I'm not quite sure I understand the rankings of the TOP 100? Medieval Madness is the number one ranked pin and it's 21 years old, I find it hard to believe that a better pin hasn't been released in that time. I had an original MB for 18 years and while I loved it when push came to shove I sold it and kept Twilight Zone which actually has a plunger, 4 flippers, and a rule set that can't be beaten the afternoon you buy it.
I see folks coming in on new games e.g. Willy Wonka and after playing like 3 games give it a much lower than average rating. Really you can decide on a game in 3 games?
>> It feels like jealousy to me, I can't have it so I'm going to rate it low.
Owners and past owners are almost the only reviews worth reading, perhaps the ranking system should give those people 100% vote and then ask everyone how many games they have played on the machine they are reviewing and give them % credit on that. 3 games your vote's worth 3%. Thanks for your 'deep' insight.
Another thing: Why post the same review on 3 different versions of a machine when the games have variations depending on the version. Post on the game you actually played ..like doh.
I just think it hurts the community and the manufactures working hard to bring us joy to not have some kind of professional moderation of the rankings that get displayed. Yes, we can filter by bogus, but these numbers are still included in the averages in the TOP 100.
Just the facts ma'am! oh, you've played 3 games, alrighty then next witness.