I don't quite understand the comparison that you're trying to make. It needs more context or details.

I don't quite understand why you think that. Your preceding example is missing something.

For what? The top 100 list? In tournaments? In collections? On location? In museums?

The point or comparison that you are trying to make is unclear. You'll probably need to elaborate more.

What additional sections are we thinking?

Em, Solid state, and modern/LCD?

Have you seen this?

https://pinside.com/pinball/top-100/custom

What else would you expect a list of top picks to be?

Sure, a slowly increasing number of modern games are creeping into the top of the list.

I mean… how can a Top 100 not be a popularity contest? It is a subjective ranking.

Also… I am not sure why we would need additional groupings. I think EM/SS covers it pretty well. The difference between an EM and an Ss is pretty fundamental- they are way more different than a game like High Speed versus an LCD game.

17 years to figure that out?!

Actually been awHile since one of these threads; almost refreshing.

I disagree, very tight rom considerations on each iteration of SS tech. This limits potential rule depth.

Sounds range from initial chime representations, to sampled audio, but again extremely limited in channels and rom capacity.

Alphanumeric animations were wonderful, but hugely limited in what is possible to convey with DMD... and then again to LCD.

Look at the EM - SS cross over games.. although the underlying tech was different, the game capabilities were mostly the same... so to then have those same games lumped in with DMD and later games seems immense?

*** Anyway, I agree it is a subjective rating anyway.

Not really what you’re talking about but my biggest struggle rating a machine is, being a mediocre player with room for only 2 pins at home I rate a game completely differently at home than I do on location. I love my JP2 at home, where I can set the outlane posts, pitch, add flipper fans, change to my preferred rubbers, add extra balls etc but I wouldn’t love it on location because I can’t do any of those things and for me that makes it too hard to enjoy at my skill level.

On the flip side I love Medieval Madness on location, even if it’s not set up great I can still have a decent game but in my tiny collection it would get old after a month.

Just 2 examples but I feel this for most pins, I just don’t rate them the same for at home vs location. Some people will only ever play a pin on location and never understand the hype because they haven’t had enough time to explore it or it’s too noisy and they can’t hear the sound package etc.

Introducing a system with 2 ratings per game that could be filtered in a custom search would mess up all the existing ratings though so I know it can’t happen.

As long as there is a top 100 decided by the general pinside population, then the numbers will always be skewed

If you have a simple solution that would be fair and easy to implement, I am sure that the powers would welcome your idea

I like them divided up by decades.

9583392C-BDCA-4EB0-A508-8FE86027A7E4 (resized).png

Nice idea. Except those pesky remakes ruin everything.

Popular to who?

There are many pins that are great fun to play from time to time, but wouldn´t ever survive in a home collection, and then the other way around ofc.

One way to counter this is a more detailed rating system or make it possible to have your own recommended top hundred calculated by the computer.

Ex. you rate playability over time and esthethic appeal more important, here is your top hundred where thoose aspects are weighted higher in the ratings.

Almost.

The real problem with the Top 100 is all the people who rate a game as a 10, simply because they just bought one (and then rate other games a 1, so their new game can move up). Which is why we always have this effect of new games shooting to the top of the list, only to eventually settle to a place much further down.

Seems like a better way would be to have everyone provide a list of their favorite 10 (or maybe 20) games. Games could then be "ranked" based on how many people have it in their list. Whether there should be individual lists for EM / SS / LCD is a separate concern.

If a new game comes out that you love, great, but to add it to your list something else would need to come off of it.

The only thing you could do to "boost" a game's score is to add it to your list, and the only thing you could do to "hurt" a game's score is to NOT put it on your list.

In b4 Levi!

Top 100 complaining threads - even when painfully mixed with a garden-variety cargument - aren't really my bread and butter. I'll leave this to you guys!

This thread doesn't have enough snark though

Snark for a man, and he'll have snark for a day.

Teach a man to snark, and he can be snarky for life.

Vaya con dios, my man.

Who cares? I dont care about the top 100. I play what I like and let others do the same. I do find it fun to pick my top 3 games from each decade, or between EM, SS, DMD and LCD though. Surprisingly its the EMs that are the hardest to choose from. Now everyone go back to playing pinball

I've got my issues with the Top 100 just like most. However, I strongly believe that a pin with an LCD screen is in no way inherently better than a pin without an LCD screen. Some LCD games are better than non-LCD, some non-LCD games are better than LCD. IMHO that's just not an appropriate way to categorize.

If I could wave a magic wand and have Pinside make just one change to the Top 100, it would be to ignore anyone who has given perfect 10s when calculating the Top 100.

Sounds like you want:
(attached).

pasted_image (resized).png

I know that exists but I strictly want to eliminate people who do all 10s. The trimmed mean would likely remove them as well as others.
I just don't want votes from people who love 10s more than life itself.