32red

[wobble33]

hi guys

anyone got this on their homepage on 32 red? i am attatching screenie. i hope these lot vpl not taking over. i have also tried live chat but thats down too..

 

[XLCoffee]

I just checked

I just checked for you and Yes I have the same message...

(I've PM'd Mark with a link to this thread)

 

[Nate]

Could be an MG Template that was not updated correctly... Well lets hope so

Nate

 

[Nifty29]

Here's my account page:






I hope this is an error.

Actually, if it is, what the hell is VPL stuff doing in my 32Red stuff???

 

[GOCC]

Got exactly the same on Ladbrokes and also cant deposit or transfer using the download. Had to use the webpage

 

[XLCoffee]

Thanks GOCC! - at least we know it looks like more of a network issue

 

[wobble33]

some funny things happening here. yesterday i went to play immortal romance at 32 red and the game was not even in my game list, now this pops up today. it prob is a error or lets hope it is. thanks guys..

 

[The Dude]

Odd. But it seems to be fixed now. At least my account looks ok.

 

[wobble33]

Odd. But it seems to be fixed now. At least my account looks ok.

yes bryan. i just looked and i have only a blank screen now. was getting a bit worried their.

 

[XLCoffee]

My splash screen is also ok now.

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

Thanks

Hi Guys,

Many thanks to those who PM'd me on this - I did read them but was too busy trying to get hold of MG!

This was a network issue which has now been resolved.

Regards,
Mark

 

[chuchu59]

Something similar at Roxy Palace. The casino outlook just changed automatically and then everything went blank.

 

[vinylweatherman]

How can such an issue link pages from completely different casinos, on different servers, and in different jurisdictions

It suggests to me that things "under the bonnet" are not as they seem, or portrayed to players.

I understood that each MGS casino was it's own ringfenced instance on it's own server, operated and maintained by MGS on behalf of the operator and located in the operator's jurisdiction. Each players' account and it's games also being unique instances on the relevant casino server.

There have been a number of very odd happenings that have made me question this view.

Also today, the announcement that Octopays and Phantom Cash have returned due to "popular demand". REALLY? since when did MGS cave in to "popular demand". Even louder calls for the return of LOTR fell on deaf ears, but two games that barely created a murmour when they vanished (I didn't even notice) are put back because MGS are unable to stand against the "onslaught" of player demands.


With the above cock-up, there is a potential security/privacy issue of documents intended for the casino opened being inadvertently sent to a completely different operator, neither of which may have any idea about what is going on. One casino having a random set of documents that belongs to no account on record, and another facing a complaint that the secure upload has shoved documents into an untraceable void - a problem normally associated with sending documents via email.

 

[Nifty29]

How can such an issue link pages from completely different casinos, on different servers, and in different jurisdictions

It suggests to me that things "under the bonnet" are not as they seem, or portrayed to players.

I understood that each MGS casino was it's own ringfenced instance on it's own server, operated and maintained by MGS on behalf of the operator and located in the operator's jurisdiction. Each players' account and it's games also being unique instances on the relevant casino server.

There have been a number of very odd happenings that have made me question this view.

Also today, the announcement that Octopays and Phantom Cash have returned due to "popular demand". REALLY? since when did MGS cave in to "popular demand". Even louder calls for the return of LOTR fell on deaf ears, but two games that barely created a murmour when they vanished (I didn't even notice) are put back because MGS are unable to stand against the "onslaught" of player demands.


With the above cock-up, there is a potential security/privacy issue of documents intended for the casino opened being inadvertently sent to a completely different operator, neither of which may have any idea about what is going on. One casino having a random set of documents that belongs to no account on record, and another facing a complaint that the secure upload has shoved documents into an untraceable void - a problem normally associated with sending documents via email.

How about we wait for the people who know what they're talking about to explain, rather than whipping up the "Its rigged I tells ya" crowd based on your personal guesswork.

 

[vinylweatherman]

How about we wait for the people who know what they're talking about to explain, rather than whipping up the "Its rigged I tells ya" crowd based on your personal guesswork.

I didn't say it was rigged. I am saying that MGS are not taking enough care to ensure that associated data, designs, etc for one operator are properly ringfenced so that they cannot accidentally bleed over to the servers and web pages of others. When it happens, it shows lax controls, even if in this instance the upload app crashed rather than attempted to upload documents to the wrong operator. That code should not even be on the Ladbrokes or 32Red servers in the first place, both relate to an app specific to Vegas Partner Lounge. It's like logging into your online bank account at one bank and being presented with a message relating to a completely different bank asking you to verify something, type in a verification code, etc. Sensible people wouldn't do it, but the event would undermine their trust in the security of the banking site in general.

MGS are NOT going to come forward and explain any of this, they haven't before. As to the games, we would still be waiting for MGS to come along and explain LOTR, it was speculation and some digging around that finally brought us the likely answer. Despite this, MGS insult our intelligence once again over this latest pair by claiming they are back due to player demand, which is bullshit. MGS just don't take away games for no reason, not even the unpopular ones that almost nobody plays. If they really did listen to players, they would not even have removed Octopays and Phantom Cash in the first place, as it was "popular", something that would have been obvious from the play stats. They have come back as MGS have dealt with whatever issue caused their removal, nothing at all to do with player demands for it's return.

There is no guesswork about the litany of complaints coming from players about documents being sent and repeatedly being "lost" by the casino. There is a security hole in the system that persists despite immense pressure from players to do something about it. This case shows one possible "black hole" route for some of these cases. With almost 20 years in the business, MGS should have come up with something better long before now.

 

[maphesto]

How about we wait for the people who know what they're talking about to explain...

As they did with the Pai Gow incident?

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/microgaming-pai-gow-poker-payout-bug.37717/

 

[De Beuker]

As they did with the Pai Gow incident?

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/microgaming-pai-gow-poker-payout-bug.37717/

Yup.
And at least we all know now how the Battlestar Galactica double wild works, dont we?

 

[Nifty29]

As they did with the Pai Gow incident?

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/microgaming-pai-gow-poker-payout-bug.37717/

Yup.
And at least we all know now how the Battlestar Galactica double wild works, dont we?

I didn't mean a MGS rep

I was rather referring to Steve or Pat or Mark who I'm sure would provide an explanation.

An error is a long way from "careless" or incompetent and it was only costing the casinos money not players. Errors do happen you know......not everything is a "AHA! GOTCHA!" situation like some would have us believe.

If nobody explains anything then fine.....have at it....but lets at least allow a reasonable chance for it to happen before we jump to conclusions and claim that we've been deceived etc all these years.

The BG issue has not been resolved as yet. IIRC a pab hasn't even been filed, so we don't know if it is even an error (and I suspect it isn't)....but it won't be handled officially here until an actual complaint is made.

I have to go back and read the paigow one as I'm hazy on it.

Still, this issue is unrelated to both anyway as it isn't about games and payouts.

 

[dunover]

I got an e-mail from Lucky Nugget today about Octopays and Phantom - prithee tell me should I go out and celebrate? Throw a party? Never even played them or heard of them before. Why did they disappear in the first place? Did Vinyl have a humptier for them?

 

[dionysus]

I got an e-mail from Lucky Nugget today about Octopays and Phantom - prithee tell me should I go out and celebrate? Throw a party? Never even played them or heard of them before. Why did they disappear in the first place? Did Vinyl have a humptier for them?

phantom sux donkey youknowwhats and octopays isnt terrible, but I'v seen it in flash enough
I'm surprised more dont have galacticons

and what happened to those 2 other advertised February releases anyway?

 

[vinylweatherman]

I got an e-mail from Lucky Nugget today about Octopays and Phantom - prithee tell me should I go out and celebrate? Throw a party? Never even played them or heard of them before. Why did they disappear in the first place? Did Vinyl have a humptier for them?

No, they are not fruities.

I fail to see how there could have been such overwhelming demand for two games hardly anyone has heard of. I believe they were pulled soon after launch without explanation. My problem is the insult to our intelligence where they feel the need to concoct a total piece of BS fiction about there being an outcry and demands for their return, trying to convince us that for once, MGS have actually listened to the players and amended their development schedule accordingly. In reality, the games came back when MGS had always intended, regardless of player feeling. They fear we just won't notice unless they invent some BS back story for the return.

The only outcry I know of is when LOTR was pulled for being "unpopular" according to MGS. Firstly, since when did MGS pull a relatively new game just because it's popularity had waned, and secondly, the outcry that followed is hardly indicative of an unpopular game disappearing. It was the pulling of the "normal" version when the progressive LOTR was launched that produced the biggest outcry. Players liked to be able to play a non progressive version, and expected the choice to remain between playing the original and the newer progressive version.

The progressive version didn't really vanish, it is now "The Dark Knight", but the engine for the original remains unused, despite there being a desire for it to return, even with an alternative theme.

It does seem that MGS have firmly broken with the past tradition of never retiring a game, no matter how old and unpopular, and moved to one where select games are now to be retired on a regular basis to make way for new ones.

 

[243 lines=daft]

These spooky events certainly add credence to the idea that Microgaming is a self contained black box that operates in its own mysterious way to spit out nailed down TRTPs regardless of what casino name goes on the cover.

Playing 9 - 15 line classic MG video slots (Thunderstruck, Avalon etc) for many years and getting to know the ebb and flow of their behaviour through sheer familiarity, I'd simply walk away from anyone that tried to convince me these games run like mechanical traditional slots.
To be fair to MG they've never tried to tell us that they do. They're an entertainment. Buyer beware, buyer enjoy, buyer sometimes prosper regardless

 

[Nate]

Even louder calls for the return of LOTR fell on deaf ears, but two games that barely created a murmour when they vanished (I didn't even notice) are put back because MGS are unable to stand against the "onslaught" of player demands.

Uhmm.. last I heard was they pulled those games due to copyright issues.. Ofcourse it would fall on deaf ears ..

Nate

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I think this is rather interesting and I share some of VWM's concerns about how this could happen.

As this is kind of 'my area' I can tell you that there's no way the 32Red Casino window would show a webpage (as that's all that screen in the casino client actually is) for another casino, unless the backend for these casinos was far more integrated than anyone of us would like to think is the case. (I'm thinking they're all simply calling from their own directories on the same IIS server.)

The error here is a standard ASP.NET exception screen - https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/32red.55604/

It looks to me like someone was mucking about in the backend desperately trying to sort out the mess they realised they'd just made, which is when the error got chucked rather than a webpage rendered.

The key thing to look at is the website that the error comes from, and remember this is in a Ladbrokes casino client, the path is:

c:\www\casino\vegaspartnerlounge.com - this will be the path on the IIS server that is serving the webpage, it's also a local path, the 'C' drive, I absolutely cannot think of any explanation for that error being served to a Ladbrokes MG casino client unless they're actually sharing the same web server.

In particular I'd really like to see the contents of the c:\www folder - as I suspect we'd recognise an awful lot of casino names in there.....

It looks to me like someone was doing some routine work on updating the websites (the 'websites' in reality are a directory on the IIS server, the casino client just displays those webpages, calling back to the relevant directory for code, graphics, and so on), and either overwrote a load of casino folders with the vegaspartner folder, or changed a path in error for the default website, or something like that.

Admittedly I'm speculating on that aspect, but from what we've seen in this thread, I'd say everything here is being served from the same web server. I very much doubt there'll be a single one, it'll be a farm of several servers but the directories will be replicated across the farm, so that they're all serving the same content at the same time.

Now is it really headline news that MG are running from centralised consolidated servers? Probably not, however, the situation seen here, to my mind, can only be explained in one of two possible ways.

1) MG allow casino operators to update their own websites, in which case there is a chocking great security hole in their setup, as the Vegas Partner guys seemed to be able to overwrite other casinos' website content, we know for sure that Ladbrokes and 32Red were affected. (I think this is highly unlikely.)

2) MG just do everything themselves, even down to trivial stuff like casino client messages and promotions and graphics (the 'website' that you see in the casino client window, basically), and someone at MG HQ dropped a bit of a clanger today during a routine change and/or update. As far as I can tell you've got multiple casinos (all of them?) being served from the same web farm, probably just with their own websites in a single instance of IIS, all of which will just have their own folder locally. (I think this is far more likely.)

Overall - I think this just gives us a graphical representation of stuff that we already knew.

I hope they're more careful with the databases than they are with the web servers though....

EDIT - Changed the bit at the start about it being 'alarming' to 'interesting', as I wrote my post I realised it was basically stuff we already knew

 

[dunover]

I think this is rather interesting and I share some of VWM's concerns about how this could happen.

As this is kind of 'my area' I can tell you that there's no way the 32Red Casino window would show a webpage (as that's all that screen in the casino client actually is) for another casino, unless the backend for these casinos was far more integrated than anyone of us would like to think is the case. (I'm thinking they're all simply calling from their own directories on the same IIS server.)

The error here is a standard ASP.NET exception screen - https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/32red.55604/

It looks to me like someone was mucking about in the backend desperately trying to sort out the mess they realised they'd just made, which is when the error got chucked rather than a webpage rendered.

The key thing to look at is the website that the error comes from, and remember this is in a Ladbrokes casino client, the path is:

c:\www\casino\vegaspartnerlounge.com - this will be the path on the IIS server that is serving the webpage, it's also a local path, the 'C' drive, I absolutely cannot think of any explanation for that error being served to a Ladbrokes MG casino client unless they're actually sharing the same web server.

In particular I'd really like to see the contents of the c:\www folder - as I suspect we'd recognise an awful lot of casino names in there.....

It looks to me like someone was doing some routine work on updating the websites (the 'websites' in reality are a directory on the IIS server, the casino client just displays those webpages, calling back to the relevant directory for code, graphics, and so on), and either overwrote a load of casino folders with the vegaspartner folder, or changed a path in error for the default website, or something like that.

Admittedly I'm speculating on that aspect, but from what we've seen in this thread, I'd say everything here is being served from the same web server. I very much doubt there'll be a single one, it'll be a farm of several servers but the directories will be replicated across the farm, so that they're all serving the same content at the same time.

Now is it really headline news that MG are running from centralised consolidated servers? Probably not, however, the situation seen here, to my mind, can only be explained in one of two possible ways.

1) MG allow casino operators to update their own websites, in which case there is a chocking great security hole in their setup, as the Vegas Partner guys seemed to be able to overwrite other casinos' website content, we know for sure that Ladbrokes and 32Red were affected. (I think this is highly unlikely.)

2) MG just do everything themselves, even down to trivial stuff like casino client messages and promotions and graphics (the 'website' that you see in the casino client window, basically), and someone at MG HQ dropped a bit of a clanger today during a routine change and/or update. As far as I can tell you've got multiple casinos (all of them?) being served from the same web farm, probably just with their own websites in a single instance of IIS, all of which will just have their own folder locally. (I think this is far more likely.)

Overall - I think this just gives us a graphical representation of stuff that we already knew.

I hope they're more careful with the databases than they are with the web servers though....

EDIT - Changed the bit at the start about it being 'alarming' to 'interesting', as I wrote my post I realised it was basically stuff we already knew

Or even more worrying, the server directory was hacked or attacked, and in a panic to restore things the client paths were misordered hence the images posted here today.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

How can such an issue link pages from completely different casinos, on different servers, and in different jurisdictions

It suggests to me that things "under the bonnet" are not as they seem, or portrayed to players.

I understood that each MGS casino was it's own ringfenced instance on it's own server, operated and maintained by MGS on behalf of the operator and located in the operator's jurisdiction. Each players' account and it's games also being unique instances on the relevant casino server.

Where has it ever said that?

I always worked on the assumption that MG held everything centrally, I suspect that when any MG casino client makes a request for a result from a game, it all basically goes to the same place.... It's actually a more secure approach than having hundreds of servers dotted all over the world, truth be told.

 

[XLCoffee]

Where has it ever said that?

I always worked on the assumption that MG held everything centrally, I suspect that when any MG casino client makes a request for a result from a game, it all basically goes to the same place.... It's actually a more secure approach than having hundreds of servers dotted all over the world, truth be told.

I believe this to be true as well. The network linked progressives over various games was the main evidence to me.

That being said, I have no proof...

 

[De Beuker]

Well, lets just hope they dont scare us to death like that again.

32RED taken over by VPL.. I almost got a heartattack when I first saw it!

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

Hi Guys,

Following the speculation on this thread I thought best to pop back in and give an explanation as I know it - I'll caveat my response beforehand by saying I am not that technically minded but I do 'kind of' understand how this works!

Basically, the pages in the lobby of MG casinos are all controlled by redirects hosted by Microgaming. An operator provides the URLs of where the redirects should point.

For example, we would provide a URL for the message of the day, promotions page, loyalty etc and it would be all controlled by them.

E.g. We may provide Old / Expired Link but the client actually goes to www.mgurl.com/32red/promo.html to look this URL up first. As I understand it, the redirects for all MG casinos are managed in one DB - I don't know this for certain.

I think what happened this morning is that VPL requested a chnge to their redirect and it was applied to all redirects. It was picked up by them before being posted on here and rolled back pretty quickly.

I hope this makes sense and helps explain what happened. This redirect doesn't mean we are in any way connected to other MG operators aside from the fact we use their software which has redirects controlled centrally.

Mark

 

[vinylweatherman]

Uhmm.. last I heard was they pulled those games due to copyright issues.. Ofcourse it would fall on deaf ears ..

Nate

This is not what MGS said. In fact, they have never said anything beyond that the game was not popular. This copyright issue theory came through allowing months of speculative discussion where parallells were drawn between the MGS decision to remove LOTR and a breakdown of negotiations between the Tolkein estate and the movie studios regarding the passing on of movie rights never granted over merchandising. Other LOTR slots (land based) were not pulled, and I then received a promotional email about another casino basing a gambling promotion on the Hobbitt movie, itself surely subject to similar rights restrictions granted by the tolkein estate. What about the UK Fruit Machine versions of LOTR, of which there were plenty. This was years ago when the movies were first released. I have also seen "middle earth" used in another promotion, surely this too is the copyright of the Tolkein estate, not something anyone can just use to promote something.
Action was even tried against a pub calling itself "The Hobbit", yet not against hobbit and middle earth related promotions.


Why can't MGS actually admit the game has been pulled due to copyright issues, and cannot be returned into play using any LOTR branding. I would at least have expected a press release covering this, and the position of MGS now that the spat between the movie studio and Tolkein estate has gone public, featuring in other media.


Are we also to assume that somehow Octopays and Phantom Cash fell foul of some rights restrictions, and had to be pulled pending negotiations. So long as MGS refuse to address such questions, there can exist only speculation and looking for similarities elsewhere, especially arguments between the movie studios and the original owners of the work, as it is the movie studios that tend to sell on the rights to slot and other game developers, rather than the original owners of the work.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Hi Guys,

Following the speculation on this thread I thought best to pop back in and give an explanation as I know it - I'll caveat my response beforehand by saying I am not that technically minded but I do 'kind of' understand how this works!

Basically, the pages in the lobby of MG casinos are all controlled by redirects hosted by Microgaming. An operator provides the URLs of where the redirects should point.

For example, we would provide a URL for the message of the day, promotions page, loyalty etc and it would be all controlled by them.

E.g. We may provide Old / Expired Link but the client actually goes to www.mgurl.com/32red/promo.html to look this URL up first. As I understand it, the redirects for all MG casinos are managed in one DB - I don't know this for certain.

I think what happened this morning is that VPL requested a chnge to their redirect and it was applied to all redirects. It was picked up by them before being posted on here and rolled back pretty quickly.

I hope this makes sense and helps explain what happened. This redirect doesn't mean we are in any way connected to other MG operators aside from the fact we use their software which has redirects controlled centrally.

Mark

This does make sense in one way, but how does this fit with the regulatory requirement that servers are sited within the jurisdictions granting the license. MGS casinos have licenses from Kahnawake, Malta, Gibraltar, as 3 main examples. This means there has to be at least three completely separate server farms, even if each has the content for a number of casinos stored in a way that makes this error possible. As far as I know, 32Red and Vegas Partner Lounge are licensed by different jurisdictions, so should exist on two separate server farms. How therefore can the 32Red server farm in Gibraltar have been messed up by a change to the Vegas Partner redirects in their own jurisdiction.

I do know that MGS does not give operators direct access to the main gaming servers.

Another question is whether having the random numbers generated centrally, away from the actual gaming servers, is allowed under the licensing rules that stipulate that the gaming should take place on the server located within the licensing jurisdiction.


If MGS have such total control, how come we have waited in vain for YEARS for a proper network fix for the notorious "server lag" that blights the MPV tournaments, a problem MGS just ignores in favour of adding even more tournaments onto a server network that just cannot cope.

Their MPV has become a shadow of it's former self because these problems among others have driven players away in frustration. It seems the main interest now is those players who play all the freerolls in the hope of winning something for free, never intending to rebuy or continue, but clogging up the servers so that players that fancy a paid for tournament soon remember why they haven't been near them for some while.

 

[Nifty29]

Hi Guys,

Following the speculation on this thread I thought best to pop back in and give an explanation as I know it - I'll caveat my response beforehand by saying I am not that technically minded but I do 'kind of' understand how this works!

Basically, the pages in the lobby of MG casinos are all controlled by redirects hosted by Microgaming. An operator provides the URLs of where the redirects should point.

For example, we would provide a URL for the message of the day, promotions page, loyalty etc and it would be all controlled by them.

E.g. We may provide Old / Expired Link but the client actually goes to www.mgurl.com/32red/promo.html to look this URL up first. As I understand it, the redirects for all MG casinos are managed in one DB - I don't know this for certain.

I think what happened this morning is that VPL requested a chnge to their redirect and it was applied to all redirects. It was picked up by them before being posted on here and rolled back pretty quickly.

I hope this makes sense and helps explain what happened. This redirect doesn't mean we are in any way connected to other MG operators aside from the fact we use their software which has redirects controlled centrally.

Mark

Thanks Mark......there's nothing like the facts.

I'm sure our resident "experts" will come up with other theories and conjecture and draw bows longer than a football field, but at least we KNOW what the reality is......but as Nate said, there's a lot of big mouths and deaf ears around.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

For example, we would provide a URL for the message of the day, promotions page, loyalty etc and it would be all controlled by them.

E.g. We may provide Old / Expired Link but the client actually goes to www.mgurl.com/32red/promo.html to look this URL up first. As I understand it, the redirects for all MG casinos are managed in one DB - I don't know this for certain.

EDIT - Having thought about this I can see the mechanics would make sense in two entirely distinct systems, which is basically what we appear to have here.

I still don't think the behaviour that was seen is consistent with what we know, (the Ladbrokes screeny in particular, and how every casino lobby ended up redirecting to the same specific VPL Documents Submission page), but as is ever the case it's just another MG mystery well have to live with

 

[wobble33]

Hi Guys,

Following the speculation on this thread I thought best to pop back in and give an explanation as I know it - I'll caveat my response beforehand by saying I am not that technically minded but I do 'kind of' understand how this works!

Basically, the pages in the lobby of MG casinos are all controlled by redirects hosted by Microgaming. An operator provides the URLs of where the redirects should point.

For example, we would provide a URL for the message of the day, promotions page, loyalty etc and it would be all controlled by them.

E.g. We may provide Old / Expired Link but the client actually goes to www.mgurl.com/32red/promo.html to look this URL up first. As I understand it, the redirects for all MG casinos are managed in one DB - I don't know this for certain.

I think what happened this morning is that VPL requested a chnge to their redirect and it was applied to all redirects. It was picked up by them before being posted on here and rolled back pretty quickly.

I hope this makes sense and helps explain what happened. This redirect doesn't mean we are in any way connected to other MG operators aside from the fact we use their software which has redirects controlled centrally.

Mark

hi guys.

i asked a question here as to why this was on my page. i am happy you explained this mark and thanks very much for doing this. i posted the original thread because i thought this looked very strange when i logged in this morning. i dont want to get involved as why it happened i am just pleased its all sorted out.

 

[Cogge]

How can such an issue link pages from completely different casinos, on different servers, and in different jurisdictions

It suggests to me that things "under the bonnet" are not as they seem, or portrayed to players.

I understood that each MGS casino was it's own ringfenced instance on it's own server, operated and maintained by MGS on behalf of the operator and located in the operator's jurisdiction. Each players' account and it's games also being unique instances on the relevant casino server.

Generally (depending on jurisdiction) it is only the RNG that is required to be on "ringfenced" instances. Game data (such as images etc), and stuff like deposit pages, promotion pages and so on are usually pulled via other servers closer to your location in order to split the traffic and keep the bandwidth and lag to a minimum.

Maybe someone just updated to deposit page code and screwed it up somehow so the brands got mixed up. Still doesn't mean that they've done any changes at all to the processes involved in actually playing a game. It doesn't mean that they haven't either, just saying they do not have to correlate.

 

[spintee]

got me worrying for a bit there, I cannot even download the the 32 red casino as soon as i hit the install button nothing happens, ladbrooks is fine, nothing showing up on my ladbrooks screen, also played 32red in flash mode and nothing came up

 

[smcinoz]

got me worrying for a bit there, I cannot even download the the 32 red casino as soon as i hit the install button nothing happens, ladbrooks is fine, nothing showing up on my ladbrooks screen, also played 32red in flash mode and nothing came up

So im not the only one that this is happening to.

Had an issue where my lobby wasnt updating with the new Jan/Feb games (Nedplay updated fine) , i uninstalled and tried to reinstall, got that error.

Got told to do a full wipe of the program, cache etc and try reinstall, no good either, still no fix. Can only play mobile or flash

Been emailing support back and forth with various details they ask for during the past few weeks.

have to wait and see what happens.

 

[spintee]

So im not the only one that this is happening to.

Had an issue where my lobby wasnt updating with the new Jan/Feb games (Nedplay updated fine) , i uninstalled and tried to reinstall, got that error.

Got told to do a full wipe of the program, cache etc and try reinstall, no good either, still no fix. Can only play mobile or flash

Been emailing support back and forth with various details they ask for during the past few weeks.

have to wait and see what happens.

Speaking with help is like talking to a brick wall, Yes they do try and help but not that it ever works, Yes I done the same thing, deleted and would not load back up, I even reinstalled operating system, and still no go, what operating system do you use? I got xp pro and someone said this is the problem, as tried it on 3 diffrent computers all running pro and did not work, Time for an upgrade I think

 

[smcinoz]

Speaking with help is like talking to a brick wall, Yes they do try and help but not that it ever works, Yes I done the same thing, deleted and would not load back up, I even reinstalled operating system, and still no go, what operating system do you use? I got xp pro and someone said this is the problem, as tried it on 3 diffrent computers all running pro and did not work, Time for an upgrade I think

Im using Vista