I’ve noticed that GOT, GB, Batman 66 straight out of the box have the flipper alignment set considerably lower these days. It makes the gap between the flippers at rest much wider, the ability to catch and control balls less frequent and of course messes up your aim compared to the standard alignment. This makes for shorter game times and the reduction in control would bring the better players back to the pack.
Is this something that just the Australian distributor is doing or is this standard out of the factory?
I don’t like the games set up this way so I have been putting them back to the old alignment (i.e. flipper aligned with the lane guide.) However, if this is the way things are going to be in the future and this is what I will encounter when I go to tournaments I guess I better get used to it.
Also if you adjust the flipper alignment it can change the shots. There is a GB on location that the owner did this and it made some of the shots virtually impossible to hit.
Ritchie likes his aligned with the ball guide. The other designers as far as I know use the more traditional alignment. The alignment on GB and TWD feels good to me. Anything that makes me not remember playing Gottlieb system 3 is always a good thing
Like the factory bubble, never trust the flipper alignment out of the box. Check the flipper alignment holes. On SAM and newer game, they are right at the tip of the flipper. JJP games too. Those holes are always right on the money. What the designer intended.
On some games, like GB, the holes are hard to see through the glass due to the art in that area. Look real close and you’ll see them. On the GOT pro I play regularly, they’re right on the money. The GB pro came with the flippers just a tad above the holes (confirmed from the op, he hasn’t touched them).
If you play for fun, by all means align with the lane guides. If you want to improve your game, play the way the designer intended.
Flopped flippers exist basically for one reason: To make outside (orbit-y) shots easier. A lot of Jpop games had them, and it kind of makes sense for those playfields (TOM especially, CV is OK too), but they were very misplaced on SWE1. In fact when he first showed the rest of engineering the game, every single person said to unflop the flippers (because flopped flippers make the middle MUCH harder to shoot, and obviously hitting the middle is kind of important on that game). He did, and everyone liked how it played. Then it went into production with flopped.
I’ve never seen a GOT flopped. GB does kind of feel that way to me, at least a little bit, and it kind of makes sense because there isn’t really anything to shoot up the middle. But, as people say, harder to control.
Flopped flippers mostly suck because they don’t “feel” right, and since the flippers are the most important aspect of a pinball game, why would you fuck with them that much and put people off of your game?
I’ve actually grown to prefer fliippers aligned a bit lower than typical on many modern games. And it seems more often than not, games in private collections or on locations are set high, especially classic Ballys and Sterns, which typically people will align with the guides and make half the shots feel like trying to Shatz instead of shooting an orbit or target bank.
Huh, now that I’ve read about it, I should go look to see if the flippers on the various new Sterns around here are like that. I’d guess most operators wouldn’t know any better.
Coming from a background where competitive players want complete and total control (namely Pokémon and fighting games), I don’t understand the logic here.
I think the lowered flippers work on GB because of the layout. Most returns to the right flipper can be cradled without much effort. Most returns to the left flipper will either roll over to the right flipper or you can help it over with a nudge or a tip pass. Once under control, you can easily post pass from either side. On paper, the lowered flippers should give you less control, but the easy control from the inlanes makes up for the loss of control elsewhere.
The observations above are based on a well played, sometimes dirty, game. Never waxed, probably at factory pitch. I’ve played screaming fast new premiums and LE’s that seem like they won’t slow down for at least another couple thousand plays. I can see how some would get impatient with those games. Of all the newer Stern’s, GB would be the last title I would recommend waxing the playfield. Horrible idea. Has anyone competed on one that they knew was freshly waxed? That can’t be good.
Because total control is boring. Watch Jorian’s Star Trek game from Expo for a great example of bad Twitch viewing. Plus I stand a much better chance of losing to a novice player on TWD, Drac or IM than I ever would on say Dr Who. I think the pinball scene was much more social in the 70s-80s because you could play a quick competitive multiplayer game on just about anything. Now I hardly play socially because I do not care to watch nor subject others to watch a 2 hr game of 24.
I have heard this argument from time to time, and it always struck me somewhat unsupported. I bet that 10 people can “use the holes” as guide and come up with 10 different results.
I have never seen or heard of exactly what tools are used in manufacturing, the radius it has on the part that the flipper is made to rest on in calibration nor if it is custom to do this before or after the rubber band is applied. Or if this is simply done by eye.
The “use a tooth pick” tip is not really a solid reference, is it.
As someone in favour of customisation and even creative modification I’d say, go with the alignment works best. And have the flippers symmetrical, please.
Side note. I wonder how flopped the flippers on those Premier games would have to be made. In order for the game to be “not controllable”.
[quote=“sk8ball, post:16, topic:2391, full:true”]Because total control is boring. Watch Jorian’s Star Trek game from Expo for a great example of bad Twitch viewing. Plus I stand a much better chance of losing to a novice player on TWD, Drac or IM than I ever would on say Dr Who. I think the pinball scene was much more social in the 70s-80s because you could play a quick competitive multiplayer game on just about anything. Now I hardly play socially because I do not care to watch nor subject others to watch a 2 hr game of 24.
[/quote]
Hmm, all right then. I think I get what you mean–this would be like those chess games that go on all day, and sometimes the next day then, in that few people would want to watch that except for the most dedicated of chess fans? Chess would definitely be a game where both players have 100% control.
I guess I’m thinking in terms of the player’s perspective, albeit not from a pinball point of view. Competitive video gamers can get very, VERY uppity if elements of chance are present. But these people rarely, if ever, care about the viewers. They go for strictly what will allow them to play at their best, even if said “best” goes for hours at a time.
I think what I’m trying to say is that I was thinking about people who play to win, regardless of how boring it may be. They want to feel like they gave it their all and that anything bad that happened was their own fault, rather than the fault of the game. I don’t know how many of these people there are in pinball, though it sounds like there aren’t quite as many.
At the core of it, I guess, is the Technician vs. Performer contrast. You seem to fall under the “Performer” label: You want to make the audience happy and entertained, and you go for whatever is interesting. What I’m used to seeing is the “Technician”: They’re all about microscopically precise execution and doing whatever it takes to win as long as the rules allow it.
I think saying that is a huge insult to Keith who is so much better than any other player that plays (or ever has, except maybe NES), pinball, but uh…sure.
