RTG - changed gameplay?

[Rusty]

very interesting thread this,
and like some others, way above my head,
so the way i see it in laymens terms and correct me if I'm wrong,
if the casino isn't going to make its expected profit margins for a particular month they can change the reel layouts IE remove an extra scatter or wild symbol to make the slot tighter, so it pays out less, so bringing up there profit margins
if that is true is that the norm across all online casinos? mg rival ect

Hi Zebedy,
I will try to clarify things as stated in this thread by myself and Dogboy and I will do my utmost not to misrepresent anything Dogboy has said.

Regarding RTG Dogboy states that there are currently various versions of each slot which differ in that the reel layouts are slightly different - meaning that RTP/payout can changed by the Casino changing the version of the slot.
So yes a Casino could change all its slots so that the payouts to players is less and they make more profit without most players knowing.

Dogboy states that Casinos change versions of the game (change payout) only infrequently and his position is that when any changes are made it is totally unconnected to an individuals previous results.

My contention is not only that the Casinos can change the slot version on a whim and often - but much of this can be and is automated so that RTP and payouts are tightly controlled.
Or in other words if you are due a little treat from the Casino you could be playing slots with a very high RTP until reaching a trigger point where the games would be switched to a much lower RTP.
As evidence of my hypothesis I suggested that people should check their old game logs and find the highest point of a winning streak and then consider if the losing streak that followed was any different to the average streak.
Another way would be to consider your winning streaks and how out of the normal gameplay experience they were.
Of course the problem with all this is that any streak by definition is going to be somewhat outside the norm but I would strongly suggest that a pattern does exist.

Of course Dogboy strongly disagrees with me on this.

So of the Two views it is safe to say that the slot you play One Day may have a much lower *set payout/RTP/expected theoretical return the next Day.
(*they all describe the same thing- house edge)

Silcnlayc pretty much states that One who plays these games extensively knows intuitively when/how the games have been changed and I would agree with that.

As for all other software?
There are a few threads on MG gameplay and Rival that describe similar views. As far as I am concerned they all use weighting, some less ethically and more greedily than others.
Ultimately you will just have to go off your own experience and preference but personally I would avoid the Rival platform like the plague and play the others for entertainment purposes only until such time the industry gets some proper regulation.

Hope that helps some.

[DogBoy001]

Heyas,

To clarify a little;

1) Not all operators change RTP variations in use, many do not change them at all.
2) The variations are not vastly different RTP and do not drastically change game play. Where possible, normal game hit rates (therefore including feature hit rates) and so forth are kept entirely as per (so no reel changes in main game, instead reel strip changes may occur during the free games, or changes are used to pick probability schedules).

...until such time the industry gets some proper regulation

I understand that regulation in the manner of the land-based industry may improve player confidence, however it will not alter the fact that operators will have several RTP variations that they can choose from, and that they may change infrequently.

In the land-based sector this is typically limited to no more than 1 change per 30 day period, which of its own accord is more frequent than is used by any RTG operators.

Woooof

[Rusty]

I understand that regulation in the manner of the land-based industry may improve player confidence, however it will not alter the fact that operators will have several RTP variations that they can choose from

It will alter the fact that they have to display the RTP to player though and make clear any changes made at any time, at least if I have anything to do with it.

[DogBoy001]

It will alter the fact that they have to display the RTP to player though and make clear any changes made at any time, at least if I have anything to do with it.

Yep, completely understand re display of RTP, though it does bring to mind Vinyl's comment that he doesn't trust such information from the casino anyway.

And as for a regulator having the power to require display of RTP, and publicise RTP change dates to players...well that doesn't happen in the land-based industry, and that's run by probably the same regulatory regimes that will cover on-line play...not sure that'll happen purely from a regulatory basis.

It's far more likely that self-regulation prompted by player feedback will eventually lead to that outcome.

Woooof

[Rusty]

Yep, completely understand re display of RTP, though it does bring to mind Vinyl's comment that he doesn't trust such information from the casino anyway.

And as for a regulator having the power to require display of RTP, and publicise RTP change dates to players...well that doesn't happen in the land-based industry, and that's run by probably the same regulatory regimes that will cover on-line play...not sure that'll happen purely from a regulatory basis.

It's far more likely that self-regulation prompted by player feedback will eventually lead to that outcome.

Woooof

Trust comes with proper regulation and transparency, I believe VWM will be relating his comments with the current regulatory situation.

The following is an excerpt from the Gambling Commission’s Remote Technical Standards consultation reply from PartyGaming Plc.

Q18. Do you agree with the Commission’s approach to displaying information
about the likelihood of winning and the prizes on offer?

For games against the house, PartyGaming agrees with the Commissions approach to the displaying of information about the likelihood of winning and the prizes on offer.

Q19. Do you have a view as to what method should be used for return to player percentage calculations?

PartyGaming agrees with the Commission that RTP information should be available for customers to view in order to make an informed choice. However we believe that the specific location of the RTP information should be up to the operator to determine. Again this could only apply to games against the house.

From UKGC site on Machine standards.

This standard is applicable to all categories of gaming machine as defined under section 235 of the Gambling Act 2005 (the Act). This standard will come into force for any gaming machine terminal, sited within Great Britain on or after 1 September 2007, that is dependant upon some external device for the purpose of gambling (including software downloads, server based systems or external random number generators), subject to the Implementation Annex to this standard (published separately). That Annex identifies those requirements of the standard which will come into force on various dates in the period 1 September 2007 to 1 September 2008.

1.4 Pay table/denomination configuration changes
Player terminal control programs that offer multiple pay tables and/or denominations that can be configured via an external communication must comply with the following:
a. information relating to the player’s likely return (%RTP) must be transparent to the player for the pay table in operation and in particular where any changes occur at times when the system is available for play;
b. the game is in an idle state when any update occurs; and
c. any change to the pay table will not cause inaccurate crediting or payment.

and

Remote Gambling and Software Technical Standards: June 2007

RTS requirement 3C
For each virtual event, game (including bingo), or lottery, information that may reasonably be expected to enable the customer to make an informed decision about his or her chances of winning must be easily available before the customer commits to gamble. Information must include:
i. a description of the way the game works and the way in which winners are determined and prizes allocated;
ii. house edge (or margin);
iii. the return to player (RTP) percentage; or
iv. the probability (likelihood) of winning events occurring.

[DogBoy001]

Yes, the UK is one of the few exceptions (we have games such as Aztecs, Cleopatra's Gold, Goldbeard and quite a few others that are in the RTG stable operating in the UK with mainstream land-based groups).

However, all of this only relates to companies seeking a UK license. If you're talking about universal internet regulation I doubt very much that this will be driven by the UK, and in the vast majority of jurisdictions there is little to no requirement for display of player odds or return.

Woooof

[Rusty]

Yes, the UK is one of the few exceptions (we have games such as Aztecs, Cleopatra's Gold, Goldbeard and quite a few others that are in the RTG stable operating in the UK with mainstream land-based groups).

However, all of this only relates to companies seeking a UK license. If you're talking about universal internet regulation I doubt very much that this will be driven by the UK, and in the vast majority of jurisdictions there is little to no requirement for display of player odds or return.

Woooof

(This answer is not specifically in response to Dogboy but a general reply on the issues of regulation.)

I agree, all of which goes to show how poorly the player is protected and that most regulatory regimes are more interested in Dollars than truly fair gaming. You yourself make this point about Australian regulation.

I can see absolutely no argument in principle why the player should not only be entitled to this information but it should be a condition of the license for a software provider by any serious licensing authority.

Software providers, Casinos, affiliates and players all have common ground which a Licensing authority can work with to make proper sensible regulation that suits all.
The UKGC is by far and away the best example of any licensing authority that does this because of its extensive consultations with all concerned parties and its large budget.
Also because it is based on UK law and is ultimately answerable to UK government (and more importantly UK press) then there is unlikely to be any Whitewashing of serious issues.
This is why I use the UKGC as a standard to be followed

If software companies are against displaying RTP they should at least be prepared to explain their position and players should take any licensing authority to task that does not have it as a requirement.

Payments that Casinos and software companies currently have to make to the various licensing authorities that offer a cut price license (screw the player-give us the money) can be accurately described as scandalous.
The blame lies equally with both parties.
Mickey Mouse Licensing authorities offer slack regulation and cut prices because many Casinos and software companies are happy to go this route- a cosy little deal where only the player suffers.

Tougher regulation and the higher cost of a license and extra player protection that comes with it is currently simply seen as not worthwhile by both these sham regulatory bodies and Casinos because any player backlash against these insidious business partnerships is largely Whitewashed.
So the majority of Casinos gravitate toward the sham Licenses such as Kahnawake.

Thank God for the few people such as Bryan (Casinomeister) who actually understand it is possible to make a Buck and still be ethical.
In fact this can be used as a marketing tool and Bryan deserves every success in this and I respect his judgement though I fully appreciate he does not seek or need any endorsement from me.

This forum is One of the very few places where Players can voice their concerns and know they will be heard and have a genuine chance of a fair outcome they would not have got even at some of these so called regulatory authorities.
Why is this the case?
Because if enough of the player community shout and scream loudly enough when something is wrong it hits the Casinos where it hurts most (since most of them have no balls) that is in their pocket.

God forbid some of the players that come here and get redress should actually put something back into the community by trying to help others and demanding the same justice for others that they have received or actually thank Bryan or Max or the membership that helped them but there you go at least right was done by them and the information is out there.

Players;
The majority of Casinos, software providers, sham authorities and unscrupulous affiliates are all dining out at your expense.
We are just ants and if we bite alone they can simply brush us off or squash us.
But if we are many and get into their food and annoy them enough they will either have to pack up and leave or make provision for us.

Yes there are much bigger issues in life but this is a gaming forum and we are here so get involved in any small way and help to make things better for everyone. Lurkers use your voice.

Sorry for sermonising but at least I feel better.

[Pinababy69]

Because if enough of the player community shout and scream loudly enough when something is wrong it hits the Casinos where it hurts most (since most of them have no balls) that is in their pocket.

We are just ants and if we bite alone they can simply brush us off or squash us. But if we are many and get into their food and annoy them enough they will either have to pack up and leave or make provision for us.

Yes there are much bigger issues in life but this is a gaming forum and we are here so get involved in any small way and help to make things better for everyone. Lurkers use your voice.

Sorry for sermonising but at least I feel better.

You are my hero, wanna go steady?

[Rusty]

You are my hero, wanna go steady?

Haha, We are and I thought it was our secret.

[Pinababy69]

Haha, We are and I thought it was our secret.

Damn, stupid me. Remind me to lay off the sauce before noon.