R&M Standard was my first/only NIB purchase. As one of the last machines built, most of the typical design/assembly growing pains and kinks had been worked out. So with that frame of reference:

- I have never once felt a lack of quality, or general indifference, in terms of the overall design and assembly intent. The cabinet is solid, the playfield is one of the best you can get, the mechs are generally proven standard components, and the fit-and-finish and overall assembly was on point: nothing was loose or broken, everything lined up right, etc. Played 100% perfect right out of the box (er, van, since I picked it up at Spooky and it was out of the box by request but, whatever). And going on 2 years later and a couple thousand plays (though not so many in recent months as I've been beyond busy and stressed), I've never had a game-breaking issue.

- My main challenges were those endemic to the design of R&M as a game, i.e. dialing in shots and rails and ramps and other fiddly adjustments to make it shoot "smooth". This is a highly subjective point, as R&M was specifically designed to be a brutal ass-kicker, which is why it's so controversial. It's hard to know the difference between "Play Betterrr!!!" and "POS brickfest game!" sometimes. Every copy is different, every player has their own tastes... but there was lots of feedback and advice in the owner's thread to find a happy consistent medium.

- HOWEVER, there are indeed things that were irksome. The stock habitrail was a flimsy and inconsistent (but functional, technically) design. The ship's wobble effect hinge was stupidly made of rigid plastic perfectly tailor made to break at some point. The questionable change to single-wound flipper coils caused lots of performance issues which took a while to get sorted out with code (which Eric eventually did admirably). The stock power supply fan gave aircraft turbines a run for the decibel record. Spooky's apparent investment in hot glue stocks means connectors can be wonky. The manual is woefully incomplete, and the game's motheroards are PC commodity class and can be problematic, so pity those who are trying to work on this game in 10-20 years.

- Perhaps worst of all, they opted to use a thinner playfield but didn't realize use of standard-size (now too-tall) flipper bushings would muck up the flippers and shots... it took a long while again for them to catch this oversight and get special reduced-height bushings made, which made a HUGE improvement in the feel of the game. They provided the revised parts for free. But man, that kind of rookie mistake / unforced error, on the most foundational aspect of a pinball game, is truly kind of baffling.

All that said, would I buy a Spooky again? Would I recommend them to anyone else? Resounding YES on both. While some of the problems and issues are frankly silly and stupid, I've been around manufacturing and R&D enough to understand how such things can happen - we're only human after all. And the vast majority of games from today all the way back to WMS / BLY and GTB days, all had some sort of service bulletins, revised parts, and/or other annoying service issues or design flaws of one kind or another. I'm sure there are a few lemon Spooky games out there but again, so too for almost any other title.

In the end what comes through is Spooky's passion for pinball, willingness to own mistakes and improve, and commitment to customers. From my own experience and observation, anyway. Others may differ.

But I'm a Spooky fan for life... and if I was made of bank I'd be lined up for SD for sure!