The playfield, seriously?

this is the 30th anniversary of a major American icon. it should wow us. the hobbit wowed me, for example. that's a beauty. let me give you an example of a true attempt to produce a tribute/anniversary edition. pics included.

20170531_165510-1 (resized).jpg
20170531_165519-1 (resized).jpg
20170531_165536-1 (resized).jpg
20170531_165545-1 (resized).jpg
20170531_165705-1 (resized).jpg

edit: added a couple words as my English is terrible tonight.

sure, but the hobbit is a georgous pinball machine though.

...but, in the movie, the Death Star doesn't just "crack in half"...

Like this?

(that's how it's done)

20170527_105546 (resized).jpg

Maybe so. But JJP shipped The Hobbit with the bezel, as a complete "art" package.

Shouldn't we expect the same from Stern?

I hear you. Surely there's a better way to "hide" a LCD screen in a game then? Why the thick black bezel then? You'd think the smaller the better in this case?

I don't know. I kind of feel like you should have let The Hobbit superiority vibe hang over the thread a little before posting that it could have been "by design".

Well, I don't know about that. I wasn't talking about software. I was talking about the overall integration of the SW "art package".

Of course, you'll say that a pinball game is more than just art. Sure. I agree. I hope SW will have both.

And why not? Stern and JJP are both american companies that manufacture pinball machines in the U.S.A. It's totally fair to compare the products they produce.

Without talking about personal gameplay preferences, It's not unreasonable for me to wish that SW was built similarly to The Hobbit, both aesthetically and structurally (as far as quality).

Because it's illegal (copyright laws)?

I could host the files on my web site, but again, it's illegal to distribute software like that.

Unauthorized copying of software is illegal. This includes distributing the software over the network or Internet – not just burning a copy of the CD or DVD. Copyright law protects software authors and publishers, just as patent law protects inventors.

IF SOFTWARE IS NOT COPY-PROTECTED, DO I HAVE THE RIGHT TO COPY IT?

Lack of copy-protection is not the same as absence of copyright. Lack of protection does not constitute permission to copy software to share or to sell. Unprotected software enables you to safeguard your investment by making a backup copy. In offering unprotected software to you, the developer or publisher has placed a significant amount of trust in your integrity.

That quote would make an awesome t-shirt.

Sure. You'd have to first disable the cooling fans. I'd go for disabling the CPU fan first, then compute shtuff a lot until it overheats. But most modern BIOSes will cut the power to the board when that happens.

So really, can you melt a PC?

Fine. Back to the point. Making a software framework accessible to "the public" requires a lot of effort. I write code for a living and if I had to make my code clear and useable for you, I'd have to package it very differently. You'd have to write your main engine to accept "mods" via accessible public classes. Know what I mean?

Sort of like how we clean our houses before we have guests...

Well said. Cheers!

Nope. It's 4 LOM.