vikingerik
Active member
- Nov 6, 2013
- 1,205
- 0
And in contrast to Cirqus Voltaire, I need to talk down Theatre of Magic.
- The illusions are just a terrible design overall. There's not a single one of them you actually want to play. You just time out all of them and wait for the next one. The illusions sorely need some actual incentive. Williams had already solved that years ago, with STTNG and Road Show feeding the missions into escalated scoring for the wizard mode. There's no excuse for Williams to get this so badly wrong. It was Popadiuk's first game, but Williams had plenty of other veterans that should have been able to set him straight.
- TOM allows some stacking, but in a weird and unsatisfying way. There's far too much conflict between shooting the trunk for other purposes and locking for multiball. You lose your progress towards starting an illusion not even when you start multiball, but just when you lock ball two! And there's a lot of weird cases around interactions with Tiger Saw, Midnight Madness, and certain illusions. It's probably the next worst game after Medieval Madness in an errant shot ruining what you're trying to stack up. Again, I might give a pass for such rough edges in an earlier game like Whitewater, but by 1995 Williams knew how to design these things.
- As we know, the scoring is wildly unbalanced in favor of bonus. Even real machines often see 50% of a game's score coming from the bonus. And with TPA's long games, that bonus really skews every sort of tournament competition.
- And that wizard mode. Grand Finale is anything but. You do all that work to get there, then a single drain with the single ball evaporates all your hard effort. The wizard mode itself also gets badly unbalanced and ten times easier with the right stack (Midnight Madness.) This is not a good game for skill testing.
I think Theatre's popularity comes almost entirely from the theme and voice package. The sultry female voice really does sell otherwise lackluster tables, call it the Xenon effect. I really can't see where I'd ever want to play this for serious competition over one of Williams' more polished efforts. It's fun for casual play, but there's no more substance beyond the casual surface.
- The illusions are just a terrible design overall. There's not a single one of them you actually want to play. You just time out all of them and wait for the next one. The illusions sorely need some actual incentive. Williams had already solved that years ago, with STTNG and Road Show feeding the missions into escalated scoring for the wizard mode. There's no excuse for Williams to get this so badly wrong. It was Popadiuk's first game, but Williams had plenty of other veterans that should have been able to set him straight.
- TOM allows some stacking, but in a weird and unsatisfying way. There's far too much conflict between shooting the trunk for other purposes and locking for multiball. You lose your progress towards starting an illusion not even when you start multiball, but just when you lock ball two! And there's a lot of weird cases around interactions with Tiger Saw, Midnight Madness, and certain illusions. It's probably the next worst game after Medieval Madness in an errant shot ruining what you're trying to stack up. Again, I might give a pass for such rough edges in an earlier game like Whitewater, but by 1995 Williams knew how to design these things.
- As we know, the scoring is wildly unbalanced in favor of bonus. Even real machines often see 50% of a game's score coming from the bonus. And with TPA's long games, that bonus really skews every sort of tournament competition.
- And that wizard mode. Grand Finale is anything but. You do all that work to get there, then a single drain with the single ball evaporates all your hard effort. The wizard mode itself also gets badly unbalanced and ten times easier with the right stack (Midnight Madness.) This is not a good game for skill testing.
I think Theatre's popularity comes almost entirely from the theme and voice package. The sultry female voice really does sell otherwise lackluster tables, call it the Xenon effect. I really can't see where I'd ever want to play this for serious competition over one of Williams' more polished efforts. It's fun for casual play, but there's no more substance beyond the casual surface.