Are they still planning on screening the playfields differently than they had been? This was conveyed to me in a phone call I had with CGC.

Some of the pictures I have seen the insert ink is very thin even with the lights off.

How would one put a diffuser into the insert? Aren't they glued to playfield? Talk to me like a 5 years old because I don't understand what that means or what I the end user would have to do.

It sounds like they are putting something into the recess under the insert. The playfields are already made and the inserts already installed so the diffuser would go underneath the insert. I could see this working to an acceptable level of improvement if the diffuser portion were only affecting the light in the region of the text.

I bet it's like that paper you see in wedding invites (the sudo transparent paper insert made to keep the paper from getting damaged (vellum paper )). It could either go inside the insert or span across the hole attached to the wood. I'd probably use 1 piece to cover all inserts over the holes so it's lit evenly. It will even out and soften the light going to the insert. Softening it will reduce the effects of the facets that are in the backside of the insert. I have an affected MMr as well. I'm not butt hurt about it but figured this would be an easy fix. I'll see if I have any (not too art and crafty without solder or code) and I'll take before/after pics.

It seems like you could stick a piece of cotton in the insert cavity on the back side of the playfield, just to see what that would do. Oops, I don't own an MMR. My comments are not wanted. I apologize.

Sorry fella, but you can't dictate other people's opinions. This is a punt, and once again disappointing. I've already written off CGC... analyzing this project from start to finish, it is obvious they care about profit first, with customer satisfaction a distant second. From shiny gold rails becoming mustard-colored (because a clearcoat on the shiny ones would be too expensive), to the arbitrary removal of coin mechs, to the half-assed response to damaged playfields due to incorrect kicker installation, to this half-assed response to semi-transparent ink. A shame, really.

He has no power here.

power_(resized).jpg

Thanks for the positive and encouraging info, Slate. My MMR hasn't arrived yet but when it does I'm sure looking forward to it.

+1 thanks for the info and I guess the proof will be in the pudding once the fix is implemented. I am also not butt hurt by the issue, just not OCD enough, but any improvement will be appreciated.

Got the same email from Doug. Wonder if they have a plan B if this doesn't work?

Does anyone have a ballpark figure of how much an unpopular playfield would cost the manufacturer?

I suppose we could ask Stern what they pay for WWE playfields.

Stern has the ever popular Rolling Stones on clearance now for $199 on the site.
Maybe WWE $150 few months down the road lol.

In before the personal attack lock

This is great news!

I have a deposit placed on a standard, and am interested to see if this will actually fix the problem. If it gets it even 90% of the way to how the original looks, I will be very happy. Still puzzled why CGC didn't use the original style of inserts...

This is wonderful news!

Will those diffusers have the black lettering on them for those that didn't get enough ink on their playfields?

There's no way you can line up additional black from under the playfield. This will just be a light diffuser, that's all.

MMR diffuser kit.

th_(resized).jpg

Hey Slate,
Saw this thread and just looked at my 132 of 1000 gold. The inserts on mine look fine to me. I have never had one issue since unboxing. Knock on wood. I had a really nice original MM and find my 132 even better...its NIB for cripes sake. Come on over one day and give me some tips to improve my game. Cold beer, Free Play...

This has been my observation as well. Hopefully the proposed fix will be very effective.

Has anyone tried to make a filter? How about a piece of plastic milk jug sandwiched between the LEDs and inserts. This worked pretty good on the Star Trek warp ramp insignia to even out the lighting.

See , this is the part I don't get. Unforeseen? You would think that's why you make a prototype an "see" these issues, and then resolve them sometime in the years before you ship them.

That's just crazy talk

If it was the inserts the earlier shipped games would also have the issue. The problem, from what I can tell after looking at numerous pics of old and new, is that the ink is too thin. Diffusers are a "fix" for games already shipped but moving forward CGC should just print the playfields correctly. Ugh.

I completely agree with this! If it were the inserts the earlier ones would have the same issue. It's the ink!!!!

If it was only the diffusers, wouldn't some of these games be normal?

Must you always poke your head into MMR threads? Always on the negative? Can't you just resist one time? Why not respect the OPs first post and take your trolling to another MMR thread at the very least.
Mercifully jfh has disappeared into the ether. But you are still here, banging away.
Anyway, I'm off to play my shiny new MMR and I don't give a fig if the inserts are a bit dodgy 'cos it's so damn fun, and I know which frigging castle I'm trying to destroy because the machine's SHOUTING IT AT ME!

Not following your misquote of what I said.

The diffusers could certainly help the look of the text on some games. Still doesn't change the underlying issue of poorly screened inserts.

I have 137 and it looks great but my 673 is kinda thin on the lettering. Looking forward to the tweak but still happy enough with the thin lettering. "It's NIB for cripes sake.."

MMR threads are getting to be like the game itself....after just a few minutes the trolls pop right up lol thankfully one has been ejected already at least 2 more to go to keep this thread on a positive course. I think folks should wait to see how well CGC's diffusers work before saying they won't work it really depends on the material used to make them. FYI I was looking at my RBION PF yesterday (about 100 plays total and mint) it uses the same style inserts as MMR. Most of the text on them is white with a black outline. After switching over to LEDs I can see the same level of transparency on the black outline and even some light coming through the white part of the text. On MMR it is much more apparent because it's just the black ink also I'm sure it would be tough to screen those King inserts where the text is so small that if they were backed in white it would be really hard to line up both layers so that one was not offset by the other.

image_(resized).jpeg

First, thank you for posting the information, I'm very happy that you are pleased with the proposed solution from CGC.

Second, the assertion that anyone who doesn't own or have on order an MMR is not qualified / allowed to comment on the situation is absurd. This is a pinball forum with a lot of passionate people, many of whom represent potential customers for this title, new or 2nd hand, as well as any additional titles that they remake down the road. Just because you find a solution acceptable does not mean all others will, nor does it dictate how that solution might impact the value of these games on the market. Furthermore it is likely that CGC reads these threads and I for one believe it's good for them to hear from potential customers whose view of the situation may differ from yours.

But does this actually make sense - you are saying the inserts became more faceted and reflective at some point during manufacturing?

It was brought to CGC's attention years ago when the sample MMr machines were making the rounds that their playfields lacked the frosted over inserts that the original Williams playfields had, making the lit inserts harder to read than the original. They brushed it off this feedback. Now, they are trying to retro-actively apply it via diffusers.

The original AFM playfields also rely heavily on frosted over inserts. I wonder if CGC will apply a similar solution to an AFM remake.

True. On the other hand, some have already made crystal clear what their opinion of PPS/CGC/Rick/MMR was, so there is probably no need to repeat it in every MMr thread.

In other words, MMr owners are obviously the most affected and are of course the people expected to contribute the most to this thread. Does not mean we should ban useful contributions from non MMr owners, as long as they do not fall into the "Broken Record" category. Also remember this is a sensitive issue so... be nice!

In any case, we will all be waiting for the final verdict when the new software, diffusers and this kit are installed.

I told pps that I could wait for the ink issued to be resolved before building and shipping my game. I got a response saying that the thin ink playfields are being sorted out of inventory and that no more thin ink playfields will be used in any further games being built. So I gave them the OK to proceed. It was shipped yesterday, so I can verify this when it arrives.

I'm not an MMR owner (yet) but I'm very likely soon to be, so I've been following this.
I think the diffuser plus software adjustability sounds really promising. - Thanks for sharing this!

I wonder (in the meantime) if anyone that has received their MMR is feeling experimental, you could cut down a diffuser from a kitchen fluorescent (they sell replacements at your local lighting or home improvement store) or they have them at photography shops. Cut it a little small for the insert, then use a little sealant tape on the outsides of the cut plastic diffuser pieces to keep that sharp plastic from scarring the whitewood in your insert-hole. Just as a stop gap until the recommended solution ships, ya know?

Anyway, good luck MMR peeps.

At the risk of venturing into said broken record territory let me make a Pinside suggestion that, at this point, I think both "sides" of the MM/MMR debate can finally agree on. There needs to be a separate Pinside marker (or whatever they are called) for this (and all future) remake titles. Both share playfield layouts, but given they are built at different times, by different companies, and using clearly different designs on the overall machine we really need a specific MMr category. No matter which someone thinks is "better", in the future going forward when used games are changing hands it really does make a difference if it's a WMS from 1997 or a CGC from 2016. IMHO.

For marketplace purposes yes, but for ratings and the likes I think it is still better to keep them under one title. Maybe have a designator like there is with condition. Hell, a lot of OG MMs have Mirco or restored playfields. Details of lineage and model type are generally going to be mentioned in a FS thread anyhow so making the need for a designator moot.

yes, I did just argue with myself

I think a case can be made that folks are clearly beginning to feel that one or the other does play better than the other. And beyond a doubt it is important from a marketplace perspective. Maybe a solution would be 2 entries, both called Medieval Madness, but with one listed as WMS 1997 and the second as CGC 2015?