The B/W (honestly Bally and Williams were the same pin company in the 90s) games from the 90s are creative and did some wonderful things with code. It was an evolution of the great playing early SS games that were admittedly light on code.

The early 00s Sterns were a step back. Struggling to stay relevant, Stern gave up on code on some of their games to push out the next game. That created games that feel unfinished.

Newer Sterns are really great but you still need to wait a few years after release to ensure that code gets some polish. Code is where Stern has jumped ahead of B/W DMDs. The depth is really amazing. They still put out a dud once or twice a year but that was the deal with B/W in the 90s.

Stern has never really done anything amazing with their playfields. It's a lot of the same old stuff. A bash toy or two, a couple of ramps, two flippers, an Italian bottom but the code is what really elevates their games a lot of times. When they did veer away from standard layouts it wasn't popular (WWE).

With regard to flippers, I personally like all flippers of every era. EMs, SSs, DMDs. All I want from a flipper is to be able to make the shots I'm supposed to be able to hit. Nothing's more frustrating to not be able to hit a ramp because there's not enough power in the flipper or make a target because the geometry's off. The only flippers I thought were a little different were P3s but it wasn't because of playability.

That's cool you brought up board games. I collect board games and love the long forgotten board games of the past more than the complicated board games of the present. It's fun to play something like Bargain Hunter which is just first to complete your shopping list wins. The enjoyment comes from the antics between the people playing instead of the in depth strategy and rules explanation required for some newer board games.

It's a good analogy to EMs and early SSs to DMDs.

I wouldn't go that far. People get tired of Sterns the same way they get tired of older games and in a party or competitive setting I find the shallower rule sets to be the most fun. Tough as nails EMs or SSs really prove who's the better player with a slightly higher percentage of random chance to make things interesting.

There's just too many games I haven't played for me to make that decision. Thankfully I don't have to.

I wouldn't say never. It's a great equalizer if you're coming from behind and you need a miracle. Alien Star was routinely picked in the PAPA tournaments.

Also I've seen "top level players (who have skills across all eras) playing for money against inferior opponents" do it because the inferior opponents have inexperience in early SS or EM games. A lot of competitive players are lacking in their knowledge of older games' rule sets and gameplay because they only get to practice on newer games. This is a flaw to strategically exploit.

The top level players are usually in the classics tournaments as well as the main tournaments and are confident in their abilities on these machines despite the higher level of randomness.

No big deal. This is kind of a discussion topic anyway and I'm enjoying it.

My first sentence did confirm you're point but I wasn't just talking about lower skilled players picking those games for a comeback. Sometimes the top players have a bad game or two and need to make a comeback and they pick older games to try to do it. I've seen Bowen do it. I've seen the Sharpe brothers do it.

Also...

Again if you knew your opponent was inferior on a game of any era that you were confident about, why would you not pick that game?

I think we're also forgetting how games are set up on the day of the tournament and what kind of success you've had on a game that day. Those make a difference for me when I'm choosing.

I think it's the best version of the game (the art is terrible on all versions).

Also regarding cabinet protectors, I don't think that's a revolutionary design feature. It was a necessity because they went from painting cabs to using decals. In my opinion painted cabs are better. I'm not sure anyone else agrees.

I do agree with you but there are goals in older games that are very hard to complete because of the difficulty of the game. I think that is a different kind of depth, although I would argue it is comparable to Sterns' depth. It's a goal that always seems within reach but hardly ever gets achieved. BSD's three multiball stack comes to mind as an example. I'm not sure how many times I've collected all of the stars in Stern's Stars. Collecting all of the passengers in Taxi is something I always have trouble with. There are others. The game's short gameplay length facilitates another press of the start button so you can try one more time to achieve that elusive goal. Some Sterns' and a majority of 90s B/W have a goal at the end but instead of a quick try to get there it requires a long journey which if failed towards the end is very draining to the spirit.

I kind of prefer lateral depth of a game. Many ways to score, many ways to get to the wizard or end goal, shorter play times. A few Sterns seem to take my preferred approach, MET (if set up properly), TWD, IM.

Hey! I like the layout of VA. Code is nonexistent but there's nothing wrong with the layout.

I agree. We should be able to discuss games pros and cons without getting into fanboy mode and attacking.

WOZ never grabbed me while on location. I wasn't able to figure out what I was supposed to do in the first game and that made me reluctant to try again. For comparison, TWD has the bash toys (which I complain about their use in too many Sterns) to gain your attention when you try it the first time. That leads to you discovering other things about the game and gets you to continue playing.

I want to play WOZ more and give it some more play time though.

I only played GB once so no opinion on that but TWD is one of my all time fave games. I just love the atmosphere it brings. The gameplay is visceral like wrestling a tiger. Hit the well walker or prison and prepare to shake the machine to gain control again. I love it because of that.

I'm not a flow guy. I don't like looping ramps that return nicely and gently to the flipper. The best flow game I've played is Demo Man. I've only played it a few times but the first time I had a hold of those gun grips and hit like 4 different ramps with 4 different flippers. That was a pretty cool feeling. GOT pro is decent as well. Most times though I stay away from games like that.

That ball must be moving fast on BSD. All of the wire forms come from a diverter or VUK.