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

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.

The real 'tops' only count if they've been out for 5+ years (or more probably) and have staying power. Just because they flopped at release doesn't mean people don't grow to appreciate them later, or when they find their crowd. No different than other entertainment. This is why you see so many 90's games at the top. The only reason new Sterns even break the top 100 is because of the way the Pinside calculations work. They need more time to settle. There shouldn't be ANY games released in the last year that are in the top 10....at least for another 5+ years.

Also, as for Munsters, which seems to be OP's big concern, it is pretty widely panned here. I wouldn't expect it to be high, since even many Stern fans dislike it.

Except Stranger Things deserves what bad press it gets. The only ones getting bent out of shape are the ones who bought it...wonder why that is

Not sure you know how top anything works. Because all top lists are personally subjective. There are very few things in this world 100% of people are going to agree on, so no matter how you cut it someone is going to come along and start a thread complaining about how it is done.

Let's say they change it, but it has the opposite effect of what you want? Are you going to rant about it again? The reason people are short is, you are complaining because what YOU want to be on top isn't. In the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter at all. It's supposed to be a fun little 'game'. It means nothing. In fact, they could completely remove it, and it wouldn't affect Pinside at all.

And as the person above me mentioned, the numbers are there. The ones on top are there for a reason and actually represent what is most likely as true as it can get on a slice of pinball that is represented by Pinside. Unlike something that was just released last month.

Your statements in the original post are incorrect (as has been pointed out multiple times), thus influencing what you think it should be.

Uh, no, they aren't.....

We know that the numbers are lower overall now. The only difference is that NOW more people are buying for home use. In the past, they sold MANY MANY MANY more to bars.

If we are lucky, yes, those numbers will exceed the past, but back then they were cranking out games like crazy.

No, we don't know 'exact' numbers. We do know it is nowhere near that many for 1 machine. So yes that is enough information.

the real intent comes out. You say people can't rate it fairly because it isn't complete, yet you think it should be higher than it is.

In a level rating field, it wouldn't even be on the list. No one is saying it isn't a joke, but your protests in the OP and prior point to a different motive here. You could always create 10000 dummy accounts and rate it 10's. Play the system.

This thread is silly. I'm taking it less seriously than I take the top 100.

The logic jump here is astronomical. Is this the kind of math they teach these days?

But then they couldn't use the top 100 to justify their purchase and high resale ask, which is really what this thread was always about.