(Topic ID: 203700)

deeproot Pinball thread

By pin2d

6 years ago


Topic Heartbeat

Topic Stats

  • 33,574 posts
  • 1,149 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 2 days ago by stubborngamer
  • Topic is favorited by 309 Pinsiders
  • Topic is sticky in its sub-forum

You

Linked Games

Topic Gallery

View topic image gallery

pasted_image (resized).png
PXL_20240411_062859517 (resized).jpg
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png
IMG_2583.gif
pasted_image (resized).png
deeprootcapital-401-2024.04.01.pdf (PDF preview)
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png
pasted_image (resized).png

Topic index (key posts)

360 key posts have been marked in this topic, showing the first 10 items. (Show topic index)

There are 33,574 posts in this topic. You are on page 634 of 672.
10
#31651 1 year ago

This arrived today. Nice gash on the left corner. Should have been marked frag-i-lé like the old man's leg lamp. Ah, well, I guess it's about par for the deeproot course.

PXL_20220729_180627215.MP (resized).jpgPXL_20220729_180627215.MP (resized).jpgPXL_20220729_180710949.MP (resized).jpgPXL_20220729_180710949.MP (resized).jpgPXL_20220729_180652511 (resized).jpgPXL_20220729_180652511 (resized).jpgPXL_20220729_180517855 (resized).jpgPXL_20220729_180517855 (resized).jpgkd956jxaje171 (resized).jpgkd956jxaje171 (resized).jpg
#31652 1 year ago
Quoted from flynnibus:

Yeah but you just crossed two topics... a cheaper game vs a startup company. One does not necessarily involve the other.

I disagree. If you're not a volume player, you're a startup. Stern already makes a cheaper game. It's The Pin/Home Model. If Stern believed that selling street level games without ramps or custom mechs would be profitable, they would do it.

The ultimate classic layout, street level and light on mechs(excepting the inline drops), is Fathom. Haggis is pricing it at $7,400 for the "classic" edition. The price of the pinball machine is in the whole picture, the process of the shop that builds it, the scale of parts acquisition and price, the relationships with vendors, the skilled labor, etc etc etc. It's not "exclude ramps and lower coil count and you have a cheap game!"

#31653 1 year ago
Quoted from Richthofen:

I disagree. If you're not a volume player, you're a startup. Stern already makes a cheaper game. It's The Pin/Home Model. If Stern believed that selling street level games without ramps or custom mechs would be profitable, they would do it.

And now you introduce yet another topic... marketability. That doesn't make Jon's game not able to be built for cheaper - it is yet another different topic of 'can you sell them' - not a discussion of can you actually build it cheaper.

Stern's latest 'The Pin' games are an exercise in budgeting and marketing - they don't fundamentally change much and pricing is more bound by Stern's bigger picture. All things that would not apply to a non-stern company.

You're attacking the point about if the game could actually be done cheaper or not by trying to argue if it makes sense for a BUSINESS to sell it cheaper. These are different discussions.

Aruging no one wants a 'street game' or 'you cant run a business selling street games' is different than 'a street level game can't be built cheap'

Quoted from Richthofen:

The ultimate classic layout, street level and light on mechs(excepting the inline drops), is Fathom. Haggis is pricing it at $7,400 for the "classic" edition. The price of the pinball machine is in the whole picture, the process of the shop that builds it, the scale of parts acquisition and price, the relationships with vendors, the skilled labor, etc etc etc. It's not "exclude ramps and lower coil count and you have a cheap game!"

Haggis is a different concept entirely. They tried to go like HWP and do everything 'in house' and reinvent the wheel. They also have no other products.. so you're talking about trying to sustain an entire business and manufacturing facility on this product line alone.

This is not the only way things can get done. It is far more common everywhere else for a company to be a design firm, that partners with a manufacturing partner who executes the supply chain management, build, and logistics. The key thing being that manufacturer isn't trying fund it's startup rampup with this single product.. nor are they solely reliant on this one contract to run their business. The whole point is to be able to leverage existing experience and economies of scale in resources. The challenge is.. unlike a boutique you aren't as nimble... because manufacturing is process driven while boutiques are more 'need driven'.

Jon's approach of sticking to COTS and proven engineering makes partnerships like that far more practical because you reduce the tasks you need to tackle and divide between the partners.

When you look at projects like PinBros or Dutch.. they are in this kind of model. But neither are in a business model to market a lower tier game.. so there isn't much point comparing what they are ultimately selling at today. They didn't set out to build a game like Jon's.

#31654 1 year ago

The layout chart seems like it has a lot more going on than in the video. I watched the video and was bored by the layout before the video was even over.

The layout chart seems a lot more interesting, maybe because it was hard to tell what was going on near the top of the playfield in the video.

I also think it is weird that he spelt PELOTON on the targets "backwards". Normally targets like that are labelled top-down, not bottom-up. (see RIVER targets on WH20, or DELUXE targets on EBD).

I first looked at it and thought "what's a NOTOLEP?".

#31655 1 year ago
Quoted from mbeardsley:

The layout chart seems like it has a lot more going on than in the video. I watched the video and was bored by the layout before the video was even over.
The layout chart seems a lot more interesting, maybe because it was hard to tell what was going on near the top of the playfield in the video.
I also think it is weird that he spelt PELOTON on the targets "backwards". Normally targets like that are labelled top-down, not bottom-up. (see RIVER targets on WH20, or DELUXE targets on EBD).
I first looked at it and thought "what's a NOTOLEP?".

Quoted from pinballguru:

It’s the same layout in video as flyer. The side drains were cropped out from view, but they are there. The video was flipped because I decided to flip the playfield to have the spinner shot from right flipper. The seven-bank of strandup targets in video are three extra-wide (1-1/2” wide) standups, but 7 regular 1” wide standups will fit. The new plunger shot delivers ball to right ball lock area.
I also replaced the Power Scoop at Pop Bumpers with a standup target.in the most recent version to save money. Power Scoop isn’t needed since balls can be stopped at the side “Ball Lock” lane. Mystery was moved to the right-side lock. I also deleted the left lock to save money.
Yes, “Easy to clean” was a big selling point for simple games. I used the Bally “Feature-Gram” from the 1970s as a model to make the flyer.

#31656 1 year ago

How much do you think that machine would cost to build? I’d guess the retail on materials for that machine is around $2500 dollars…

#31657 1 year ago

I’d guess around $2,000 for the cabinet, legs, trim, backbox, etc with a power supply and associated distribution, central computer, central pinball controller, display, audio and speakers.

Maybe $500 for the playfield, cutting, art and clear application

About $1,000 in playfield mechanics, associated electronic controllers, and wiring. Plastics, posts, rails, etc.

Maybe some royalty fees for the design team, or bake in the cost of buying a design with associated software, video, audio, art

Maybe a per unit license fee (a license seems to be a great ROI if you can make a smart investment)

So I think closer to $4k before labor, overhead, and profit margin for the manufacturer

#31658 1 year ago

ZIDWARE 3.0 & 4.0 COMING SOON?

#31659 1 year ago
Quoted from HighProtein:

ZIDWARE 3.0 & 4.0 COMING SOON?

Yeppers. Turner logic is next up to take a swing at this.

11
#31660 1 year ago

How many new games could have been made for all the effort trying to finish Jpop's neon puke crap?

It's the Oak Island of pinball.

#31661 1 year ago

If you saw the facility, equipment, tools, parts and supplies in person. Along with the talent they had and $$$ spent.

It’s hard to fathom how poor and incompetent the execution was when you see others do much more with so much less.

But it happened. And the drama continues with 2.0. Gotta love it.

#31662 1 year ago
Quoted from flynnibus:

And now you introduce yet another topic... marketability. That doesn't make Jon's game not able to be built for cheaper - it is yet another different topic of 'can you sell them' - not a discussion of can you actually build it cheaper.
Stern's latest 'The Pin' games are an exercise in budgeting and marketing - they don't fundamentally change much and pricing is more bound by Stern's bigger picture. All things that would not apply to a non-stern company.
You're attacking the point about if the game could actually be done cheaper or not by trying to argue if it makes sense for a BUSINESS to sell it cheaper. These are different discussions.
Aruging no one wants a 'street game' or 'you cant run a business selling street games' is different than 'a street level game can't be built cheap'

Haggis is a different concept entirely. They tried to go like HWP and do everything 'in house' and reinvent the wheel. They also have no other products.. so you're talking about trying to sustain an entire business and manufacturing facility on this product line alone.
This is not the only way things can get done. It is far more common everywhere else for a company to be a design firm, that partners with a manufacturing partner who executes the supply chain management, build, and logistics. The key thing being that manufacturer isn't trying fund it's startup rampup with this single product.. nor are they solely reliant on this one contract to run their business. The whole point is to be able to leverage existing experience and economies of scale in resources. The challenge is.. unlike a boutique you aren't as nimble... because manufacturing is process driven while boutiques are more 'need driven'.
Jon's approach of sticking to COTS and proven engineering makes partnerships like that far more practical because you reduce the tasks you need to tackle and divide between the partners.
When you look at projects like PinBros or Dutch.. they are in this kind of model. But neither are in a business model to market a lower tier game.. so there isn't much point comparing what they are ultimately selling at today. They didn't set out to build a game like Jon's.

For small volume the majority of cost you are trying to cover is overhead. It drives everything and often forces the in house aspect to it all. A small volume manufacturer tries to take advantage of economies of scale in individual parts. But final assembly unless it can hit high scale is usually best done in house. Too long to transfer the process, too many headaches having to watch your assembly partner, and frankly not high enough volume for them to get proficient if there is any niche aspect to your assembly process. So for instance it works great if building a PCB, lots of companies do that and do it well (news apparently to DR). It does not work so great when there are many intricacies to the final assembly of parts. Now if you are a small company that makes a small margin product it is absolutely idiotic to do it all in house. Too much infrastructure costs before you’ve made a dime to obtain volumes needed for it to pay the bills. Hagis seems kinda caught in no man’s land here, but hopefully they will figure it out. If they truly can run lots of Bally classics it makes sense. If they can’t they will find it hard to get return on investment.

#31663 1 year ago
Quoted from pookycade:

For small volume the majority of cost you are trying to cover is overhead. It drives everything and often forces the in house aspect to it all. A small volume manufacturer tries to take advantage of economies of scale in individual parts. But final assembly unless it can hit high scale is usually best done in house. Too long to transfer the process, too many headaches having to watch your assembly partner, and frankly not high enough volume for them to get proficient if there is any niche aspect to your assembly process. So for instance it works great if building a PCB, lots of companies do that and do it well (news apparently to DR). It does not work so great when there are many intricacies to the final assembly of parts. Now if you are a small company that makes a small margin product it is absolutely idiotic to do it all in house. Too much infrastructure costs before you’ve made a dime to obtain volumes needed for it to pay the bills. Hagis seems kinda caught in no man’s land here, but hopefully they will figure it out. If they truly can run lots of Bally classics it makes sense. If they can’t they will find it hard to get return on investment.

Don't forget when done in-house, you can skimp a LOT on assembly drawings. Go to an outside vendor? Pfft, not a chance. Everything needs documented out the wazoo big time. Just imagine a room full of people that might have not ever seen the bottom of a pinball PF, and now they are putting them together. Even having great, detailed drawings, it was still common to hop on a plane to visit the outside vendor in order to hold their hands for a bit.

I worked at a major defense contractor prior to my retirement. Just touching a drawing to update was $250K.

#31664 1 year ago
Quoted from mbwalker:

Don't forget when done in-house, you can skimp a LOT on assembly drawings. Go to an outside vendor? Pfft, not a chance. Everything needs documented out the wazoo big time. Just imagine a room full of people that might have not ever seen a the bottom of a pinball PF, and now they are putting them together. Even having great, detailed drawings, it was still common to hop on a plane to visit the outside vendor in order to hold their hands for a bit.
I worked at a major defense contractor prior to my retirement. Just touching a drawing to update was $250K.

Yep and having done build files myself they usually had to be translated into assembler English. And what I mean by that is that what I thought as an engineer was perfectly clear in my instructions was absolutely 100% not clear at all.

#31665 1 year ago
Quoted from mbwalker:

Just touching a drawing to update was $250K.

Whaaaat? What’s the approx cost breakdown here in terms of management, actual drafting, and gratuitous profit margin?

I know the defense industry is a bloated whale, but damn.

#31666 1 year ago
Quoted from pookycade:

Yep and having done build files myself they usually had to be translated into assembler English. And what I mean by that is that what I thought as an engineer was perfectly clear in my instructions was absolutely 100% not clear at all.

engineering (resized).jpgengineering (resized).jpg
#31667 1 year ago

I think this might be a good deeproot 2.0 logo, actually!

44D4FAD7-D48E-4072-BBB8-5BEC7896A87C (resized).jpeg44D4FAD7-D48E-4072-BBB8-5BEC7896A87C (resized).jpeg
#31668 1 year ago

True story, preparing for the birth of my first child I built one of these IKEA type monstrosity baby cribs, cursing the entire time at the bad instructions. Finally got done only to realize that it was too big to fit thru my kitchen door to take to the baby room. Had to disassemble and come close to starting over. I have never lived that one down.

#31669 1 year ago
Quoted from JStoltz:

Whaaaat? What’s the approx cost breakdown here in terms of management, actual drafting, and gratuitous profit margin?
I know the defense industry is a bloated whale, but damn.

I can't break it down per se, but there's definitely a lot of fingers in the pot and hoops we had to jump thru. Me (engineer) making a change (i.e. designing, testing), drafting (with me setting next to the drafting person), components, a HUGE list of people to review (translate: kill a couple of hours each), maybe a 'rinse and repeat'. I was actually quoted a lot bigger number by a program manager, but I even had a hard time believing it (but no reason to actually doubt it).

Don't forget the hourly rate is not what is charged. It includes overhead, ends up being a very BIG hourly rate. Each department essentially has to charge a rate to cover overhead. And the rate was uniform across the country, meaning the expensive states like CA influenced our rates too.

A lot of it is driven by the customer (the DOD) requirements.

#31670 1 year ago
Quoted from pookycade:

True story, preparing for the birth of my first child I built one of these IKEA type monstrosity baby cribs, cursing the entire time at the bad instructions. Finally got done only to realize that it was too big to fit thru my kitchen door to take to the baby room. Had to disassemble and come close to starting over. I have never lived that one down.

I once assembled an IKEA thing by myself where the first instruction was a crossed out picture of a single frowning person and the second was a not crossed out picture of two smiling people. It sucked.

#31671 1 year ago
Quoted from mbwalker:

I can't break it down per se, but there's definitely a lot of fingers in the pot and hoops we had to jump thru. Me (engineer) making a change (i.e. designing), drafting (with me setting next to the drafting person), components, a HUGE list of people to review (translate: kill a couple of hours each), maybe a 'rinse and repeat'. I was actually quoted a lot bigger number by a program manager, but I even had a hard time believing it (but not reason to actually doubt it).
Don't forget the hourly rate is not what is charged. It includes overhead, ends up being a very BIG hourly rate. Each department essentially has to charge a rate to cover overhead. And the rate was uniform across the country, meaning the expense states like CA influenced our rates too.
A lot of it is driven by the customer (the DOD) requirements.

Gotcha— that makes sense. I work in Industrial Automation and this kind of thing is 1-2 orders of magnitude less expensive to accomplish for us, even on the higher end (pharma). I guess it just underscores the bananas amount of dollars up for grabs from the DOD.

#31672 1 year ago
Quoted from mbeardsley:

I also think it is weird that he spelt PELOTON on the targets "backwards". Normally targets like that are labelled top-down, not bottom-up. (see RIVER targets on WH20, or DELUXE targets on EBD).
I first looked at it and thought "what's a NOTOLEP?".

It is spell PELETON going from top to bottom on the flipped layout, like DELUXE on EBD.

#31673 1 year ago
Quoted from mbwalker:

Don't forget when done in-house, you can skimp a LOT on assembly drawings. Go to an outside vendor? Pfft, not a chance. Everything needs documented out the wazoo big time. Just imagine a room full of people that might have not ever seen a the bottom of a pinball PF, and now they are putting them together. Even having great, detailed drawings, it was still common to hop on a plane to visit the outside vendor in order to hold their hands for a bit.
I worked at a major defense contractor prior to my retirement. Just touching a drawing to update was $250K.

military is likely very different from your average manufacturing company. changing a drawing does however involve a lot. first the engineer to update it, then a BOM Admin to make the revision, then a purchasing employee has to send the revsion to the vendor where they have to re-negotiate (because the drawing is the agreed contract). even if the updated drawing doesnt affect tooling or difficulty in holding tolerances, often a vendor will up the cost because of extra cost of their documentation updates and processes.

#31674 1 year ago
Quoted from toyotaboy:

military is likely very different from your average manufacturing company. changing a drawing does however involve a lot. first the engineer to update it, then a BOM Admin to make the revision, then a purchasing employee has to send the revsion to the vendor where they have to re-negotiate (because the drawing is the agreed contract). even if the updated drawing doesnt affect tooling or difficulty in holding tolerances, often a vendor will up the cost because of extra cost of their documentation updates and processes.

I've never worked on consumer or commercial stuff. In my profession, making 40,000 or 50,000 of something is a big deal. Plus supporting the product for 20 or 30 years (or more) is not uncommon.

I was always amazed at the run rates of cell phones. I think I saw just the other day Apple spits out over 600K phones a DAY. Wow, talk about logistics. Or if there's a design issue - ouch! Granted, their hands likely aren't tied w/respect to the spec requirements like the military side of the fence, but 600K of anything out the door that is reliable is pretty amazing.

10
#31675 1 year ago
Quoted from mbeardsley:

I also think it is weird that he spelt PELOTON on the targets "backwards". Normally targets like that are labelled top-down, not bottom-up. (see RIVER targets on WH20, or DELUXE targets on EBD).
I first looked at it and thought "what's a NOTOLEP?".

I come from Gottlieb where spelling feature standard is left to right. For example, on Bad Girls, the spell “RERACK” went from bottom to top because the bank is on left side. Nobody ever thought that the targets should have been labeled the other way.

#31676 1 year ago
Quoted from pookycade:

So for instance it works great if building a PCB, lots of companies do that and do it well (news apparently to DR). It does not work so great when there are many intricacies to the final assembly of parts

Dunno.. I worked for a company that did contract assembly like this. They did the PCB assembly, all the wire assembly, and mechanical assembly there with contract labor. It wasn't that much different from what you see at the Stern factory except for the # of stations and overall scale. We built huge power control systems, electric power meters, panel systems for HVAC, security and all kinds of stuff. And this is just some podunk contract manufacturer in rural Pennsylvania. It's why companies like DP and PB are able to find partners to do this stuff. The biggest negative to Pinball is it takes a ton of space relative to other products being built and the sheer number of assemblies in a game make it expensive to build. The supply chain portion of the build is what kills so many who try to start pinball companies because they start with pinball people.. not manufacturing people. So understanding how to source, forecast, stock, and do that efficiently is what makes it hard for them. Yet, that is exactly the kind of expertise you are hiring for in a manufacturing partner. I think the most unique portion of pinball would simply be the differences in QA and of course dealing with the small community of parts vendors.. as that has proven to not necessarily be quite as 'open' in the past.

I think the bigger obstacles are not the idea of building a pin - but the issues that these days pinballs are largely 'one-off' products with pretty short lifespans. They are ran until demand is gone, and then they start over again. That means a lot of retooling, retraining, new documentation, new QA design, new sourcing, new inventory and all the time for that... every game. That's the startup costs that really eats at anyone doing games via contract manufacturing.. and where after decades Stern finally optimized their processes to be more efficient in those cutovers so they can afford to switch products more frequently. So unless you get a product that has demand for years where you can benefit from so much reuse.. you amplify the risks that plagued pinball for ages... 'you can't afford a flop'. The front-loaded investment in both design and manufacturing made projects risky and potentially fatal if sales didn't materialize.

#31677 1 year ago
Quoted from mbeardsley:

I also think it is weird that he spelt PELOTON on the targets "backwards". Normally targets like that are labelled top-down, not bottom-up. (see RIVER targets on WH20, or DELUXE targets on EBD).

Don't think I agree with you. The clockwise orientation so you read left to right is more common

Screen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.22.22 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.22.22 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.31.02 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.31.02 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.30.17 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.30.17 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.29.08 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.29.08 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.27.24 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.27.24 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.24.31 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.24.31 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.23.30 AM.pngScreen Shot 2022-07-30 at 12.23.30 AM.png

Deadpool is the only recent stern that I can think of that used top-down in that kind of target labeling. Not saying it's the only one... but it's an outlier compared to the norm.

Remember when standing in front of the game.. the stuff at the front of the playfield is closer to the player is easier to see.. so its natural to scan upward.

#31678 1 year ago

Mueller Special Counsel approved

mueller (resized).jpgmueller (resized).jpg

I assume this is a typo and not a backdating a month

Screen Shot 2022-07-29 at 10.43.16 PM (resized).pngScreen Shot 2022-07-29 at 10.43.16 PM (resized).png

deeprootcapital-132-2022.07.29.pdfdeeprootcapital-132-2022.07.29.pdf
#31679 1 year ago

New company name- Recidivist Pinball.

#31680 1 year ago

Sorry....been away....just caught up and watched the CT Video. Seems like a nice guy who means well. Time will tell. I didn't like that he didn't mention the scamming crook, er, ex employee jpoop and that he would have nothing to do with him. (maybe a future video)

#31681 1 year ago
Quoted from spfxted:

Sorry....been away....just caught up and watched the CT Video. Seems like a nice guy who means well. Time will tell. I didn't like that he didn't mention the scamming crook, er, ex employee jpoop and that he would have nothing to do with him. (maybe a future video)

Because he plans to work with Jpop.

#31682 1 year ago
Quoted from spfxted:

Sorry....been away....just caught up and watched the CT Video. Seems like a nice guy who means well. Time will tell. I didn't like that he didn't mention the scamming crook, er, ex employee jpoop and that he would have nothing to do with him. (maybe a future video)

I hope he names it “Sincerity Pinball” or “Means Well Pinball”

#31683 1 year ago
Quoted from Roostking:

Because he plans to work with Jpop.

If that's the case then i guess he's learned NOTHING.....but he will....the hard way....

#31684 1 year ago
Quoted from spfxted:

Sorry....been away....just caught up and watched the CT Video. Seems like a nice guy who means well. Time will tell. I didn't like that he didn't mention the scamming crook, er, ex employee jpoop and that he would have nothing to do with him. (maybe a future video)

Yeah you have clearly been away…

#31685 1 year ago
Quoted from CrazyLevi:

I hope he names it “Sincerity Pinball” or “Means Well Pinball”

MeansWell Sincerly Pinball!

#31686 1 year ago

Let’s not forget this apparently is the only guy who took no shit from Robert. Why do you think that is? Because he’s a nice guy who means well?

Awful nice to show up with a fistful of dollars and save those cherry picked policies that nobody seemed to know anything about from certain doom…

#31687 1 year ago
Quoted from Roostking:

Because he plans to work with Jpop.

I'd hold off on this assumption and others in the thread regarding his plans until we next hear from Turner.

#31688 1 year ago
Quoted from blueberryjohnson:

I'd hold off on this assumption and others in the thread regarding his plans until we next hear from Turner.

Well, if he has any sense, he should come out asap and state as much IMO.

#31689 1 year ago
Quoted from blueberryjohnson:

I'd hold off on this assumption and others in the thread regarding his plans until we next hear from Turner.

Well, if he has any sense, he should come out asap and state as much IMO.

#31690 1 year ago
Quoted from flynnibus:

Don't think I agree with you. The clockwise orientation so you read left to right is more common
[quoted image][quoted image][quoted image][quoted image][quoted image][quoted image][quoted image]
Deadpool is the only recent stern that I can think of that used top-down in that kind of target labeling. Not saying it's the only one... but it's an outlier compared to the norm.
Remember when standing in front of the game.. the stuff at the front of the playfield is closer to the player is easier to see.. so its natural to scan upward.

Well, I was going by the only machine I own with a left-side row of targets...

pasted_image (resized).pngpasted_image (resized).png
#31691 1 year ago

White Water looks correct because of the way the letters are oriented (90 degree rotation from the target). If they weren't rotated, it wouldn't look right.

I don't like how Batman 66 does it. It's like they tried to split the difference (it was also a super rush job, so details like that probably weren't heavily thought about)

#31692 1 year ago
Quoted from TreyBo69:

White Water looks correct because of the way the letters are oriented (90 degree rotation from the target). If they weren't rotated, it wouldn't look right.
I don't like how Batman 66 does it. It's like they tried to split the difference (it was also a super rush job, so details like that probably weren't heavily thought about)

Yes, but that same rotation is used in his layout diagram, which is why it looked wrong to me. Maybe now that he has flipped the design left-to-right it will make more sense, but I was going by the image that was posted.

#31693 1 year ago
Quoted from mbeardsley:

Yes, but that same rotation is used in his layout diagram, which is why it looked wrong to me. Maybe now that he has flipped the design left-to-right it will make more sense, but I was going by the image that was posted.

Oh yeah...I see now. Lost what was originally be talked about.

I'm guessing it was just for demonstration purposes, but they should rotate some to look "right"

#31694 1 year ago
Quoted from mbeardsley:

Yes, but that same rotation is used in his layout diagram, which is why it looked wrong to me. Maybe now that he has flipped the design left-to-right it will make more sense, but I was going by the image that was posted.

I should have rotated the letters for P-E-L-E-T-O-N to read correctly. Even though the layout is flipped, the letters will still need to be rotated a bit to read correctly. I won't make that error again.

#31695 1 year ago
Quoted from pinballguru:

I should have rotated the letters for P-E-L-E-T-O-N to read correctly. Even though the layout is flipped, the letters will still need to be rotated a bit to read correctly. I won't make that error again.

Completely irrelevant and way too much bandwidth was wasted on it. Clearly not much to bitch about in the way of pinball this summer. Great layout I love it!

#31697 1 year ago

Can we get the Reader's Digest version?

#31698 1 year ago

Well one things for sure: Pinball ain’t easy but it sure is exciting!

#31699 1 year ago
Quoted from clempo:

Can we get the Reader's Digest version?

He covers five main topics/questions:

1. Are former deeproot people involved?
2. Is Jpop involved?
3. Will he discuss what went down at deeproot?
4. What are his plans for RAZA?
5. What are his plans for other deeproot games?

#31700 1 year ago

Chris Turner is starting a pinball company. He wants to release some of the IP for the homebrew community to use. He didn't specify what IP. He wants to be open and have feedback from the pinball community about his designs. I guess he is wanting to be the GPL version of pinball and is attempting an open source business model.

Promoted items from Pinside Marketplace and Pinside Shops!
$ 15.00
Cabinet - Sound/Speakers
Gweem's Mods
 
$ 1.29
Playfield - Toys/Add-ons
Daddio's 3D Printed Mods
 
Hey modders!
Your shop name here
There are 33,574 posts in this topic. You are on page 634 of 672.

Reply

Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.

Hey there! Welcome to Pinside!

Donate to Pinside

Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!


This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/twip-is-deeproot-the-next-misadventure-or-a-pinball-revolution/page/634 and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.

Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.