(Topic ID: 262677)

Pinside Top 100 complete joke!!!

By Thunderbird

4 years ago


Topic Heartbeat

Topic Stats

  • 162 posts
  • 81 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 4 years ago by Passave
  • Topic is favorited by 1 Pinsider

You

Linked Games

No games have been linked to this topic.

    Topic Gallery

    View topic image gallery

    image-17 (resized).jpg
    InShot_20200228_013609745 (resized).jpg
    359482B7-DB1F-454C-A8E4-4881ADA308E8 (resized).jpeg
    EAA3C18A-C214-44A0-B743-9D79570082B4 (resized).png
    B89A1994-49EC-4F2D-A114-83194476BEE1 (resized).jpeg
    pasted_image (resized).png
    AgonizingVagueIzuthrush-max-1mb.gif
    pasted_image (resized).png
    There are 162 posts in this topic. You are on page 1 of 4.
    -44
    #1 4 years ago

    Top 100 is meaningless, a farce and irrelevant:

    Growing tired of the complete joke that the supposed Pinside top 100 has become. It is somewhat irrelevant and serves no real purpose. It needs overhauling badly. Boils down to an owners and haters list. Owners pumping up the ratings and haters trying to bring ratings down on great games. Jurassic Park for example debuted at #1 until the haters started rating it 3’s and 4’s. Same thing happened to POTC and on and on.

    That’s why the top 100 should be renamed to “Owners & Haters top 100 bragging & bashing list”. The way it’s setup is near meaningless. Old games and new games should not be on the same list, imo. It is a popularity contest, with new games always being bashed in favor of the old nostalgic games.

    It appears to not be based on how good a game is, rather, people hating on Stern, JJP, American Pinball or Spooky.

    True top 100 games should be listed in order of sales figures, which we will never know, unless any current pinball company went out of business. Doubt B/W sales figures come any where close to the current day HUO market, as there are so many more potential sales in this market than the old location based regimes of the past.

    How do you feel? How should the supposed Top 100 be overhauled? Or are you fine the way it is?

    60
    #2 4 years ago
    pasted_image (resized).pngpasted_image (resized).png
    11
    #3 4 years ago

    I don't think there are any major issues with the top 100 as it currently is. Yeah it's going to have some biases, but I don't really think there's anything you can do about that when your basing it entirely on user reviews. Using sales numbers would be an awful method to rank games though. Sales don't equal quality. Addams Family is a fantastic game, but I don't think it's the best game ever made.

    There is a flagging system for reviews, though I'm not entirely sure what it does. If you see a review that's obviously someone review bombing a popular game, flag it.

    At the end of the day though, no one takes Pinside's (Or any pinball website's) top 100 too seriously. It's meant to be a fun way to rank games and see what the general consensus of them all is. I enjoy watching certain games and seeing how they change in rank over time, even if in the grand scheme of things it makes no difference.

    #4 4 years ago
    Quoted from mystman12:

    I don't think there are any major issues with the top 100 as it currently is. Yeah it's going to have some biases, but I don't really think there's anything you can do about that when your basing it entirely on user reviews. Using sales numbers would be an awful method to rank games though. Sales don't equal quality. Addams Family is a fantastic game, but I don't think it's the best game ever made.
    There is a flagging system for reviews, though I'm not entirely sure what it does. If you see a review that's obviously someone review bombing a popular game, flag it.
    At the end of the day though, no one takes Pinside's (Or any pinball website's) top 100 too seriously. It's meant to be a fun way to rank games and see what the general consensus of them all is. I enjoy watching certain games and seeing how they change in rank over time, even if in the grand scheme of things it makes no difference.

    Well said!!

    28
    #5 4 years ago

    Who cares

    Play the games

    Enjoy the games

    Who cares again

    19
    #6 4 years ago
    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    Boils down to an owners and haters list. Owners pumping up the ratings and haters trying to bring ratings down on great games. Jurassic Park for example debuted at #1 until the haters started rating it 3’s and 4’s. Same thing happened to POTC and on and on.

    Most brand new games skyrocket to the top of the list, then settle down as a wider audience gets a chance to play and own them. That initial spike of ratings is generally caused by hype and fans.

    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    That’s why the top 100 should be renamed to “Owners & Haters top 100 bragging & bashing list”. The way it’s setup is near meaningless. Old games and new games should not be on the same list, imo. It is a popularity contest, with new games always being bashed in favor of the old nostalgic games.

    There are options to sort and filter the list by manufacturers and years.

    The older games have been around considerably longer than the games released in just the past few years, so there are considerably more people who have played them. Personally, I barely have any game time on games released in the past 3 years or so.

    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    True top 100 games should be listed in order of sales figures,

    They are currently based on what people think of them, not how many were sold. Quantity produced/sold doesn't always correspond to quality or popularity. They are entirely different statistics.

    Keep in mind that there are a few titles that had very low production numbers, but are quite popular and very sought after.

    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    Doubt B/W sales figures come any where close to the current day HUO market,

    Actually, production numbers are a fraction of what they were in decades past. To my knowledge, no modern game has come close to 8k-10k production numbers that were sometimes reached back in the day. It's only recently that production numbers have started to climb with the recent resurgence of pinball in general.

    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    How do you feel? How should the supposed Top 100 be overhauled? Or are you fine the way it is?

    It's not meant to be taken too seriously. It just for fun, it maybe helps gauge what games might be generally better than others, and it might help bring attention to games you might not be familiar with.

    61
    #7 4 years ago
    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    It appears to not be based on how good a game is, rather, people hating on Stern, JJP, American Pinball or Spooky.

    Dude it is based on ratings of games, including you own. Medieval Madness 6 ? Original and remake? Munsters you give 9. Come on mate.

    #8 4 years ago

    I love the top 100. It has helped me seek out and play better pins.

    No list of any kind is 100% "fact, " but the pinside list is the most carefully thought out and implemented.
    I enjoy seeing what others consider great and then trying them out myself.

    #9 4 years ago

    They should use the median, not the mean to determine a more accurate #

    Get rid of the top and bottom 10% or so and use the rest as your average.

    27
    #10 4 years ago

    Bwahhaahaha! How can OP call out anybody? You wrote the same review for like 5 games!! You are the problem with the rating system.

    #11 4 years ago

    Perhaps it should be set up like a Hall of Fame and machines need to be at least _ years old to be included?

    To me it is pretty silly to compare great old classic machines and the latest machines anyway.

    Maybe 5 different top 100 machines lists:

    Top 100 woodrails
    Top 100 EM's
    Top 100 flat playfield SS (and include very early ramp machines both here & in the before 2000 list)
    Top 100 SS (before 2000)
    Top 100 SS (after 2000)

    #12 4 years ago

    Everyone knows the #1 game is whichever one has just been released. Except the Beetles. The Beetles sucked.

    35
    #13 4 years ago

    Maiden a 6, and Munsters a 9.853? Hahahahahah

    #14 4 years ago

    We should use a binary system.

    Assuming $1 per play.
    If you had a Dollar, would you Flip it?

    Yes : 1

    No : 0

    14
    #15 4 years ago
    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    Top 100 is meaningless, a farce and irrelevant:

    Thanks for doing your part in helping to make it a farce with your rating contributions.

    #16 4 years ago

    Maybe it’s me but I could care less if any pin I own is in the top 100. I buy and collect what I like !

    #17 4 years ago
    Quoted from whitey:

    Maybe it’s me but I could care less if any pin I own is in the top 100. I buy and collect what I like !

    Couldn’t, not could.....

    #18 4 years ago
    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    Top 100 is meaningless, a farce and irrelevant:
    Growing tired of the complete joke that the supposed Pinside top 100 has become. It is somewhat irrelevant and serves no real purpose. It needs overhauling badly. Boils down to an owners and haters list. Owners pumping up the ratings and haters trying to bring ratings down on great games. Jurassic Park for example debuted at #1 until the haters started rating it 3’s and 4’s. Same thing happened to POTC and on and on.
    That’s why the top 100 should be renamed to “Owners & Haters top 100 bragging & bashing list”. The way it’s setup is near meaningless. Old games and new games should not be on the same list, imo. It is a popularity contest, with new games always being bashed in favor of the old nostalgic games.
    It appears to not be based on how good a game is, rather, people hating on Stern, JJP, American Pinball or Spooky.
    True top 100 games should be listed in order of sales figures, which we will never know, unless any current pinball company went out of business. Doubt B/W sales figures come any where close to the current day HUO market, as there are so many more potential sales in this market than the old location based regimes of the past.
    How do you feel? How should the supposed Top 100 be overhauled? Or are you fine the way it is?

    The only part you got right here is that yes, it is meaningless. Just not for the reasons you stated.

    #19 4 years ago
    Quoted from Pinmeister:

    Everyone knows the #1 game is whichever one has just been released. Except the Beetles. The Beetles sucked.

    Maybe , but The Beatles is pretty good .

    #20 4 years ago

    I'd like to just rate games in order of my preference for the game. Just drag and drop the game to where it fits in your personal list. Then pinside could assign a value for each position on the list, amalgamate for all users and come up with an overall ranking.

    22
    #21 4 years ago
    AgonizingVagueIzuthrush-max-1mb.gifAgonizingVagueIzuthrush-max-1mb.gif
    #22 4 years ago

    I think the top 100 is pretty accurate. The only inaccuracies I see are several of the newer machines that do not deserve there current standing.

    #23 4 years ago

    Never bothered me. Besides, there are many pins that I enjoy that are listed in 101 - 200. Not gonna get butt-hurt over it, though.

    #24 4 years ago

    I usually look at three lists when looking at a pin's rating - Pinside Top 100, Caucasian2Step's ratings from Pinside, and the International Pinball Database (IPDB) For example:

    Caucasian2Step #1 - Twilight Zone
    Pinside #4 - Twilight Zone
    IPDB #1 - Twilight Zone

    This does tend to downplay new pin fever somewhat from the Pinside Top 100 list.

    #25 4 years ago

    I never even look at the 'Top 100' list. I don't care how they are rated. I know what I like and that is what's matters to me.

    #26 4 years ago
    Quoted from EricHadley:

    Couldn’t, not could.....

    #27 4 years ago

    If they made it so a game couldn't be rated until it's been out for 5 (or 10 years) it would probably be more accurate. Take away the shiny new factor and people over-rating games they've just bought.

    #28 4 years ago
    Quoted from nwpinball:

    until it's been out for 5 (or 10 years) it would probably be more accurate. Take away the shiny new factor

    I say 7-12 months give or take. Whenever the first Premium shows up for $6500 or less, the holyshitthisisthegrestestthingevergottahaveitiaminonanleforsuremangotallmymodslinedup phase is over and accurate ratings will start.

    #29 4 years ago

    It’s serves its purpose perfectly.

    How else could people sleep well at night knowing they were justified in buying an $8000 adult toy?

    #30 4 years ago
    Quoted from Wickerman2:

    I say 7-12 months give or take. Whenever the first Premium shows up for $6500 or less, the holyshitthisisthegrestestthingevergottahaveitiaminonanleforsuremangotallmymodslinedup phase is over and accurate ratings will start.

    Code on new Stern games isn't really there in that time frame though is it?

    #31 4 years ago
    Quoted from srmonte:

    I think the top 100 is pretty accurate. The only inaccuracies I see are several of the newer machines that do not deserve there current standing.

    Agreed.

    I find it's uncannily accurate with regards to rating quality of shots and rules; "one more game" feeling...and general fun.

    ....I'm not saying it's perfect, and perhaps it could be tweaked. A couple of weeks ago, there was a thread that developed quite a few good ideas for updating the Top 100.

    12
    #32 4 years ago

    OP - the biggest farce are your own ratings and the creation of this thread.

    5.4 for JJPOTC and 9.8 for Munsters...lol and a cut and paste job for 4 or 5 of your review comments...gimme a break.

    11
    #33 4 years ago
    Quoted from pipes:

    OP - the biggest farce are your own ratings and the creation of this thread.
    5.4 for JJPOTC and 9.8 for Munsters...lol and a cut and paste job for 4 or 5 of your review comments...gimme a break.

    9.8 on a Munsters???????
    Is that for the prettiest machine? !!! The code on that game sucks silver balls.

    #34 4 years ago
    Quoted from kklank:

    9.8 on a Munsters???????
    Is that for the prettiest machine? !!! The code on that game sucks silver balls.

    9.853 to be exact. He’s probably saving his 10 for the Thunderbirds review.

    #35 4 years ago

    Lol, you that are picking on Munsters rating. Exactly the point.

    -12
    #36 4 years ago
    Quoted from pipes:

    OP - the biggest farce are your own ratings and the creation of this thread.
    5.4 for JJPOTC and 9.8 for Munsters...lol and a cut and paste job for 4 or 5 of your review comments...gimme a break.

    The game is a great layout, then choosing through many characters that only change the game slightly and then no reference to the characters again, seems average...hence average score.

    Cut and paste when they blur into similar layout, game play and rule sets. Why write difference if it is all similar?

    This is the point of this post. Hence why top 100 seems frivolous...

    -8
    #37 4 years ago
    Quoted from pipes:

    OP - the biggest farce are your own ratings and the creation of this thread.
    5.4 for JJPOTC and 9.8 for Munsters...lol and a cut and paste job for 4 or 5 of your review comments...gimme a break.

    LOL

    #38 4 years ago
    Quoted from snyper2099:

    It’s serves its purpose perfectly.
    How else could people sleep well at night knowing they were justified in buying an $8000 adult toy?

    Nice point.

    #39 4 years ago
    Quoted from Tommy-dog:

    I never even look at the 'Top 100' list. I don't care how they are rated. I know what I like and that is what's matters to me.

    Makes the most sense...

    #40 4 years ago
    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    Lol, you that are picking on Munsters rating. Exactly the point.

    I’m picking on only YOUR rating. Where it lands in the top 100 seems reasonable at #72 with a 7.9 rating. Rating games based on sales figures as you suggest is complete nonsense. It’s fine the way it is and shouldn’t be taken so seriously. Your ratings might be taken more seriously if you wouldn’t cut and paste the same comment for multiple games. That’s ridiculous.

    #42 4 years ago

    If the machines you own aren't in the Pinside top 10 your games price automatically drops by 10k. Sorry, we don't make the rules, we just make them up.

    #43 4 years ago
    Quoted from Thunderbird:

    The game is a great layout, then choosing through many characters that only change the game slightly and then no reference to the characters again, seems average...hence average score.

    Sorry, what character do you play as on Munsters to warrant a near perfect score? It must be continually referenced during the game but I must have missed that.

    The top 100 is just fine the way it is because ridiculous ratings like yours will get balanced out eventually which is why Munsters sits at #72....where it belongs.

    #44 4 years ago

    I generally only rate games I’ve owned, which I think gives people better insight into how I feel about a game. It also puts them on a pretty even playing field since I understand the rules and the shots very well.

    The exceptions are if I’ve spent a good amount of time on it.

    #46 4 years ago
    Quoted from SkillShot:

    I generally only rate games I’ve owned, which I think gives people better insight into how I feel about a game. It also puts them on a pretty even playing field since I understand the rules and the shots very well.
    The exceptions are if I’ve spent a good amount of time on it.

    Good point and if only everyone did that.

    #47 4 years ago

    Like it or not, the Pinside list and the IPBD list are the only ones out there with enough user inputs to be considered valid.

    #48 4 years ago

    I’d at least give this guy credit for not posting any 10’s or ratings at 5 or below. There are no perfect pins and every machine has some value. If I were to offer a change it would be to list early solid state machines in a separate category. It seems as though true classic early solid states keep getting bumped back by the newer pins with the most toys on the playfield.

    #49 4 years ago

    Consider the list “data”. The list also is the “google introduction “ to new possible pin collectors/ players. How else besides the pinside list ( and IPDB) do people find information on pinball machines?

    At this point do I think MM is the greatest pin of all time? No! Do I think people try to keep the top 4 (MM, MB, TZ, AFM ) in place? Yes! Do I care ? NO!!

    Just use it as what all list are, a collection of people’s input on games. Helps one make decisions in buying/ selling games.

    There are 162 posts in this topic. You are on page 1 of 4.

    Reply

    Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.

    Hey there! Welcome to Pinside!

    Donate to Pinside

    Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!


    This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/pinside-top-100-complete-joke and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.

    Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.