A plea to WMS and Microgaming

[vinylweatherman]

Unfortunately, as I hope that you can understand, I cannot divulge the details of confidential inter company notifications further than I have done - this is for Microgaming to comment on. However my comments were to hopefully reassure you that Mg games will continue at Rizk as we have had zero indication that MG are pulling out of the UK market

Micrgaming really don't give a toss about the players, as we know they NEVER comment other than in official press releases. Even the little you have been able to reveal does not match what is happening, as it isn't just a few of the older games, but the entire Microgaming suite, that have been pulled from some casinos.

Unfortunately, players no longer trust anything that is said in the nature of reassurance, as we have been let down repeatedly by broken promises, the example of the Fortune Lounge and Digimedia jerking around of their UK players being just one of many.

What players don't like is the usual outcome, they wake up one morning and find they are locked out of the casino (or their usual games), and front line CS are absolutely clueless and waste hours of the players' time advising them to try things like reinstalling the casino, cleaning out temporary internet files, updating Flash, Windows, browsers, etc. What is even worse is that such actions often happen mid promotion, which means it isn't even as simple as players being able to withdraw their balances and close the account.

This will also affect those casinos that supposedly DO meet requirements, and where MG are not going to pull their games. Players have no idea, so they see or experience reports of some casinos suddenly losing the games, and they are on "red alert" for them all. This will cost these casinos business because whilst they may have the games, and there are no plans to withdraw them, affected players will be reluctant to deposit due to getting their fingers burned in the past.

The damage may already be done though, and deposits may well dip until players are confident that this has "blown over", and those casinos with the games are likely to keep them.

Others, like me, will worry about the potential impact on download casinos, as ALL the games are MG, so if they are pulled, the casino will be as empty of games as Frankley services in February

 

[Harry_BKK]

For years we have been saying about the US: "Oh dear, we feel really sorry for our fellow players from the Great Free Land."

I think we can slowly add to that: " Oh dear, the UK is following Big Brother to the Hell of making online gaming a disaster for everybody."

 

[paul7388]

For years we have been saying about the US: "Oh dear, we feel really sorry for our fellow players from the Great Free Land."

I think we can slowly add to that: " Oh dear, the UK is following Big Brother to the Hell of making online gaming a disaster for everybody."

You are so correct. This UK responsible gambling is doing my head in. Trying to play certain games without autoplay and having to constantly type in an amount that I am willing to lose. All a lot of crap.

And welcome back posting Harry

 

[Naok777]

The irony of it all is what annoys me the most.

The UKGC forcing "responsible gambling" restrictions on games offered by casinos like Videoslots who already go far above and beyond regulatory requirements in that regard, seriously:
Deposit limit option
Loss limit option
Wager limit option
Max bet protection
Time limit option
Temporary account blocking
Self exclusion

But no, the UKGC thinks that somehow the above is not enough and tries to ruin autospin

Meanwhile the unlicensed clip joints from Costa Rica will continue to not give a toss, so really how does any of it help protect players?

 

[vinylweatherman]

The irony of it all is what annoys me the most.

The UKGC forcing "responsible gambling" restrictions on games offered by casinos like Videoslots who already go far above and beyond regulatory requirements in that regard, seriously:
Deposit limit option
Loss limit option
Wager limit option
Max bet protection
Time limit option
Temporary account blocking
Self exclusion

But no, the UKGC thinks that somehow the above is not enough and tries to ruin autospin

Meanwhile the unlicensed clip joints from Costa Rica will continue to not give a toss, so really how does any of it help protect players?

It's the nanny state effect. It can be overdone by treating adults like children, and ruining the very thing they are trying to keep safe. However, it's not just a risk for the players, it's a risk for the treasury too because if the licenced experience is ruined, players will start looking for the better experience that only unlicensed casinos can offer, such as unfettered autoplay, no banned game features, and software that isn't available at all in the UK licensed environment. Not all unlicensed casinos are rogue either.

There are some things the UKGC have left out. Of MORE value to players than RG measures on autoplay would be to make it compulsory for max bet terms and game exclusions to be enforced by the software, not left as traps for the unwary player who hasn't scoured the website for terms and conditions that may be in several different places. This is another licensing condition they should have considered, a ban on terms scattered around a site, but all terms to be in one place, with a prominent link at the TOP of the page, not a small print link right at the bottom that can often only be reached by a fair bit of scrolling. They should also have banned terms that can only be viewed once a player has made a deposit and claimed the offer.
A ban on unnecessarily long payment times is another thing they have missed. They should have taken the lead from the banks and insisted on a "faster payment" type system, with licensed casinos having to explain each step and why it takes as long as it does, and having to get their times approved by the UKGC, which would ban any time spent "doing nothing", which players see as "pending period". Of course, some casinos already comply with this suggestion.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I have a slightly different view on this. As with all new "government agencies" the beginnings are always rough and actions rarely effective/understandable/rational.

To me as an outsider it looks rather like a rushed patchwork than a comprehensive "Responsible Gaming" policy.

In clear words, the UKGC has little clue what they are indeed doing. Some committee/designated group developed some ideas/proposals and - "yep, we do this one...and errm this one...and eeeerrrrmm, maybe this one".

And i tell you why i see it this way. The bloody MAX BET button is still next to the SPIN button!!!

As i mentioned in the other thread i had a lawyer going through the UKGC RG regulations and he was laughing his head off. I am sure he would laugh again when he would read the regulations that asked for these changes.

In my view, and i think many will agree, the Videoslots "responsible gaming" console is the perfect example how sensible and thought-through RG can be done/achieved, for both sides, the player and the casino.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I have a slightly different view on this. As with all new "government agencies" the beginnings are always rough and actions rarely effective/understandable/rational.

To me as an outsider it looks like rushed patchwork than rather a comprehensive "Responsible Gaming" policy.

In clear words, the UKGC has little clue what they are indeed doing. Some committee/designated group developed some ideas/proposals and - "yep, we do this one...and errm this one...and eeeerrrrmm, maybe this one".

And i tell you why i see it this way. The bloody MAX BET button is still next to the SPIN button!!!

As i mentioned in the other thread i had a lawyer going through the UKGC RG regulations and he was laughing his head off. I am sure he would laugh again when he would read the regulations that asked for these changes.

In my view, and i think many will agree, the Videoslots "responsible gaming" console is the perfect example how sensible and thought-through RG can be done/achieved, for both sides, the player and the casino.

The UKGC would have used their own lawyers to look through the proposed regulations, as well as ensure that they were properly implemented within a robust legal framework. Perhaps part of the problem is that no one at the UKGC nor their lawyers have actually played at one of these "remote gambling" establishments, so really don't know what they are doing in terms of the player experience.

They should have had some lay members co-opted on to their committee who are active players, preferably with a variety of experiences from poker, casino, bingo and betting. The UKGC did at least run public consultations, but the method they used would have scared off many ordinary players as it involved "fat" documents and plenty of "legalese" to be waded through. We did have one or two members here who took our views and converted it into something the UKGC could accept as a proper representation, but it doesn't seem to have carried much weight. I suspect the industry had far too great an influence, and fought off measures likely to cost them too much, and they didn't succeed entirely. They probably didn't want a requirement to enforce max bet terms via the software, and the UKGC probably didn't have much of a clue about the convoluted terms surrounding boni, so didn't look too deeply into it.

The UKGC simply passed the buck by stating that casinos should ensure that their terms and conditions were consistent with consumer protection laws, leaving it up to casinos to interpret these laws, and for players to challenge these interpretations through the ADR system or the courts.

 

[Jd666]

The bloody MAX BET button is still next to the SPIN button!!!

Was just thinking that on Net Ent slots.
UKGC should be doing something about that

 

[Jono777]

Agreed Harry.

Have to say the balance and design the way this RG has been implemented (yes very important and 'a must') is a bit school boy tho.

Various random pop up's across numerous casinos, none of which are accurate with regards to the time frame (take BetAT's - You've been playing 2.36 hours and won £471.00)

Errm I fucking wish, more like I been playing 45 minutes and almost bust!

Leo Vegas, 'You've been playing for 196 hours, don't you think it's time for a break?'

Erm again, I've been to work, slept, ate, shat and yes I did log out at the end of my last session!

I'm sure the basic or programmers could have designed a generic RG tool which 'one size fits all' but no they have to beat about the bush, drag their feet and generally make a hash of implementing such a simple piece of coding.

Same with the auto play, mountain out of mole hill time again.

 

[fun4all]

UKGC has always been a poor jurisdiction. To be fair so has every other one except the IOM but it is disappointing.

Now they are demanding their 15% and that operators must be licenced here I think they are simply trying to show they are doing something, and this very public autoplay rule is just that, proving they are "doing something".

Sadly for the UKGC this autoplay rule is poorly thought out, helps absolutely nobody (operators, normal players, vulnerable players) and is merely a big annoyance. They are doing nothing to help anybody here and merely look ham fisted and having no experience of the industry to anybody with any sense.

If responsible gaming was their thing and they really did want to help vulnerable players there are a myriad of reasonable regulations they could have implemented. Instead we get this useless annoyance.

 

[Jono777]

Just this minute logged in, I rest my case

 

[vinylweatherman]

These wildly inaccurate RG popups need to be addressed as they are clearly a glitch, but one that could cause casinos to fall foul of their licensing conditions. If the UKGC had co-opted some players onto a committee, they would already know this, probably from the laughter coming from the committee room

One of their regulations states that operators "cannot be held responsible if players hide their clocks", so it probably follows that they can't be held responsible if after implementing the autoplay rules, players simply buy a fancy gaming mouse with "auto fire" and use this instead. This would not be AI or a bot, nor even the vague "prohibited software", it would be a mouse that is freely available and is intended for gamers.

 

[Harry_BKK]

The UKGC would have used their own lawyers to look through the proposed regulations, as well as ensure that they were properly implemented within a robust legal framework. Perhaps part of the problem is that no one at the UKGC nor their lawyers have actually played at one of these "remote gambling" establishments, so really don't know what they are doing in terms of the player experience.

They should have had some lay members co-opted on to their committee who are active players, preferably with a variety of experiences from poker, casino, bingo and betting. The UKGC did at least run public consultations, but the method they used would have scared off many ordinary players as it involved "fat" documents and plenty of "legalese" to be waded through. We did have one or two members here who took our views and converted it into something the UKGC could accept as a proper representation, but it doesn't seem to have carried much weight. I suspect the industry had far too great an influence, and fought off measures likely to cost them too much, and they didn't succeed entirely. They probably didn't want a requirement to enforce max bet terms via the software, and the UKGC probably didn't have much of a clue about the convoluted terms surrounding boni, so didn't look too deeply into it.

The UKGC simply passed the buck by stating that casinos should ensure that their terms and conditions were consistent with consumer protection laws, leaving it up to casinos to interpret these laws, and for players to challenge these interpretations through the ADR system or the courts.

With all due respect VWM, i gave the UKGC RG regulations to a lawyer specialized in contract law and got the copy back full of RED markings, really totally full. Each highlighted either a loophole, a missing word/expression, partial explanation etc etc. It was just hilarious to see that, literally i could not believe what i was seeing. And i had 100's if not 1000's of sale/project contracts in front of me in my life, each 20 - 114 pages long, where the "legal spiel" was much more exhaustive than the scope of supply.

Hence, in my view, the legal advice the UKGC took, if they really did, was not worth a penny they paid for it. My lawyer said and i quote his letter: "I wish to have only once in my life such an easy case where these regulations are part of the court proceedings."

But I agree with you, the big casino operators/software providers/lobbyists had their hands in this and made well sure the regulations are rather a farce than something firm, especially on "Responsible Gaming" or "Social Responsibility Code Provision" as they call it.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Agreed Harry.

Have to say the balance and design the way this RG has been implemented (yes very important and 'a must') is a bit school boy tho.

Various random pop up's across numerous casinos, none of which are accurate with regards to the time frame (take BetAT's - You've been playing 2.36 hours and won £471.00)

Errm I fucking wish, more like I been playing 45 minutes and almost bust!

Leo Vegas, 'You've been playing for 196 hours, don't you think it's time for a break?'

Erm again, I've been to work, slept, ate, shat and yes I did log out at the end of my last session!

I'm sure the basic or programmers could have designed a generic RG tool which 'one size fits all' but no they have to beat about the bush, drag their feet and generally make a hash of implementing such a simple piece of coding.

Same with the auto play, mountain out of mole hill time again.

LMAO Jon ... :clap:

I find Rizk the worst (sorry to say this Captain), they just log you out in the middle of a spin!!!

 

[vinylweatherman]

With all due respect VWM, i gave the UKGC RG regulations to a lawyer specialized in contract law and got the copy back full of RED markings, really totally full. Each highlighted either a loophole, a missing word/expression, partial explanation etc etc. It was just hilarious to see that, literally i could not believe what i was seeing. And i had 100's if not 1000's of sale/project contracts in front of me in my life, each 20 - 114 pages long, where the "legal spiel" was much more exhaustive than the scope of supply.

Hence, in my view, the legal advice the UKGC took, if they really did, was not worth a penny they paid for it. My lawyer said and i quote his letter: "I wish to have only once in my life such an easy case where these regulations are part of the court proceedings."

But I agree with you, the big casino operators/software providers/lobbyists had their hands in this and made well sure the regulations are rather a farce than something firm, especially on "Responsible Gaming" or "Social Responsibility Code Provision" as they call it.

Well, the UKGC won't talk to you, but if they have another of those public consultations, maybe a UK player could submit your red marked contribution to it in their name to see if they take it rather more seriously.

Government bodies often find themselves out of their depth when it comes to loophole exploitation. The tax laws are a great example, for every loophole they shut, two more are found by smart lawyers and accountants. This is despite the tax code now being almost the size of the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Well, the UKGC won't talk to you, but if they have another of those public consultations, maybe a UK player could submit your red marked contribution to it in their name to see if they take it rather more seriously.

Government bodies often find themselves out of their depth when it comes to loophole exploitation. The tax laws are a great example, for every loophole they shut, two more are found by smart lawyers and accountants. This is despite the tax code now being almost the size of the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Firstly, I doubt they would listen to us "low lives of players", they never did, nor can i remember that any other jurisdiction has. The weight of the casino industry is just so huge, they would surely be there to grind down any potential changes not favorable to the casino operators.

Secondly, I didn't spent the money to do this for the UKGC (they got a budget in the millions), I wanted my own peace of mind regarding the RG regulations and get closure on the 32RED case, which i did.

 

[Deeplay]

In my view, and i think many will agree, the Videoslots "responsible gaming" console is the perfect example how sensible and thought-through RG can be done/achieved, for both sides, the player and the casino.

Agreed Videoslots have it bang on right as do Royal Panda - easy to implement and control. And instant. Only difference between the 2 is Royal panda you can up your deposit limit after 24 hours / videoslots it takes 7 days.

I am totally fine with both of the above options for deposit limit increases. I still feel the UKGC will in the end get it right but its going to take time, and lots of trial and error. I get the feeling they are learning as they go along.

As for if UK players are better off with the UKGC now in full swing or not - well this has yet to be seen I think.