Wow, hot topic. just like a "what kind of oil is the best" on a motorcycle form.

What I am saying is if you buy X game the cabinet art matches that playfield. If you buy a different populated playfield sure you could chunk it in but it would look goofy as fuck….imagine NBA in a AC/DC cabinet. Yeah you certainly could do it but why would you. If you don’t care about artwork then sure….it would just look funny. And people obviously DO care about the artwork….threads discuss it all the time so I would say to many people it is important.

Totally see what you're saying, but all that you mentioned are $100 add ons or less per game. The idea of playfield swapping would be a giant expense, and I don't see it adding to their revenue stream.

I will say though, that I overheard from a group of guys who regularly test Stern games before they go into production, and they already have in their possession a standard Stern cabinet, and they swap playfields to test them before they go into production. The biggest issue is the third flipper playfields, which needs its own special cabinet and wiring and what-not in order to operate properly (if I'm remembering correctly).

So actually, swapping of playfields in Stern games already exists, so maybe I shouldn't be so closed-minded about it.

I think if you developed a cool generic artwork package and made it so just the software changed it might have a shot…..

Sort of like how consoles work….

Maybe it’s entirely pinball related theme…. Celebrates stern pinball for instance…. Then you could have different software packages.maybe you could have an EM type game… where it eases up the power to the solenoids to slow the game down, the Leds look like old fashioned G.I.

Another theme plays like TNA, great music, killler light show…. (Actually would be cool if TNA added a hidden EM mode).

You could have some things that mix it up….by having things raise out of playfield. Bumper, generic bash toy….

And even with that not sure it’s a great idea.

I’m not saying that playfields should be interchangeable. I’m saying things could be improved upon. How much more could a set of full rails cost? Would writing a diagnostic program that recognized burned out lamps and broken switches really cost that much?

What's that old Levi chestnut, if Pinside ran Stern they'd be out of business in a month?

A generic cabinet like this…replace with Stern/JJP or whoever then art doesn’t matter. It just has to have standard cabinet wiring/power supply/display etc. for that platform. This is the easy part. Good luck getting manufacturers on board with this.

9EF4D30C-D63D-4E59-800A-9F786CC4E243 (resized).jpeg

From a company that famously removed all rails from machines?

In truth, almost every game ever made can swap with enough effort. Solid states within the same board series are generally easier than other games and usually just require a handful of connectors and a rom or dipswitch change if using a multi-board.

What you are describing is the P3. You can buy external (magnetic) artwork and swap based on game if you choose. I have the operators kit installed to prevent people from just pulling the artwork off the game, but that's not needed in a home environment. They offer both generic and themed artwork. There are also internal artwork options like aprons and sling/side target plastics. The backbox/translite area is handled by the application, and changes automatically.

There are currently four modules available commercially, with more in development by third parties (like me) and of course Multimorphic.

You select the games from a launcher (like a console), and it knows which applications can be played on the currently installed module (and informs you if they can't).

Disclaimer: I have developed a software-only game for every existing module, three of which are available commercially.

I've also developed my own multi-games that allow for swapping of different playfields and hundreds of games (the Multi-Bingo and Multi-Races). It's way more of a chore to swap those (non-P3) multi playfields as you have to unscrew the playfield, swap a jones plug selector, and remove three jones plugs in the back of the head to pull out the playfield. This would be similar to a traditional solid state pinball (replace jones plug with connector).

In the P3, you have a module that is 1/3 the size of a full playfield (smaller, way lighter, and can ship much more easily as no freight needed), and has between 3 and 4 connectors. Swapping is crazy fast and easy.

Their most expensive playfield module is less than $3000, currently. The most expensive game for the system that I've produced is $149.00 - that's a full separate game using the same layout.

I also like to put a foot under the front of the game, and prefer the underside to be (mostly) empty), so I made some carts on casters that can hold a couple of modules. Easy to swing into place, less lifting, and no moving boxes around, and I keep them at the back of the games so I have room to move.

I'm sorry that there's nothing that catches your fancy just yet, but hopefully one day there will be. Not every game is for everyone, which is part of the strength of the platform, in my opinion. The games I've developed are very different from those Multimorphic has developed for the same hardware.

Nobody wants bland cabinets. It's ugly. People pay extra for better cab art, mirrored backglass, and all that. If you are paying $10000+ for a pin you want it to look amazing and not like every other pin. If you don't have space for more pins, you don't have space to store a bunch of populated pf's, translights, and all that. Platforms change and technology improves which makes the concept useless.

Your statement of "nobody" is absolutely incorrect. There are definitely some of us out here who don't give a shit about art, particularly cabinet art that no one ever sees because it is sitting in a line of pins. You are right that there are lots of people who care a lot about frivolous things like that, but it definitely isn't everybody.

And the difference between storing (and moving/setting up) a full machine vs just a playfield and maybe a translite is very different. There is a spot in my garage right now with two games folded up, I could easily fit 4-5 playfields and translites there.

This won't happen for many of the reasons people have stated. Too many people in this hobby care about silly stuff like cabinet artwork, matching powder coating, limited edition number plates, toppers, etc. And some amount of them have machines as show pieces more than games to be played, so if they can't show it off what good is it? Manufactures know this and know that the money is in catering to that market so there is nothing in it for them.

I would absolutely do this. I could have a row of machines and occasionally swap out the gameplay for another game without taking up all the space (and most importantly the full cost). I see absolutely no downside to this. But I am not the type of customer keeping all these manufactures in business.

What would you be willing to pay for a swappable playfield? (a pro and premium equivalent)

I just don't see why people think removing the cabinet is going to provide such a substantial cost reduction.

The playfield is where most of the labor costs are, the software of the game is still expensive, and shipping a reinforced giant box with a fully assembled playfield isn't going to be that much cheaper than shipping a cabinet with a playfield in it.

Exactly.

Would you pay $5000 for a “swappable playfield?”

Well that's where the "me" becomes a problem. I'm not willing to pay for a NIB machine as it is. But if Stern started vaulting fully populated playfields for SAM games I'd pay a few thousand for some of them. Again, it isn't a business model Stern will get into because they can make way more money selling shiny trinkets, but it would be a cool thing if it were available.

If people had the option of $6500 for a new pro or $5000 for a new playfield a significant percentage would choose the playfield.
If it's nearly impossible for the average pinhead to swap alone, fewer pinheads will be interested.

It's not just cabinets though. It's also the boards, the legs, the coin doors, all the other little parts that go into it. I have no idea what the cost breakdown on each part of a machine is for stern, but once the initial run is done to cover all the upfront design and license cost, just on pure parts and manufacturing they can probably churn out populated playfields for a "relatively" low cost. They won't, but they could.

SAM games don't make a ton of sense to swap because of how they connect to the cabinet. On Spike it really is just two or three small connectors and it lifts out. SAM is much more involved. It's certainly doable if you're determined, but taking a Spike playfield out is a breeze in comparison.

The cabinet wood/metal, legs, lock down bar assembly, glass, power supply, the main CPU board, and other bits and pieces simply isn't that big of a cost reduction in the grand scheme of costs. A couple years ago I was told the Stern platform, ie everything but the playfield, was about $1,000. Add some inflation and it's still only maybe a 20% reduction in cost.

But now you need a new shipping package for the fully populated playfield (if you get a replacement, doesn't Stern send them in wood crates?). Now the factory needs space for that and a different area to store things ready to ship. And now the cabinet making department is underutilized. And the testing department has to make test rigs because they can't do final tests on the game in their actual cabinet.

If swappable playfields made fiscal sense for Stern, they'd offer them by now. Instead Stern sees the home line as the best solution to making games that only cost "a few thousand"

You're right. Clearly Stern, JJP, and everyone else should eliminate art and upgrades to pins because the market does not want that. Everyone would just love to have $10000-$20000 in populated pf's just sitting in the back of their dirty garage. Wives especially love expensive clutter taking over the house. Best thing is you get to wrestle throwing out your back swapping heavy pf's! Why has nobody ever thought of doing this before?

Again, this is all hypothetical because there is no way Stern would get into this given all the money they are making with their current model.

I just went and looked at a SAM game, it's all on connectors and the boards in the back box are less than on an early solid state. That swap would take like 10-15 minutes, that is no barrier at all.

As for cost, I don't doubt the non-playfield parts are around $1000. But it would be surprised if many playfields were more that $2000 in parts. Most of it is labor and markup, which you obviously can't get around.

Again, they aren't going to do this and I'm not arguing that they should. I'm just saying it is possible there is a market for it. As an example, it's very unlikely I'm going to buy a NIB machine because I just don't see the value there. But if Stern announced a new playfield swap business line for the pro line where new and current run playfields could be purchased alone and put into any existing machine (or even a generic cab they sold), I'd be very interested in that. Reportedly Stern doesn't make a lot on the pro line anyway, this could be an opportunity to expand that market a bit. Again they won't do that and they likely shouldn't. But I'd be in for it.

Multimorphic has thought about this a lot, and for like 10 years or so now? The way they are doing it is probably as close as you’re going to get to a full playfield swap out. Yes spike makes it way easier and the pfs weigh less than older systems, but it’s still a bit cumbersome to remove an entire playfield. Maybe if they cut it into two pieces that slide in like the P3 system, but with a front pf also instead of a static front 2/3… but even then, I dunno. If they fit under a game safely I could have some interest — the market is limited quite a bit to people with space constraints for full physical games and you’re already competing with the P3 for market share.

I too am curious about this. Levi mentioned Congo and Dr. Who in a list of examples of previous failed attempts at playfield swaps. How do these 2 games relate to that?

Your absolutes are quite absurd. As I said, clearly most the market does want all the extra stuff and that's why it is there. I was just pointing out that not everyone does. There are those among us who would have no problem with $10,000-20,000 in populated playfields ready to swap in to games. There may not be a lot of us, which is why I have said repeatedly that Stern won't do it. But that doesn't mean that none of us are interested.

Many people have stated concerns about the difficulty getting a playfield in and out a machine which is confusing. It really isn't hard if you have two people. It's far lighter than lifting a full machine, which is also much easier with two people. All you have to do is disconnect some connectors and lift it out.

Confusing? Just like you said, it would be a pain in the ass. You need two people that are comfortable taking apart a game without damaging anything. That's not something you casually do just to play a game. Of course it's doable but that's not the point.

According to IPDB Congo was produced as a "conversion kit" for certain WPC games.

It's before my time. Some of the old timers have chimed in here and RGP over the years.

The consensus: [plot twist]: Nobody wanted them.

You'll find that to be a common theme when it comes to the "why not" idea of swappable playfields.

Nobody wants them, at least far too few ops/home buyers to make it worth the trouble. It's a losing idea in pinball and always has been, and always will be.

That is absolutely something I causally do to enjoy a game. It's not at all an uncommon thing to do in pinball. And one person is really just an extra set of hands to lift for about 10 seconds. I'm realizing this is very much and old man/damn kids moment though. So take my work for it then, it really isn't hard.

Duplicate

I doubt that ..it's just that the right concept of the idea has not come along yet ......maybe it will never be done but with the way shipping costs are going it might happen due to necessity.......smaller lighter box less shipping and handling costs for the manufacturer and consumer. It may not appeal to art connoisseur types but if the game is of decent depth and entertaining to play it won't matter to the rest of us

In a lot of ways this conversation will inevitably loop back to why games are as expensive as they are in general (so many reasons).

This hobby has such a giant disconnect of what people think a game costs to make and what a fair price to charge is.

I think Multimorphic is doing a good job in filling that niche with the P3.

The industry has tried many times to get conversion kits to take off in the past, but the demand just isn't there. Gary Stern knows first hand with PinStar. The company's focus was to make conversion kits for Early Solid State machines. Their first and only conversion kit was titled Gamatron and it flopped. Gary doesn't even remember how many he sold. Shortly after that, PinStar folded and Data East Pinball was born.

Yeah, if a Pro model is $6899 then I wouldn't be surprised if a "kit" would sell for $5499 - $5899. The other negative with kits is that it locks them into a particular set of hardware, connections, protocols, etc. I imagine there would be an uproar from Kit 1.0 owners if they brought out a newer Kit 2.0. Selling machines in their entirety let's them make any micro changes they want without worrying about backward compatibility.

I've got a Godzilla Premium at home. I love it. I also really like Jurassic Park Premium and I really Like Deadpool. What would the price on those have to be in order for me to get just a playfield? I'd say about $2500. I would much rather have a full on machine than just a swapable playfield. Could Stern make money at $2500 per on those? Probably not including licensing, labor, and design costs. At the same time, I'd say it being an entirely seperate cabinet is worth about $7500 (including the playfield to me). Could I go out and Get JP Premium or DP premium today at $7,500? No. I don't see the economics on this one working.

I dunno, if they were 100% against improvement we’d still be playing EMs.

Stern held out on DMDs for a long time, why’d they move to LCD? They cost more and by your logic it was a waste of time.

I can guarentee it would not be Stern , JP or any other current pinball manufacturers they have more than enough business.

Clearly they made a business decision.

If they thought they'd make more money sticking with DMDs forever, that's what they would have done. If producing EMs made more financial sense than producing digital games, that's what the entire industry would still be doing. Financial considerations are what motivate these decisions.

I think you missed the general gist of my point. They aren't 100 % against improvement, they are 100 % against losing money / profits.

You've been around awhile, you should know that by now! The stuff being suggested in the post I was responding to - giant tubular playfield rails, little flaps that keep balls in the trough, etc. etc. - these things would do nothing but add cost, either absorbed by the consumer or the manufacturer. There is zero incentive for Stern to implement these things.

(and not to get sidetracked, but I can't help myself...do DMD displays cost more than LCD displays? In 2022? Really?)

I think the big innovations in pinball have been a result of competition, not of individual companies necessarily wanting pinball to be better for the sake of pinball. Stern didn't start putting in those LCDs until JJP proved it could be done. It is usually an outsider or underdog innovating (Data East Checkpoint DMD) and then the big dog (Bally/Williams, Stern) hitting back with matching or better improvements.

Thanks Levi. I wonder how much the movie Congo played a part in the reluctance to jump on a conversion

I don't disagree that competition will help drive innovation however, B/W was actively developing a DMD game at the same time as Data East. Checkpoint came out in Feb 91 with Gilligan's Island out in May and T2 in June of the same year.

Compare this with JJP releasing WoZ in 2011 and it wasn't until 5 years later that Batman 66 came out.

We live in a society that will pay a premium for convenience. The amount of money people pay for these things is insane anyway. If I’m spending $7000 anyway and you upsell me that your model has a few features that are a huge time saver and make service and maintenance easier for $7500, I’m all in. Over the course of a lifetime of ownership, that $500 more than pays for itself. Companies need to sell features and benefits, not low costs.

This. There are far more wealthy and somewhat lazy people actually buying Stern games than cheap guys talking about what Stern could do to maybe interest them.

Stern doesn't have an issue with keeping the factory busy...

Maybe if there was a massive market crash Stern would reconsider swappable playfields, but I don't think you'd get anything like the cornerstone pro/premiums as swappable playfields. It'd be something like the Home Pin version of swappable playfields. Very cheaply built, limited BOM, limited software features, and maybe some rehashed content from the big brother. But also....this isn't going to happen lol

Swappable playfields is definitely a stretch and for the home market it’s probably not a reality no matter the trim level of the machine. I am advocating for full length rails and other ease of maintenance upgrades. Imagine a Pro model having an easily removable playfield with full rails similar to Revenge From Mars. The game is on location and after a few months needs a good cleaning and things adjusted. Instead of having to remove the entire machine, you pull the playfield and toss it in the back of an SUV, take it to the shop and do what needs done and return it a few hours later.

On the other hand, far more people would complain about the additional cost compared to the hardcore few that would appreciate such a feature

And for what it’s worth, Spike games are pretty easy to pull out of the cabinet. I know you can buy full size rails to install on games, though I have no idea how many Spike games would easily accommodate them

Actually p2k was a huge success. B/w sold more units than they have in years. They already wanted to close the doors on pinball because they can can charge the same for a slot machine with a fraction of the cost. They thought they gave pinball team an impossible objective. And they surprised them with something revolutionary. The head people already had their eyes set to close the doors regardless in how successful it was.

I agree that extra playfields hanging around and in-the-way is an issue. But, having said that, the P3 platform is, IMHO, doing the best job at transversing this complicated(?) idea in the current age of pinball.
Heist was something like $3500 to purchase brand new. Yes, you did have to have already invested in the core *hardware*, i.e. the cabinet. Still, I think Gerry is the first one to be on track to make this whole sloppy *swappable playfields* concept a working reality.
Personally, I am hoping his vision is not too ahead of its time to work (meaning financially viable).

Heist is $2750, and $250 of that is the upper flipper module which can be used on any future layout.

P3 is the most innovative thing to happen to pinball in the past 7 years it's been out.

P3 also shows most people really don’t want the innovation they clamor for.

Which is too bad. Gerry is great. Hopefully they can crank out a couple great licensed themes to break through.

I stand corrected.