New Slot Announcement Afterlife Inferno by Leander

[Simmo!]

Very impressive video Chops!! Watched the whole thing and how you keep the chat going for an hour!! LOL.

"A sensible incarnation of a High Variance slot" was the bit hat made me happiest

 

[dunover]

Very impressive video Chops!! Watched the whole thing and how you keep the chat going for an hour!! LOL.

"A sensible incarnation of a High Variance slot"

He can out-yap me and that's saying something!

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Very impressive video Chops!! Watched the whole thing and how you keep the chat going for an hour!! LOL.

"A sensible incarnation of a High Variance slot" was the bit hat made me happiest

That opinion may have shifted a bit for the follow-on video.... I've not deposited again to play this slot, but have had a couple of kickbacks from Video Slots in Casino Race rewards and Weekend Boosters, which I've played through on this.

Yes I understand it's high variance and it's the nature of the beast, but I genuinely do question how many people are going to be prepared to camp this slot out for as long as it can take to finally kick something decent back?

 

[Simmo!]

That opinion may have shifted a bit for the follow-on video.... I've not deposited again to play this slot, but have had a couple of kickbacks from Video Slots in Casino Race rewards and Weekend Boosters, which I've played through on this.

Yes I understand it's high variance and it's the nature of the beast, but I genuinely do question how many people are going to be prepared to camp this slot out for as long as it can take to finally kick something decent back?

Yep I understand that. Many a time I have chopped and changed my opinions of games. Remember "Great Blue"? Loved it, hated it, loved it again, hated it again LOL.

 

[Simmo!]

Picking the highest variance bonus round on what is already a high variance slot for a competition is a pretty risky proposition IMO, I can see some players getting badly burned if they dig their heels in with it. The other two bonus rounds pretty much always pay a little chunk back (Inferno more than Purgatory), Paradise can and does return 1x stake or less on a bad round.

No different to a DOA or a Bonanza comp, surely? (Just a general FYI, the RTP is the same whichever bonus round you pick).

 

[ChopleyIOM]

They only have one bonus round though, whereas with this comp the participating player has to deliberately choose the crazy high variance round that is truly dreadful to sit through when it pays poorly (or zero!), and are very much aware they had two other choices.

 

[Simmo!]

They only have one bonus round though, whereas with this comp the participating player has to deliberately choose the crazy high variance round that is truly dreadful to sit through when it pays poorly (or zero!), and are very much aware they had two other choices.

Actually it's not really "crazy high"...the article I wrote alludes to the fact that that's the type of HV Game I was trying to avoid designing. It is the highest yes, but statistically, you actually have a better % chance of getting more than 100x on Paradise than you do of getting < 1x.

 

[theapple]

No different to a DOA or a Bonanza comp, surely? (Just a general FYI, the RTP is the same whichever bonus round you pick).

but tbf even doa average bad bonus round pays around 10x. I know its average pay is well above 10x, but im talking about "crappy" bonus rounds in particular. 10x is not a lot different to 0,4x and 0x pays but it still feels less of a punch in the face I know it was probably just a run of bad luck and ill probably give it another shot soon but if i was some random player who had 2 0x paying bonus rounds in a row, it wouldnt be easy to convince me to play that slot again.

Heck im sure most of us played some random xx slot once or twice, got extremely bad bonus round and never looked back?

also i know its a small sample but i found both DoA and bonanza base game much more forgiving, but then again i suspect that might even out once you get a decent wild reels feature (which i didnt get at all since my first play there ). Im sure after 10k spins or so you will probably be near...ish stated rtp, but the real problem is most people dont have balance to endure 5k spins long beating :=o Or they have balance but no patience.

What im trying to say is... after a few plays even base game feels like playing a very high variance free spins feature. If you dont get hell freeze thingy you are most likely going to die, and you will die quickly too

maybe other people had different experience, which is entirely possible because of my small sample but after like 4-5 sessions on it, i still only had 5OAK once, it was 5OAK of Jacks

only time i was in front is first time when i played it when i got 3 reeler hell freeze which paid around 50x, followed by 3 quick sets of free spins that all paid ok (2x around 90x and cant remember the last one pays). On my other plays it played like this

- dead base game
- gets free spins
- dead free sipns
- back to dead base game
- gets another set of dead free spins
- and so on til my balance dropped from 90 to 20, playing 20-40c spins :=O

once again i think the game has enormous potential, and unlike most other slots, it actually shows it as we can see from a few screenies around but sometimes it really feels its variance slider is a tad off :=/

edit: i also believe how having a bonus guarantee (aka RR) that pays 10x doesnt really work either, because psychologically it still feels like you got 0x and you are just as disappointed (because you got the lowest possible prize) so im not entirely sure how what could be done to avoid those 0x-1x pays tbh

edit jr
initially i just wanted to say its not exactly just like DoA but ended up with a wall of text so here is tldr: Getting 2x bonus feature on DoA is, or at least it *feels* more bareable because most of the time base game will keep you alive until next feature arrives. I dont think that can be said for this one hence 0x free spins have much higher impact on the player. If that makes any sense?

 

[paul7388]

Actually it's not really "crazy high"...the article I wrote alludes to the fact that that's the type of HV Game I was trying to avoid designing. It is the highest yes, but statistically, you actually have a better % chance of getting more than 100x on Paradise than you do of getting < 1x.

Well i played this for a while earlier. Ended up with a small profit on 20p bets only because i got hell freezes over twice and both times it gave first 3 reels for £40.

As for the Paradise feature i selected that 4 times out of 10 bonuses. Twice i got under 1x bet. Once i got about 3x bet lol and the other i got a huge win compared to those of about 12x.

Played it a few times now and if it was not for the hell feature it would eat money fast. The Free spins might be able to produce monster wins but from what i have witnessed and others i would say the free spins will pay little more often than not.

I feel best chance of winning will be on the hell feature. Played it a few times this week and until today could not even get a bonus and from about 10 bonuses today only one paid decent and that was won with the random multiplier that paid about £20. All the rest were very poor.

Not a slot i would play unless i had a good bankroll.

 

[goatwack]

I think the best thing for this game, perhaps in the next update, is for the designers to implement Hugo into the base game, have him knocking at the screen and maybe some sort of Pick Me feature.

Provided Play N Go are ok with that

 

[geordiecolin]

After my first visit on this slot in real money ended badly this is a slot that I would only visit when I am already healthily in profit and even then I would set a limit on my loses. Even then it is only because of my involvement in the trials of the game and these two Casinomeister threads.
I agree that most casual visitors to it will base their opinion on their first visit to the game and if it pays poorly they are not so likely to play it again. During my first real play session I went over an hour and over 400 spins without hitting a bonus or freezes over feature. Then I hit two bonuses within 100 spins and during those 100 spins which included the bonus rounds my balance still managed to reduce significantly.
At best in my opinion it is a game to play on low stakes and in the background while multi tasking,just like I do with DOA

 

[geordiecolin]

8.30 minutes in is an independent positive opinion from a seasoned player

 

[theapple]

8.30 minutes in is an independent positive opinion from a seasoned player

yeah but if you check his Vikings play, a few slots after afterlife you'll see how he is not a fan of 0x bonuses either, so it just confirms what i said. First impression matters and it matters a lot. Getting a couple of 0x bonuses in a row is most likely not going to net you a lifetime player

he also said "what the fu#"//# point in 0x bonuses, why program your slot to pay 0x" but thats pretty much a tradeoff if you want to have a bonus that can pay 14000x and pays, idk 100x on average, low paying bonuses are a must. To some degree i still agree with him, because 0x bonuses drive players away and thats why slots like DoA, Reel steal, bonanza and such mask it with 8x-20ish x bonuses Its still pretty low win and definitely not what you were hoping for, but still a world better than 0x or 0,4x bonus

not sure how many of you played Pink elephant but im sure most of vets here gave it a shot. I tried it a few times, had 4 bonuses in total. 3 paid less than 1x. That was a few months ago and i havent played it ever since. I know it has potential but im not touching it again unless im like 1900x in front already :=o

 

[Simmo!]

First impression matters and it matters a lot. Getting a couple of 0x bonuses in a row is most likely not going to net you a lifetime player

Couldn't agree more. Nobody "likes" a 0 bonus - but for me it's a question of "accepting" a 0 bonus to get a 1,000x + bonus and that is the nature of a high variance game and why I love them - it's about how much "risk" a player want to take. You're not talking about games so much as you're talking about players: there are all sorts of players and all sorts of games aimed at different types of player. HV players will accept that slots give 0 bonuses more than Medium Variance and Low Variance. But they also expect them to give 1,000x bonuses more than MV and LV games and we've seen several of them on Afterlife: Inferno in the first week or two of release too. It depends entirely what you like. There are games that are way more HV than Afterlife that won't give you 0 bonuses but you'll see the bonus a lot less frequently (that was another option I considered actually but decided against it).

In fact, this is one of the most interesting and challenging things about developing a game I found - balance. You're absolutely right in that a player will judge a game a lot of the time on their first 2 or 3 sessions - winning is what a player wants to do and if they don't, they are not going to play a game as much. This is why you see Net Ent and other companies develop so many MV/LV games - it keeps people playing, offers casinos a lower risk and attracts lower risk players and they do very, very well out of it. It's also why I can't honestly think of a Net Ent game I'd turn on my PC specifically to play because that's not my cup of tea. But I am not their target market: I'm a risk taker and I'll happily take a handful of crap feature wins to get a whopper every now and again.

 

[dunover]

yeah but if you check his Vikings play, a few slots after afterlife you'll see how he is not a fan of 0x bonuses either, so it just confirms what i said. First impression matters and it matters a lot. Getting a couple of 0x bonuses in a row is most likely not going to net you a lifetime player

he also said "what the fu#"//# point in 0x bonuses, why program your slot to pay 0x" but thats pretty much a tradeoff if you want to have a bonus that can pay 14000x and pays, idk 100x on average, low paying bonuses are a must. To some degree i still agree with him, because 0x bonuses drive players away and thats why slots like DoA, Reel steal, bonanza and such mask it with 8x-20ish x bonuses Its still pretty low win and definitely not what you were hoping for, but still a world better than 0x or 0,4x bonus

not sure how many of you played Pink elephant but im sure most of vets here gave it a shot. I tried it a few times, had 4 bonuses in total. 3 paid less than 1x. That was a few months ago and i havent played it ever since. I know it has potential but im not touching it again unless im like 1900x in front already :=o

No, 0-paying bonuses are fine as long as the game doesn't say 'CONGRATULATIONS' afterwards. It's that that makes me physically attack random inanimate objects and not play the game again for a long while.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Because I record all my bonus rounds I've taken the time to crunch my numbers on this slot.

TOTAL REAL MONEY SPINS - 6519
RTP - 84.39%

BONUS ROUNDS (including Hell Freezes Over) - 54 (1 in 121)
HELL FREEZES OVER - 13 (1 in 501)

HIGHEST FEATURE PAY - 91.9x
HIGHEST HELL FREEZES OVER PAY - 74x
NUMBER OF ZERO PAYING BONUS ROUNDS - 3 (All Hell Freezes Over)
NUMBER OF BONUS ROUNDS PAYING LESS THAN 10X - 14
AVERAGE BONUS ROUND PAY - 28.5X

NUMBER OF WINS OF 100X OR MORE - 3 (All in the base game)
HIGHEST PAY - 143X

Here's the spreadsheet with the feature pays, as you can see, pretty crummy numbers.

'Seeing the potential' can only take things so far, how many thousands of spins can a player be expected to lump away for?

 

[dunover]

Because I record all my bonus rounds I've taken the time to crunch my numbers on this slot.

TOTAL REAL MONEY SPINS - 6519
RTP - 84.39%

BONUS ROUNDS (including Hell Freezes Over) - 54 (1 in 121)
HELL FREEZES OVER - 13 (1 in 501)

HIGHEST FEATURE PAY - 91.9x
HIGHEST HELL FREEZES OVER PAY - 74x
NUMBER OF ZERO PAYING BONUS ROUNDS - 3 (All Hell Freezes Over)
NUMBER OF BONUS ROUNDS PAYING LESS THAN 10X - 14
AVERAGE BONUS ROUND PAY - 28.5X

NUMBER OF WINS OF 100X OR MORE - 3 (All in the base game)
HIGHEST PAY - 143X

Here's the spreadsheet with the feature pays, as you can see, pretty crummy numbers.

'Seeing the potential' can only take things so far, how many thousands of spins can a player be expected to lump away for?

View attachment 91708

That is funny, you reporting a 28x average on feature returns, because IIRC correctly that's virtually what I recorded when testing for Simmo doing 20 rounds of each of the 3 features.....

 

[Simmo!]

'Seeing the potential' can only take things so far, how many thousands of spins can a player be expected to lump away for?

They won't if they've got any sense - they'll stick to Medium Variance slots which are designed for that type of player.

This is why variance is so, so, so much more important to players than RTP. RTP is what it is and it will always deliver. Variance dictates how long you may have to play a game and how that RTP is delivered to you. If you like lots of regular wins and what to see something close to RTP on every few sessions, don't play HV slots, play MV or LV. If you like massive wins and are patient, play them. You might get a massive RTP very quickly or a crap RTP very quickly.

I don't really get why everyone is hung up on RTP on here these days. The only thing it is useful for is helping you decide variance.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

That is funny, you reporting a 28x average on feature returns, because IIRC correctly that's virtually what I recorded when testing for Simmo doing 20 rounds of each of the 3 features.....

Well unless my feature pay distribution is way out of whack compared to expected results, I think it's pretty clear that this slot is missing those midsize wins in the 150-300x range, the kind of wins that can boost a bankroll, extend a session, and if you get a couple of them close together, lead to a cashout.

54 features, all under 100x stake, and I know that my next 54 features could be the same. 1000x stake is a really rare hit, and that's what I'd need to get off my next feature just to get to RTP, let alone see any sort of profit.

Inferno should have been the 150-300x capable feature on this slot IMO. (Squish the multipliers, increase the spins, keep its RTP pool the same, flatten it out a bit. I don't think there's anything wrong with having a more medium variance bonus round choice on what is overall a high variance slot.)

 

[geordiecolin]

yeah but if you check his Vikings play, a few slots after afterlife you'll see how he is not a fan of 0x bonuses either, so it just confirms what i said. First impression matters and it matters a lot. Getting a couple of 0x bonuses in a row is most likely not going to net you a lifetime player

he also said "what the fu#"//# point in 0x bonuses, why program your slot to pay 0x" but thats pretty much a tradeoff if you want to have a bonus that can pay 14000x and pays, idk 100x on average, low paying bonuses are a must. To some degree i still agree with him, because 0x bonuses drive players away and thats why slots like DoA, Reel steal, bonanza and such mask it with 8x-20ish x bonuses Its still pretty low win and definitely not what you were hoping for, but still a world better than 0x or 0,4x bonus

not sure how many of you played Pink elephant but im sure most of vets here gave it a shot. I tried it a few times, had 4 bonuses in total. 3 paid less than 1x. That was a few months ago and i havent played it ever since. I know it has potential but im not touching it again unless im like 1900x in front already :=o

I echoed what you have said about player retention in an earlier post but in the interest of balance I posted that positive feedback.
I can hate Bonanza but last night it was very good to me

 

[dunover]

Well unless my feature pay distribution is way out of whack compared to expected results, I think it's pretty clear that this slot is missing those midsize wins in the 150-300x range, the kind of wins that can boost a bankroll, extend a session, and if you get a couple of them close together, lead to a cashout.

54 features, all under 100x stake, and I know that my next 54 features could be the same. 1000x stake is a really rare hit, and that's what I'd need to get off my next feature just to get to RTP, let alone see any sort of profit.

Inferno should have been the 150-300x capable feature on this slot IMO. (Squish the multipliers, increase the spins, keep its RTP pool the same, flatten it out a bit. I don't think there's anything wrong with having a more medium variance bonus round choice on what is overall a high variance slot.)

But I did score several at over 100x though. The Bandit geezer on YT did OK on it.

 

[theapple]

In fact, this is one of the most interesting and challenging things about developing a game I found - balance.

I understand what are you talking about and i read your article long time ago so i know what are you on about. But you kinda missed my point(s) there though


Testing the slot is one thing but real play can be very expensive to sit through bad patches, regardless of your stakes.

Even for us lowrollers who play at 40c rtp of 85% over 10000 spins would mean something like 600 net loss. For a lowroller, thats pretty huge and usually translates into 20-30 deposits. I really believe most people are not willing to dedicate that many deposits to play just one, or even two slots. And this is coming from someone who plays bdba on every other session, for last 7-8 yrs

Now of course there will be people winning huge just like there are people winning huge on every other HV slot. But main difference between this one and lets say DoA is that while both are HV and both have big base game potential, and almost unlimited free spins potential, DoA has limited its base game wins to 1 odd line of badges and stuff like 100x is the most you can realisticaly expect to get in Doas base game. I know theoretically you could get double line or + wild line + sheriffs but ive played it for millions spins and never had either thing happen so it might as well not be there.

Afterlife on the other hand has already paid over 8500x in base game but as the result of such a hit the rest of the game has to suffer. I know thats a risk you were willing to take but in the long run even a few % lower RTP does make a difference. In Doas case that 8500x win would be translated into 80x badges lines. It would still pay the same, but there would be 80 different people getting closer to expected RTP, instead of just one being well above it DoA still manages to do all that while being able to pay out 2,500x for scatters or odd 3k-8k x in fs. Thats also why you rarely (never) see 1000x base game hits in bonanza despite its ''unlimited'' potential.

I know how HV slots are not for everyone its natural not all people are going to like it but this one sometimes really feels like playing a jackpot slot :/ You need to hit that jackpot or else your chances of getting in front are rather slim. Afterall, to recover from 8,500x hit base game has to deliver 9000 or so dead spins

i still like the game and im going to play it from time to time. i absolutely love the hell freeze feature and extra wild adding suspense to it because at the end of the day you could always hope for that 5000x hit in base game. If it was me in charge i wouldve probably created something twice as HV with potential of 25000x pays in base game and only now i learned to respect slot creators a bit more

I just thought id try my best to point out what i feel is the biggest difference between some classic hv slots and this one. Other slots definitely some sort of soft cap, even if some of them in theory have literally unlimited potential they have some sort of limits in place to make sure too many people dont have to "suffer" because of one lucky person and instead they choose to distribute those 8500x wins via either 85x 100x wins or 20ish 200x + and so on.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I really think you've hit the nail on the head there Mr Apple. It's all well and good to say 'Well that's what HV slots play like' and 'I like slots with massive potential', but when you're at the coalface of depositing real money and playing real spins, none of that matters when you hit 54 features over 6500+ spins and not get a pay of over 100x stake on a single occasion.

IMO that's what was missed here, and during testing with (presumably) pretend money and (possibly) in some sort of debug mode what was lost is how are real players going to feel when they're grinding away at this thing for hours and hours?

I've played an awful lot of slots over the years, I know how rare 1000x pays are, let alone higher than that, and yet I need 1000x stake just to get back to level pegging. This slot has already taken £407 of real money funds off me on 40p spins, and there's nothing to stop it doing the same again. The odds of hitting that 8500x stake pay are astronomical, I'd rather just play a progressive whereby hitting semi-lottery odds pays a life-changing amount, rather than a few grand.

It's possible HV slots just aren't for me and this was a bad choice of slot to get so involved with, I suspect I'm more a MV-HV fan than pure HV, but my opinion stands that the pays on Afterlife Inferno could have been jigged around a bit whilst maintaining its HV nature, but lessening (or removing) the risk of someone getting a run like I did on it.

I don't think slots need pays of 8500x on the paytable at all, HV or otherwise, as they're so fiercely expensive to pay for. Similarly the 15x multiplier in Inferno is over the top, trancemonkey said somewhere (this thread or elsewhere) that multipliers are really expensive, and 15x is a very big multiplier.

There's a thread on these forums for wins of 3000x or over, there is no higher category, and we all know why, 3000x is a massive pay and any player would be delighted to hit that. Once you start adding multiple wins of that size (and bigger!) to the paytable, the 'cost to player experience' as it were, becomes too high IMO.

 

[Simmo!]

I suspect I'm more a MV-HV fan than pure HV

Not knocking that but your profile of player is not really who this game is aimed at. I'd hope that some players in that category will like it, but accept that as many probably won't. Probably as theapple says, it will depend for many on how they first do on the game. That's just how slots work.

i still like the game and im going to play it from time to time... because at the end of the day you could always hope for that 5000x hit in base game.

That is exactly what I was trying to achieve. There are games that don't even attempt to do that, games that do, games that get it right, games that get it wrong, players who don't like a game, players who do like a game. Only time will tell where this one fits into that but basically, there is something for everyone out there. But that is what I wanted this game to give people: the realistic chance of something decent.

 

[dunover]

I really think you've hit the nail on the head there Mr Apple. It's all well and good to say 'Well that's what HV slots play like' and 'I like slots with massive potential', but when you're at the coalface of depositing real money and playing real spins, none of that matters when you hit 54 features over 6500+ spins and not get a pay of over 100x stake on a single occasion.
*********
There's a thread on these forums for wins of 3000x or over, there is no higher category, and we all know why, 3000x is a massive pay and any player would be delighted to hit that. Once you start adding multiple wins of that size (and bigger!) to the paytable, the 'cost to player experience' as it were, becomes too high IMO.

Actually there is old Choppers, my 'Hyper Wins' (10,000x +) one.

Hyper-Wins Screenshots (10,000x Stake Plus)


I ain't had the good fortune to join it yet, but many have....

I think you and Apple aren't quite grasping the maths of games such as this. I've said 100 times on here about 'egg-timer' variance, especially on Netents which we both agree on having had a good discussion previously and from which I often use your 'pernicious' definition when describing Netent pay tables. Yes, you will need 1000x to catch up, but think about Netents where it's almost impossible to catch up when as little as 100x down. At least here you are only a spin away from 2000x which will totally shatter your opinions thus far and shed a new light on the game.

I have played BDBA, Bonanza, Dead Or Alive, Book Of Ra Deluxe and had stuffings far worse than you exemplified above. But I know this will happen, I accept it and the pay-off is the unrivalled thrill of seeing those monster hits when they do appear. Then again, I'm the exact type of player who the game is aimed at, and there are lots of us.

You guys seem to desire and seek a gently undulating RTP curve, whereas I like the pronounced peaks and troughs.

Now it's only fair to say here that the pitfall of HV slots is player first impression. Win (like matey with the 8000x) and it's the best slot going. Get the inevitable prolonged sub TRTP periods for hundreds or even thousands of spins like Chopley has and the game's a piece of shit, never gonna play it again etc. Then the RTP distribution gets blamed, the pay tables, the random feature and everything else.

On Bonanza Chopley changed his tune (although he maintained he still didn't like it) when he hit the 800x feature, suddenly perspective changed. I would say the game is similar to Immortal Romance but with more volatile features, hence people noticing more when the base game isn't maintaining balance and the features don't perform for them.

The fact that an 84% RTP over x-thousand spins is so unsettling suggests a player isn't really used to playing truly HV games, despite having dabbled a few times. If, like me, they are virtually all you play then it doesn't seem as significant.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Actually there is old Choppers, my 'Hyper Wins' (10,000x +) one.

I ain't had the good fortune to join it yet, but many have....

Meh, basically progressive wins and 5-Wild Desires, with DoA just about creeping over the line and a handful of other outliers. And it's attracted about 12-13 screenshots in four years, we must have different definitions of 'many'

I think you and Apple aren't quite grasping the maths of games such as this. I've said 100 times on here about 'egg-timer' variance, especially on Netents which we both agree on having had a good discussion previously and from which I often use your 'pernicious' definition when describing Netent pay tables. Yes, you will need 1000x to catch up, but think about Netents where it's almost impossible to catch up when as little as 100x down. At least here you are only a spin away from 2000x which will totally shatter your opinions thus far and shed a new light on the game.

There's a MASSIVE difference between awful 'Netent variance' (which indeed I did call out a few years ago as being pure evil maths table design), and what I would call sensible mid-high variance, which is what I'd describe the superlative WMS slot Bruce Lee as (the original 60-liner). That could whack out 1500-3000x stake (I had 1689x stake off it) but the distribution of pays was such that lump away at it for any period of time, and it would kick back a 200-300x stake win to keep you going.

You guys seem to desire and seek a gently undulating RTP curve, whereas I like the pronounced peaks and troughs.

Not at all, I find LV slots deathly boring. I like MV or maybe MV+ slots. I guess part of the problem here is that AFAIK there's no actual accepted textbook definition of variance, so we're all applying our own opinion to it.

Now it's only fair to say here that the pitfall of HV slots is player first impression. Win (like matey with the 8000x) and it's the best slot going. Get the inevitable prolonged sub TRTP periods for hundreds or even thousands of spins like Chopley has and the game's a piece of shit, never gonna play it again etc. Then the RTP distribution gets blamed, the pay tables, the random feature and everything else.

Now you're 'repeating' things that no one has actually said, no one's saying the game is a 'piece of shit', people are expressing their opinions about it. Very different thing.

On Bonanza Chopley changed his tune (although he maintained he still didn't like it) when he hit the 800x feature, suddenly perspective changed.

TOTAL NUMBER OF REAL MONEY SPINS PLAYED ON BONANZA SINCE THE FIRST TWO SESSIONS I VIDEOED FOR MY CHANNEL - ZERO

I would say the game is similar to Immortal Romance but with more volatile features, hence people noticing more when the base game isn't maintaining balance and the features don't perform for them.

IR did it better IMO, we all knew it had the the 5-Wild Desire on the paytable, even if just as a one-off, and that was enough. IMO we don't need multiple 3000-8000x and higher wins on the paytable snaffling up opportunities from further down.

The fact that an 84% RTP over x-thousand spins is so unsettling suggests a player isn't really used to playing truly HV games, despite having dabbled a few times. If, like me, they are virtually all you play then it doesn't seem as significant.

I'm not 'unsettled', I just don't like it

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Follow-on video

 

[Simmo!]

Must admit I do like your presentation style

I think the video just supports the discussion we've had above so it's not worth going over those again but it's interesting getting opinions from different types of players. In fact, that's where the Focus Group was very useful: players who like different things and have different expectations.

 

[dunover]

Meh, basically progressive wins and 5-Wild Desires, with DoA just about creeping over the line and a handful of other outliers. And it's attracted about 12-13 screenshots in four years, we must have different definitions of 'many'



There's a MASSIVE difference between awful 'Netent variance' (which indeed I did call out a few years ago as being pure evil maths table design), and what I would call sensible mid-high variance, which is what I'd describe the superlative WMS slot Bruce Lee as (the original 60-liner). That could whack out 1500-3000x stake (I had 1689x stake off it) but the distribution of pays was such that lump away at it for any period of time, and it would kick back a 200-300x stake win to keep you going.



Not at all, I find LV slots deathly boring. I like MV or maybe MV+ slots. I guess part of the problem here is that AFAIK there's no actual accepted textbook definition of variance, so we're all applying our own opinion to it.



Now you're 'repeating' things that no one has actually said, no one's saying the game is a 'piece of shit', people are expressing their opinions about it. Very different thing.



TOTAL NUMBER OF REAL MONEY SPINS PLAYED ON BONANZA SINCE THE FIRST TWO SESSIONS I VIDEOED FOR MY CHANNEL - ZERO



IR did it better IMO, we all knew it had the the 5-Wild Desire on the paytable, even if just as a one-off, and that was enough. IMO we don't need multiple 3000-8000x and higher wins on the paytable snaffling up opportunities from further down.



I'm not 'unsettled', I just don't like it

Nope, there are far more Hyper wins that people haven't added to the thread because they aren't aware it's there, like the old sandwich toaster in the loft. There have been hits on Rambo for example exceeding the 10k - I do encourage people to dig it out and post them there. Your assumption was wrong, regardless of how you define 'many' yourself.

I never said anybody specific said it was a piece of shit, but was exemplifying the type of comments that occur when players don't immediately win on new games.

It's funny you mention Brucie - I detest that slot and have remorselessly been battered by it nearly every session since I first saw it. You got the ultra-rare 20 free games so again that will bias your opinion just like lack of gameplay and wins has affected mine.

There is actually a definition of high variance numerically expressed as a coefficient. I can't remember the ranges but some casinos used to use it. Say you get a 6-reel slot with 1x7 and 9x0 on all (10-position) reels and one pay line and you want to make this 96% you have a 960k prize for 6x7's which should occur once in a million spins. That is volatility 1.00000. Then make ALL symbols 7's and you get 6OAK every spin for 0.96 and the volatility is 0.00000.

Now using this as a benchmark a LOW volatility slot would have a figure of something like 0.00017 and a HV slot 0.00037. This is highbrow maths shit I forgot years ago but I'm sure somebody more in the know can comment further. Regardless (and this is where our difference of opinion may stem from) it's possible to have two HV slots of 0.00037 BUT with differing distribution via the RTP allocated to features. So let's say AI and IR were the same in overall variance then your point could mean the difference between the two, and you prefer one to the other. Fair enough.

But I still think you secretly fantasize over Bonanza.

 

[sufferinsilence]

I agree with The Bandit, 0x bonuses shouldn't be allowed. Somehow I find it much more difficult to accept on a HV game to have a 0x bonus because it usually takes 100s, if not 1000s, of spins to actually get to the bonus round while on LV or MV there'll be a bonus waiting for you "around the corner" and getting 10 to 20x is in my opinion a decent result.

Anyway, I can't even test this game because the only casino where we can play Leander in Belgium doesn't have this game. Any idea when it'll be released there @Simmo! ?

 

[Simmo!]

... I can't even test this game because the only casino where we can play Leander in Belgium doesn't have this game. Any idea when it'll be released there @Simmo! ?

PM me the casino and I'l try and find out for you SiS.

 

[trancemonkey]

Couldn't agree more. Nobody "likes" a 0 bonus - but for me it's a question of "accepting" a 0 bonus to get a 1,000x + bonus and that is the nature of a high variance game and why I love them - it's about how much "risk" a player want to take. You're not talking about games so much as you're talking about players: there are all sorts of players and all sorts of games aimed at different types of player. HV players will accept that slots give 0 bonuses more than Medium Variance and Low Variance. But they also expect them to give 1,000x bonuses more than MV and LV games and we've seen several of them on Afterlife: Inferno in the first week or two of release too. It depends entirely what you like. There are games that are way more HV than Afterlife that won't give you 0 bonuses but you'll see the bonus a lot less frequently (that was another option I considered actually but decided against it).

In fact, this is one of the most interesting and challenging things about developing a game I found - balance. You're absolutely right in that a player will judge a game a lot of the time on their first 2 or 3 sessions - winning is what a player wants to do and if they don't, they are not going to play a game as much. This is why you see Net Ent and other companies develop so many MV/LV games - it keeps people playing, offers casinos a lower risk and attracts lower risk players and they do very, very well out of it. It's also why I can't honestly think of a Net Ent game I'd turn on my PC specifically to play because that's not my cup of tea. But I am not their target market: I'm a risk taker and I'll happily take a handful of crap feature wins to get a whopper every now and again.

Sorry Simmo but I have to wholeheartedly disagree here... You're expecting people to "pay to learn" but that simply doesn't happen. Unless you make it VERY clear in the game design where the huge wins come from, people will switch off very quickly, whatever variance they like. Sites like this and the streamers will help you for sure if they pick up on it... but I think you've misjudged this slightly.... that's just my opinion and I know I could be wrong..

It sounds like you've made a game as a player and not as a games provider - and it plays like it. You do NOT have to have zero bonuses on games... in fact I go out of my way to make sure I don't, regardless of what variance game I'm making. And with clever maths it's more than possible - so there really is no excuse for it...

 

[goatwack]

Well there's only one thing for it, Plan B

Time to crack out Microsoft Paint Simmo

 

[Simmo!]

You do NOT have to have zero bonuses on games... in fact I go out of my way to make sure I don't, regardless of what variance game I'm making. And with clever maths it's more than possible - so there really is no excuse for it...

I'm not allowed to go into the maths in public TM but we are talking a fraction of a % chance of a zero bonus, so it's not exactly a big thing. Nonetheless, it's worth debating and I think it's important for a game to be able to provide all outcomes, not have them manipulated to exclude ones that aren't popular. If you were to make a game that never had a zero bonus, that just doesn't sit quite right with me.

There's actually quite a few false assumptions in this thread but as I am not allowed to talk about the maths, I have decided not to comment (average pays, chances of a mid-pay, RTP etc) plus I think it's fair (and way more interesting) to get people's opinions without all the facts.

It sounds like you've made a game as a player and not as a games provider - and it plays like it.

That's exactly what I've done... that's the whole idea behind the experiment LOL. I think we're coming at this from different angles.

 

[dunover]

Sorry Simmo but I have to wholeheartedly disagree here... You're expecting people to "pay to learn" but that simply doesn't happen. Unless you make it VERY clear in the game design where the huge wins come from, people will switch off very quickly, whatever variance they like. Sites like this and the streamers will help you for sure if they pick up on it... but I think you've misjudged this slightly.... that's just my opinion and I know I could be wrong..

It sounds like you've made a game as a player and not as a games provider - and it plays like it. You do NOT have to have zero bonuses on games... in fact I go out of my way to make sure I don't, regardless of what variance game I'm making. And with clever maths it's more than possible - so there really is no excuse for it...

Then that defeats the object of the HV potential slightly, as you end up with a variation of, if not the same, as that bastarding Bonus Guarantee on my old nemesis The Rapist. I hate it, and would rather have zeroes and 1's than all those bloody 10x bet outcomes, knowing that I'd see more high results as opposed to the predictable tedium of so many 10x hits. Again, that's my player-mode view.

This thread though has been great as a perspective from players who don't usually do HV slotting, players that do (like myself) and some who like to dabble like Chopley but prefer the M/M-HV games. It also demonstrates how we could be very productive together when the Slots Focus Group starts in earnest which I have indicated in response to Bryan that I can take care of when it's up and running. If there are developers who look in here, and have seen this thread I fail to see how they cannot see the usefulness and potential of this idea for both them and us.

Back to AI, I don't want to annoy anybody here but I do have a feeling some respondents don't 'get' the thinking behind the math model here. That's not because they are lacking but maybe through the choice of games they opt for most of the time. I think if this thread was about a low or L-MV game I'd be scratching my head and thinking far harder than I need to do for AI.

In a way it's like a few of us in the pub, and I'm extolling the virtues of say a BMW to the group and another the virtues of a Range Rover - in the end one isn't in the market for the other even if they have driven it occasionally.

 

[sufferinsilence]

On Novomatic and Merkur, just to name 2 of the providers of the most volatile slots, I've never seen a 0x bonus myself. Even on a "book" bonus if none of the symbols are actually expanding there's always a linehit thrown in the mix so you come out with something. Ofcourse this must be compensated in the basegame with more dead spins.

 

[trancemonkey]

On Novomatic and Merkur, just to name 2 of the providers of the most volatile slots, I've never seen a 0x bonus myself. Even on a "book" bonus if none of the symbols are actually expanding there's always a linehit thrown in the mix so you come out with something. Ofcourse this must be compensated in the basegame with more dead spins.

Exactly... you don't need it. It's not necessary. Players want potential yes, but that doesn't mean you have to be brutal to afford it. Book of Ra has a 5,000x max win. But it rarely gives zero bonuses.

Sadly like Simmo I can't go in to more detail... but if I ever meet Simmo got a drink I'm sure we can discuss

And I totally agree with Dunover that the rhino and Montezuma way is also crap.

 

[paul7388]

Anyway do not actually think i said thanks to Simmo for creating the game. So thanks for the work and effort you put into it.

As other have said it will appeal to some more than others. All depends what sort of slot people like. Personally i have rarely ever played IR Rhino and not a great fan of DOA . All the classics on here. Bonanza have played a bit but not my favourite sort of slot the new Blueprint clone is actually better.

But due to the fact i rarely play those type of slots is probably why this new game will not be my first choice. To me the best feature is the hell freezes one as ive had that and first three reels wild four times now out of about 10 features.

But unfortunately i can not get over excited about the free spin features. Bit of me thinks the slot would have been better without the free spins lol and just the hell freezes since it seems to be where money is but i know that would make it even more boring.

But it's your slot and tailored to what you like. And for that style it is a good slot. A lot of thought went in and maybe in the future if you do more they might be more along the style i play most and i might love them

 

[goatwack]

Would love to design a slot from the ground up, must be quite a thrill. It's every slot player's dream surely

As a debut project it is very well done. We're inundated with slots 24/7, but when you take a step back and look at its origins, it is quite remarkable really.

The dark theme is great and the audio outstanding. Would love more brooding themes, problem is most IPs are under lock and key haha

Lovecraft, Geiger, even things derived from other media like Dark Souls etc I'd love to see done well and fully realized. When is it my turn goddammit

 

[ChopleyIOM]

This slot really does seem to be all or nothing when it comes to the bigger hits, it's either 5000-8000x or better on Hell Freezes Over, or..... not much else. Given the number of comps that have been running, and especially the latest comp where wins in free play count (i.e. anyone can lump away for as long as they like), and my own feature experience in both real and free money play (final video to come on that later today), I'd say we've probably got a pretty decent idea of how this one rolls for most people, most of the time.

How many confirmed sightings have we had of 1000x stake or better on anything other than Hell Freezes Over, two or three? It's like you're almost playing for that 'semi-progressive' hit where you get retriggering wilds in HFO finishing with the full five reels, or you're always going to be scrabbling to make RTP, let alone see a profit.

There seems to be very little in the midrange, 250-500x hits are largely absent from the proceedings as far as I can tell, I know we're never going to be shown the exact maths behind the game but I'd love to see how the pay distributions around the average feature pay actually manifest themselves.

A comment that was left on one of my videos is as follows (not saying either of these statements are 100% accurate, I certainly think the HFO RTP assessment is some way out), but it's interesting to see how other people are perceiving the slot.

From what I have seen so far it's a med variance slot at best pretending to be HV. Of course I would need a bigger sample size to make a more accurate assessment.

Also:

The math is pretty bad, and i personally hate the "temp" sticky wilds, change the math and have them completely sticky IMO. So far it looks to me that 10-15% of the RTP is in the HFO feature but not got enough data.

 

[SpinUk]

This slot really does seem to be all or nothing when it comes to the bigger hits, it's either 5000-8000x or better on Hell Freezes Over, or..... not much else. Given the number of comps that have been running, and especially the latest comp where wins in free play count (i.e. anyone can lump away for as long as they like), and my own feature experience in both real and free money play (final video to come on that later today), I'd say we've probably got a pretty decent idea of how this one rolls for most people, most of the time.

How many confirmed sightings have we had of 1000x stake or better on anything other than Hell Freezes Over, two or three? It's like you're almost playing for that 'semi-progressive' hit where you get retriggering wilds in HFO finishing with the full five reels, or you're always going to be scrabbling to make RTP, let alone see a profit.

There seems to be very little in the midrange, 250-500x hits are largely absent from the proceedings as far as I can tell, I know we're never going to be shown the exact maths behind the game but I'd love to see how the pay distributions around the average feature pay actually manifest themselves.

A comment that was left on one of my videos is as follows (not saying either of these statements are 100% accurate, I certainly think the HFO RTP assessment is some way out), but it's interesting to see how other people are perceiving the slot.



Also:

To paraphrase Trancemonkey from ages ago, in that most players are happy with a 100x hit - which I don’t agree with - in this case I actually dont think there is much of a differance player impact-wise between a 3000x and 8000x hit.

I can say this from personal experiance after getting almost a full screen of wilds on Finer Reels at £3 a pop paying just over £11k, and getting - say - a wild desire win on the same betsize of £6k which I have had a few times.

The “hit” or “rush” felt the same. Only thing is with an 8000x potential at the expense of any mid range wins at all, I wonder how many players have the stamina to continue on it. Even dead or alive will spit out the occasional mid range win. I think well over 95% of players would give up once they hit the 1000x loss mark.

And thats coming from someone who plays only high-mid to high variance games.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Yes I made very much the same observations over a few posts in the last few pages, for each of those super-rare 8000x hits you could pay for a couple of 1500x hits (which is still really big and would delight 99.9% of players) and have enough left over for 20 nice solid midrange hits of 250x or so.

Unless my own feature pay distribution, and those we've seen reported here at CM, are way out of whack with what the slot should be producing - it seems to me that pays have been scrunched down to the low end to afford those massive hits at the top end, and what's suffered is midrange wins and even 'normal' big wins.

A slot doesn't have to be 'get rich or go home' in its win ranges, a couple of wins in the 200x-400x range in a relatively short period of time can turn a session right around, but with Afterlife Inferno you start to feel like you're going to get ground out or hit really big, I can't see enough in the middle. I'm not saying the slot won't produce such wins from time to time, but it's the frequency of them that feels off to me, unless I've just been really unlucky and the results we're seeing posted here at CM are way off the norm as well.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

And on that note, what will be my last serious session on this slot! From now on it's just the occasional cycle through each of the features I think

Video includes a full breakdown of all my real-money play stats.

 

[Simmo!]

This slot really does seem to be all or nothing when it comes to the bigger hits, it's either 5000-8000x or better on Hell Freezes Over, or..... not much else.

I think what I'm struggling to get across to you here Chopley is that this slot was designed for a different type of player than you, and I'm not just talking about variance, I'm talking about "experience". I designed the game to be for players like me because I don't feel there are many great choices out there. To clarify, I like a game where, when I am losing in a session, there is a game I know I can turn to where a 3,000x, 5,000x or even 8,000x hit is achievable, and not just "pie in the sky" like I feel most HV and progressive jackpot games are. And I feel somewhat vindicated by the fact that within 3 weeks of release we've already seen two 8,000x plus screenshots posted from the HFO feature.

Plenty of games will entertain you more than "Afterlife: Inferno". But very few games give you a realistic chance of 5,000x-8,000x. Of course it's important to get some balance between "fun" and "potential" as best as possible and only time will tell whether I got that right. But if you're "my type" of player you'll get it and if you're not, I don't think you will. It's really as simple as that. The "slot player's mindset": different in everyone.

Incidentally, just for the record there have been quite a number of 200x - 1,000x screenshots in the competitions both from the features, HFO and even a 500x one from the base game.

 

[zap987]

I'd say the biggest problem is that not enough RTP appears to be in the free spins. It's high variance, it doesn't need 60-65% RTP in base game or however much it is. The Hell Freezes Over feature is good, nice twist on Wild Desire with the respins, but hitting 3+ scatters just doesn't feel exciting at all. Either the Bonanza way of making the feature very rare but worth more, or the Finer Reels of Life version of cutting basegame pay a lot to increase value of free spins would have been better options imo. Of course I might be influenced by having 3 of my first 4 features pay 0x 3 times and 10x once, but I just can't see the potential in the free spins at all and Chopleys data kinda confirms it.

 

[Simmo!]

I'd say the biggest problem is that not enough RTP appears to be in the free spins. It's high variance, it doesn't need 60-65% RTP in base game or however much it is.

I'm not allowed to comment on the maths in public but what I can say is that we tried variations of each during testing and over 000's of spins and this felt like the best balance to me. The RTP in the free spins is actually pretty good - in fact I seriously considered taking some of it and putting it back into the base game actually LOL.

Either the Bonanza way of making the feature very rare but worth more, or the Finer Reels of Life version of cutting basegame pay a lot to increase value of free spins would have been better options imo.

There are indeed one or two things that I would go back to and possibly reconsider (not the RTP distribution though) but the two things I accepted early on are: 1) there will always be a compromise in an HV Game and 2) it's actually impossible to design a game that will be liked by every type of player. The mega-ways thing is very clever - it makes you see potential a lot more quickly than a fixed liner or a ways slot. I can't say I play them enough to know if that is fulfilled though as I like the more traditional games. Funny you mention TFROL - that was a game I held up and used to highlight what I wanted to avoid - a boring base game. Which just goes to demonstrate how every player is different I guess

 

[ChopleyIOM]

The one thing I wonder in all of this, during the developing, testing and CM 'consultation' phase and all the rest of it, is how many people actually sat down and lumped away at this slot like I did?

I bet there aren't that many other people out there who've put 8248 spins through this slot with real money, sat through 69 features and 16 HFO features. i.e. Have had the extended player experience that I've borne witness to.

You keep saying you designed this slot for players like yourself Simmo, but I genuinely wonder how many players out there are going to be prepared to sit through the run I did, and TBH I think I've got more persistence for this sort of thing than a lot of folks.

My last deposit to play this slot was an act of grim determination more than anything else, but all it succeeded in doing is getting this slot on the permanent 'Don't get involved with it' list. I guess the proof of the pudding will be in its popularity with the player base as a whole as time goes on, and I honestly wish you well with that.

 

[Balthazar]

The one thing I wonder in all of this, during the developing, testing and CM 'consultation' phase and all the rest of it, is how many people actually sat down and lumped away at this slot like I did?

I bet there aren't that many other people out there who've put 8248 spins through this slot with real money, sat through 69 features and 16 HFO features. i.e. Have had the extended player experience that I've borne witness to.

You keep saying you designed this slot for players like yourself Simmo, but I genuinely wonder how many players out there are going to be prepared to sit through the run I did, and TBH I think I've got more persistence for this sort of thing than a lot of folks.

My last deposit to play this slot was an act of grim determination more than anything else, but all it succeeded in doing is getting this slot on the permanent 'Don't get involved with it' list. I guess the proof of the pudding will be in its popularity with the player base as a whole as time goes on, and I honestly wish you well with that.

Chopley I'm pretty sure that his point was this isn't a slot to sit in front all day and play for thousands of spins like you did, it's a slot to play a couple of hundred spins at most during a session to see if you can hit big and if it doesn't happen you just move on. I do that all the time with HV monsters like Queen of Riches.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Chopley I'm pretty sure that his point was this isn't a slot to sit in front all day and play for thousands of spins like you did, it's a slot to play a couple of hundred spins at most during a session to see if you can hit big and if it doesn't happen you just move on. I do that all the time with HV monsters like Queen of Riches.

Well as per my last video on the slot, that's pretty much the conclusion I'd come to as to how I'll play it in future. So maybe it is the 'right sort of slot for me' and I was just playing it wrong?

My stats show however, that you could do 41 such 200 spin sessions, and only see the high side of 100x stake on two occasions across 69 features.

I still think the pay distribution on this slot is out of whack - but we're into subjective opinion at that point I guess

 

[SpinUk]

I'm not allowed to comment on the maths in public but what I can say is that we tried variations of each during testing and over 000's of spins and this felt like the best balance to me. The RTP in the free spins is actually pretty good - in fact I seriously considered taking some of it and putting it back into the base game actually LOL.


There are indeed one or two things that I would go back to and possibly reconsider (not the RTP distribution though) but the two things I accepted early on are: 1) there will always be a compromise in an HV Game and 2) it's actually impossible to design a game that will be liked by every type of player. The mega-ways thing is very clever - it makes you see potential a lot more quickly than a fixed liner or a ways slot. I can't say I play them enough to know if that is fulfilled though as I like the more traditional games. Funny you mention TFROL - that was a game I held up and used to highlight what I wanted to avoid - a boring base game. Which just goes to demonstrate how every player is different I guess

Well as per my last video on the slot, that's pretty much the conclusion I'd come to as to how I'll play it in future. So maybe it is the 'right sort of slot for me' and I was just playing it wrong?

My stats show however, that you could do 41 such 200 spin sessions, and only see the high side of 100x stake on two occasions across 69 features.

I still think the pay distribution on this slot is out of whack - but we're into subjective opinion at that point I guess

The only comparison off the top of my head is Jungle Spirit that achieves the whole span of low/mid range and super wins 10000x +.

But im guessing to achieve this it has the base game having far less potential (to get a decent base game “butterfly” hit must be well over 1 in 1000).

And it has to be said - Jungle Spirit IS very boring to play.