Journalist Tool

Kineticist

  • HDashboard
  • IItems
  • ↓Ingest
  • SSources
  • KBeats
  • BBriefs
  • RIntel
  • QSearch
  • NName Review
  • +Health

v0.1.0

← Back to items

Episode 123 - The Physical Game

Wedgehead Pinball Podcast·podcast_episode·53m 44s·analyzed·Jul 27, 2026
View original
Export .md

Analysis

claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 (batch) · $0.022

TL;DR

Playfield geometry spectrum: unique-but-clunky vs. familiar-but-derivative shot layouts.

Summary

Alan and Alex of the Wedgehead A A Pinball Podcast explore how physical playfield layout and shot geometry affect a pinball machine's feel and playability. They discuss the spectrum between unique/novel layouts (like Uncanny X-Men, Avengers Infinity Quest) that feel fresh but introduce clunkiness, versus classic/familiar layouts (like Attack from Mars, Pokémon) that are comfortable and smooth but derivative. They trace design philosophy from EM-era designers through Steve Ritchie ("flow") and Pat Lawlor ("stop-and-go") as opposing poles, then examine modern designers and the trade-off between novelty and polish.

Key Claims

  • The late 1970s transition to solid-state pinball introduced the role of the lead programmer, separating from the designer's work in EM machines.

    high confidence · Alan explaining the evolution from EM designers handling everything to solid-state era introducing programmer roles.

  • High Speed (1986) is the first clear example of his 'flow' design philosophy with repeatable upper loops and fan layout.

    medium confidence · Alan and Alex debating when Ritchie's flow concept emerged; they settle on High Speed as the first clear example.

  • Pat Lawlor officially retired after Toy Story 4.

    high confidence · Alan stating definitively: 'Pats officially retired. He went out on Toy Story 4.'

  • Unique/novel playfield layouts inherently introduce more clunkiness and rejects due to unusual angles and non-standard geometry.

    high confidence · Alan explaining the downside to tweaking the 'sacred geometry of the fan layout' introduces variance and clumsiness.

  • The two-flipper fan layout is the foundational backbone of modern pinball and has been optimized for smooth play over 30 years.

    high confidence · Alan: 'the perfect place to place all the shots on flippers to be perfectly smooth and feel good to hit was figured out over 30 years ago.'

  • Rick and Morty intentionally splits its layout: right side familiar/friendly, left side unusual/goofy, per Scott DeNise's design intent.

    high confidence · Alan citing Scott DeNise's stated design philosophy for Rick and Morty's asymmetrical layout approach.

  • John Borg games sit between Steve Ritchie and Pat Lawlor on the spectrum—Steve-style layouts with big Central Park-style toys that stop the ball.

    medium confidence · Alex discussing John Borg design signature as a hybrid approach between the two titans.

  • Rhodes (Wedgehead operator) recently bought an Uncanny X-Men Premium because the novel layout excited him after a long career in pinball.

    high confidence · Alan recounting Rhodes' reasoning for the purchase: 'there's a lot of shit on this game I've never seen before.'

Notable Quotes

  • “the perfect place to place all the shots on flippers to be perfectly smooth and feel good to hit was figured out over 30 years ago”

    Alan @ mid-episode — Core thesis: modern pin layout optimization is mature; novelty requires intentional deviation that sacrifices polish.

  • “Pats officially retired. He went out on Toy Story 4.”

    Alan @ mid-episode — Confirms Pat Lawlor's retirement and final game design; community significance as end of an era.

  • “there's a lot of shit on this game I've never seen before, and I've been in pinball for a long time”

    Rhodes (via Alan) @ mid-episode — Validates novelty as a driver of collector/operator purchasing decisions even for veterans.

  • “you have to do it to get X-Men. You know, you have to do it to get Avengers”

    Alan @ late-episode — Articulates the core trade-off: novelty requires accepting clunkiness; you cannot have both.

  • “When those shots work, incredible. When you're hitting everything clean and it's all cooperating, that game is so much fun to shoot. But then you kind of get off or your shots get a little bit off...you're like, Jesus Christ, this stuff is not cooperating.”

    Alex @ mid-episode — Illustrates the variance and frustration inherent in novel layouts—consistency depends on player precision and machine condition.

  • “It's derivative bullshit.”

    Alex (satirically, referencing critics) @ mid-episode — Captures the dismissive attitude some players have toward familiar fan-layout designs.

  • “he has his Hallmark styles, but it's somewhere in between Pat and Steve. It's, like, it's kind of a Steve layout with, like, a big Central Park-style toy that stops the ball and gives you a moment”

    Alex @ mid-episode — Defines John Borg's design DNA as a middle ground hybrid.

  • “we've all seen this show before. You're not playing it for the first time. You aren't discovering a brand new vision.”

Entities

AlanpersonAlexpersonSteve RitchiepersonPat LawlorpersonJohn BorgpersonKeith ElwinpersonScott DeNiseperson

Signals

  • ?

    design_philosophy: Core design spectrum contrasts Steve Ritchie's 'flow' philosophy (long chained shots, open center, ball keeps moving) vs Pat Lawlor's 'stop-and-go' (tight, claustrophobic, ball pauses between shots). Modern designers largely occupy middle ground.

    high · Extended discussion of Ritchie and Lawlor as opposing poles; characterization of their design DNA as persistent across eras.

  • ?

    design_innovation: Unique/novel playfield layouts (Uncanny X-Men, Avengers Infinity Quest) intentionally sacrifice geometric polish and consistency to achieve freshness and player intrigue. This is a deliberate trade-off, not an oversight.

    high · Alan: 'to really shake up the format and make something feel unique in the modern day, you are actively choosing to add in a little bit of jank or a little clunk.'

  • ?

    gameplay_signal: Novel layouts exhibit higher variance in shot execution due to unusual angles and non-standard geometry. Success depends more on player precision and machine condition than familiar layouts.

    high · Discussion of Infinity Quest Captain Marvel ramp, Uncanny X-Men shots failing when player is off or machine differs; Katana shot on Deadpool having consistency issues across copies.

  • $

    market_signal: Novel/unique layouts drive premium purchases even among veteran operators. Rhodes' Uncanny X-Men Premium purchase attributed to fresh design despite long hobby tenure.

    high · Alan recounting Rhodes: 'there's a lot of shit on this game I've never seen before, and I've been in pinball for a long time' as motivation for premium purchase.

  • ~

Transcript

groq_whisper · $0.036

0:00
Music You're saying all the things that I know you're like Make a good conversation I gotta handle you just right You know what I mean I took you to an intimate restaurant Then do a suggestion of it There's nothing left to talk about Lessons horizontally Let's get physical, physical I wanna get physical Let's get into physical. Let me hear your body talk. Body talk. Let me hear your body talk. Hello, everybody, and welcome to another episode of the Wedgehead Pinball Podcast. As always, I'm your host, Alan, one of the owners of Wedgehead in Portland, Oregon. Joined in the basement studio as usual, it's George the Puppy and his bone, and my co-host, Alex the Waterboy. How are you doing? I'm doing good. We're both keeping a nervous eye on George here as he just continues to explore the room and try to find new shit to mess with.
1:26
But yeah, no, no, I'm doing good. You know, it's my turn to plug the coffee, which everyone always loves. That's right. If you're listening to this show, you probably already know by now, but we have a coffee account. It's ko-fi.com slash Wedgehead Podcast. You can go there, throw us a few bucks if you want to support all of the hard work Alan puts in and all of the easy work I put in. And if you do throw us a few bones, you get an invite to our private Discord where we're always hanging out, chopping it up with the crew. It's usually pretty active and good time. A lot of good pinball discussion in there to be had. Lots of stuff about the show and not about the show at all. Yeah, a lot of stuff. I'm always surprised how much non-pinball stuff people want to talk about in there. Sometimes the movie discussions go hard. Yeah, it's kind of like a movie Discord that has some pinball discussion occasionally. Yeah, that's good. As related to movies. Yeah.
2:18
But in today's episode, we have yet another example of the tail wagging the dog, and that's a topic that popped up in the said discussion point recently out of the blue in our Discord, something that I felt would make for an interesting full episode of the podcast, and that's the physical importance of a playfield layout. For listeners of the show, they know that we often talk about or highlight the role of the lead designer on this show, and they do have a big job. And they're kind of like the director of the film or the, quote, dad of the project, as Steve Ritchie has described it in the past. But the first thing they are responsible for is the physical layout of the machine, the shots and the mechs and the balancing of the bill of materials or bomb. Pinball as a game is more than the sum of its parts. And on the show in the past, we have talked extensively about the impact of art and light shows and theme integration have on the final product. They are all important and they are all essential to the fabric of the game and a player's individual experience whilst playing the game. Back in the old days, it was pretty much the league game designer and the artist who would be the driving force of what a game ended up being. I'm always curious back in the day how involved the rules guys were. Like, did they just hand, like, did someone, you know, Steve just hand Flash over to just a dude? And they're like, I'm going to make the worst rule set of all time for this? Like Eugene Jarvis? I think that's when it all kind of started, you know, in the late 70s. Yeah, because prior to that, like, I think, like, Norm Clark, I know, like, was the one that invented the relay logic for, like, carryover progress on a multiplayer game. So at that level, in the EMs, I... The EMs, they did all of it. Doing, like, the rule set, everything. Everything, yeah. And so it's, like, at some point that separates. And it's probably when it became, like, you know, programming because they're like, I don't know how to do this nerd shit. Yeah, so the programmers get... So now there has to be somebody at least implementing what they wanted, and that's where we start seeing the separation. In the late 1970s, Pinball transitioned into the solid-state era, and with it brought the added role of the lead programmer, as Alex was saying. Oh, that makes sense, yeah. I should have, you know, looked at the notes. Over the decades since, the lead programmer's role has grown increasingly more important as the levels of complexity in the games have increased. For a long time, their contributions were largely very underappreciated, but it has been changing. Even if the game designer still gets the lion's share of the credit and criticism over the final game's reception, you are starting to see the lead programmer and the lead designer being co-credited more obviously as a duo nowadays. Yeah, or at least co-blamed. It comes up like people really know the names of programmers when they think they did a shit job. Absolutely. It's kind of funny. All of this is to say that in the modern day, we as pinheads typically discuss pinball from two main points of view, particularly when we are playing or discussing new releases. There's the where's the code or it needs a code update discussion. And then there's the talk about how it shoots or the geometry of the game. Clearly, both are important and both intertwined alongside each other. And I'm not suggesting that programming is less important to a game in any way, shape or form. But on this episode, I strictly want to focus on the physical layout and geometry of the shots and what it does to the feeling of the game. So modern pinball and the concept of shots. Yes. So we've talked about this on the show a lot, but for most of pinball's history, there were just like a lot of targets spread around a play field and maybe a few bumpers. Yeah, there were maybe like a few short lanes, but they often weren't directly shootable from the flippers. They were like at the top of the playfield. If you nudged a ball through them, you're spelling something, right? So that's like classic old school EM early solid state. Yeah, like a amount of rails into EMs, yeah. And then this changed at some point sort of gradually over time, but by the late 1980s, pinball had shifted far away from what it was before, had migrated to elongated ball paths spread across the playfield, creating a field or array of what pinball players kind of colloquially refer to as shots.

Alan @ late-episode — Explains player fatigue with derivative layouts despite their technical smoothness.

Rhodesperson
Zackperson
George Gomezperson
Norm Clarkperson
Eugene Jarvisperson
Wedgehead Pinball Podcastorganization
The Uncanny X-Mengame
Avengers Infinity Questgame
Attack from Marsgame
Pokémongame
Deadpoolgame
Rick and Mortygame
John Wickgame
Toy Story 4game
High Speedgame
Flashgame
The Hobbitgame
Terminator 2game

sentiment_shift: Community expresses fatigue with familiar, classic fan-layout designs despite their technical smoothness. Dismissive language ('derivative bullshit') used toward comfortable but unoriginal layouts.

high · Alan discussing how familiar layouts feel seen-before; Alex's repeated 'derivative bullshit' characterization of criticisms; discussion of 'cookie cutter, uninspired, lazy' perception.

  • ?

    design_philosophy: Scott DeNise's Rick and Morty intentionally uses asymmetrical design: right side traditional/accessible, left side unconventional. Strategy to blend novelty with familiar elements.

    high · Alan crediting DeNise's stated intent: right side 'normal orbit entrance,' 'very friendly ramp'; left side 'completely bonkers,' 'tight entrance,' 'U-turn that'll fuck you.'

  • ?

    historical_signal: Solid-state era introduced programmer role separate from physical layout designer. EM-era designers handled all aspects (relay logic, playfield, rules). Separation increased as code complexity grew.

    high · Discussion of Eugene Jarvis and late 1970s transition; Norm Clark's relay logic invention; programmer role growing in importance over decades.

  • ?

    industry_signal: Williams/Bally's dominance came from covering full design spectrum (Ritchie + Lawlor + middle ground). Competitors largely copied successful designs rather than innovating independently.

    medium · Alan: 'Williams absolutely dominated the industry. They were covering the whole spectrum...everything else you saw from other manufacturers...feels like a knockoff of a Bally Williams.'

  • ?

    personnel_signal: Pat Lawlor officially retired after Toy Story 4. Marks end of an era for one of two foundational design philosophies.

    high · Alan's definitive statement: 'Pats officially retired. He went out on Toy Story 4.' Lamented as 'never going to get Toy Story 5 from him.'

  • ?

    design_philosophy: Most modern designers (John Borg, Keith Elwin, etc.) operate as hybrids, blending Ritchie and Lawlor influences rather than pursuing either extreme. Recognizable style emerges from specific recurring elements rather than pure philosophy adherence.

    high · Discussion of John Borg's 'Steve layout with big central Pat-style toy'; Keith Elwin's 'U-turn ramps and shit lifted from Gottlieb's from the 80s'; medium-ground positioning of most contemporary designers.

  • ?

    gameplay_signal: Modern pinball terminology ('How does it shoot?') refers to chained shot sequences and lane-based geometry, distinct from EM/early solid-state focus on standalone targets and defensive ball control. Reflects late 1980s design shift.

    high · Discussion of shift from targets to lanes/ramps with guided paths; Alan: 'How does it shoot? That means you shooting the ball into lanes, into an array of shots.'

  • ?

    design_innovation: Two-flipper fan layout optimization reached maturity approximately 30 years ago (circa 1996). Further refinement yields diminishing returns; novelty now requires deviation from optimized geometry.

    medium · Alan: 'the perfect place to place all the shots on flippers to be perfectly smooth and feel good to hit was figured out over 30 years ago.' Discussed as limiting factor for new designs.

    • 6:25
    Yeah, like what we think of as like a modern shot. Like, because it's like when people, like if you're counting the shots in a game, you're looking at like the ones where the ball goes somewhere, right? That's kind of what it is. Start somewhere and somewhere else. Yeah, because it's like you don't, like, yes, you shoot for like stand-up targets and drops and stuff, but we don't really, that's not what we're talking about when you say shots, right? Yeah, it sort of has changed over time. I think it was interesting just sort of realizing like we've never done an episode exactly like this even though we've been doing this show for like three years. That's a long time, yeah. But it is funny how it's like a game becomes like there's a bunch of targets. If an EM has 20 drop targets, you're like that's basically 20 shots. Yeah, that's 20 different shots. Players don't think about it like that. I remember when I had my Hobbit way back when I first got into Pinball, Hobbit was like the third pinball machine I bought or whatever. And I was talking to somebody when I was buying Lord of the Rings from him. It was Zack. It was a guy that kind of like explained a lot of stuff. He's the pinball Yoda I always mention. And he's like, yeah, he's like, oh, it's kind of cool. But he's like, there's just like not really like any shots on the game. He's like, there's just like the two crisscross ramps and like the orbits. And I was like, yeah, but it's got like 20 drops on it. And he's like, those don't count, though. He's like, by that metric, he had a Deadpool premium. And he's like, by that metric, he's like, Deadpool's got like 30 shots. Yeah. And he's like, you know, that's not the same. And I was like, yeah, I'm like all defensive about Hobbics. It's like my first expensive game. Just funny because I'm like, yeah, like now I'm like, yeah, drops are a very different thing. Even though you do shoot for them individually, depending on rule sets and stuff, it's not the same. Yeah. In this array of shots, they can all kind of be referred to as lanes since they have guides on both sides that open to the player to shoot at directly from a flipper. These lanes can end up in a ramp, orbit, loop, scoop, vuck, bash toy, but they all have guides that sort of craft lanes for the ball to travel specifically before reaching its final destination, right? Yeah. And then with this new transformation of the game and the shift into more defined shots, as we call them on each playfield, the common vernacular for describing playing a pinball machine became, well, how does it shoot? Yeah. Right? Like, so when we all talk to each other, how does it shoot? What does that mean? That means you shooting the ball into lanes, into an array of shots. Like, that's how modern pinball is viewed. Which isn't really something like when you tell me when you're like, oh, you're like North Stars, such a sick Gottlieb. I'm not like, oh, how's it shoot? Right. It's not really part of the discussion when you get to, like, old games. Yeah, because old games are, like, more of a control the ball. It's defensive play. That's kind of the difference between, to me, like a classic and a modern, like, the design mindset is one is just like a game of control. And then it becomes less and less about fighting for control as time goes on and more and more about shot accuracy. Yep. Something that we've talked about a little bit in the past comes up at least. So there's the subjective versus objective things about how a game shoots. This should be obvious, but it bears repeating since sometimes when people hear other people describe something subjectively, like we do on this show, they can get upset and want to argue because it differs from their own subjectivity on the matter. A good shooting game to one person can be someone else's idea of a bad shooting game. Like all things related to pinball, the individual players interact with the game through their own perspective and point of view individually. In some ways, you can often sort of parse some sort of consensus, maybe, a la Rotten Tomatoes type of opinion, but it's still not an objective measure. Yeah, there's never going to be a way to plug a playfield design into a computer and it spits out, this is a good shooting game. Yeah, you're going to ask 100 people, they're all going to have different opinions. You can judge it like the Olympics, but you're never going to be able to measure it. Yeah, and so in this episode we will be discussing games. I will particularly be using examples from my own personal perspective to try and explore and illustrate the different ways in which pinball machines, quote, shoot, and how designers' approaches vary in different, interesting ways. Some listeners will certainly disagree. And if you donate to the Ko-fi account, then you can come and disagree with me on our Discord server as much as you want. Yeah, if you haven't donated, you can't disagree. If you haven't donated, you could just shut the fuck up. That's your option. You could sit there in your car. Yeah, there's no way to... You could scream at your car and kind of punch the roof, and that's about it. You can disagree, but you can't do anything about it. Yeah, exactly. If you're in the Discord, you can fight us. Yeah. Okay, so there's one big thing, and I feel like we've touched on it on the show in the past, but the classic kind of pinhead designer, left brain, right brain comparison here. In the 80s and 90s, there were two all-time great pinball designers who were delivering highly innovative, massively popular, and maybe most interesting, very different types of pinball designs. Because they were so clearly different in their approaches, it was easy for even the least perceptive pinball nerd to see them as opposite ends of the spectrum. Yep, Trudeau and John Norris. Yep. The Gottlieb boys. Them Gottlieb boys.
    11:22
    On one side of the spectrum, you had Steve Ritchie, known as the King of Flow, because his design philosophy became long shots that strung to each other, allowing the player to chain different shots together in combos, causing the ball to flow. So this is where this comes from. This term flow in a pinball machine comes from Steve Ritchie and his designs. His games are fast. The ball stops minimally. The center of his play fields are typically very open and his games encourage playing on the fly. When do you think Steve Ritchie invented the concept of flow as he invented most things in pinball? But really, like seriously, when do you think Steve Ritchie's first game that felt like it flowed was? I mean, it depends on how far you go back, but I think when you play Flash, it doesn't feel like games before it. That's true, but it doesn't flow. I mean, it can. You can repeat the upper loop. I know it's like the first real game with a repeatable upper loop, but you play that game, and I'm like, it does not feel like, I'm not like, wow, this thing's, you know? Well, I think he invented the fan layout. I think high speed flows. Yeah. And that's 86, so maybe that's the first one. Yeah, I'm blanking on what he kind of gets into some nonsense between those two. Stellar Wars and stuff. Well, I mean, he made Firepower, but that's not a flow game. But that's a target game. Again, that's what we're talking about. That's 79-80. But Steve Ritchie sort of champions sort of lanes and then shots and then stringing them together. On the other side of the spectrum, you have Pat Lawler. He was known for really tight and claustrophobic play fields, lots of extra auxiliary flippers and odd angle pocket shots. His style is often called stop and go because on a pack game, the player is typically gaining control of the ball to set themselves up for a very certain shot, aiming for it. And then if they make the shot, the ball will often stop in a scoop behind a gate and a saucer on a magnet for a moment or two before returning the ball to a player's control. Hence, stop and go. Yeah. Yeah right I mean he just likes like his games stop the ball often You know both of these guys all great legends of the field titans of the industry but very often in the discussion back when I got into the hobby about 20 years ago it was very easy to find people that strongly resonated with one designer style or game ethos over the other These preferences were given added strengths as both guys clearly skewed so far apart from each other. Like, it's also why I think Williams absolutely dominated the industry. They were covering the whole spectrum. Yeah, they were covering the whole spectrum with their designers, most notably with Steven Patz Games, but they also had lots of other talent sort of in the middle of the spectrum. It's just very interesting that these guys were so successful and were such clearly opposite sides. Yeah, and that was exactly that was like that was about as far apart as they got everything else you saw from other manufacturers. And it, Bally Williams was just dominating. So everything kind of just feels like a knockoff of a Bally Williams in that era. But it's like a lot of the designers were kind of just like copying what they're they're looking at the guys that are selling 15,000 units and they're making other games. And that's not to discount those other games because I love a lot of stuff. But it's like a lot of them you're like, yeah, this is trying to be like a Steve Ritchie or a Pat Lawlor game. So where does that fit? Do those guys still cover like is that still kind of the standard from like zero to 100 of like, you know, stop and go to flow? I think they're still the two best examples because they're so extreme. Yeah, but that can't be the full range because, like, a PAT game stops, but it's not like they are. That, to me, is not the same as shooting bad. No, I'm not saying that they shoot bad. It's OK. This is different than what I was kind of expecting. I thought the scale was kind of supposed to be like, oh, it's like clunky to flow, you know, clunky to smooth. Well, we'll get there. I do think if you want to dumb it down that far, I do think that it's clear that Steve's games are smoother shooters. Yeah. They have less clunk in their games. Yeah. That doesn't mean that they're bad. It just means that there's a price to pay for novelty. I mean, that is true. There's always a price to pay for anything. Anything that differentiates itself from T2 released in 1991. Yeah, I do. Anything that's different than that is going to be, you know, there's going to be a drawback. Yeah, and that's why we have a new spectrum for the modern day as defined by me. Oh, good. Good, we have our own scale. We have our own scale now because time is, you know, a lot of time has passed since the Pats retired. Steve just made another game. Pats officially retired. It's officially retired. He went out on Toy Story 4. Man, we're never going to get Toy Story 5 from him. I know. That's kind of a bummer. The iPad's a more central character in this one, and that guy fucking loves iPads.
    16:11
    He could have had a whole iPad game, dude. But it's like just, you know, with the power bestowed upon me by having my own pinball podcast, I get to make the new Spectrum. Yeah, that's why we have the podcast, so we can make stuff up. As the game progressed, every other designer's tried to mirror the success, push the game of pinball, physical layouts further. In the reiterations and through the different lenses of each new designer we get, we get to see a lot more hybrid approaches, right? Steve and Pat are the type of designers that if they were film directors, their styles would be so incredibly distinctive as to be the sort of directors where you could see 10 seconds of the movie, immediately know who directed it, a la Dario Argento, Wes Anderson. I know who Dario Argento is.
    16:52
    He's an old-timey guy. Wes Anderson or Tim Burton for you, for the youngest. You know what I'm saying. Yeah, where it's like you turn on the TV, you see a scene from Willy Wonka, you can immediately go, this is the good one that Tim Burton made.
    17:11
    Yeah, their style is so strong it's basically unmistakable because they operate on different ends of the spectrum, flow versus precision. Most other designers naturally fall somewhere in the middle, and even though it's clear when you see enough of their games to be able to spot hints of their style, like a Keith Elwin, like now you can play a Keith game, you're like, this is like Keith type stuff. Yeah, you're like, there's a bunch of U-turn ramps and, like, shit lifted from Gottlieb's from the 80s. Yeah, dude. And you're like, yeah, it's a Keith game. But his stuff isn't necessarily all stop or all flow. It's sort of more of a mix than either Steve or Pat. Even the guys that do have, like, I think, like, John Borg is one that gets accused of making samey games, and he has his Hallmark styles, but it's somewhere in between Pat and Steve. It's, like, it's kind of a Steve layout with, like, a big Central Pat-style toy that stops the ball and gives you a moment and stuff. And it's like Steve didn't really do that. Steve didn't stop the ball so often. Steve doesn't really like to stop the ball. Yeah, which I like that. I like that too. So most of these other guys are more like a Chris Nolan or a Ridley Scott. They're highly accomplished filmmakers and they do have features to their styles, but you can't look at a single frame of their movies and immediately know it's a Wes Anderson movie. You could be in a theater and you could see the new trailer in 10 seconds. You're like, before it even says Wes Anderson movie, you're like, yeah, I fucking know, dude. Yeah, you hear some little fucking plinky plunky piano bullshit. Asteroid City. Yeah, dude. You're like, oh, here we fucking go. Yeah, look at the colors. Like, he's wearing a Robin's egg pea coat. It's fucking Adrian Brody. Like, it's fucking, right?
    18:48
    Yeah, I like Wes Anderson movies. So my modern spectrum is more, is it unique or does it feel classic slash familiar? Yeah, that makes sense. You know, novel or derivative. Yeah, exactly. Essentially, I feel like the perfect place to place all the shots on flippers to be perfectly smooth and feel good to hit was figured out over 30 years ago. But the problem is that layouts, if you keep doing that, they start to feel very samey when the designers and companies keep giving us that without enough variety. The two-flipper fan layout is, in fact, the backbone of modern pinball and is the foundational layout for some of the most popular, well-regarded pinball machines of all time. But as we discussed in our fan layouts episode, some pinheads are immediately angered by them. Well, they've seen those games before. They've been derivative bullshit. It's derivative bullshit. They're not happy about it. Hello!
    19:45
    Hello? Ongo Goblogian, the art collector. Charmed, I'm sure. Yes. I'm going to invite you to a show. Okay. But first, allow me to destroy your gallery.
    19:59
    Bullshit. Bullshit. Derivative. Let's explore more about the spectrum because I think there's a clear benefit and drawback to each approach. And the player's individual preferences will dictate which games they tend to enjoy more or more often. You can like both. Now pick a side, coward.
    20:21
    OK, so the first one we're going to talk about is the unique slash novel slash interesting shot layout approach. These are games where many of the shots are unique or unusual in some clearly identifiable way. Games like Uncanny X-Men or Avengers Infinity Quest, for example. Has anything ever been described as interesting just like across all of time and that actually been like a positive thing?
    20:47
    When I hear the word interesting, you're like, yeah, it's interesting. You're like, how's that? How's your food taste? It's interesting. No one ever wants to be interested by anything, dude.
    20:57
    Like it's like how you sell someone like a documentary or something because you want to like be like, oh, I watched a documentary. It's really interesting. And you're like, was it fun to watch? No. It was interesting, though. And you're like, OK. I feel like there's a little bit of, we kind of know which, you know, I don't know if this is going to go anywhere good when we're starting to describe these as the interesting layouts. People like both of these games a lot. I suppose. Okay. So what are some examples? How are we starting this? Well, like I said, you know, the benefit to these games, Uncanny or Avengers, right? Infinity Quest. The benefit is that they offer some shots that feel truly unique to pinheads. And ideally, they're more intrigued to play them for the first time. There's something when you see a photo of a game like Uncanny X-Men, you go, I want to play that thing so bad. Yes, it's so because you're like, especially if you've been in the hobby for a while, you're like, holy shit, there is so much going on in that game that I've never seen before. And it looks so fun to shoot. And it is. Yeah, it is. This isn't like I'm not trying to like sneak in like, oh, it looks really fun to shoot. It is fun to shoot. But right. So it can enhance your enjoyment of the game. If you feel like the playfield layout is fresh. Yeah, it's doing new shit. It's also funny, like X-Men specifically, I remember Rhodes, he doesn't buy a ton of premiums for his route. Rhodes, the Koh-N-O-R wedgehead, for listeners unaware. Honestly, buying more than I thought he would. Lately, he must have a little too much money over there. But I remember him buying the premium X-Men, and I was like, man, I'm kind of surprised. Like, big X-Men guy, huh? And he's like, I don't know. He's like, there's a lot of shit on this game I've never seen before, and I've been in pinball for a long time. And I was like, I mean, he's not wrong. Like, there's a lot of shit in there that no one's ever seen before. And it got him all fired up and got him to buy a premium. Yep. Which is, like, not, well, at the time, it wasn't a super common thing. You're right. He's been buying a lot lately. He buys a lot of them lately. Yeah, maybe we should start changing that. The downside, of course, to these unique choices the designer made tweaking the sacred geometry of the fan layout. Yeah, they all start, I assume every designer starts with a CAD file of Terminator 2. When you start tweaking the sacred geometry, it introduces some clunkiness to the shots. The unusual angles have more variance, and the ball's spin and momentum lead to increased rejects and clumsiness in a way that the more basic layout does, right? Look at the Captain Marvel ramp on Infinity Quest Premium. It's a cool as hell ramp. When it works, yeah, when the ball goes around it nice and smooth, which isn't that often. Yep. Or most of the shots on Uncanny X-Men. When those shots work, incredible. When you're hitting everything clean and it's all cooperating, that game is so much fun to shoot. It's the most fun to shoot modern because it's so fucking crazy. But then you kind of get off or your shots get a little bit off. You're not on the top of your game that day or you're playing a copy where it's just not what you're used to or something. And you're like, Jesus Christ, this stuff is not cooperating. Feels horrible. It's like it can be like a demoralizing game to play when it doesn't want to work for you. Yep. And you're like, that doesn't really happen when it's just like a fan with seven shots in the same spots that you're expecting them to be. Exactly. That's where we get to the traditional slash classic slash basic slash comfortable shot layout approach. These are games where the shots are arranged in the familiar pattern. No two games are exactly alike, but you can immediately draw upon muscle memory and find the shots quickly. This makes them accessible. Think Attack from Mars or Pokemon. Mmm, Pokemon. The benefit in these layouts is that it's comfortable. The shots put you immediately in control of the game. It's that old pair of pants that you have already broken in and fit you perfectly. It's that sitcom that you watch on repeat and immediately start over once you get to the end. Yeah. You know, it's that. It's comfortable. That's what these games are. It's familiar. It's good. The geometry is smooth. The shots are polished. Shooting it feels good. Or at least familiar. Yeah, yeah. I think that, to be fair, is a big part of it. It's like these are the placements we're used to. And so it's just like that's where it should be on the tip of the flipper. That's where an orbit shot is supposed to be. That's where the ramp is supposed to be. Because a lot of games do follow very similar formulas, like much closer than you would maybe expect, even if they look very visually different. You're like, ah, the Rampager's in the same place or whatever. And the downside, as we've said, you know, is that it's 2026 when we're recording this. We've all seen this show before. You're not playing it for the first time. You aren't discovering a brand new vision. It's cookie cutter, uninspired, lazy, or at least that's what some players who are firmly on the other side of the spectrum will say about it. Yeah, derivative bullshit. Yeah, dude, that's what they say. So where do I actually stand? And Alex can interject here with his own takes because we do differ on this a little bit. But this is something that I feel like I've been talking about forever casually with fellow pinheads in person and now online or discord. I truly believe that to really shake up the format and make something feel unique in the modern day, you are actively choosing to add in a little bit of jank or a little clunk. Like, it's part of, like, you have to do it to get X-Men. You know, you have to do it to get Avengers or, like, or even, like, kind of Kong or something. Yeah, anything that's kind of, like, unique. I mean, even playing something, I don't know, I'm trying to think of one that's just, like, just, like, one shot that's, like, a little goofy or something. It'd be, like, um... I mean, even the Katana shot on Deadpool was famously, like, you'd run into copies where you're, like, Yeah, it doesn't work as good. Like John Wick you have like the nightclub area and stuff and it like it kind of like a weird reject It got a little bit like that kind of like the one kind of like abnormal thing on that layout I love John Wick Yeah And I like that kind of the one abnormal thing on that layout And it's kind of like the thing that like pisses people off and people aren't happy with it. And that's not really like a shot. I guess doesn't feel like clunky. But it's just like anytime you do anything, like anytime you're strained from the formula, even a little bit, it's going to be where friction is introduced. It feels like. Yeah. But it's also where like the novelty comes from. Obviously, this is also on its own spectrum since a game like you're saying it can be overall pretty clunky or just have a single clunky or janky shot. Most games have a mix of somewhat traditional shots mixed with something spicy, too. Yeah. Right. Like Katana shot in Deadpool is kind of a spicy shot on an otherwise not that crazy fan layout. Yeah, that's a really clear-cut example of this sitting right in front of us with Rick and Morty and Scott DeNisi has many times said intentionally the right side of the game is all where the shots are supposed to be. It's a normal orbit entrance. It's a very friendly ramp. It's all just right there. And then the left side of the game is completely bonkers. The ramp is in a goofy spot that's a tight entrance. It's got the U-turn that'll fuck you from the left. It's all just kind of weird. The upper flipper shots are weird. And so it's like there's two – that was a very intentional split between traditional and untraditional. And for myself, the reason why I decided to write and record this episode was because I saw the reaction I got in our Discord when I said this following statement.
    28:24
    Quote, I don't like the FOTE layout, which is Fall of the Empire. What keeps me away from playing it? I just can't get over a layout where I don't think the shots themselves are fun. There's nothing anyone can do in programming once I don't like flipping the game. I also started that discussion by pointing to Mando as a game that I don't particularly like either for the same reason. I said, quote, I don't think Mando is fun to shoot, which is why I never learned the game. Good art and sound package, though. Good theme integration. I just don't like the layout, so I'll never like the game. And that caused a whole commotion because people are like, well, but rules and like the rules make the game fun. And I'm not disagreeing with any of that. I agree with that. And I don't have to love every shot, but I have to think that a game would be fun to flip around on as a white would before there's rule. Like, because that's how I approach the game. Like, there are things that I like about games and layouts and stuff. And there are things that I definitely don't like. Some include center ramps, mid-playfield scoops, section off separate playfield areas, like upper or lower playfields. Mando has all those things on the same game. Like, right? It's not a big surprise you don't like it. See, I think a game that doesn't shoot, like a modern game coming out, that doesn't shoot, you know, quote-unquote, well. Like something that I don't think this is, oh, this is super fun to shoot. Something that I don't think would be fun as Whitewood. It has an uphill battle in front of it. Like, it needs to do other stuff exceptionally well to win me over. To make up for it, yeah. But I think, like, I'm like, there's games that I really like that I'm like, I don't think this is, like, that fun to shoot, including the aforementioned Rick and Morty. It's kind of like an example of, I'm like, I don't think Rick and Morty is particularly fun to shoot. It doesn't really, like, like, you can rip combos and stuff on it, but it is kind of clunky. Like, the left ramp, like, transitions material three times. It kind of stops. It moves the ball behind the playfield, which always just feels bad because you can't see the ball, which is an unspoken thing here. If you can't see the ball do anything, it may as well not be doing it. So no good designer is trying to hide their work, which is interesting because there are some designers that definitely do that. But anyway, that's kind of a side tangent. But with Rigg and Morty, I don't think it shoots well. I just think it's a really good level of difficulty. I think the rule set makes it very addictive. It works really well. The rule set works really well with it being a difficult layout. And I think the layout is very functional, but I don't think it shoots well. Yeah, I mean, and there's differences of opinion, obviously. I don't like Vote or Follow the Empire because it's fan-shaped, right, like a fan layout shape, but it doesn't flow. And I realized that whether it's Junkyard or Austin Powers, I hate a fan that doesn't flow. If not flow, then why are you fan shaped? Right? Like, I'm just... I mean, it is. That is very true. It's kind of just like, why am I shooting a fan if it's not going to keep ripping? Yeah, like, if you're not going to... Because then you kind of have an easy shooting layout, but it's not fun to chain combos. So you're like, what are we doing? To me that feels kind of like an intentional appeal at a casual audience and it's like too dumb for the casual. It's offensive. Well, I mean some people love it. That's what we're saying about this. To me it's like I don't think it shoots well. That's why I don't like the game. There's like it makes the sounds. It's very Star Wars. And I've heard from the people that like it that the rule set's very good. They did a very good job on it. And that's fine. I'm just not ever going to get there because I don't like playing it. I don't like shooting it. There's too much jank on the buck, the Death Star. I don't like how it stops the ball all the time, the fucking toilet bowl, the scoop. It's like, again, these are my personal preferences, but I would just say for the sake of this episode and being able to have a discussion, these are what I would consider games that shoot poorly. I'm not saying that other people don't find them fun to shoot. Another classic example for me is Simpsons Pinball Party. It's another one where it's got a really deep and balanced rule set, alien invasion, all-time great wizard mode, the callouts and sound are excellent. I absolutely love the theme, but I fucking hate shooting that game. And so it all falls apart because I find the layout so clunky and janky, and because of that layout, I just don't want to play it. The Simpsons Pinball Party, the only part that I think is truly bad about that game is the layout. In all other aspects, I think that that game is good, if not great, except the layout. And because I don't want to shoot it, I don't want to play it. That's a weird one because I'm like, I think the layout's like cool, but I kind of agree with you. I don't actually like shooting it. It's just kind of like a lot of little rattly shots. And I think the biggest thing is the Grodge kind of killing momentum and constantly thrown into the upper playfield. Stops a lot. I'm like, it's one of those games where I'm like, if there's a pro version, maybe I would like it more. Yeah. You know, but yeah, it is tough. You know, other games that I think are pretty good except for the layout are Evil Dead. I just don't think it shoots very well. But I love the theme and integration of the theme on that game. Rules are simple to intuit for me, so I'd actually say that I actually like the overall approach to that game. But to me, it's just a clunky shooter, and that effect is so strong on me that it makes me not enjoy playing a game. Like, that's the effect of a layout to me personally as a player. Yeah. See, I agree with you on a lot of these games that you're like, that doesn't shoot well and that's why I hate it. And I'm like, or that's why you don't like it. I should say you hate it. A lot of them, I'm like, I can get over it. Like, it's just not as important. I'm like, I can get over it. The layout's not as important to you. I don't like those are the games that I don't keep going back to. I'm not looking to buy an Evil Dead. I mean, if there was one at Wedge right now, I'd be playing it for sure. Yeah, at least for a while. But it's like there's not it's like a lot of these games that I'm like, yeah, if they don't shoot well, that's kind of the difference between me like loving it or just being like, yeah, it's fun. But I do think most pinball machines are fun. So I have like a lower bar. I just think about, like, if you know us and, like, the games that I, the modern games that I love, is it any surprise that I love John Wick or, like, I love Pokemon? Yeah. I was like, no, because they, they're smooth. They're, they are the more basic. Yeah, you're like, they just shoot well. They're the fan, they just, to me, in my play style, they shoot well. Mm-hmm. Right? Like, they're fun to rip combos, they're fast. Yeah. The shots feel smooth, they're not clunky or janky or rattly. Yeah. And so for me, it's like, I don't know how many times I've watched The Office or Parks and Rec. I can start that shit over and just watch it over and over again. How many times have I seen Bob's Burgers all the way through? A million times. So I do that when I watch my sitcoms. I like that in my pinball too. It depends what you're looking for when you go play the games. Exactly. The two big pillars of pinball game design are the physical layout, how it feels to shoot, what we're talking about, how the ball moves, and then rules and software. You definitely need both for a game to be great. They do complement each other. I just think that different players value one more than the other, but my point is that for me, the layout has to make me feel good when I flip it blindly. Yeah. If I find the shots clunky, clumsy, slow, or even just like overly stoppy and precious, like if I feel like I have to be precious with like grabbing the ball, passing it, dropping it in a cradle, lining up a shot and just like finessing it and making sure it doesn't rattle out. Yeah. Now I just don't like the game. Right. Like I just don't want to do that. Yeah, I suppose. I'm speaking for myself here. I'm just saying that's how I am. I've learned that it's important to me. I wasn't able to articulate that younger me, like why I like something or why I don't. Now it's like I know. Easy to just do like you're either a Pat Lawler or a Steve Ritchie guy. Because that's like, well, one of those is very representative of one of them. You know, those are each their own style. That's why we started out that way. Like I'm saying is like when the new game comes out and I play it for the first time, I don't know the rules or anything. Oftentimes it's not even close to done anyway, so who cares? So all I have is that initial feeling of that physically flipping and shooting the game. And so my impressions are either I like playing this even though I don't understand any of the rules or objectives or I don't. Right? So if I enjoy flipping the game blindly, only then am I interested in learning the rules and objectives that will either deepen or lessen my enjoyment of the game from there, depending on whether the rule set matches my own taste. Yeah. Like, for me, it's like... I think that's true to some extent for everybody, unless you're really, like, into the theme. Unless you, like, really want to like the game. Right. Because that's always the thing. You're like, well, if you play it and you're immediately like, I don't really like how this just, like, feels. If you don't like how it feels right off the bat and you're not trying to sell yourself on the game, you're naturally just not going to bother learning it. It's only like people that are really deep in the hobby and they're like, I'm going to learn every game that comes out, which is not abnormal for those of us that are deep in the hobby. You're going to at least learn how to start a mode and do some basic stuff on every game that comes out. But it's like for like an average player, if you just don't like how it feels, why would you? I always think it's interesting because, I mean, I guess I do approach it intentionally, like I'm discovering a new thing for the first time. Like, I do know that in the modern day there are people, like you'll post a link to gameplay video of a new game, and there'll be someone from a company or the designer or whatever playing the game, and they'll be running through sort of the rules and how it starts stuff up. I never watch any of those. Yeah. So, like, I walk up to a game completely blind. As like, I just want to play this and see how it feels. And when I'm playing that game, I'm just like, oh, I haven't hit that ramp shot or I haven't hit that shot. Or if I bash this guy, does he do something? Right? Like, yeah. So I'm going to just feel it out. Yeah, I just feel it out. Which is like approaching the game for its own merit instead of like the rest of it is all just marketing at the end of the day because it's like they can like sit there and have like a Twitch stream like explaining the rules and every week. Oh, this is so much fun. Oh, did you see that cool little like little like that's a reference to the cartoon. And then the next time I'm playing it, I'm like, oh, yeah, that's a reference to the cartoon. I've never even seen the fucking cartoon. It's like all that shit is just marketing at the end of the day. And it works. Like for me, that's like the fun I like. I like that. But that's not that's very, very much not object like approaching things objectively. Yeah, and it's like, again, like, lots of people have the ability to have a first impression, like, they don't really love the game, or, like, it doesn't shoot to them, it doesn't speak to them at first, but then the rules and the programming and all that stuff gets added on top, and then they go, oh, shit, now this is one of my favorite games. Yeah, because like the rest of it elevates maybe what I find deficient in the layout itself. I'm just saying that for me, I would just will never. It's mandatory first hurdle. Yeah, I will not get past that. Like if I if I go, this game sucks to shoot, I am the type of player that I'm like, I will never like this game. There's nothing that can change. And the other thing that I'll do is like, I can have a game that I love shooting. I'm like, I don't like this shit no more. Yeah. Like it not like the shooting is the only thing important No I still think like you need the rules and programming obviously to make a great game And even for me I not just like oh the rules don matter They absolutely do Game of Thrones, the pro, is a good example of this. I love flipping that game when it came out, still do. But the rule set is everything I hate in a rule set, so it's a game I don't like to play. Being fun to flip isn't the end-all, be-all metric, even for me or any other pinhead I know. But it's definitely the first hurdle. If I don't think it's fun to shoot, that's it. Brush it aside. Because I realize to me it's like when I play a modern game, like I'm saying like kind of DMD Plus or like System 8, like when games start to flow and have shots and stuff, right? If I don't think it's fun to shoot, it's like it'll never bounce back. I just don't care. That's it. Did you think like D&D was fun to shoot?
    41:07
    I think so. That's a game that a lot of people say is not fun to shoot, right? I think that's another one to me that feels functional. I don't think I would be having very much fun playing D&D as a Whitewood. I'd be like, it's fun. It's fine. No, I don't think it's that fun to shoot. And that one, because to me, that's kind of the most, it's not even like a bare bones layout or play field. It's just like really like. You know what's interesting about that game, though, is like, it's not that clunky. No, it's pretty, it's pretty smooth. It's smooth. It does stop the ball a lot because especially with the center vuck shot. Yeah. A spinner into center Vuck is like, to me, a nightmare on paper. You're like, boy, hitting a spinner into a Vuck already sucks. And then it's like, it's in the center of the game. It's your bailout shot that you're hitting all the time. To me, that one is just like, that's one of the games that I can think of that I'm like, I would not think that was very fun if the rule set wasn't as fun for me as it is. Yeah, I mean, I played through to get, I got my insider just to play it the quote right way. I played it a decent bit when it came out. And I like it. You probably played it more than me. And it made me appreciate it. It's not a game I play, though. Yeah. Because, again, it comes— See, that's the thing to me is that there's a lot of these games. That's what I've been realizing since we kind of talked about this in the Discord is that it's like there's a lot of games. And I'm like, I think that game's fun even though it doesn't shoot that well. But then I don't really go back to them long term. Yeah. Whereas, like, a lot of, like, the really, like, basic shit, I'm like, I'm still playing, like, Steve Ritchie games. People can tell me it's just another fan. It's still fun to me. I think Jaws is in this category of like, I think Jaws is fun to shoot. Yeah. Like truly, like if I was playing that as a Whitewood, I was like, cool, this is a fan layout. Yeah, it's like a cool, it's a cool fan. But it's fun and like the shots rip together. But then the rule set, I'm just like, stops the ball all the fucking time, makes you make decisions and shit. Like, it's like all, like it plays so fucking long, constant multi-balls, right? I think the Stop and Go fans are an intentional appeal to newer players where it's friendly shots where you're expecting them and it gives you time to breathe. And to me, I'm just like, I don't like it. I feel like it's counter to the design ethos of a fan layout. That's how I feel. That's exactly how I feel. I think there's only kind of the wave ramp is kind of clunky on that game, but the rest of it is like these shots are all reasonably pretty smooth. There's not a lot of clunk in Jaws. So do you think they've already made every game you want to play and you're just only going to see at best, you're just going to see variations of that? Because you're saying novelty equals clunk. You don't like clunk. No, I'm just saying like novelty, there's a trade-off where you get some clunk. Yeah. It doesn't mean that it's necessarily bad because there are games where I'm like, there are certain shots in X-Men that I'm like, If the rest of the game shot, if they weren't all that clunky, if every shot wasn't that clunky, if two or three of the best shots in that game were exactly how they are, super fucking cool, very interesting, feels great when they work, and then the rest were normal, it'd be incredible. Right? Like, that'd be an incredible game. As it sits, I like it, you know, but I can't love it. You know what I'm saying? Because flew a little too close to the sun, Icarus's wings melted themselves off, right? That's just sort of the problem where you're like, man, this is fucking glorious. Yeah, but there's a price to be paid. And I think it's fine with Jaws where it's like the wave ramp is kind of clunky. That's one shot. That's okay.
    44:51
    It's okay to have one shot. I agree with that. I like that. It's like the wave ramp, you've got to hit clean to actually make it. And you're like, I like that because that's kind of a hard thing to do on a modern stern. Like there's not a lot of shots that are actually you have to hit clean to make. It's just like I like having that like on Jaws. Like I think Jaws, I'm kind of with you on that where I'm like, I think Jaws is actually a really nice shooter. I don't love the rule set. I'm just, I'm always, I like that game fine. It's just I don't go out of my way to play it a ton. That's another example. So it's like I'm just giving you examples of like I do, there are games where I think are fun to shoot, but I still won't like the game. You know, like it's I'm not just a simpleton that's like it's if it shoots and then I don't even think about rules. I don't know. So do you think there's any are there any exceptions to this? Those that can walk the line of novelty while keeping. Well, we're going to get there. We're going to get there. There's one exception. But before that, I want to talk more about our boy, Pinball Jesus, because we talked a lot about Steve Ritchie and Pat Lawlor. A lot of our listeners don't know about those guys. Yeah, yeah. Or not enough. Yeah, you know, they've... We're talking about Pinball Jesus, Mr. Keith Elwin, right? So let's talk about some Keith Elwin games. I think in this new spectrum, right, of the way they shoot, and let's just compare Keith Elwin games to each other for a little bit. Because I think his games are pretty varied. For one designer, his are varied. Yeah, he has his hallmarks, but his games themselves are very, I agree, they're very different. So to me, Jaws fun, like smooth overall to shoot. I prefer it greatly over the layout personally of Jurassic Park or Avengers, which I find way too clunky to enjoy. But my enthusiasm to Jaws breaks down at the rule set as opposed to stumbling right out of the gate with Jurassic Park or Avengers. Which I'm like from the get go before I learn the rules, I'm like, what the fuck is all this rattly like there's just rattly shots, right? Like, just like rattly fucking rejects and shit. And you're like, what is this? Like, so, like, I don't even know the rule. Like, those games, like, when people criticize Avengers, they go, you know, the rules have got too much. Like, I was like, dude, we don't even get there, dude. I'm like, that Captain Marvel ramp? Are you fucking kidding me? Like, the fat ramp? Yeah, the wraparound orbit ramp that doesn't, it's like. The little loop off the, like, the ball dropping. Dead end ramp, there's a lot. There's a spinning disc, which is always just a good way to just get shit in the way. Yeah, that's good. And then there's a center ramp. You know, once again, I gotta say this again, just again, because I know people are mad right now. I find these games not fun to shoot. You may find them fun to shoot, but even if you love shooting Jurassic Park or Avengers, I know you can't look me in the eyes and say these games are as smooth to shoot as Pokemon. You can prefer this side of the spectrum, but it comes with tradeoffs. Pokemon, the shots are smoother. They don't reject. They're not clanky. They may not be as interesting to you as a fan of Jurassic Park or Avengers. But all that's really saying is you're the type of pinball player that you want those unique, more interesting, different, novel, varied approaches on a pinball layout. You're like, yeah, I don't want to play Pokemon. It's like, this is boring. Yeah, you look like I already played that game. So it's like you prefer those things. And it's good that like Keith in and of himself gives you different options. Yep. Right? Like he has some games that... I think that's why he's been successful and people keep buying repeats of his... Like people just buy every Keith game that comes out. And I think that's why he's very intentionally trying to avoid making his games similar from one to the other. Now you did say, is there an exception? You make a game that's novel without clunk. Is there a person that could do this? Is such a thing possible? Is it possible? I will say one man was able to do this. His name was Dennis Nordman. He is the exception. He is the one exception. The man's still alive, which is amazing. And not working actively at a pinball manufacturer, although someone just picked up one of his designs. Yeah, yeah, Turner's making Yukon Yeti. Okay, I forgot, man. Yeah, okay, so he's got games kind of trickling out from boutiques and stuff. But Dennis Norman makes very smooth shooting but still very distinctive and unique games. As everyone knows, Whitewater's my favorite game. Smooth as hell. It is smooth. And no other game is like that game. It's a good game. I'm just thinking about Whitewater now. I'm like, that's a good game.
    49:31
    But he's criminally underrated. You know, give me a smooth shooting game. Let me flow play it. We got a Dennis Norman episode coming soon. I say it just so I have to put ourselves on the clock to actually do it. We got to do it. Oh, good. That'll be fun. You know, he's my favorite DMD era designer. It's the best of both worlds. He's the swirl cone at the boardwalk. He can't choose whether you want vanilla or chocolate. Fucking you get both right. Like that's him. But for everyone else. Yeah, you kind of you take the good with the bad. You know, like you get the interesting approach and, you know, it's not some of the shots. The thing about this is, is it has to be like, you're like, that shot is so fucking cool that I don't care that I had to grab and control and it rejected three or four times before I made the shot. Yep. Right? Like that's, and for everyone's, everyone's different about that. You know, and in case the listener couldn't tell in the age-old debate of Steve Ritchie or Pat Lawler, which we started this off, firmly Steve Ritchie guy. I love so many of Pat's games too, but in my heart of hearts, I'm a Ritchie guy through and through. They're smoother, even if Pat's layouts are more varied and novel, right? Like, that's where I sit on the spectrum. I'm a Steve guy, and in general, even when we're not judging Steve games, that's what I want. I want the game to feel smooth.
    50:51
    Yeah. I want it to... Yeah, you want it to be a Steve... That's why NASCAR is the best Pat Lawler game, because it's, you know... The Steve Ritchie game. Steve Ritchie gaming disguise.
    50:59
    And in case of the super cool wacky shots versus more standard layouts with classic shot patterns, again, I'm just, we're talking about modern games, I'm more Pokemon than I am Uncanny X-Men if we're talking two Jack Danger games. Yeah. X-Men is so fucking cool. And when the shots behave, what a thrill. Like, truly. It really is. It really is so fucking cool. It's very cool shooting that game. That's probably the whitewood I would be like most excited to shoot because I'm like I don't even need scoring on this thing. It's just fun to watch the ball do it. But it's like with Pokemon, man, it's like what keeps me coming back? It's an old sweater. Just keeps getting warmer with age. Yeah, it just keeps working. Just works good. Just feels good. Yeah. It always works like how I think it's going to work. Like it feels good when to do it. But pinball, like we said, is a physical game and that's the allure. Even for the folks that are way more interested in the programming and rule set side of games than I personally myself am, they have to admit that virtual pinball just isn't the same thrill without the real deal physical copy of the game. That's the power of pinball. The ball is wild. It moves predictably, but still in a chaotic and not fully controllable way. That's what makes pinball a beautiful game. And for me, it's what makes me love it so much. Yeah, I mean, that's the whole appeal. If the rules were the only important part, you wouldn't be buying $10,000 games to put in your house because you could just get it all as a V-Pin. That is a good point, and I think that is kind of lost on some, like, some people get so deep into things like tournaments and like, oh, the deep rule sets and everything, and you're like, yeah, but if it's not fun to shoot, what's the point? That's my whole point. That's my whole point. If you don't like shooting it, then what is there? I think that's a pretty good way to sum it up. We want to say go out at the end of this episode, find a pinball machine on location, go play it, support your local operators keeping the game alive on location and accessible to new players. And if you're in your Discord, I want to hear your thoughts after this episode, where you fall on this spectrum, what's most important to you as a pinball enthusiast. But until next time, good luck. Don't suck. Let's get physical, physical I wanna get physical Let's get too physical Let me body talk, body talk Let me body talk I've been patient, I've been good Trying to keep my hands on the table It's getting hard, it's holding back You know what I mean.