New Slot Announcement Afterlife Inferno by Leander

[goatwack]

I do agree that a high variance slot has to have that feeling of being able to hit the 8000x, as with Bonanza. It may be dour but can- and has- produced crazy wins out of nowhere.

It's fair to say not one tester put the game through 8000 spins I'd imagine, no one lie please , but if that element of surprise is absent then ploughing on does feel futile.

I'd like to think it can churn out belters but I wouldn't want to invest 8000x into it first. It has to be 'impulsive' and/ or spontaneous to make it a true great.

I'm hoping to see the monstrous wins soon, as I think it's in there, begging to come out

 

[Jono777]

Defo a "Limit yourself" type slot.

4 sessions of 200 spins (approx), 2 winning ones and 2 losing ones so all is fair in love and war.

This hit after just 25 or so spins earlier today, rescued the balance and session. Played for one Purgatory feature after which paid 10x so I too my profit and ran, Enjoyable to say the least this game as unlike others I can't tell what is coming (yet )

A 'sprint' rather than a 'marathon' slot for sure

At least I don't feel also like with a Wild Desire/Storm its gonna throw one reel wild and pay sub 1x

 

[ChopleyIOM]

200x is a very good HFO feature, be prepared for far worse!

Here are my results from 16 of them in real money play. Three paid zero, highest was 210x, all others were less than 100x, average was 39.1x

 

[Simmo!]

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

Pretty much every facet of games in general are subjective opinion. I like the pay distribution - it does what I like in a slot game. The fact that you don't like it is also fine. I don't like Bonanza but that's very popular. I absolutely love Katana and Mystic Secrets and most people I talk to think base game pays are rubbish and make them boring. All subjective.

From the way you have described what you like in videos and on here, we are both after different experiences. I like games that sacrifice some of the lower/mid pays to make way for a better chance of very large wins whereas you prefer a bit more balance and a more regular spread of wins. Afterlife is not that game. It can be - but not as often as others.

 

[Balthazar]

I do agree that a high variance slot has to have that feeling of being able to hit the 8000x, as with Bonanza. It may be dour but can- and has- produced crazy wins out of nowhere.

It's fair to say not one tester put the game through 8000 spins I'd imagine, no one lie please , but if that element of surprise is absent then ploughing on does feel futile.

I'd like to think it can churn out belters but I wouldn't want to invest 8000x into it first. It has to be 'impulsive' and/ or spontaneous to make it a true great.

I'm hoping to see the monstrous wins soon, as I think it's in there, begging to come out

Bonanza is far more forgiving than Afterlife Inferno since it has plenty of hits in the 150-500x range. I don't mind playing Bonanza for long periods of time as it's a slot usually capable of maintaining your balance if you play at the right stake. Afterlife Inferno, on the other hand, ate 2 straight deposits at low stake with very little play time. IMO this is Queen of Riches/Starquest territory. That doesn't mean that I don't like it, you just need to know what you are getting into: try your luck for few spins then GTFO.

When I play it in the future I'll only play the highest variance bonus because "swinging for the fences" is the only thing that makes sense with this slot (to me). Don't aim for play time or mid-range wins.

 

[dunover]

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:

I can tell you with certainty nowhere near 15% of the RTP is allocated to the HFO feature.

 

[dunover]

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.

Jungle spirit will never give you 10,000x bet. The maximum single hit is 7680x. The base game in that is far worse than AI's.

 

[dunover]

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.

Again, it's not a slot you seem to 'get' like I do - that isn't a criticism but based on what games I've seen you play in the main before and none are quite like AI. Bonanza is similar in some ways - I lose deposit after deposit but I write it off as soon as I begin, knowing that when I am not expecting it I'll eventually get that 2-5000x drop in the bonus round and then the feeling is fantastic, adrenaline surge and big cash-out happening. In effect it's a bit of a lottery - if 50 of us deposit £100 and play say 40p spins, one of us will hit big and the rest won't; it's all about the timing of the big hit, whether it comes early to make you ahead instantly or whether you have deposited so much beforehand that even the big boy doesn't get you out of the hole.

Take your Bonanza video - you had a relatively early 800x bet hit and will always be ahead on it as you've said you don't like it and won't play it again. Another 9 players doing the same as you at the same time would've lost. Just like some AI players have had relatively early giant hits and are well ahead on it, and you ain't. You seem to have an expectation that because you're down over a few thousand spins that somehow an adjustment is more likely or imminent. You could be right, but on this type of math model you could have the same outcome of your first few thousand spins over and over. If you want a slot that get's +/- 2% of it's TRTP over a few thousand spins, try a medium or low-medium volatility game.

 

[mack341]

200x is a very good HFO feature, be prepared for far worse!

Here are my results from 16 of them in real money play. Three paid zero, highest was 210x, all others were less than 100x, average was 39.1x

View attachment 91925

Just watched your vid this afternoon, your balance playing 20p stake seemed to keep afloat for ages and even went up but upon switching to 60p stake the balance changed direction downwards which reinforces that [dons tin foil hat] concern I have about slots.

I'm a bit new to slots [2yrs] and still can't get my head around rtp, in your vid you were about 84% rtp at the start but about £500 down, so presumably if todays session had given you that extra 13 % rtp back you'd have hit the games long term rtp but still been down hundreds of pounds.

It makes me think Slot games could easily have a rtp higher than 100% and the casinos would still rake in the money because the rtp is arrived at by the game churning through the spins while giving out small wins.

I would also just like to add I watched your gambling low ebbs video last sunday and it was excellent, my focus normally drifts abit with personal stories on youtube but I found that tale of woe fascinating, transported me back to the 90's and was brilliantly told by yourself.

 

[mina1929]

Finally I got to play the game got free spins and I picked the last one with 8 spins.

Result was 0 winnings

And guess what I still like the game lol

Didn't play it for very long though but I will have another go next time

 

[Simmo!]

It makes me think Slot games could easily have a rtp higher than 100% and the casinos would still rake in the money because the rtp is arrived at by the game churning through the spins while giving out small wins.

I've always thought this too actually. My feeling is that a slots player will generally play beyond the "optimum" point of cash-out rendering RTP largely pointless*. I've had this conversation with more than one developer but they won't buy into it. Some time back, iNetbet had an HV video poker game (Joker Poker) with a 100%+ EV. I'd love to know if that made a profit - I bet it did.

* Side note: I really don't understand the hang-up on here these days about RTP. I see people always posting an RTP based on a few hundred or a few thousand spins which is a total red herring. A low variance slot will usually be closer to RTP, a high variance slot will usually be further away and if they're not, why does it even matter if you know the average is 96%? Some-one please fill me in

 

[theapple]

Pretty much every facet of games in general are subjective opinion. I like the pay distribution - it does what I like in a slot game. The fact that you don't like it is also fine. I don't like Bonanza but that's very popular. I absolutely love Katana and Mystic Secrets and most people I talk to think base game pays are rubbish and make them boring. All subjective.

From the way you have described what you like in videos and on here, we are both after different experiences. I like games that sacrifice some of the lower/mid pays to make way for a better chance of very large wins whereas you prefer a bit more balance and a more regular spread of wins. Afterlife is not that game. It can be - but not as often as others.

I think you are kinda missing what chopley is trying to say here though. I also dont think slots being good, or popular is something entirely subjective either. You can like a slot, or not like it at all but if enough people smash it on daily basis, its popular and thats it.

Slot could be boring or ugly and still be popular. All merkur slots are boring, ugly, super HV monsters and they look like they were made in 1971. But people still play them all the time. Ive played all of their slots. on some slots ive had crappy luck and was a few 100's x down after a few plays, but never really much more than that and it was never something that one or two sets of free spins couldnt fix.

Main difference between those slots and this one is i dont really have enough, if any confidence in free spins here. When i get fs on MM deluxe i always expect something huge. And its actually rare to have a crappy bonus here. After just 2 dozens of features on afterlife i dont really look forward to free spins anymore at all. I know that would probably be different if i hit a monster on one of first few sets of free spins but from the looks of it, thats going to be very rare which also means you will end up with lots of disappointed first timers who arent very likely to play the slot again.

Now i know you said you wanted to make a slot that can pay 8888x in single spin and you are well aware how you cant please everyone, which is nice and cool but in the end of the day that 8888x will please just one person, while tons of others will give up and im sure quite a few people wont get past first play on this one either.

I also dont think you are giving enough credit to people in this thread tbh. You keep on saying this slot is not for x or y, but how many people you actually think would stick with a slot that has 80ish rtp over almost 10k spins. How many people are going to make 10k spins on a slot thats not been kind to them to begin with? You keep on repeating that, and it makes it look like you created a slot that will only cater to people who are ok with playing 90.000 spins while having 84% rtp on it. Im not sure theres big enough market for that?

I know rtp even after 10k spins means f all but we all have to keep in mind this isnt a test, and theres realy money involved and im afraid not too many people have infinite funds to chase a slot if they are constantly loosing at it, no matter what mindset that player is. Theres a big difference between factory rtp being achieved after 1m or 890m spins, and i really have no clue what nr are we talking about but from basic maths if that number is bigger and variance is also bigger, we will end up with some really, really ugly numbers :=O Maybe thats why there arent (m) any slots like this out there? Just guessing mind you

Again, it's not a slot you seem to 'get' like I do - that isn't a criticism but based on what games I've seen you play in the main before and none are quite like AI.

thats because there really arent any other games like AI games where you can win 1000x in base game are rare. Games where you can win over 8000x are just not there.

You can win almost 8000x in that netent pets game but i dont play that one either because base game is just as bad and if you consider both random features AI is miles ahead.

My main point is most people who play slots like playing slots. They dont really buy lottery tickets all that often, so when we get this close to crossing the line between the two people dont really know what to expect

and one last time i dont think its a bad slot. Afterall it plays just like new netent releases that have max win of like 100x-400x tops and actually have worse base game and free spins can actually pay 0x too. Just thinking about it, i have no idea how some of their slots reach factory RTP But i dont play new netent slots either so theres that :=/

 

[ChopleyIOM]

* Side note: I really don't understand the hang-up on here these days about RTP. I see people always posting an RTP based on a few hundred or a few thousand spins which is a total red herring. A low variance slot will usually be closer to RTP, a high variance slot will usually be further away and if they're not, why does it even matter if you know the average is 96%? Some-one please fill me in

Well what other metric do we really have to go an as a player? We know if we're up or down, and by how much, but the T-RTP of a slot is the only thing we can measure our 'performance' against, as it were.

I fully understand that T-RTP is something that evens out over millions of spins, particularly as you go higher up the variance curve, and when you head into the realms of progressives like Mega Moolah, I'd suspect your sample size would need to be tens (hundreds?) of millions of spins to get the 'correct' amount of RTP from the progressives into the equation.

Human beings instinctively dislike randomness, we like to establish patterns and a sense of control over everything, and we're notoriously bad at getting our heads around massive numbers.

I know my spin sample on Afterlife Inferno is tiny against its long-term T-RTP, but it's a large number of spins for a single player and represents a reasonable cash investment on my part, along with a lot of time - so I compare my RTP with the T-RTP as something to bring order to the randomness and to give me a yardstick to work with, as a sense for how 'good or bad' I'm doing.

 

[Simmo!]

You keep on saying this slot is not for him, but how many people you actually think would stick with a slot that has 80ish rtp over almost 10k spins.

Well I would if I could see the slot had the realistic potential to give me very big wins and I wouldn't if I felt it couldn't. And that's why I designed this slot: because too many HV slots don't make me feel that way. Just filling a gap

 

[Simmo!]

Well what other metric do we really have to go an as a player?

I just look at my balance. That's more reliable I find

 

[mack341]

I've always thought this too actually. My feeling is that a slots player will generally play beyond the "optimum" point of cash-out rendering RTP largely pointless*. I've had this conversation with more than one developer but they won't buy into it. Some time back, iNetbet had an HV video poker game (Joker Poker) with a 100%+ EV. I'd love to know if that made a profit - I bet it did.

* Side note: I really don't understand the hang-up on here these days about RTP. I see people always posting an RTP based on a few hundred or a few thousand spins which is a total red herring. A low variance slot will usually be closer to RTP, a high variance slot will usually be further away and if they're not, why does it even matter if you know the average is 96%? Some-one please fill me in

Could the regulators bring in regulations that would be about game design, so rather than the long term rtp it would be about how much profit is acceptable for the slot to make say per £1,000,000 staked. Fair gaming to me is also how much profit a game is extracting from the consumer over the long term; does raging rhino, per million spins, make more money than bonanza, who knows?

 

[Simmo!]

Could the regulators bring in regulations that would be about game design, so rather than the long term rtp it would be about how much profit is acceptable for the slot to make say per £1,000,000 staked. Fair gaming to me is also how much profit a game is extracting from the consumer over the long term; does raging rhino, per million spins, make more money than bonanza, who knows?

I wouldn't put it past the regulators to do anything at the moment but I don't think anything they do would necessarily be applied retroactively. That said, I think RTP is fair myself: in theory for every player under RTP there is nearly the same amount over RTP. I think if the regulators did anything it would continue to be more in line with controlling time and money spent by players. There are areas that deserve attention IMO: for example, some games where you are required to "collect" things to trigger features and the lure of progressive jackpots. IMO these would be ripe targets for regulation because they can manipulate behaviour to be more favourable to the operator. To be clear, I don't think these things are necessarily unacceptable myself but I do think regulators might interpret it differently.

 

[mack341]

I wouldn't put it past the regulators to do anything at the moment but I don't think anything they do would necessarily be applied retroactively. That said, I think RTP is fair myself: in theory for every player under RTP there is nearly the same amount over RTP. I think if the regulators did anything it would continue to be more in line with controlling time and money spent by players. There are areas that deserve attention IMO: for example, some games where you are required to "collect" things to trigger features and the lure of progressive jackpots. IMO these would be ripe targets for regulation because they can manipulate behaviour to be more favourable to the operator. To be clear, I don't think these things are necessarily unacceptable myself but I do think regulators might interpret it differently.

In the chopley vid, I think he was down about £500 [btw I'm not attacking afterlife, I haven't played it myself as the bookie casinos don't seem to have leander games] at 84% rtp however if he was 113% rtp I don't think he would be £500 up, however maybe this is where the number/volume of spins comes in to account and being 13% above rtp could represent a large amount of money if you have done millions of spins.

The Equations and algebra required for slot mathematics are a bit beyond me.

 

[theapple]

Well I would if I could see the slot had the realistic potential to give me very big wins and I wouldn't if I felt it couldn't. And that's why I designed this slot: because too many HV slots don't make me feel that way. Just filling a gap

yeah but thats the thing. Most people wouldnt get that far to begin with. And i dont think im talking about people who play low-med variance slots either. If people have some horrible results in first few 100's, not to mention 1000's of spins they are very likely to say "screw this" and get done with it. I get what are you saying with potential but once again we are getting dangerously close to lottery ticket potential here imo.

Just try to think about it as someone who has no connection with the game whatsoever. How many people are going to stick with a slot that showed no potential, other than in paytables, in first few thousands spins? Afterall, if you dont think its a right slot for someone who stuck with it for 10000 spins, who is it for?

Lottery ticket has potential. Hell, its much higher potential than any of slots that are out today. And yet people dont play it but they play slots instead.

I know how this slot makes you feel like it could achieve its max win, unlike many other slots out there. Hell im not even sure we've seen full screen of bars in starburst after 9000 trillions of spins played on it, but its unrealistic to expect from people who play a few 100's of spins on a new slot, to stick with it despite getting little to no return in free spins or base game. But you know it can dish out some nasty wins because you worked on it. Random players wont have a clue about it so what makes you think they are going to stick with it, during the rough patch which can last as long as you dont hit a decent hell feature, or something that looks even more rare, decent free spins win.

Im also pretty sure getting a few 0-10x wins from free spins would be a deal breaker for most people, regardless of their preference. Even people who are into super HV slots are not huge fans of 0x wins.

that brings me to another point, wasnt it possible to make free spins appear lets say 10-20% less often but have little to no 0x wins ? I really fail to see what good brings 0x win to anyone involved? Players hate it, slot developers should hate it too because features like that are very likely to drive players away, so whats the point in getting a no win feature? Is it possible to just skip the feature and not award it at all? Or would that get us into "omg its rigged" territory ? Really curious about some things as you can see

I know you need a few low wins to keep average in check but from the looks of it average feature win is 30x or so. But 10x is also low win for free spins by anyones standard but it would make less people ragequit the game after siad feature ends, no?

 

[goatwack]

I see what's happening here: make games extremely volatile over millions of spins whilst limiting punters' playtime, thereby ensuring nobody wins, ever!

The bastards

 

[Simmo!]

If people have some horrible results in first few 100's, not to mention 1000's of spins they are very likely to say "screw this" and get done with it. Im also pretty sure getting a few 0-10x wins from free spins would be a deal breaker for most people, regardless of their preference. Even people who are into super HV slots are not huge fans of 0x wins.

I agree... I don't dispute this As Dunover said earlier, you either get it or you don't. That's what I mean by it being designed for a certain type of player and those that aren't will find it hard to understand.

that brings me to another point, wasnt it possible to make free spins appear lets say 10-20% less often but have little to no 0x wins ? I really fail to see what good brings 0x win to anyone involved? Players hate it, slot developers should hate it too

Yes it was possible but I think I explained this earlier: I wanted the game to be "natural". I don't feel comfortable manipulating a game to remove certain scenarios. The percentage chance of a 0 in any feature is tiny but I had to have it.

I know you need a few low wins to keep average in check but from the looks of it average feature win is 30x or so.

Sorry I can't talk about the maths in detail - all I can say is it's not nearly that low.

 

[brianmon]

@Simmo!
Would it not have been a better idea to include the triggering scatter win with the feature win?
Ok you're only going to get a 2x win for 3 scatters. But wouldn't that be better from a players 'psychological' point of view than a big fat ZERO? Plus 4 scatters, which I've had quite a few times, gives 50x win even if the free spins paid zero

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Yes it was possible but I think I explained this earlier: I wanted the game to be "natural". I don't feel comfortable manipulating a game to remove certain scenarios. The percentage chance of a 0 in any feature is tiny but I had to have it.

Well out of 69 features I had three zero pays and sixteen pays of less than 10x. Admittedly the zero pays were all HFO.

Of my 69 features, 54 paid less than 50x, 13 paid 50-100x and just 2 paid over 100x.

Sorry I can't talk about the maths in detail - all I can say is it's not nearly that low.

I'm sure the average goes up substantially once you start adding those 8000x and better hits into the list, but this comes back to how many players are ever going to see those, and with what frequency?

If I duplicate my 69 results on the spreadsheet three times (to give 207 features with an average pay of 34.1x), and then add a single 8000x as the 208th feature, the average increases to 72.4x, simply by adding that single large win.

My guess would be that the true average pay is in the 45-55x range, and then we're just back to that subjective argument about how the average should be distributed across the range

 

[Simmo!]

@Simmo!
Would it not have been a better idea to include the triggering scatter win with the feature win?
Ok you're only going to get a 2x win for 3 scatters. But wouldn't that be better from a players 'psychological' point of view than a big fat ZERO? Plus 4 scatters, which I've had quite a few times, gives 50x win even if the free spins paid zero

Yes - you're right, it would have been Brianmon but unfortunately by the time this came up (via the Focus Group) the game engine would have required some redesign and it was a bit too late in the day.

 

[PMKFRUITPRO]

Chop - I made s similar style post about rtp and how I’ve ran on the game with regards to DHV. I’m running at about 80% RTP over nearly 20,000 spins now. I made the point that as an individual player I may as well stop as I’d have no real chance of getting those losses back. You were very quick to point out(as if I needed educating) about how I would if I put x amount of millions of spins through. Of course I already knew that but perhaps after you’ve played just over a third of the spins I’ve endured on DHV and with better results you’ll see where I’m coming from!! And you’ve only been on 20 and 40p!!!

I’ve played afterlife and I’m sorry but the game does nothing for me at all. I find it quite dull and boring tbh. To me as a player you need to feel that every time u get a bonus it could be something special. Rightly or wrongly this game just doesn’t give me that feel. None of the features excite me or have me on the edge of my seat. They’re quite slow to play out and are generally mundane run of the mill stuff. Even with the likes of Raging Rhino which has now become one of the most dreadful games out there right up to the last spin there’s always that slight feeling it could roll in a monster. You certainly don’t get that with any of the features in this game, unless you get a miracle start in the.... ahem ‘locking’ wilds one.

It seems the only chance of anything decent is the hell freezes over. Which of course is a rip off of a wild desire. With immortal romance tho I still feel amber could throw in something stupid, so I’d play IR over this for that very reason. I just don’t get that ‘feeling’ with this game. If you don’t get that feeling as a player about a slot you simply don’t play it, especially if you find the features uninspiring.

Dunover is right about BTG. They have the balance right in most of their showcase games, which is why they are so popular. I’ve played probably now a conservative estimate of 500,000 spins through bonanza. I’ve still not hit more than a 500x win! But it keeps me coming back for more! Even tho I could easily go through 5 Mouses, keyboards and monitors playing the damn thing! I’ll never have that feeling about afterlife.

Of course it’s all about opinions. For me if afterlife didn’t have the connections behind it that it does none of us would really give it to much of a 2nd look. It would just be ‘another’ slot. Sorry if that sounds harsh to the people behind it but you can only report on what u feel after playing it. I hope it does well. I’ll give it the odd feature now and again but nothing more.

 

[Simmo!]

I’ve played afterlife and I’m sorry but the game does nothing for me at all. I find it quite dull and boring tbh. To me as a player you need to feel that every time u get a bonus it could be something special.

I understand that reaction totally - that's how I feel playing Bonanza and DoA and in the latter instance, I've never had a 5 wild line in 1000's and 1000's of spins but I still go back to it from time to time to try and get the 5 scatters or wild lines. But I fast spin my way through the base game as it's so dull. "Dull" to me means no chance of getting anything decent and during testing, there were plenty of sessions where I came away thinking I had this wrong, basically because as you say, the session was boring. Then every now and then I'd get an awesome one which would remind me of what I was trying to achieve. The focus group was quite split too: some didn't like it all, others said they absolutely loved it.

I could have made the bonuses just pay an average of 60x each time and bring in the spread of wins so you always go something between 30x and 100x with the odd bigger win but you have thousands of games you can turn to if you want that. In fact, that's exactly what the Inferno feature did at first and that - to me - was so, so dull I asked for it to be changed. I am not saying I got everything right at my first attempt but I really, really didn't want to design yet another safe game. Yes, commercially it may have made more sense and I could have tried to appeal to a wider audience, but I really, really feel that there is a gap in the market for a game that can provide decent hits with reasonable frequency.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I would also just like to add I watched your gambling low ebbs video last sunday and it was excellent, my focus normally drifts abit with personal stories on youtube but I found that tale of woe fascinating, transported me back to the 90's and was brilliantly told by yourself.

Cheers mack I appreciate the comment, that wasn't the easiest video to make but the reaction to it has been universally positive so I'm glad I made the effort

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I could have made the bonuses just pay an average of 60x each time and bring in the spread of wins so you always go something between 30x and 100x with the odd bigger win but you have thousands of games you can turn to if you want that. In fact, that's exactly what the Inferno feature did at first and that - to me - was so, so dull I asked for it to be changed. I am not saying I got everything right at my first attempt but I really, really didn't want to design yet another safe game. Yes, commercially it may have made more sense and I could have tried to appeal to a wider audience, but I really, really feel that there is a gap in the market for a game that can provide decent hits with reasonable frequency.

At the risk of going round in circles (as we're clearly never going to agree on it!) I still think this is the thing that was got the most wrong about this slot, not having a midrange sort of bonus round that the player could turn to for a decent chance of 100-250x with the odd bigger hit, and use Inferno to do that with.

Surely the whole point of having three bonus rounds plus HFO is that you've got the scope to craft three different bonus rounds depending on what the player wants, pegging Inferno and Purgatory at identical variance seems like an opportunity missed, and IMO simply makes Purgatory flat out worse because if you start off with a few dead spins you know there's bugger all chance of getting a decent multiplier, whereas Inferno can hit a 15x on a 5OAK on the very last spin, and Inferno retriggers properly on three scatters too.

It's already not a 'safe' game with the massive potential of HFO, having one out of three other bonus rounds as a less volatile option seems, if anything, like the sensible choice to include.

 

[Simmo!]

At the risk of going round in circles (as we're clearly never going to agree on it!) I still think this is the thing that was got the most wrong about this slot, not having a midrange sort of bonus round that the player could turn to for a decent chance of 100-250x with the odd bigger hit, and use Inferno to do that with.

That is what the Inferno and Purgatory features do, a bit more so with Inferno.

Incidentally, it's not really a case of agreeing or disagreeing - we just like different types of games, that's all

 

[ChopleyIOM]

My mind is made up, it's time to do THE STARBURST CHALLENGE #2 - this time the subject of my attention will be Afterlife Inferno, STATS TRACKING AHOY

Some may recall, I can be very persistent when it comes to this sort of scenario.

 

[Simmo!]

My mind is made up, it's time to do THE STARBURST CHALLENGE #2 - this time the subject of my attention will be Afterlife Inferno, STATS TRACKING AHOY

Not quite sure what the challenge is about but if it is about proving a point, I can probably save you a bit of time if you want. You have roughly a 1 in 10 chance of a 100x-1,000x hit on the features (aggregated).

 

[Tirilej]

I wonder if you Chopley would have had a different opinion if you had been getting my results with this game. I've played a lot more spins than you have and all for real money, mostly 20-40c bet but some a bit higher too.
This is a game that suits me fine. I love high variance. What I don't love to do with those games though is to get stuck playing several hundreds non paying spins. If it doesn't pay I leave, which is the reason why you see that my average amount spin is very low.
I don't try to beat a game, I prefer to win

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Not quite sure what the challenge is about but if it is about proving a point, I can probably save you a bit of time if you want. You have roughly a 1 in 10 chance of a 100x-1,000x hit on the features (aggregated).

I want to see how the feature pay distribution starts to work out over a statistically significant spin sample, and to see if I can land a monster HFO at some point. It doesn't prove or disprove anything as such, it's to satisfy my own curiosity, I also want to see something big land in one of the three free spins rounds, as I didn't top 100x stake in 52 of them, let alone anything juicier than that.

Obviously VS won't give me a nice 'My RTP' backend for free play with spins played and suchlike, but the numbers for feature frequency seem pretty settled now so I can simply multiply the number of features (inc HFO) by 120 and it should be about right.

 

[Jono777]

Another more important observation, why is Chopley so afraid of the "like" button

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I wonder if you Chopley would have had a different opinion if you had been getting my results with this game. I've played a lot more spins than you have and all for real money, mostly 20-40c bet but some a bit higher too.
This is a game that suits me fine. I love high variance. What I don't love to do with those games though is to get stuck playing several hundreds non paying spins. If it doesn't pay I leave, which is the reason why you see that my average amount spin is very low.
I don't try to beat a game, I prefer to win

That's a pretty rich run on this slot, especially considering there are no major HFO hits in there and you've topped out at 1089x stake. Congrats!

I take your point about saying 'if it doesn't pay I leave', but on a random slot it makes zero difference - (or it shouldn't, at least!) - if one lumps away for hundreds or thousands of spins in a single session, or breaks them down into multiple smaller sessions.

 

[goatwack]

I don't know what this toing and froing is supposed to prove exactly. It was always marketed as an extremely high- varianced 'Fan project come to life', not Christ's return

It's not lavishing small and medium- sized wins in the base game with regularity for a reason, namely to have a punt on one of the bonuses, not excluding the Wild Freeze Desire feature contained within.

Bonanza gets regularly pilloried (me included) but is still popular, and has potential, and produces big wins.

Here we have a game out for two weeks and there's no showstoppers, well, c'est la vie, it might take a few thousand spins, much like DOA when it's in a good mood.

Just what is it that people want? A stellar base game and bonuses that cater to low, medium and high-rolling afficianados in one big happy pixellated slot fiesta?

Show me a designer that can make that and I'll get on bended knee

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I don't know what this toing and froing is supposed to prove exactly. It was always marketed as an extremely high- varianced 'Fan project come to life', not Christ's return

Well to my mind it's just nice to have a respectful and adult chat about a slot, kind of what forums are for, I'd have thought? I find the mechanics of slots and slot design fascinating, and because Simmo wrote such an extensive and informative article about this slot (which is unusual, if not unique, when it comes to a slot's design and production), AI really piqued my curiosity.

 

[Tirilej]

That's a pretty rich run on this slot, especially considering there are no major HFO hits in there and you've topped out at 1089x stake. Congrats!

I take your point about saying 'if it doesn't pay I leave', but on a random slot it makes zero difference - (or it shouldn't, at least!) - if one lumps away for hundreds or thousands of spins in a single session, or breaks them down into multiple smaller sessions.

Especially a high variance game can have very long cold periods. I try to avoid them by leaving. I maybe would hit a monster if I stay since it's as you say random, but slotting should be fun and it's no fun waiting for a hit that maybe never comes.

I maybe should add that I've had a lot of big wins both in the base game and in the features, so you've simply just been unlucky. Probably you will turn around winning while I will lose. Horrible thought but normal

 

[Jono777]

Like I said before, NOT a slot to chase on, sprint sessions rather than marathon ones.

To be fair I employ this tactic across probably every slot I play (with the exception of Low rolling DoA) and it works pretty well

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Another more important observation, why is Chopley so afraid of the "like" button

Sorry I'm not intending to be rude, I'm just not used to posting at forums that have a 'Like' button, I'm all old-fashioned and that

I've gone back and done a load of likes over the last couple of pages, and will try to remember to press the button in future - I do appreciate the fact that people are taking the time to post and the more of us who get involved, the more interesting these discussions are

 

[nikantw]

Between DoA (frequent features and "easy" 1000x+ wins) and Bonanza (rare feature, very rare 1000x+ wins) I feel this is close to DoA but with 3 times harder to get 1000x+ and more things going on, better look and more 20x-200x wins.

 

[curremon]

I dont know how someone can say this game is good ?
1. dead spins dead spins dead spins 3x bet win dead spins dead spins dead spins
2. hell freezes over took me 650 spins and paid me 3x bet
3. on those 650 spins ive seen 3 scatters 2 times and both features i picked paid me 4x bet
4. game is laggy as fuck
5. see screenshot , it doesnt even pay wins ?

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

Also i just lost 100e on it with rtp 40%... puuuuh

 

[Reelsoffun]

I dont know how someone can say this game is good ?
1. dead spins dead spins dead spins 3x bet win dead spins dead spins dead spins
2. hell freezes over took me 650 spins and paid me 3x bet
3. on those 650 spins ive seen 3 scatters 2 times and both features i picked paid me 4x bet
4. game is laggy as fuck
5. see screenshot , it doesnt even pay wins ?

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

Im not a massive fan either BUT....

1. to be expected with a HV game.
2. so you expect the first one to give you 5000x + ?
3. 2 features in 650 spins is not that bad, played bonanza lately?
4. Its never been laggy for me.
5. yeah no win on a payline so yeah no its not going to pay you! ( but agree that one should have been a payline )


I did feel the same but i have had some 500x + wins lately so it is a case of you have to hit it lucky, like pretty much every other slot in the world....

 

[curremon]

How thats not payline ?????

And yes i have played bonanza lately, but atleast it pays me more than nothing when i get free spins

 

[paul7388]

How thats not payline ?????

And yes i have played bonanza lately, but atleast it pays me more than nothing when i get free spins

If you check the paylines you will see as weird as it is that that is not one of the paylines

 

[Simmo!]

I must admit it took me some time to get used to that but the unfortunate thing about a 20 pay-line slot is that only 2 rows can have 7 pay-lines and one has to have 6. Leander just preferred to have a different one that's all. A tad annoying but IMO a minor annoyance.

 

[Reelsoffun]

How thats not payline ?????

And yes i have played bonanza lately, but atleast it pays me more than nothing when i get free spins

You been lucky then as i have had several give less than 3x

 

[curremon]

What is "best" feature to go in here ??? seems like wilds are missing on sticky wilds.. win multipler doesnt go high with that feature and first one havent tried but i bet it gives only 3x when you win

 

[Simmo!]

What is "best" feature to go in here ??? seems like wilds are missing on sticky wilds.. win multipler doesnt go high with that feature and first one havent tried but i bet it gives only 3x when you win

Depends whether you want to lose quickly or slowly

Seriously though, the sticky wild feature is very volatile: every now and again it can go very big whereas the other 2 tend to be more reserved. They can all pay crap - as you have found out - but the Paradise sticky wild one is more likely to pay crap than the other two. It is also the most likely to give over 1,000x so it depends on your risk tolerance

 

[goatwack]

Depends whether you want to lose quickly or slowly

Seriously though, the sticky wild feature is very volatile: every now and again it can go very big whereas the other 2 tend to be more reserved. They can all pay crap - as you have found out - but the Paradise sticky wild one is more likely to pay crap than the other two. It is also the most likely to give over 1,000x so it depends on your risk tolerance

Try not to use 'crap' so much for your own product Simmo, it's bad for business