What's new
Pinball info

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Medieval Madness Remake

Wiredworm

Wiredworm

Registered
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
2,373
Location
Grimsby
A new video has been released featuring the remake of Medieval Madness.


From my limited experience to the original it looks as if the look and feel of the table has been recreated pretty well. Not sure sure about reliability; I guess time will tell on that one once they're in the hands of the owners.

It's interesting that they say that 'no owner should have to ever replace an LED' because it's not something you can do. I hadn't realised but the LED's in this are surface mounted onto a lot of the under playfield boards so if one does pack up then you'll be looking at removing the entire board and either having it repaired or replaced. :eek:
 
Last edited:
Aren't there 2 back up leds for each surface mounted one so a board repair would only be required if all 3 fail?
 
mark9 said:
Aren't there 2 back up leds for each surface mounted one so a board repair would only be required if all 3 fail?
Click to expand...

yup... should one fail the other two "automatically increase intensity"... almost like they are expecting them to fail... but hold on ... the LED's have only 50,000 hours of life... so in that case why have three...
 
Paul said:
yup... should one fail the other two "automatically increase intensity"... almost like they are expecting them to fail... but hold on ... the LED's have only 50,000 hours of life... so in that case why have three...
Click to expand...


Well done you've started him off on a mmr rant again.... Let it go paul let it go lol
 
I was actually quite interested in this remake until what they were doing with the electronics and lighting etc was announced. After watching this video I have to say I totally agree with Paul. The boards on this machine look well Mickey Mouse and not fit for purpose. The original is clearly a better machine as its easy to get spares for and powered by well known and proven boards made up from discreet components. Considering they didn't really need to do any R&D (but chose to in order to cut manufacturing costs), I think PPS are being pretty greedy with this.
 
I suppose it depends if...

Cost + time of replacing/fixing loom/lights > cost /time replacing the whole board.

IE it might be cheaper to have a huge one off cost than lots of little ones.
 
Interestingly i was chatting Tia friend tonight who is an electronic engineer and repairs highly technical board down to component level - including Smd and multilayer boards (where possible)... He gives it 4-5 years max lol :)

One thing he did say though was - what will the abailability of replacement boards be like in 4-5 years time....
 
So production has finally started, first games should be ready next week.

And they're already working on the next remake, wonder what it's going to be?
 
I'm sure everyone knows my opinion of this sort of thing (and also the new Stern Spike system) so I will not rant here and upset Adrian ;)

But the bit I don't understand is why not just make the machine 100% exactly like the original?

So many of the parts are either standard Williams parts that are in production, or have already been reproduced in runs, and as such all the tooling is available (ramps, plastics, playfield, castle parts etc)

They could have literally just ordered all the parts and assembled it, and thus it would be near enough 100% accurate reproduction, and it would also mean for anyone buying one that it was more importantly 100% interchangeable with existing parts, thus guaranteeing many years of maintainability.

While I understand that moving the pcb's to the playfield does things like save on the cost of wire, surely all the redesign work is time consuming and comes at a high design cost (while pcb manufacture is relatively cheap, pcb design is expensive as a service)
 
[cynic]

But this means they can fund their design costs by using a guaranteed high sales run pin as the guinea pig.

Plus it means people wanting replacement parts need to buy off them direct rather than a thriving pre-existing parts market that puts no money in their pocket.

Cha-ching.

[/cynic]
 
RGV said:
[cynic]

But this means they can fund their design costs by using a guaranteed high sales run pin as the guinea pig.

Plus it means people wanting replacement parts need to buy off them direct rather than a thriving pre-existing parts market that puts no money in their pocket.

Cha-ching.

[/cynic]
Click to expand...
There needn't of been any design cost whatsoever, MM was fine as it was PCBs included.

If they decided to manufacture more boards identical to the orignals surely they would of been able to sell them into the parts market to repair other pins based on the same board set. If you had a WPC95 pin with a CPU board destoryed by leaking batteries what would you rather replace it with, a Rottendog remake or a new board of totally original design?
 
From the design cost side, I was thinking it might be more along the lines of wanting to test the design they were planning to use on all other pins going forwards in an effort to build cheaper, simpler (better?) pins going forwards. Assuming there's going to be anything after MMr of course. But if MMr sells well then why wouldn't there be?

Its not a bad beta-test thinking about it - Use a relatively large customer base (I'm assuming MMr sold like hot cakes) and have an existing near-identical (but old design) model already in the marketplace to benchmark your shiny new design against. I'm sure there's going to be a lot of comparisons made when people get their hands on the new machines. I know I'd like to see both models next to each other somewhere so people can take the Pepsi challenge on them.

On the board front - They could indeed just use the old board set and compete with all other existing established replacement board suppliers. However I'd assume if they're going to supply replacement parts for their equipment that they would prefer a new board setup they could patent and monopolise a market with, removing any need to compete (or lower prices) at all. Again this assumes they even care about said market and want to cater to it. If they don't though they're making some expensive "break 'em and bin 'em" toys.

Again, this could equally all be part of a drive to build a more modern, cost effective pinball by removing all the old 1980s technology from the equation and replacing it with shiny new post-millenium niceness. Its fun to speculate either way though.
 
Luke,
Just look at it as a new challenge plus it can live at your house while you fix it! Plus you can then give it a full in depth review and really slate it. As long as you can fix it, whatever you say about it is fine by me! :D
Cheers you CV fixing superstar (fingers crossed so far)
 
Adrian Hufton said:
Luke,
Just look at it as a new challenge plus it can live at your house while you fix it! Plus you can then give it a full in depth review and really slate it. As long as you can fix it, whatever you say about it is fine by me! :D
Cheers you CV fixing superstar (fingers crossed so far)
Click to expand...

Adie, if that ever happens, I'll re-wire it to original WPC boardset :rofl:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom