Spot on.Do away with operator adjustable RTPs.
Which is a prime example of a casino that fits into the catagory of a casino that feels unrespectable.Simple really...
If you need you average RTP to be 96.5%, and some providers with very good games refuse to give you a lower RTP, you run others at a lower RTP to compensate.
Which is a prime example of a casino that fits into the catagory of a casino that feels unrespectable.
A punter joins a casino because they have those said games which are "Very good games" and finds them to be just as good as they do at every other casino they play at regarding gameplay and rtp.
They then jump to a compensating slot/s and get bloody fleeced in no time!
It is not right or fair and nore does it feel "respectable"
Does it matter?What slots are the compensating ones?
As they dont exist, yesDoes it matter?
You are contradicting your own argumentAs they dont exist, yes
You are contradicting your own argument
Please re read the first quote of yours that I responded to just a few posts upHow exactly am I contradicting myself?
You are confusing compensating games with using lower RTPs across multiple games to compensate for running higher RTPs in some.
The two are completely different.
Your statement advocates balancing out a rtp of popular games with lowering the usual rtp on others. Right?
But that's just balancing the overall casino economy to make sure that the overall aiming RTP is in line with business requirements.
Are you now suggesting that the same provider refuses to reduce the rtp on their more popular slots but are willing to reduce them on their less popular slots to compensate? <- this as apposed to you meaning reducing other providers rtp to compensate for the provider that refuses to comply with reducing but has great slots?Advocates.. no. Explains what actually might happen. Yes
But that's just balancing the overall casino economy to make sure that the overall aiming RTP is in line with business requirements.
That is not the same as having rigged/compensated/compenrigged games.
Without wishing to de-rail this important thread, I just thought I would question the last statement above...which is to me, a perfect oxymoron.
to compensate Is to reduce or counteract.
Based on this statement, the word ‘compensate’ is used exactly right....
Are you now suggesting that the same provider refuses to reduce the rtp on their more popular slots but are willing to reduce them on their less popular slots to compensate? <- this as apposed to you meaning reducing other providers rtp to compensate for the provider that refuses to comply with reducing but has great slots?
Your original post did not read that way to me
They may be feasable and ecceptable to you,but to me both scenarios are unfair and are prime examples of why the ability/inability to tamper with rtp and trtp fits into this thread as a prime examply of what is needed to make the industry appear more respectableIt could be either. Both are feasible.
It depends on many factors...
They may be feasable and ecceptable to you,but to me both scenarios are unfair and are prime examples of why the ability to tamper with rtp and trtp fits into this thread as a prime examply of what is needed to make the industry appear more respectable
It's well established that most players do not know what rtp is or where to look for it or what it means to them. Just because the casino provides the slots rtp is enough? Receive the same game play and rtp that you expect at other casinos in a "Good game"only to play at the compensated games only to get fleeced?You think its unacceptable that a shop sets it's own prices? As long as they tell you the price, what is unacceptable.
Also, as much as I would love the same RTP everywhere, this is simply not feasible or likely. Casinos are businesses. They aren't charities. As long as the RTP is displayed (which they are in most good regulated markets) what exactly is the issue?
It's well established that most players do not know what rtp is or where to look for it or what it means to them. Just because the casino provides the slots rtp is enough? Receive the same game play and rtp that you expect at other casinos in a "Good game"only to play at the compensated games only to get fleeced?
Nobodies suggesting the casinos are charities.
Transparency and fairness is key here and such practices are not on the side of the player
Such information should be displayed clearly on the games screen,maybe with a link that takes you to a full explaination of what rtp and trtp means.So how would you propose to educate the players on RTP? Serious question btw.. Having one RTP is never gonna happen. It's a free market, and also different countries have different taxes so its impossible.
So how would you propose to educate the players on RTP? Serious question btw.. Having one RTP is never gonna happen. It's a free market, and also different countries have different taxes so its impossible.
How did they suppress it? It's in the help screens right?Such information should be displayed clearly on the games screen,maybe with a link that takes you to a full explaination of what rtp and trtp means.
By providing such information then the player is given fair choice to vacate the game or play it.
If reducing rtp on slots is fair,reasonable and justifiable then why did Videoslots go to such great lengths for as long as possible to suppress their reductions on 3 providers rtp's?
Maybe regulate it depending on what tax they have?
If they pay x amount of tax, they MUST provide the highest rtp-versions of the slots.
But if they pay x amount of tax, they are allowed x amount of providers with lower rtp.
It ended up being on the help screen eventually. Given their ever prescence here they also had every oppertunity to inform us but didn't until challenged. They also suddenly stopped introducing us to their new games which they did once or twice a day-which included each slots rtp- from exactly the day before they introduced their reduction. It took some time before it was rumbledHow did they suppress it? It's in the help screens right?