I hear ya. I like ACDC Premium as its just an incredibly fast paced game, has kick ass music, the king of flow Steve Ritchie does the voice work which is cool and the multiballs and canon shots are sweet. The game technically has 12 modes for completing the 12 songs but I find it hard pressed to call them modes after playing a game like WOZ or LOTR as the story isn't there and instead its just completing the same number of shots to get the next song. However, I wouldn't want a story mode rule set in ACDC or even Metallica as I think the rulesets those games use today work extremely well since music games.

Can't help it teekee, funny how I keep bumping into you in these WOZ threads. I'm #112; which number did you buy? How do you like the EC/Rescue MB stack people were using at the PAPA mini-tournament? Can you actually add anything to the conversation other than saying "I don't like it" for the 700th time?

xoxoxoxo

I agree about AC/DC Premium. I really enjoy mine. It is, however, the last NIB DMD game I will buy. Stern needs to move to the LCD backbox for their next models. In fact, AC/DC will be on the chopping block if The Hobbit shapes like like I think it will.

ACDC modes aren't completion modes, they're scoring modes. Honestly, unless you're *trying* for encore, the goal isn't to complete songs as fast as possible, but to use the song rules + multiballs to maximize scoring as much as you can. Say I build the War Machine spinner to huge values and am a shot or two from multiball, I'm staying on WM if I hit the lit juke. Changing songs would be silly since I'm looking at 3-5M minimum left orbit shots with the bell multiplier...

It seemed as though a few of us here where having a nice civil discussion regarding WoZ. Both the negatives and the positives. Nothing personal, nothing crazy... you show up and seem as though you want to start trouble, what gives?

I ask again, teekee, do you have any opinions as to the gameplay, scoring, stacking, art, modes, or anything else to do with the game besides "I don't like the theme or company?"

Big hugs for a fellow WOZ fan, you must really be looking forward to it considering how much time you spend talking about it

Pretty good summary.

You asked me for my Cliff's Notes version of my WOZ review. Well, you just typed it.

The graphic in this post was very enlightening considering the opinions stated.

Thank you... and mine were free. I think you were wanting $20?

Yeah, but it would have saved you typing that post!

So my opinion is "fact" then..........

Gotta love the Woz obsession going on! Jack should love it, good for bidness.....

We accept your guys opinions, again and again! Some people don't like it, a small minority, like any pin MB, MM, Tron, Met, whatever.....never seen anything like the Woz threads, and btw, the game is "developing" and the code is unfinished, kind of like how most Sterns progress to the "greatest pin eva"...

To say the pin blows now or doesn't have "lastability" is kind of..........premature, but hey, to each his own and despite the avalanche of great reviews and people changing preconceived notions and going from hate to love, there will always be the holdouts and people that don't like it, its ok, the converts are coming and reviews are great!

And the Hobbit is looking good! Rock on!!!

The build/overall quality is now factually much better than Stern? Ok, I'll stipulate to that...

Not surprised...lol.

So what if he posts in WOZ forums? Based on what I have read, Teekee's posts have been very fair and measured.

Stupid statement. The added weight is a result of the quality improvement, not the reason for it.

Let me spell out a few examples for those who are slow on the uptake. Note that WOZ is a widebody. Bigger pf, bigger cab = more weight. But that's a design choice, not necessarily related to quality, so that is one factor that adds weight. But for the quality factor, we have this:

WOZ has 11-ply plywood (higher quality) that is also a bit thicker than standard playfields. (There was an early change of some hardware for the increased thickness.) Stern *downgraded* to cheaper 7-ply (from the former 9-ply standard). Thicker plywood = more weight, plus the added quality of more plies.

Pretty sure the WOZ cabinet is also made from the same plywood. Can anyone confirm? If so, stronger/better cab, better quality. And heavier.

WOZ has a lot more "real" toys on the pf compared to current Sterns. I'm not talking about cheap plastic off-the-toystore-shelf glue-it-on crap. 2 mini-playfields, each made of better plywood. More motors and coils and magnets, all of which add weight. Metal rail guides and brackets (WMS style) seem heavier than Stern's. Someone reported that WOZ plastis were heavier/stronger than those used by Stern now. I can't personally confirm that, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Hi-res graphics printed on wood, with ample clearcoat. Probably doesn't add much weight, but is better quality than cheap printed decals slapped on a flimsier cabinet.

Audio system: *seven* component drivers, plus more bracing in the backbox to support them. As opposed to 2 cheap-o single-driver speakers in the Stern backbox (yes, even on their "top-of-the-line" LE models). Add in a real audio amp with crossover (OK, not a huge amount of weight there but big difference in audio capability/quality).

The "brains" include a real pc motherboard, real memory, etc., and all conveniently located in a detachable metal cage box for service/testing. Probably a bit heavier than Stern's current board system, definitely more capable. (It can run HD video and quality music, etc.)

Playfield support? WOZ has the killer full-length "sled runners" (like Pin2k did) -- SLide it out to any distance and all components underneath are protected. Or, unplug and pull the pf out, sit it on your floor or bench to work on the pf with unobstructed access. Stern? The standard sheet-metal sliders weren't cheap enough, so now you get a useless pair of little plastic pegs. Not only can you not really work on the underside of the Stern pf without lifting it all the way up, but if those pegs get knocked off the little lockdown rail, the pf will drop and you might crush some components. Handy? No. Protective? No. Cheaper and lighter? Yes. Advantage WOZ.

I'm sure there are more examples; I've only explored the inside of a prototype. To address your comment: WOZ doesn't have better build quality because it's heavier. It's heavier because it has better build quality. See how logical reasoning really works?

Well, to Teekee's credit (as well as others who feel that WOZ has mediocre or poor play), I think we should look at the comparison in terms of "platforms". You are describing a difference, in many ways, of two platforms.

As a NIB Stern buyer, I agree that the WOZ platform appears superior to the Stern platform. All of the things you mention above along with the expanded LCD screen show a true disparity between the two companies.

As for theme, gameplay, etc., let the debate go on. I, for one, respect other's opinions on WOZ gameplay. If they feel it is mediocre, then they probably shouldn't own it.

I would say my statement may be ignorant, but not stupid. Educate me. Remember, the initial comment was 'it just feels better because Sterns feel lighter'.

What are the advantages of 11-ply vs. 7-ply? Besides being heavier and more expensive (Are those advantages?). Do the extra 4 plies mean the screen printed art on the top will last longer? Less dimpling of the clear coat? Why not put a 20 ply play field in?

Same questions as above. Will the art last longer? Not fade? Or is it just heavier and more expensive to produce?

Honest questions.

StevenP , nice write up. Can you tell me if all the stuff you mentioned =fun ?

I don't think its an ignorant question. I can say that there is a world of difference in terms of "flex" when I lift my LOTR playfield as opposed to my AC/DC playfield which does make me feel a bit un-easy.

Not sure on the wear. Maybe both companies could get away with printing a playfield on CDX for all I know.

Why would you need a heavier cabinet and playfield? I've never seen a cabinet or playfield fall apart during normal usage. All the rest i can see as an improvement but out of all of them i only can see the display and computer casing adding substantial weight.

That's the funny part for me. Removing the Woz vs Stern debate I find the more basic games to be the ones I love. From Williams AFM to Sterns IM.
More stuff can or may be more fun but I have not seen it yet.

I want *real* quality in my pins, so I'm not buying again until they are using carbon fiber instead of wood.

Fair point.

Those things obviously dont = gameplay.

However, it does mean when you find a theme/title you like- its gonna be an awesome combo.... For me- that's why I'm excited to PLAY TH and hopefully find one I want to own.

Some of us do think the game is fun.

C'mon, I was addressing a ridiculous statement regarding physical build quality (and weight) alone. Your question is completely tangential/orthogonal to that. It is still premature (IMO) to definitively asses a subjective "fun factor" for WOZ because there is a lot more to come in the software. As an example, one update brought in the outlane ball-save modes, which most people appear to agree adds a big fun factor. Many more modes to come, some of which I think may be a little fun.

Besides, fun is ALWAYS in the eye of the player. I don't think ACDC is fun at all, but many here think it's the best game ever. Not a fan of more examples of the same old fan layout. And "Faster is better" isn't my basis when I think of which pin games I find more fun to play. I think WPT is one of Stern's best games to date, easily (def in the top 3). Many here don't care for it. I really do not like STTNG or TZ; they are the favorite games of many people, and in the top 5/10 of many others.

From what I can guess about WOZ (based on playing a prototype, reading comments on the feel and newer features, seeing where the software is going), I think it will be an extremely fun game for me. YMMV, of course.

I have to agree. WOZ sets a new standard attracting folks to a table.

More plies and thickness means sturdier, less likely to warp or flex when moving the pf, etc. There's a limit to what you need. But recent Stern playfields do feel a LOT lighter and have more 'bend' to them, which can't be good long-term for the clearcoat, etc. You want a playfield to be rigid. Plies won't affect the longevity of the artwork--that's a product of the printing and clearcoat processes. I don't think anyone would deny that the WOZ cabinet looks FAR nicer (quality-wise, even if you don't like the theme) than any Stern cabinet. I also have a WOZ playfield, and it is really gorgeous. Glass smooth with full, rich, detailed color. The crystal ball above the flippers even looks kind of 3D.

Yes it does. They did a great job with the crystal ball for sure. I was more impressed by it than the LCD!

Maybe that min. limit is 7 ply? Are you lifting the play field several times a day to worry about flex and it affecting the clear?

It sounds like you don't have the answers to my questions. Still sounds like 'Heavier=Better".

The answer to my questions (Will the art last longer? Not fade? Or is it just heavier and more expensive to produce?) is, the heavier cabinet is required for it to look better. Ok, thanks for clearing that up.

Someone's never routed a Bally 6803 game

No, recent Stern playfields do flex noticeably when you lift/support them. That is not a good thing. It can affect the artwork and clear, over time. The surface longevity also depends (largely) on stiffness of the upper layer (or 2), esp. with balls striking the pf surface all the time. I'm not sure the exact wood quality used in the pfs, but I'd be shocked if the Stern pf surface was of higher quality. (because it would cost more).

As for cabinet quality, you could do nicer direct-print clearcoated cab art on cheaper wood. But pin cabs do get banged around often. (Not all games just sit in an owner's gameroom --these are commercial entertainment machines, remember? And most do get moved/stored/relocated now and then. Sturdier is better. And it's not like Stern is charging a lot less for markedly inferior build quality.

I don't know why we need to compliment one by dissing the other. I've seen and played about 4 differing WOZ machines and I liked the look of the cleared cabinet and many of the things implemented in the pin. That said, a pin does not really need to weigh 300+ pounds to be quality. What it needs to do is play well without many issues and have durability. So far each manufacturer has had their issues IMO. When WOZ was not even out there were claims of superior quality and complete code and while they did some things very well I would not classify the machine as superior. We all have our own opinions though and that is a good thing as it would be boring if everyone agreed on everything. Not trying to start a flame war just the other side of the coin I guess.

From my experience Sega and Stern playfields just feel flimsier. When the ball is ejected into the shooter lane the kickout solenoid makes the whole playfield wobble. I don't see that behavior on Bally/Williams games with the same style trough and kickout solenoid. As for Sega games, the rails are pretty decent, my only complaint with those is the cabinet rail stops aren't high enough and it's easy to pop the playfield out of place. The modern Stern playfield rests are a joke, they look and feel no more resilient than doorstops.

Kind of the point I was trying to make, in a round about way

When a person says 'I could tell the quality was better than Stern, because it's heavier' ... there just isn't a roll eyes emoticon big enough for that.

As a guy that moves pins in and out of locations by himself, personally, heavier to me means my back will hurt more, and I paid more for the privilege of doing it.

Hunh. How long have you been messing with pinball machines?

Firstly, Stern, some Bally/Williams use MDF or in older cases *particle board* for the bottoms of cabs, backs of heads, etc. This is simply a cost-cutting move as MDF or particle board is cheaper. Now if you've never seen what water/moisture does to MDF or particle board, then you just haven't seen that many pinball machines (or video games which are mostly particle board).

When that crap gets wet, it basically starts to disintegrate. I'm sure someone can show a picture of a cab bottom or head back that's gotten wet and started to bubble/come apart. Those are structural pieces and the strength of the cabinet depends on them.

Over the last couple of decades I've seen plenty of cabinets coming apart or just plain rotting apart from moisture issues. Plenty of B/W (widebodies especially) seem to have issues with maintaining their glue joints on corners and I can't recall how many of those cabinets I've had to reglue.
Both Stern and B/W also used a lower grade of plywood which results in bad spots from where knots were. If those spots end up on a cabinet edge, then glue joints there aren't nearly as strong and can become problems down the road easily. Lower quality plywood also results in delamination. I know you've seen it, especially on the bottom edges of pinball cabinets. Slide it out of your vehicle and see how many little pieces of wood were left behind.

Because JJP is using high-ply, quality plywood throughout the cab, the cab is going to endure much better than how Stern or even B/W built theirs. Not only is the plywood higher quality, but they put a rubber T-mold on every exposed wood edge. That will keep those boxes together a lot longer. (besides just looking a ton better than exposed plys)

THAT is a big part of the weight difference and I've only touched on cabinet differences, not playfields.

Do a few playfield swaps on 90s B/W and modern Sterns and you'll see just how flimsy they are. Of course you should also ask the question why does a Stern from the late 2000s NEED a new playfield already?!?!? (I have a Spiderman in the shop right now with a blownout playfield, mostly due to magnets, also an IJ4 coming up with a trashed PF. Not very old for that to be happening)

If a pristine playfield costs from $700 to $1000, would you want it built on a $20 piece of plywood or a $40 to $50 piece of plywood? Pretty simple concept.

true, but i took one apart . These where made out of compressed wood, now that is cheaping it out to much

Same reason so many Monster Bash and AFM playfields got blown out early... bad design (no protection from wear) plus lots of play with crappy balls installed. Or, the same reason so many CV playfields are shot - crappy manufacturing leading to clearcoat delamination. Even a lacquered playfield will hold up reasonably well if edges and high traffic areas are protected from wear and the balls are kept fresh.

Improper preventative maintenance would be my guess.

So you are implying that 11 ply vs 7 ply will result in less play field wear? Ok. I could have sworn I've seen play field wear already on one of the mini-play fields in WoZ. Maybe they skipped a ply on that one?

So, if I keep my Stern cabs dry, out of fires, and dont move them every week, they should be okay? That's good advice.

Ooh, thanks for reminding me! Monster Bash, what a perfect example of where a better quality piece of wood could have kept that playfield usable longer! Virtually every MB made ends up bowed at the Drac Track because the wood wasn't strong enough to stay flat with that big arc cut through it. No idea if JJP's playfield wood would have been enough, but it certainly would have helped.

MB is a sore point to me. I've done 4 PF swaps on MB and I have one coming up on a Bash that I had ALREADY done a PF swap on back in 2003! Damn flimsy things....

Don't get me wrong, using higher quality wood, more ply's, etc on a pinball is awesome. Necessary? That's debatable. Does it increase the price? I would think so.

I'm glad I can still buy super fun pins for $5500 NiB. Stern, please don't start using 11 ply and carbon fiber. Thank you.

@ garymartin: appreciate the good reply Question with these playfields is if it's because of the wood or because they cheapened out to much on the clearcoat. I can also understand why you would like to have the bottom of the cabinet in better quality wood but that's why i sead normal usage. A moisty environment is bad for all wood and iron parts me thinks

No, I'm stating the simple observation that a higher quality piece of plywood will not flex or deform as easily. I didn't imply or state that it would prevent wear to the top of the wood, that would be a stupid comment.

There's enough humidity in the air to affect MDF or particle board over the years.

What was this paragraph referring to then:

It sounds like you are implying something about wear there, I dont know, maybe I'm wrong.

The balls are what affect wear on the top. Exposed edges that the balls can impact don't stand a chance, that's why MBs mosh hole gets so destroyed. The clearcoat will last a few hundred games, then it's chipped off and the balls are sanding away at the exposed wood edge. Most scoops limit the amount of exposed wood edge, but MB used a new design that practically encouraged it.

Best MB ever was the one at the Cedar Point arcade years ago. Mosh hole was literally softball-sized. The game was out of order because a ball had fallen through the playfield to the left of the scoop into the cabinet.

I noticed you have a TAF in your collection. A local bar owner here in town contacted me recently about selling the TAF he'd had in a Mexican restaurant for years. I went and took a look at it.

The cabinet was coming apart badly enough that he had bought angle brackets and screwed them into both the inside of the lower cab *and on the outside of the head* It literally needed a brand new cab and head. The playfield was actually not too bad, no magnet burn, only minor wear on the electric chair and swamp kickout.

The spot where that machine was sitting was inside and air conditioned but not far from doors that led to their patio.

So if that machine bad been built a bit tougher, it would still be a fairly decent example of the title. This one however, had enough moisture get into it over the years that it needed an $1,800 cab replacement, (add in art for another $250).

It is a damn shame that a 21 year old pinball machine is worn out .

Pure anecdote at best.

My cab is together, and does not have any moisture problems. All TAF's were built just fine.

See how that works

+1. I purchased a NIB LOTR in 2004 and it looks/plays awesome after nearly 10 years. From my perspective, many aspects of a pinball machine are over engineered for the home. Making them more reliable, more affordable, and easier to manage (automatic update over the internet, remote debugging, etc.) is what home consumers care about.

Yes, that is in regard to how badly Stern playfields can get destroyed around magnet holes that go through the playfield. Stern's soft metal replaceable core idea sounds good on paper but on route those magnet cores get ignored, they deform badly and the wood ends up getting destroyed around them.

In total honesty, a BW playfield would probably get blown out just the same with magnet cores protruding all the way through the PF. Not a lot of BW titles used that approach though. It's rather common on 2000+ Sterns.