From: sbb@panix.com (Steve Baumgarten)
Subject: Re: inflated scores hit the mainstream
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 02:02:32 GMT
	<1992Aug21.084357.8798@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In article <1992Aug21.084357.8798@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> S_TITZ@iravcl.ira.uka.de (Olaf Titz) writes:

   Some time ago, I saw a pin where the last digit of the mechanical (!)
   score display was no real display digit, but a zero *painted on the
   backglass*. On the latest pins the smallest score seems to be 50 or
   100. Can someone tell what this is good for?

Increased self-esteem for novice players -- who pretty much support
the industry.

Besides, just a couple of weeks ago the national debt hit
$4,000,000,000,000 (that's trillion, folks).  So pinball has a ways to
go before it catches up with reality.

   Maybe it is just that: 'on this new machine, you are able to score x
   at one shot [with x a strict monotonic increasing function of time]
   and are therefore able to increase your personal highscore every time
   a new model comes out' - everyone loves to 'get better all the time',
   and this supply is (again) just a function of demand.

Exactly right!  But consider what else attracts novices: dot-matrix
displays, SuperCharger ramps, all sorts of miscellaneous playfield
junk -- and lots 'o licensed themes.  Without people reluctant to play
pinball, we might still be playing single-ball 60s-style games.  After
all, we enthusiasts will play almost anything if not given the choice.

You are seeing the invisible hand of pinball capitalism at work, as
each new game tries to pile on more neat animation, more astounding
high scores, more great-sounding music, and ever more cows in an
attempt to get people to drop their quarters in.  I think it's working
pretty well; the record high sales of TAF provide some empirical
proof that more of everything really *is* better.

   But, with the billion shot finally around (and the 'ordinary' best
   shot on the same machine still at 1 million), highscores get more and
   more meaningless. And, if you say, 'I got a highscore of 6 million...'
   you'll get interrupted by 'what? ridiculous... there are billions...'
   just before you can complete your sentence: '...on EIGHT BALL DELUXE.'
   (no that wasn't me to score 6 million on 8BD, unfortunately :-)

One problem for wizards now is that it's almost impossible to compare
high scores.  For example, on LW3 the ramp value can be set to carry
over to the next ball or not.  The difference could easily be worth
tens of millions of points.  A friend just played the LW3 that I play
all the time and reflexively reached for the gun after the first
subway loop.  Of course, on this game you need two loops to start the
first shootout -- it's just set harder overall than the game he's used
to.  So how can we compare scores, even on the same game (and putting
aside differences like how well maintained each game is)?

Game designers can stick as many zeros as they want on the end of my
score -- just keep making games like TAF and LW3 and I wouldn't care
if the scores started using scientific notation...

--
    Steve Baumgarten       |  "New York... when civilization falls apart,
    PANIX, New York, NY    |   remember, we were way ahead of you."
                           |  
    Email: sbb@panix.com   |                            - David Letterman