claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 · $0.035
Scott Danesi defends Raven as underrated, countering Pinside hate with mechanical cleverness and thematic charm.
Raven was a very big seller for D. Gottlieb & Co. with 3,500 units made
high confidence · Alan (host) introducing the game; described as factual production detail
Raven is currently ranked #301 on the all-time Pinside list, making it the lowest rated game ever featured on the Wedgehead show
high confidence · Alan stated explicitly; quantifiable ranking
The game lacks a multiball, which contributes to its poor reputation
high confidence · Alan explicitly identifies lack of multiball as a major criticism repeated in reviews
Raven was supposed to be Rambo but used an unlicensed female character instead (similar to how Bone Busters was an unlicensed Ghostbusters knockoff)
high confidence · Scott and hosts discuss Gottlieb knockoff licensing strategy; Frank Black review mentions post-Rambo 2 / post-Aliens timing
The backglass was created using photorealistic photography with a model, requiring the model to return for multiple photo sessions
medium confidence · Scott mentions they 'had to create' photos and 'got a model to come back' — suggests historical knowledge but phrased conversationally
The cabinet came with black armor on it from the factory
medium confidence · Scott states 'it came with black armor on it too' and 'that's factory' — insider knowledge but not extensively detailed
The ramp mechanic nudges left or right unpredictably, but can be controlled with skill via star post nudging
high confidence · Scott describes the mechanism in detail and explicitly defends the skill element; confirmed by both hosts
The sniper popup targets with scanning lights are skill-based, not luck-based as one reviewer claimed
high confidence · Scott strongly disputes M. Bomley's claim that spotting targets with scanning lights is 'more luck than skill,' arguing it's '100% skill'
“If you believe in something, you sign your name to it.”
[name withheld pending review] @ 0:00-0:15 — Sets the episode's thematic tone: Scott is personally defending Raven and willing to stake his reputation on it
“Raven gets slammed for its artwork, and rightfully so. The backlash is silly and dated.”
[name withheld pending review] @ ~3:00 — Exemplifies the contradiction at the heart of Raven criticism—acknowledging the backlash while also calling it unfair
“This is absolutely no such thing as an unfun pinball machine, and I'm going to prove it to you right now.”
Alan (host) @ ~8:30 — Core philosophical claim underlying the 'Die on this Hill' segment: all pinball games have entertainment value if played correctly
“Dude, I guarantee you will be there for an hour with your buddy, having a couple beers, and having the best time of your life trying to spell that fucking word.”
Scott Danesi @ ~9:30 — Defends even poorly-rated games (Thunderbirds) as fun in social play context; illustrates Scott's philosophy on game evaluation
“People don't know how to have fun.”
Scott Danesi @ ~12:00 — Scott's recurring thesis: the issue is with players/reviewers not appreciating Raven's merits, not with the game itself
“When you come in, I'm like, oh, have you played our Raven yet? And they're like, isn't that game bad? I was like, no, you're bad.”
Alan (host) @ ~25:00 — Demonstrates operator influence on community perception—negative operator sentiment directly discourages casual play
“That's why even when we get a brand new game, like a new unboxed game, and everyone comes in and they're like, Alan, what do you think about the new game? I was like, I don't know. I haven't really played it.”
Alan (host) @ ~26:00 — Contrasts healthy operator approach: withholding judgment and letting players form their own opinions rather than poisoning perception
community_signal: Multiple reviewers cite Raven's poor reputation as reason to dismiss it without deep engagement; negative operator sentiment actively discourages casual player exploration, creating self-fulfilling prophecy of low play counts
high · Dumb Record owned Raven in arcade and left negative Pinside review; machine had lowest play count of any game in venue. Alan notes that when he withholds judgment on new games, customers form their own opinions, but operator negativity poisons perception.
gameplay_signal: Scott argues modern players don't appreciate simple rule sets; Raven features clever mechanics (sniper targets, drop target sequencing, nudge-controlled ramp routing) that require actual skill but lack the complexity or multiball hooks that current players expect
high · Scott: 'The average pinball player now doesn't understand simple rule sets.' Kate001 review indicates dip-switch customization available but players couldn't find engaging configuration. OneTaste review actually praises dangerous standup targets.
design_innovation: Scott credits Raven with predating modern innovative mechanics: sniper popup targets were ahead of their time, compared to Cactus Canyon. Central ramp with randomized routing but skill-based nudge control represents clever engineering for 1986.
high · Scott: 'That was ahead of its time. That's before Cactus Canyon... Clever use of drop targets for this time.' He highlights airball protectors and innovative playfield design elements.
product_concern: Raven's unlicensed Rambo theme and photo-realistic female character backlash dominated criticism; multiple reviewers cite 'faded' backglass as primary complaint, conflating fading/aging with poor original design
high · Frank Black, Dr. L, and others focus on backglass/cabinet art as deal-breaker. Scott and hosts argue backglass is 'actually really good looking' when not faded. Scott notes Gottlieb used new camera technology for photography.
groq_whisper · $0.129
The 8-bit audio quality is deliberately stylized and 'sounds like it was made on a Nintendo,' not drab as one reviewer claimed
high confidence · Scott defends the audio design philosophy; multiple reviews cited as missing the intent
The OneTaste review was actually a positive endorsement, not a negative one, despite using backhanded phrasing
medium confidence · Scott reinterprets OneTaste's review as praising dangerous shots and positive mechanical elements; hosts initially misread it
“The key shot is going over the inlanes to light the spinner for 10K a spin momentarily.”
Scott Danesi @ ~28:00 — Identifies that negative reviewers misunderstand the rule structure—they weren't hitting lit shots, then blamed the game
“With a modern CPU and new programming, this game could be fun.”
Kate001 (Pinside review quoted) @ ~27:30 — Reveals a common critique: the game's potential is good but limited by 1986 hardware and software constraints
“It lights up. It plays. It has shots. But there's nothing special about this machine at all.”
Sevens (Pinside review quoted) @ ~15:00 — Exemplifies dismissive criticism that lacks specific gameplay examples; Scott argues reviewers aren't actually engaging with the mechanics
collector_signal: Raven machines currently priced $1,200-$2,500 on secondary market depending on condition. High-condition example with original mylar and minimal wear observed during episode.
high · Alex checks Pinset: 'They're like $1,200 still.' Alan finds West Chicago listing for $2,500. Both note machine is 'in nice shape' with 'original mylar.'
operational_signal: Operator choices directly impact casual player perception. Alan demonstrates how venue operators can highlight underappreciated games to drive engagement; Dumb Record operator negativity actively suppressed Raven play counts.
high · Alan: 'When you come in, I'm like, oh, have you played our Raven yet? And they're like, isn't that game bad? I was like, no, you're bad.' Contrasts with approach of withholding judgment on new games. Dumb Record had lowest play count of any machine despite being playable.
design_philosophy: Gottlieb used unlicensed characters to avoid IP costs (Rambo knockoff with female warrior; Ghostbusters knockoff as Bone Busters). Intent was commercial appeal to young male players, not feminist messaging; reviewers disagreed on thematic interpretation.
high · Scott: 'They definitely were [trying to capitalize on Rambo franchise without licensing].' Dumb Record reviewer conflicted about 'girl power' vs 'pinup girls' intent. Scott: 'Every guy's dream girl. She's hip-firing that thing.' Indicates commercial demographic targeting.
gameplay_signal: Reviewers misunderstood shot sequences: Kate001 complained ramp only gave 50K without realizing ramp's purpose was to route balls to outer areas for sniper target combos. Indicates players didn't grasp the intended flow or weren't hitting lit shots.
high · Scott: 'You didn't light it. Exactly. You did not light what you were supposed to light. The key shot is going over the inlanes to light the spinner for 10K a spin.' Kate001 review shows expectation mismatch on ramp rewards.
market_signal: Gottlieb's strategy of using unlicensed character knockoffs (post-Rambo 2, post-Aliens era) represents cost-saving approach to theme licensing. Raven's female warrior theme intended to capitalize on action film trends without IP costs.
high · Frank Black review: 'This was made post-Rambo 2 and at the same time of Aliens. So we have a Rambo female like the character Ripley in Aliens.' Scott and Alan discuss Bone Busters as Ghostbusters knockoff.
community_signal: Several reviewers demonstrated they didn't fully engage with the game's mechanics or audio; dismissal based on aesthetic factors rather than actual gameplay testing. Some admitted 'I have tried hard' but 'failed' to find redeeming features.
high · Scott on audio criticism: 'This person obviously didn't listen to it at all.' M. Bomley called sniper targets 'luck' when Scott argues they're 'skill.' Kate001 acknowledged rule complexity via dip switches but couldn't configure enjoyably.
historical_signal: Raven ranks #301 on Pinside's all-time list, making it the lowest-rated game ever featured on Wedgehead's 'Die on this Hill' segment. This ranking reflects strong community consensus against the game, but the hosts frame this as opportunity to reassess via insider perspective.
high · Alan: 'It's currently ranked number 301 on the all-time pin side list making it the lowest rated game that we have ever featured on the show.' Episode premise is to challenge this consensus.