If ratings are fair it is not a problem for me they are several years old.
This top 100, rates and comments, should be a help for anybody who can't know and play all pinball machine.
Unfortunatly, some people are not serious and can rate à machine around 1 with à comment like " ugly". It also works in the Other way. These kind of rates are much more damaging than an old but fair one that has not been updated for any reason.
I think there is no perfect system to rate pinball machine, it depends on the seriousness of people.
If i estimate 10% of rates are not fair ( the highest and the lowest), then get out them of the averaging.

Im just curious why no machines in pinside top 100 are from before 1980.Can anyone suggest pins before this date that they feel deserve to be up there.

Peaceboy,

From your msg posted above, i can't tell if you have noticed the e-m top 100 list that you can click on, or if you have seen that the list for #'s 101-200 can be viewed by clicking on the field at end of the Top 100 list.
There are several late 70's pins that are ranked in the 101-200 range.

I don't think ranking is way overrated coz there are as many "10" as "1" rates. It depends on tastes.
The most fair ranking is to count only rates coming from owners (current or past) and people who played at least 50 games or more. But it is so easy to screw your own collection that it is impossible to do.

I thought about this:

One good way would poll/rate a game compare to another game, they do that in statistics all the time to get way more accurate measurements:

You first got to pick at least let's say 5 games you played, the more games the better. Then the system ask you questions if you would rate "x" title better/lower/equal for example "music" than "y" title. Each question asking you about different games and a different game aspect.

At the end, the system rank the games according to your answers without given them a specific score. Even if someone tries to crap on a game, all the system knows is you like that game or certain aspect of it less than another.

I think that would work most of the time.
What you guys think?

That's a great feature idea. Would absolutely be more accurate. Would not be easy to code for I'm sure though.

I don't think a game having a low ranking means it's bad, but a high taming is usually indicative of a good game. All the top 50 are really good games.

Mentioned in some posts above I think it would be good to rank both our collection and want lists on our personal profiles. Not sure how the list could go with the top 100, but would be good for us for reference.

I disagree with those that say you need to spend a month with a pin before rating or you need to be a tournament player. Initial thoughts really matter. If I'm playing a pin and I no longer desire to play it after a few games and want to play another one it will not rate high for me. I realize I may be rating a game too low for some in that case, but that is how I feel.

For example, I don't rate LOTR very high, but I know others really love it and it is in their only five list. I went back to that game five times and still didn't like it that much. It was not good for me for one reason or another (it was hard), but I may like it better if it was in my basement and could spend some real time on it.

I also rate MM and ATM really high because when I first got into pinball those are the pins that really kept me coming back. I'm still not a strong player, so I like those types of pins. However, they may not hold my attention if they were my only pin.

I just hope those that do get a chance to spend more time on pin update their initial reviews, which is what I strive to do.

Beat me to it Luppin. I was just reading the comments on 7 of the reviews/ratings, and was about to post this about GB-Prem/LE at #1.
Note: GB-Pro is at #19 in Pinside Top 100 List.

We will see how far the next wave of ratings/reviews will knock GB down in the rankings next week, but for this week GB is #1.

You mean the fact if you look at ratings of individuals and they rated all the games they supposedly own 10/10 with no comments?
Half the time people rate games they have not even played, or in some cases mistaken the game they have played if their is more than one version of the title.
GB is a phenomenal example, LE #1 and how many people even seen one, let alone played the game?
Seriously?
GB Premiums have not even shipped!
In some cases there is no practical knowledge of pinball design anyway.
Good design = fun ≠ price

Comparing old games against new ones is inconsequential, as good games stand the test of time.
People said TZ was "overrated" since 1993, yet it has always been in the Top 10.

Look at the words, and ignore the rest.
I would not recommend deleting old reviews, as they have more value just like Pinballreviews.com that has been around since the early 2000s.
Funny? Yes
Insightful? Yes (most of the time)
100% Objective? No
But, at least they actually played the games, unlike the majority of players/owners/collectors on this website.