97.8% RTP slots - did you know about them?

[ThePOGG]

That's not really a good analogy. In fact, as an online player you're lucky that any company provides you with their RTP numbers. As I mentioned in last year's G2E review, I asked the casino floor manager in the slots/video poker section what the RTP was for certain games at the Wynn. He couldn't tell me because he didn't know.

There have been reports published on the RTPs of certain casinos on and off the strip in Vegas, to include the airport. You'd be shocked at how low they are. It seems to me that no serious online player would accept anything under 90%, but in Vegas, that's what you'll get.

I think we're making different points here - yes realistically there's nothing to force the casino industry to reveal this information, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be. Outside of gambling, any entertainment you involve yourself in will tell you how much it's going to cost you up front. And further than that, any game outside of the slots/casual category offered in any casino can be analysed to find the house edge figure. Hiding the RTPs of slots games has become common place for casinos because it's convenient for casino, not because it's an ethical practice or it's good for the customer.

I do agree to a certain extent that player's are lucky that any RTP information is released - all casino operators could easily have decided to go down the route that has been historically taken, but i think it's a very positive step and shows a willingness to engage in transparent practice when a casino does release this information.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

The easiest answer is to vote with your cash and only play at casinos that are upfront about their RTP.

I won't play at any casino that doesn't publish their RTPs.

I'll just about tolerate the MG policy of listing a single RTP for all their slots, but that really is at the outer limits.

At the other end are the providers who give an individual RTP for every slot, and they are very much my preferred options.

In the middle you have folks like 3Dice who list RTPs for their game ranges, including splitting up the slots into two categories and providing the Zeitgeist page.

I certainly wouldn't play an IGT slot at a casino that used the RTP ranges and didn't respond to a query about which maths model they were running.

 

[TheLastCylon]

The easiest answer is to vote with your cash and only play at casinos that are upfront about their RTP.

I won't play at any casino that doesn't publish their RTPs.

I'll just about tolerate the MG policy of listing a single RTP for all their slots, but that really is at the outer limits.

At the other end are the providers who give an individual RTP for every slot, and they are very much my preferred options.

In the middle you have folks like 3Dice who list RTPs for their game ranges, including splitting up the slots into two categories and providing the Zeitgeist page.

I certainly wouldn't play an IGT slot at a casino that used the RTP ranges and didn't respond to a query about which maths model they were running.

I'm in your boat completely. Especially after finding Pinnacle/Galewind. The sheer amount of data that they provide is unprecedented. After them, I'm not much inclined to accept anything less.

To be fair, I do still play Net Entertainment, and they provide the RTP for all of their games direct from the company. I'd like to see some third-party verification, though.

 

[Simmo!]

Personally i feel that this information should be made public as standard.

The odd thing is that so many casinos don't want to publish it. I mean, if you are a Microgaming or Playtech casino it seems like you have the same RTP as everyone else anyway so there is no disadvantage to posting it. Indeed, while other's dont you could get a significant advantage over them but like you say, only a couple do.

 

[TheLastCylon]

For example I recall that at one NetEnt casino Bloodsuckers was listed at 98.00% but was listed at 94.x% at another. Therefore you can't be 100% sure that the same game pays the same at every casino, so it's always a good idea to check from the help files at the casino you play at. The problem is that at some casinos the payout is not listed in the help files.

Are you sure about that? Because if that's the case, then that is very disappointing for me. I assumed that the RTP's posted on NetEnt's website were the RTP's.

 

[TheLastCylon]

There have been reports published on the RTPs of certain casinos on and off the strip in Vegas, to include the airport. You'd be shocked at how low they are. It seems to me that no serious online player would accept anything under 90%, but in Vegas, that's what you'll get.

I think that it's a trade. Someone has to pay for the shows with laser-shooting, flying, fire-tigers and the cirque du soleil performers that serve cocktails. The slots go much of the way toward funding all of the fun stuff the freeloaders like myself take advantage of.

And to be fair to the strip casinos, the big guys, the casino does have the RTP data available. Sometimes you have to ask for it. And most of the slots that I actually went through the trouble to ask about were north of 95%. Much better than Foxwoods, that's for sure.

You can find slot averages in a nice, digestible form

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

, and fuller, more complex information at the NGCB's financial information reports, Old / Expired Link.

 

[maxd]

Any reason why they're not accredited do we know?

Haven't seen this answered yet so ...

The Accreditation process begins when the casino contacts Bryan and requests to be considered for the Accred list. So no request = not being considered.

 

[ThePOGG]

Are you sure about that? Because if that's the case, then that is very disappointing for me. I assumed that the RTP's posted on NetEnt's website were the RTP's.

In general - and by that i mean that it's extremely rare to see anything else - net ent casinos all use the same house edge settings, however i have encountered one or two games that have different settings at different casinos. I could vouch for BloodSuckers - every casino i've encountered it at has a house edge of 2% - but the one that springs to mind is Relic Raiders which has quite a large difference from casino to casino.

 

[ThePOGG]

The odd thing is that so many casinos don't want to publish it. I mean, if you are a Microgaming or Playtech casino it seems like you have the same RTP as everyone else anyway so there is no disadvantage to posting it. Indeed, while other's dont you could get a significant advantage over them but like you say, only a couple do.

I think that it's a trade. Someone has to pay for the shows with laser-shooting, flying, fire-tigers and the cirque du soleil performers that serve cocktails. The slots go much of the way toward funding all of the fun stuff the freeloaders like myself take advantage of.

Simmo! - i couldn't agree more! I do understand why online casinos don't - it's an attempt to protect themselves from bonus hunters - but ultimately it's misplaced. Many of them are terrified of a surge of players beating them if they release this information, yet if you look at the market in the last 4 years more and more big name casinos have released this information and are coping with unprofitable players by being careful with the restricted games. Personally i'm a big fan of Boyle - the first Playtech casino to release this information - and Virgin, who make this information available in an easy to use chart and consistently use the lowest house edge where a range is available. The big hope I have for Microgaming is that 32 Red will choose to be that first outfit to do so – the truth is that many other venues are offering Microgaming slots and releasing the RTP figures, so this information is slowly getting out anyway.

That leads me on to my next point - the huge house edges that b&m casinos offer. I think that in general they are a mistake. When you play a game with a 8%+ house edge all that happens is that you more likely to lose your money far quicker than playing a game with a 4%- setting. Casinos want you to lose money so on the surface this seems like a good thing, but when you get to play for longer with the money you put in you end up feeling like you got more entertainment for your buck. In other words, more value for money. When you feel like that you're more likely to spend more. Obviously there's a balance to be achieved, but roasting the golden goose seem to miss a lot of value in eggs!

It's been a while since i looked at it so i may not be precise in the details, but i remember reading a report several years back by Bill Zender (former Alladin's CM) about his blackjack tables. He ran some experiments and came to the conclusion that the anti-card counting measures were costing the casino far more than they were saving it. Basically to prevent card counting and team play the casino were using a variety of deterrents including no mid-shoe entry and shuffling at the mid-point of a 6 deck shoe. His experimenting showed in a mid-sized vegas casino that every extra round/hour that is dealers were getting out was generating nearly an extra $100k/year for the casino. By moving the shuffle point back 2 decks he could increase the number of rounds per hour (assuming that the dealer was shuffling 4 times/hour) by about 20! And honestly that's a little conservative. It would take a very strong CC team to hit the casino anywhere near hard enough to undo that and if his security team were properly trained in what to look for (at a far lower cost than $2 mil), much of that threat could be avoided. The point i'm making - somewhat long windedly - is that many of the counter measures put in place by the gambling industry to stop people winning have not been properly thought through and often these anti-player procedures end up hurting the casino more than helping them.

 

[Jufo]

Are you sure about that? Because if that's the case, then that is very disappointing for me. I assumed that the RTP's posted on NetEnt's website were the RTP's.

Yes I am sure I saw Bloodsuckers listed at 94.??% once. That's because I was under the impression that it is a low HE game and I was surprised to see the RTP in the help file, so that's why I remember it so well. But it's been a while and I don't remember which Netent casino this was at. If I find out which one it was I will let you know.

It could also be a simple mistake of displaying incorrect RTP value and there's a good chance they have fixed it by now.

 

[jstrike]

It's so easy to change a slot's payout odds that I think it's a lot more important to know the real RTP the house has been paying, than the theoretical one listed by the software maker, unless you can compare both the pay table and the reel weights with the factory settings. And players don't usually get access to reel weights. Add one more stop for a lemon on one reel of a fruit machine and you can change the RTP drastically.

My software has one progressive slot that's 100% RTP (theoretical and real), with daily payout percentages listed... but the deal with this slot is that it only pays 100% or more if you play with skill.

I have a theory of game design I've been working on for awhile, and the new games I write follow the same pattern, which is like this...

1. Make a game that anyone can play without any skill at all, but with a skill element that they can choose to play or not.
2. Design the game so the pay table is the same whether they play for skill or not,
3. Make sure that pure "luck" play without any skill pays a pretty good RTP - say about 96% - and that the more skill they have, the higher it goes, but, not much more than 100%.
4. Make jackpots pay out more frequently for skill play, and make it progressive.

In theory, I think this should work. You end up with a game that pays out in reality around 98%, because a lot of people don't bother with the skill options. Jackpots are still open to everybody, but the higher-skilled players tend to take more of them.

In practice, it hasn't been exactly a smooth ride... the slot I mentioned, scuba cube (Link Removed ( Old/Invalid) ) was designed just like this. But I made a mistake in the math that wasn't discovered until a very skilled player showed up and won 5 jackpots over two days last week. After the third jackpot, he wrote and said, I think this game's broken... but we just kept paying him out and didn't believe him until the 5th one, and then I was like... okay, this game's broken, I'm pulling it offline. Turns out I mixed up a variable and the thing was paying out somewhere around 600% for the most skilled players (the luck-only players who contributed to his progressive pots had no idea, or they would've played the skill option!) On the up side, the math isn't broken now, but still over 100% theoretical if a player is very skilled like he was. In the end, 100% was boring for him after winning so much while it was broken, and he hasn't been back much since the fix. So I guess it all comes down to what your expectations are...

The point i'm making - somewhat long windedly - is that many of the counter measures put in place by the gambling industry to stop people winning have not been properly thought through and often these anti-player procedures end up hurting the casino more than helping them.

This is also a really good point. I'm struggling with a kind of awkward situation at the moment. I get 1-2 tables of poker filled a night, pretty much exclusively freerolls, but it was starting to bleed out a little bit into real games. We try to be a friendly place, so we had a lot of family groups playing, some from the same IP addresses, which was considered OK as long as their opponents knew about it. But it started to become a problem when some of the new players who were showing up complained that it wasn't right to let a few groups sit there and generally run the tables.

So I got harsh and I put in a new policy where same IP players - and even ones who've shared IPs in the last day with each other - can't sit at the same table. We immediately lost half our poker audience and the other half (the ones who complained) had no one to play. I realize this is a kind of extreme/stupid example, but it says a lot about how it's more expensive to micro-manage security on some things than it is to just let a few people slip under the radar.

 

[Simmo!]

It's so easy to change a slot's payout odds that I think it's a lot more important to know the real RTP the house has been paying, than the theoretical one listed by the software maker, unless you can compare both the pay table and the reel weights with the factory settings.

While an actual RTP would be welcomed, a slot's RTP (or range) is logged as part of the certification process by the licensing authorities is it not? So while it is theoretically easy, in practice the process of changing an RTP would be a lot more complicated.

 

[jstrike]

While an actual RTP would be welcomed, a slot's RTP (or range) is logged as part of the certification process by the licensing authorities is it not? So while it is theoretically easy, in practice the process of changing an RTP would be a lot more complicated.

In a best-case scenario with a licensing jurisdiction like Nevada or New Jersey, software can't be uploaded to a physical slot to change the reel weights without passing through the gaming control board, and the operator can't upload software to it directly. Online, it's obviously a lot more prone to shenanigans. We're in Costa Rica and run our own software, so obviously we can set RTP to whatever we want. I know that my players know that, so I've built a whole site that goes out of its way to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we pay what we say we do, and give players all the data daily to verify it for themselves. But my general takeaway from talking with a bunch of different licensing jurisdictions around the world is, they might check it out the first time, but by no means are they going to go line-by-line over all the code in every single software update to see if we changed any odds. Basically after the first audit, they take casinos at their word that the announced RTP hasn't changed. And I can tell ya, it's easy enough to slip in a change to a slot paytable that no one'll notice, but it's ridiculously easy to change the reel weights without anyone knowing.

The only proof players have, in the end, is from actual RTP that a player can verify based on other real players and/or real results from games, with enough depth of data to prove something meaningful, and taken over the course of a long period of non-rogue, fair behavior by the casino. Based on what I know I wouldn't rely on any licensing jurisdiction other than land-based ones in the US to actually guarantee that an announced theoretical RTP was accurate.

 

[Simmo!]

[online]...Basically after the first audit, they take casinos at their word that the announced RTP hasn't changed. And I can tell ya, it's easy enough to slip in a change to a slot paytable that no one'll notice.

The casinos are at the mercy of the software providers, certainly all those using games from Microgaming, Playtech, IGT, Novomatic etc which is why the casino licensing jurisdictions would probably only need to check it once. The key testing point is at the game certification stage which is what I was alluding to.

 

[jstrike]

The casinos are at the mercy of the software providers, certainly all those using games from Microgaming, Playtech, IGT, Novomatic etc which is why the casino licensing jurisdictions would probably only need to check it once. The key testing point is at the game certification stage which is what I was alluding to.

Definitely. But I also don't completely believe that casino operators for PT/MG have no ability to change RTP on games. I think they do, in some cases. Last I heard Maxima/Class1Casino was running a rogue Bitcoin operation with Playtech software that they'd completely taken control over, and were making all kinds of modifications to. I don't trust that an operator has no ability to change things, because I don't think the software providers keep a close enough eye on their operators installations to know for sure if something's changed. I could be wrong 'cause I've never tried to license mainstream software, and if I were licensing mine I know I'd check up on that on a very regular basis... but I don't believe the operators are totally beholden to the software companies' factory-setting RTP, even if they claim they are.

And then, y'know, maybe I'm just paranoid. But I know how easy it is to hack something when you've got the tools.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Definitely. But I also don't completely believe that casino operators for PT/MG have no ability to change RTP on games. I think they do, in some cases.

That's a pretty big claim dude!

I can't speak for PT, but surely in the case of MG the casinos are basically just frontends for the MG servers, and every single call for every single spin/deal/roll on every single game goes back to the MG servers?

I'd have thought that any interference anywhere along the line between client and server would be detected, whether or not it's initiated by a rogue casino or a hacking player?

 

[jstrike]

That's a pretty big claim dude!

I can't speak for PT, but surely in the case of MG the casinos are basically just frontends for the MG servers, and every single call for every single spin/deal/roll on every single game goes back to the MG servers?

I'd have thought that any interference anywhere along the line between client and server would be detected, whether or not it's initiated by a rogue casino or a hacking player?

Y'know, I'm not really sure but I thought that non-white-label casinos were expected to pay for and run their own servers, as long as they give the software co. access to them for updates, maintenance, etc. I'm not saying operators are sticking some cheating mechanism between the client and server, since I don't think that's possible...if it was, players would be savvy to it. But I wasn't under the impression that every MG casino was running out of some central MG server farm somewhere. I assumed it was software that was installed, maybe obfuscated or encrypted, on a server wherever the operator was based. I could totally be wrong about this. The non-transparency of all this stuff is part of what leads to a lot of doubt. But I've heard people tell me they could get me an MG installation on my own servers that could be altered for whatever. Obviously, that's not something I'm looking for, but software is software. Sooner or later someone gets hold of a copy.

If MG or PT had ever come out and said "hey, these operators screwed with our software, don't use them," then I'd believe that no operator was bending the RTP. But look, Playtech still hasn't said a word about the fact that an ex-playtech casino is running a complete stolen installation of their software out of private servers, with all the Marvel games and everything. Does that mean Playtech quietly approves of it? Who knows what to think, when the game providers choose to be so secretive about everything? All it proves is that software can be taken and run on some other server, and even the software company might not say it's illegitimate for fear of making players think there are tons of rogue copies of their programs floating around, which could potentially destroy the value of their brand. So instead they sweep it under the carpet and only deal with it when it becomes a major situation. Meanwhile, once you have a copy of anything it's easy enough to patch. And I really don't know what measures those companies take to reign in operators who screw with RTP on private servers, but as long as the RTP isn't ridiculously low and the operator pays his bills on time, I'm not sure why they'd bother to mess with it.

 

[TheLastCylon]

Yes I am sure I saw Bloodsuckers listed at 94.??% once. That's because I was under the impression that it is a low HE game and I was surprised to see the RTP in the help file, so that's why I remember it so well. But it's been a while and I don't remember which Netent casino this was at. If I find out which one it was I will let you know.

It could also be a simple mistake of displaying incorrect RTP value and there's a good chance they have fixed it by now.

I hope that's the case. Having the RTP values available on all of their games on their website is a pretty big declaration of those being the RTP values. And if they operate on ranges, with games like Relic Raiders having REALLY low RTP's on their site, one would think that advertising their variability would be good.

 

[TheLastCylon]

But look, Playtech still hasn't said a word about the fact that an ex-playtech casino is running a complete stolen installation of their software out of private servers, with all the Marvel games and everything. Does that mean Playtech quietly approves of it?

HA! Holy crap. Seriously? This happened? Good God, Playtech.

 

[maxd]

@jstrike: it's important to differentiate between options in the software to mod the RTP and someone actually hacking into the software to accomplish the same. The former is certainly possible, depends on the software package. The latter is pretty unlikely, though not impossible, but would require some serious reverse engineering and technical know-how. If there's a 1% chance of the former then there's about a .01% chance of the latter. IMO, YMMV.

 

[P.V.]

HA! Holy crap. Seriously? This happened? Good God, Playtech.

Interesting how this could happen, would like to hear more.

Indluge us Jstrike with your proclamation.

 

[Simmo!]

Last I heard Maxima/Class1Casino was running a rogue Bitcoin operation with Playtech software that they'd completely taken control over, and were making all kinds of modifications to.

Yes I'd like to hear more about this too...pretty major stuff. What's the story here jstrike? "Last I heard..." is a bit woolly - what was the source and if so what made it credible? Has there been anything published about this?

 

[ThePOGG]

I hope that's the case. Having the RTP values available on all of their games on their website is a pretty big declaration of those being the RTP values. And if they operate on ranges, with games like Relic Raiders having REALLY low RTP's on their site, one would think that advertising their variability would be good.

I've just checked all the casinos listed below and it appears they all now list the RTP of Relic Raiders as 90%, as does the Net Ent site. Perhaps i made a mistake with this one previously, although i don't think so as this one stuck out in my memory as unusual. Once my site redesign's finished i am going to have a section in each review listing the various RTP figures are different casino much like the list below, rather than just the lowest and highest in the text, however i'm going to list it as house edge rather than RTP - i've always found RTP to be a casino focused figure and a little misleading psycologically in a similar way to charging 4.99 for something rather than 5. I know it was never really intended to be a stat that was used by players and that's why it is the way it is, but i'd rather know how much i'm being charged than how much change i going to get off 100.

BetClic 90%
Betsson 90%
Casino Euro 90%
Cherry Casino 90%
Come On! 90%
Nordic Bet 90%
Redbet 90%
Stan James 90%
Unibet 90%
Whitebet 90%

 

[ThePOGG]

It's so easy to change a slot's payout odds that I think it's a lot more important to know the real RTP the house has been paying, than the theoretical one listed by the software maker, unless you can compare both the pay table and the reel weights with the factory settings. And players don't usually get access to reel weights. Add one more stop for a lemon on one reel of a fruit machine and you can change the RTP drastically.

The problem with real RTP is that it can be misleading and is meaningless for predicting future results. The real RTP for the last week can give figures that are both far too high or far too low based on the short term variance that the casino is experiencing. Especially with slots games where the vast majority of the RTP is tied up in rare events, those rare events are not always evenly distributed so a jackpot that should be hit 1 in 200000 spins may hit 3 times in 200000 or not at all in 1000000. Both these distributions would skew the real RTP figure over the short term and give an unrealistic picture of what the game is expected to return.

I do take your point about it being easy(ish) to tamper with games after they have been certified and unfortunately as long as regulation is next to non-existent in any proper sense there's never going to be any avoiding that but i don't think real RTP figures solve that problem. They simply give more scope for the player that wants to claim they've been 'cheated' because a game has a theoretical RTP of 97% but has a real RTP of 91% for the last month. The average customer doesn't understand what long-term means.

On another topic - i love the idea of skill based slots games. As long as you're careful to ensure that very few players will ever be good enough to actually beat the game, you give the player the feeling of being able to beat the game while ensuring that the house has a significant enough edge to make money. It's what make blackjack the game it is today. PM me details of your opperation - obviously i would need to do a lot more research to compile a review, but in principal i really like what you're doing and would be interested in placing you on my site.

 

[aceking123]

hi guys ( slight derail ) , question for rainmaker as he seems to know a lot ) casino euro cross netent cannot supply player logs for there games to which has been asked for any ideas anyone ? RTP% mainly theyve got no clue