Doubts about Vegas online casino

[Rusty]

Well not played RTG for many moons, knowings as I do how the software plays, especially the last couple of years.

Anyway I always liked the games but hated the low returns so closed all my RTG accounts but something reminded me of Vegas casino online.
I have requested my account closed with this casino on at least 6 separate occasions due to their slots being the tightest on the net but everytime I tried to log back in my account remained open.

Anyway I had an itch to revisit my old love hate relationship with Cleopatra's gold and Ronin as well as looking at the new slots so fired the casino up and sure enough my account remained open.

I decided to make a micro deposit and low roll and 18c a spin.
OK little play time, try again.
5 micro deposits later I am reminded why RTG software and all their casinos are off my Christmas list but what really gets me is this is an accredited casino.
A casino where the payouts are so low that the games are tantamount to being rigged - manager feel free to post my lifetime wager return - but perhaps more importantly a casino where repeated requests to have my account closed have been ignored.

Now I don't want any goodwill gestures and I don't want my account closing because I will keep playing there and posting my exact results - if I win for the first time since joining this dump then I will close my account after a withdrawing. If I continue to get ripped off at least I get the satisfaction of warning others to never play at this casino or the mainstreet group despite the accredited status they have here.

It's all good.

 

[maxd]

Sounds like a perfect candidate for a Pitch-A-Bitch, no?

 

[chayton]

Personally if I was going to go with only one RTG casino, it wouldn't be one of the Main Street group. Their payouts just take way too long IMO.

Of course you're not going to win anything anyhow so I suppose it doesn't matter.

 

[vinylweatherman]

You could always refrain from reinstalling the casino, after all, you didn't EXPECT things to have changed for the better, so if they HAD closed the account, would you not have tried a different RTG to confirm that things are just as bad.

Besides, it looks like DogBoy let one slip in another thread - could be worth a peek

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/rtg-software-backend-issues-rtp-etc.41825/

He has now admitted that the "2 pear" variant on Fruit Frenzy is 91%, not 97.5% as it seemed from the pages at the RTG site, where a 91% setting for this game doesn't even exist.

He then goes on to justify the widespread and secret applications of RTP changes as "fair", perhaps an admission that this is a more widespread practice than even the "conspiracy theorists" thought.

I have delivered counter arguments to his 5 key points in favour of this being a fair practice, plus a general summary, and further arguments as to why this is NOT as "fair" online as it might be in B & M casinos.

 

[AGW]

Vegas Casino Online, Las Vegas USA Casino, etc. are all well-known casinos.

 

[slotjunkie]

Vegas Casino Online, Las Vegas USA Casino, etc. are all well-known casinos.

for their unbelievable SUPER tightness and ridiculous payout wait time! Which virtually amounts to NO wait time because you will NEVER win

 

[petro]

I had a random 10$ bonus posted to me in the mail for Vegas Casino.
Went to reedem it and their CR told me to *&#$ off. Not literally, but you get what I'm saying...

 

[vinylweatherman]

I had a random 10$ bonus posted to me in the mail for Vegas Casino.
Went to reedem it and their CR told me to *&#$ off. Not literally, but you get what I'm saying...

So, WHY spend money sending a mailer to a player, only to p1$$ on their own reputation by giving the player "the bird" when they actually try to claim it.

They have gone from "neutral" to "rogue" in the eyes of that player, who may then write of this in the forums.

Surely it is better to NOT send the mailer, and at least stay "neutral" in the eyes of said player.

 

[Rusty]

Sounds like a perfect candidate for a Pitch-A-Bitch, no?

No thanks Max.
I will reserve any PAB for non payment.

What would I gain from a PAB that I can't achieve in this thread?

Edit.

I can see on reflection that the title of this thread is a little inflammatory so perhaps you could change it to something like, "Doubts about Vegas online casino"

 

[Rusty]

You could always refrain from reinstalling the casino, after all, you didn't EXPECT things to have changed for the better, so if they HAD closed the account, would you not have tried a different RTG to confirm that things are just as bad.

Besides, it looks like DogBoy let one slip in another thread - could be worth a peek

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/rtg-software-backend-issues-rtp-etc.41825/

He has now admitted that the "2 pear" variant on Fruit Frenzy is 91%, not 97.5% as it seemed from the pages at the RTG site, where a 91% setting for this game doesn't even exist.

He then goes on to justify the widespread and secret applications of RTP changes as "fair", perhaps an admission that this is a more widespread practice than even the "conspiracy theorists" thought.

I have delivered counter arguments to his 5 key points in favour of this being a fair practice, plus a general summary, and further arguments as to why this is NOT as "fair" online as it might be in B & M casinos.

You're dead right about not reinstalling them and that is completely my fault though of course they should have closed my account before that and they are completely at fault in this respect.
It is definitely policy to ignore account closure requests.
As for the returns at this particular brand - they can't be rogued for being super tight because there is no real way of proving payouts are much lower here than other places - though they are. so admittedly I am just stirring the pot on that one.
Then again why should I just sit and take it? I had no way of knowing they were super tight and unresponsive when I joined.
At least people reading this are now aware of what to likely expect from this brand.





I'm pretty sure I have closed every other RTG that I was ever going to play at.

 

[Rusty]

Besides, it looks like DogBoy let one slip in another thread - could be worth a peek

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/rtg-software-backend-issues-rtp-etc.41825/

He has now admitted that the "2 pear" variant on Fruit Frenzy is 91%, not 97.5% as it seemed from the pages at the RTG site, where a 91% setting for this game doesn't even exist.

He then goes on to justify the widespread and secret applications of RTP changes as "fair", perhaps an admission that this is a more widespread practice than even the "conspiracy theorists" thought.

I have delivered counter arguments to his 5 key points in favour of this being a fair practice, plus a general summary, and further arguments as to why this is NOT as "fair" online as it might be in B & M casinos.

I missed this thread unfortunately.

Of course it is not fair practice for operators to be able to change RTP at any time without notifying the player - it is why such practice is illegal in the UK, a fact not mentioned by Dogboy which really just throws a light on his attempts at obfuscation and disinformation regarding the matter.

It is not even fair practice for operators not to clearly display the current RTP/HE for any games and again this a legal requirement in the UK.

It is perfectly obvious why such practices are unfair to the player and even more obvious why software companies such as RTG refuse to incorporate them.
Do we really want to trust the unofficial RTG spokesman's protestations that the software is not rigged when he considers it fair that the player should be kept in the dark as to the odds of the game they are playing and that the operator should be allowed to change these odds at any time on a whim without the player knowing?
As I have said previously there is good reason the likes of RTG and Rival can not be found in whitelisted jurisdictions.

I agree with your counterpoints and have made very similar ones myself previously. For those that have missed them this is my take on it.

You caught Dogboy out in that thread but I suspect anyone who has played RTG for any length of time will understand that 91% is not now the new lowest RTG returning slot, there is nothing to say there are not much lower RTP settings and I firmly believe there are and as you know argued long hard that the old 93,95,97 settings only was complete fallacy. By the way it still makes me chuckle when people insist that all MG slots have only one RTP setting.
The truth is there should be no settings, I know this is accepted practice and Dogboy is right this how B&M slots operate (though they must publish RTP for fairness) but that doesn't make it right.

A slots theoretical RTP should be made up from a totalling a complete cycle of all possible combinations and dividing by the winning spin total according to the paytable. The RTP should be clearly published in the paytable and any future changes made known.
This is fair practice.

Imagine playing roulette whereby you place your bets and press spin then numbers 37 and 38 are added to the wheel? Sound fair?

Another perpetual lie about how the software operates is that Freespin and bonus rounds are not predetermined.
You are awarded a prize(determined but hidden) and that prize is revealed through a pick, freespin or other type of bonus game.
The freepins are not delivered as random individual events and this is true of other software just as the picks you make in the pick rounds will not alter the predetermined prize.
I understand the technical reasons for this and why it can be deemed fair by some jurisdictions with certain safeguards in place but it is the lie I object to.

A lot of these issues though are not RTG specific but I guess they see a lot of threads like this because a lot of their operators tend to be, how shall we say this, somewhat less than than shining beacons of the industry.

Another disingenuous argument that Dogboy likes to put out is that the software must be fair otherwise operators would offer potentially +ev bonuses but set the RTP real low.
Maybe he wasn't around when all the rogues were doing just that, offering to good to be true bonuses or maybe he would argue they didn't set the slots lower they just didn't pay winners - either way it is hard to see RTG in a good light.
Anyway such arguments are very patronising. I liken it to the argument that MG software is no longer weighted because after they were caught out their paytables and reel strips now match the perceived RTP so therefore they must no longer be weighted.
I mean you have to naive and blinkered to Nifty standards to accept that as a credible reassurance. Talking of Nifty his sycophantic ramblings in that thread made me queasy and there was me just recently suggesting that he sometimes came across as a shill. "Dogmeister"

On top of all this we have the fact that RTG still after all these years supply their software to operators who are known to have scammed players.

I have always said RTG make good games and I think they have helped raise the bar in slot design.
The problem is you can fancy a woman all you like but once you know she has raging syphilis it is sure to put you off.

 

[maxd]

Talking of Nifty ....

Not sure why you need to interrupt an otherwise unrelated thread to start taking shots at your fellow forum members but please don't.

Whether you like or dislike someone on the forums you're welcome to keep your personal insults to yourself, per the Forum Rules if you need to be reminded.

 

[funeral979]

You know I really have nothing against Nifty personally. He adds alot to the forum and makes alot of positive contributions. That being said, he does take cheap shots at other members quite often. Many members have decided to lurk rather than actively contribute due to this behavior. Most of the time the mods seem to turn a blind eye to this. Yet whenever anyone says anything remotely negative about Nifty or his posts, it seems as if Max comes running to the rescue...as if he can have run of the paddock. I don't really want to add any fuel to the fires....but you know if you can dish it out.....

 

[maxd]

You know I really have nothing against Nifty personally. ... he does take cheap shots at other members quite often.

Report it! How many times do we have to say this?

Report it! Report it! Report it! Report it! Report it!
Report it! Report it! Report it! Report it! Report it!
Report it! Report it! Report it! Report it! Report it!
Report it! Report it! Report it! Report it! Report it!

There, does that make it any clearer?

Here is how to Report a post:

Attach Removed (Old not found)

Nifty reported the off-topic slagging above, I responded accordingly.
Other such things have apparently gone on but were un-reported, no response from us.

Report -> something is done if needs be.
No Report -> nothing done.​

So yeah, Report it. Very simple. No mystery, no drama.

As to hoards of people lurking rather than post because Nifty, or whomever, might respond. Sure, easy to say, let them contact me privately to confirm their "forced into lurking" status and then we'll see just what significance there is to these "oppressed masses" stories. Been there, done that, it was BS then and I'll bet a precious part of my maleness that it's BS now.

I could say "anonymous persons love my collection of fetching hosiery" but that means basically nothing because there's no evidence, no burden of proof and no recourse for the disbelievers. Such things are groundless hearsay and who needs more of that?

Yet whenever anyone says anything remotely negative about Nifty or his posts, it seems as if Max comes running to the rescue....

Prove it! And since you can't, because it isn't true, I welcome you to keep insulting statements of that nature to yourself. If I slagged you off as freely as you seem to feel at liberty to slag me off I'd be fired, plain and simple.

Behave better, raise the bar a little. It's better for everyone.

 

[petro]

Wow, Max is like the Yoda of forum posting.
That post is like a work of art.

 

[funeral979]

Well I guess if saying "report it" 20 times in a row makes a post a work of art

Sorry Max I wasn't insulting you. I wasn't slagging you off. I was just making an observation. I don't see how me saying that you are coming to his rescue is an insult to you. But you are attacking me because I brought up Nifty again. It seems as if it strikes a chord in you whenever his name is mentioned. And I just don't get it. Im just asking for a little fairness. How would you like me to behave better Max? I don't really see how I misbehaved by me making an observation of the deteriorating sense of common decency being displayed by forum members. Other members RUDELY make observations and they get a pat on the back. My post pointed out Nifty's positive qualities as well. Just asking for a little FAIRNESS.

 

[jetset]

Just my personal view, but I think there is a little too much speculative commentary here at present - everything from 'many' members 'leaving' (when they manifestly have not) to 'gang warfare', unfair or biased moderating and thus far unsupported claims that members are so scared that they have gone into lurking mode.

Perhaps before tossing around such generalities members should reflect even briefly on their posts before hitting the submit button.

Sorry for the derail - unfortunately one of several in an otherwise very interesting thread. I have to say, however, that imo Rusty's attack on another member at post #11 is a provocative, insulting and unnecessary distraction from the otherwise useful perspective content in his post.

 

[maxd]

I don't see how me saying that you are coming to his rescue is an insult to you. .... Just asking for a little FAIRNESS.

Your statements state plainly or imply without much doubt that we lack fairness, that one of the mods here "comes running" whenever "anyone says anything remotely negative about him or his posts", etc. This is insulting and degrading whether you intended it to be or not. And, as I've already said, it is groundless because you can't show with actual evidence that any of it is true.

It's very easy to say "I'm being oppressed here!" or "how about a LITTLE fairness" but it's quite another to back any of it up with actual facts or to show specific instances of what you claim is happening.

Basically I'm saying the attitude expressed in some of your posts** -- aside from the actual direct accusations -- is negative and not constructive and you provide proof for none of it. This is pointlessly damaging, hence "behave better".

To be perfectly clear:

• if Nifty or anyone else is behaving badly towards other members, Report it.
• if you think one of the mods is giving Nifty or anyone else special treatment, Report it.
• if you find that you are being mistreated by one of the mods, Report it.
• if you've got generic, unsubstantiated grumbling or insults you want to post, don't! None of us needs that crap.

The point being that if you claim such-and-such bad thing is happening then Report it when you see it. If there are no such reports and no proof given that the thing ever happened then basically you are just making free-wheeling accusations because you feel like it. Like I said: behave better, raise the bar, everyone wins.

**Please note that I said 'some', as in 'a few, not all', as in 'on occasion'. You may not conclude from this that I am saying 'all of your posts', hence no need to throw up your arms, say 'everybody hates me and I'm leaving!' or the like.

 

[petro]

Well, I am pretty much a newbie at forum posting. And I haven't felt 'opressed' here yet.

Although, Casinomeister kind of scares me.

 

[Rusty]

Not sure why you need to interrupt an otherwise unrelated thread to start taking shots at your fellow forum members but please don't.

Whether you like or dislike someone on the forums you're welcome to keep your personal insults to yourself, per the Forum Rules if you need to be reminded.

Still got that boner on for me eh Max?
How sweet.
By the way I started the thread and I was responding to the link that VWM provided.

If you want to do something useful change the title of the thread as I suggested instead of following me around with a hard on.

 

[maxd]

[derail]

And I haven't felt 'opressed' here yet.

Just say "Max is a big girl's blouse" or "Bryan wear ladies underwear". Oppression follows.

JK.

Still got that boner on for me eh Max?

¿qué?

[/derail]

... change the title of the thread as I suggested instead of following me around with a hard on.

Not sure why this discussion requires the sexual references -- that's politesse for "it doesn't, stop it" -- but thread title is now changed per request, had been unaware of the suggestion.

 

[Rusty]

Just my personal view, but I think there is a little too much speculative commentary here at present - everything from 'many' members 'leaving' (when they manifestly have not) to 'gang warfare', unfair or biased moderating and thus far unsupported claims that members are so scared that they have gone into lurking mode.

Perhaps before tossing around such generalities members should reflect even briefly on their posts before hitting the submit button.

Sorry for the derail - unfortunately one of several in an otherwise very interesting thread. I have to say, however, that imo Rusty's attack on another member at post #11 is a provocative, insulting and unnecessary distraction from the otherwise useful perspective content in his post.

Don't know anything about the rest of your post or what it pertains to but regarding my comments about Nifty of course I mean them but I don't mean to insult people just offend them.
This may be hard to understand but if I met the guy I would happily buy him a beer and have a chat.
He just became my pantomime villain in the forum for some reason, well quite a few reasons actually.

Nifty, I'm sorry.
Max, I am sorry.
I shall try to disagree with you both more agreeably in the future.

 

[maxd]

Max, I am sorry. I shall try to disagree with you both more agreeably in the future.

No worries, live and learn, we all should. A more "agreeable" future sounds like a good thing.

 

[chayton]

Wow, Max is like the Yoda of forum posting.
That post is like a work of art.

Except Yoda would have said "A precious part of my maleness I'd be betting."

 

[Westland Bowl]

Well I guess if saying "report it" 20 times in a row makes a post a work of art ........

Andy Warhol turned mere repetition into 'art'.

 

[jetset]

@ Chayton

 

[nisosbar]

Besides, it looks like DogBoy let one slip in another thread - could be worth a peek

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/rtg-software-backend-issues-rtp-etc.41825/

He has now admitted that the "2 pear" variant on Fruit Frenzy is 91%, not 97.5% as it seemed from the pages at the RTG site, where a 91% setting for this game doesn't even exist.

Further to this point, not that this is a big deal, but I find it interesting that he claims to do some sort of design for either RTG or another slot company but can't keep the RTP percentage correct. Just sort of funny. But we still luv you, Dogboy!

 

[rockycatt]

were has the dog boy gone i havent read anything from him in a while

of course i might have misse him posting i like to get inside info [we c an debate it if needed ] but i read all his posts that i saw

 

[jetset]

More provocation, and a persecution whinge to boot it appears.

Please give it a rest, Rusty and let's get back to gambling stuff that you're good at.

 

[footdr]

Why I don't play at vegas online casino

They allow quicktender deposits but NOT withdrawals to quicktender.
Why? Sounds like a bogus practice, one that allows them to take longer to pay you via Check. I don't accept any checks anymore.

 

[Rusty]

More provocation, and a persecution whinge to boot it appears.

Please give it a rest, Rusty and let's get back to gambling stuff that you're good at.

You're late to a party you weren't invited to and next time bring beer instead of "whine".
There is plenty of "gambling stuff" in this thread from VWM and myself, feel free to contribute to that by all means.

 

[vinylweatherman]

You're late to a party you weren't invited to and next time bring beer instead of "whine".
There is plenty of "gambling stuff" in this thread from VWM and myself, feel free to contribute to that by all means.

He IS invited by default. Any "party" held in the public forum is open to any CM member.

DogBoy works for a company that designs slot games. It was RTG that got it wrong, not DogBoy, when making up that set of web pages.

DogBoy cannot speak for RTG themselves, but what I succeeded in doing by reopening the FRuit Frenzy debate was to have him forget himself for a moment, and reveal what the RTP of that variant was in his defence of it's use by an operator.

The "trap" was to suggest it was a 60% setting, which DogBoy had to correct by saying it was 91%. He didn't have much choice really, as he couldn't say it was 95%, and if he said 97.5% it would have been a lie. This forced him to reveal that a setting that didn't exist at all on those pages actually DID exist.


This also seems to me an indication that in order to get answers out of DogBoy, we have to put forward credible arguments in support of the WRING answer, which has to be MORE "rogue" than the correct one. DogBoy will then correct any "technical misconception".

It seems reasonable to expand his recent "technical correction" to ALL the slots at RTG, and presume that ALL were given 3 variants, and these were ALL 91%, 95%, and 97.5%. PROGRESSIVE slots are all 94% - no alternate settings. I would presume the "missing 1%" is the contribution to the progressive pool.

The "super user" question is more an RTG one, rather than one of slot design, but RTG answered this one through their actions (as in "please remove that picture of a super user console from the forum").

 

[Nifty29]

You're late to a party you weren't invited to and next time bring beer instead of "whine".
There is plenty of "gambling stuff" in this thread from VWM and myself, feel free to contribute to that by all means.

What you said was completely unnecessary and unprovoked.

Jetset is about as even-handed and polite as you can get.

Shows how much your 'apology that wasn't an apology' is worth.

Now back to the RTG settings argument....

I believe it was Bryan (after contacting RTG) that stated the 91% setting was only for 'booths' - not Dogboy.

IMO there are some members who just hate having someone around who knows more than they do about something and try everything possible to either discredit them or derail the posts they contribute to. We are talking about someone who isn't interested in the politics or the 'player vs casino' mindset, but rather about the facts associated with the software.

I really don't understand why members don't embrace this kind of information and be respectful of those who take the time to provide it. Attempting to 'trap' them or pick out things from 12 months ago is pointless and is nothing but an exercise in point scoring.

If members want to ignore the facts provided by those who actually design the software, then so be it - but at least consider that others might like to actually learn something, and turning it into a pi*sing match to prove who is smarter than who is really childish.

AFAIK, Dogboy is the only member here who has first-hand knowledge of the inner workings of RTG slots and how they are designed. It's about time some members deferred to a more knowledgable person on this subject and stopped pretending they know more - because they don't.

 

[maxd]

With all due respect to your opinions guys we don't need another mud-slinging match here, and that's surely where this is going. Since the rhetoric is unlikely to shame anyone into becoming a better person I suggest a collective shrug and we all move on.

 

[jetset]

You are correct Max.

Rusty's response to my criticism should not have provoked further comment from myself, and I have edited out my reaction to it.

 

[Nifty29]

I also apologize Max

 

[Rusty]

You are correct Max.

Rusty's response to my criticism should not have provoked further comment from myself, and I have edited out my reaction to it.

I agree.
I also should of not responded to your response which was a complete derail and did not add to the thread in any useful way.
I much prefer our rational debates to this nonsense and do respect your opinions so let's move on.

IMO there are some members who just hate having someone around who knows more than they do about something and try everything possible to either discredit them or derail the posts they contribute to. We are talking about someone who isn't interested in the politics or the 'player vs casino' mindset, but rather about the facts associated with the software.

Nifty, you really are full of it.
why do you assume somebody with a vested interest in the industry has only facts even though this has actaully been disproved and the evidence is in this very thread?
As for mindsets - it is clear yours is completely fixed and you have an obvious bias.

I really don't understand why members don't embrace this kind of information and be respectful of those who take the time to provide it. Attempting to 'trap' them or pick out things from 12 months ago is pointless and is nothing but an exercise in point scoring.

You see this is the sort of utter garbage you continually churn out with a complete disregard for the facts.
Dogboy would not of even been here for you to fawn over if it were not for certain members questioning how the RTG software operated.
Obviously you were not one of those members so for you to try and take the moral high ground really does show how superficial your protestations are.
Oh and why worry about anyone being trapped if they only dispensing facts not that this is what happens anyway?

If members want to ignore the facts provided by those who actually design the software, then so be it - but at least consider that others might like to actually learn something, and turning it into a pi*sing match to prove who is smarter than who is really childish.

AFAIK, Dogboy is the only member here who has first-hand knowledge of the inner workings of RTG slots and how they are designed. It's about time some members deferred to a more knowledgable person on this subject and stopped pretending they know more - because they don't.

Says you and given your track record I think I and many other members will treat that slur with the disdain it deserves.
How about you visit some of the old threads where I and Dogboy debate the RTG software quite amicably.
I have no problem debating these things and many other issues that surround online gaming with other credible forum members and there are dozens of threads where I strongly disagree with other members without it becoming personal.
I have never once seen you add any constructive debate to any of the big issues.
That is the difference with you and why I have no time for you or your ramblings.You have proven time and time again that you do not want to enter into proper debate and would rather derail threads with the kind of unfounded garbage you have all too predictably spouted in this thread.

You are worried about the lack of knowledge of certain posters that know infinitely more than you?
Where does that leave you then?

 

[The Dude]

Admin Note - let's be mellow

@ Rusty and Nifty - please put each other on one's ignore list - thanks.

No more personal jibes in the thread, okay? Thank you.

 

[takethemoney]

I'm more interested in where all the information that has been brought forth, albeit, not all new, is taking us, and much less interested in the drama. We can watch Jerry Springer and get that!

 

[Nifty29]

@ Rusty and Nifty - please put each other on one's ignore list - thanks.

No more personal jibes in the thread, okay? Thank you.

Aye Aye Cap'n