I'm truly shocked

So, why so many updates that appear to fix nothing, change nothing, and for existing games with no bugs in them; yet games that have VISIBLE, if minor, bugs do NOT get updated with a fix?

If these updates don't fix anything obvious, they must be fixing something "under the bonnet", and the most obvious candidate for this would be the game play, which would alter the RTP.

Support for this is the fact that noone will disclose to players the "version control" document that goes with the change, yet this is software on the players' machine. Other types of software update would have a version control document accessible by the end user. Casinos don't only not make the document available, they refuse to supply it when it is requested. It's use is in diagnostics where the changed software no longer works on the client machine, but works on the machines of the majority of users. It helps the user determine what best to look for when trying tom diagnose the problem.

Of course, if they ARE doing something unpalatable like lowering the RTP of a number of games, they would not want players to see this clearly laid out in a document. However, if the changes are "innocent", like changing something to do with video rendering, there should be no reason to keep this secret from players.

When RTG had their marketing sheets available that showed the RTP settings, I also found one of these version control documents for the latest lobby update at the time. They certainly produce this document, but don't want users to find out what changes have been made to software that they host on their machines. This is a real problem when an update stops the lobby from working, and the attitude from the casino is "something wrong with your machine, not our responsibilty to fix it". They may suggest the player take their machine to an IT specialist, but the lack of a version control document detailing the changes that broke the software is going to make the task much more expensive, even impossible.

Again....speculation....and that is NOT going to help the situation at all.

No online or offline provider (3Dice being an exception) that I'm aware of provides details of each and every update they release to the player. The exact same speculation, therefor, could be directed at MGS....and I see it hasn't stopped you playing....so you obviously don't place much value on it.

Unless you are part of the IT team at every casino, there's no way you can say what every update contains.

As I said earlier, and Simmo! alluded to, there's no smoking gun here. It's par for the course that RTPs can be altered,and just because PT doesn't take out a full page advert in every major newspaper to tell you when they do it, doesn't make them "liars" or "misleading", as nobody else does it and it is not a regulatory requirement.
 
Again....speculation....and that is NOT going to help the situation at all.

No online or offline provider (3Dice being an exception) that I'm aware of provides details of each and every update they release to the player. The exact same speculation, therefor, could be directed at MGS....and I see it hasn't stopped you playing....so you obviously don't place much value on it.

Unless you are part of the IT team at every casino, there's no way you can say what every update contains.

As I said earlier, and Simmo! alluded to, there's no smoking gun here. It's par for the course that RTPs can be altered,and just because PT doesn't take out a full page advert in every major newspaper to tell you when they do it, doesn't make them "liars" or "misleading", as nobody else does it and it is not a regulatory requirement.

That is a problem, not an excuse for operators to hide behind. It is limp regulation that has allowed this kind of BS to go on for years.

As for change documentation, I am NOT talking about changes made to the server side, but changes made to MY machine that may suddenly cause conflicts and malfunctions. In order to sort MY machine out, I need to find out what has been changed to narrow down the scope of investigations.

Casino updates often change software that is used by other programs, and the reverse can also be true. This can introduce errors and incompatabilities. Given that the casino is going to stick to it's changes, I need to know what NEW requirements have been introduced in order to make the relevant upgrades and configuration changes necessary for my machine to start working again. The secrecy surrounding client side updates is unnecessary, as these would be things like upgrading the minimum version number of the Flash player needed. Currently, it is guesswork, and it wastes time trying to fix the Flash player when the problem might actually be due to changes in other requirements, such as minimum browser version, JAVA, etc.

The secrecy also breeds suspicion, and occasionally this is justifed as in the notorious case of an operator hiding malware in a client update that was designed to prevent players' PCs from visiting the websites of one of it's competitors.

MGS also make many changes to existing games, and I actually DO believe they change how some of them work, including the RTP. I also believe any changes are global, and all MGS operators have to accept them or pull the game. There HAVE been cases where individual operators have removed games, highly unusual for MGS as a whole.

If there is nothing to hide, why keep such a basic IT document secret. In the IT industry in general, it is a requirement to produce such documentation whenever an application is updated, anything less is considered bad practice. It is also a requirement to produce a workable "rollback" procedure for critical systems so that if the update fails, users are not left without the service.

It is of course possible that buried in the vast number of cache files in the MGS download client that this document IS present. I have found a few other "hidden documents" in there in plain text that relate to a few of the configuration settings.
The worst offender when it comes to client updates that bugger things up is RTG, possibly because they do so many each month.
 
As I said earlier, and Simmo! alluded to, there's no smoking gun here. It's par for the course that RTPs can be altered,and just because PT doesn't take out a full page advert in every major newspaper to tell you when they do it, doesn't make them "liars" or "misleading", as nobody else does it and it is not a regulatory requirement.

This is the regulatory requirement:

h) Information about the likelihood of winning:
i) a description of the way the game works and the way in which winners are
determined and prizes allocated;

ii) For each game, information about the potential prizes and/or payouts
(including the means by which these are calculated) should be easily
available. This should include, where applicable:
(1) Pay tables, or the odds paid for particular outcomes.
(2) For peer-to-peer games where the prize is determined based on the
actions of the participants a description of the way the game works and
the rake or commission charged.

Today we get h ii) 1 (underlined) but seemingly nothing for the bolded h and h i).

The pay table alone cannot meet h and h i so there is a supplementary regulatory requirement that they are not meeting. When the "likelihood of winning" and/or "the way the game works" (optimal play) or the "way in which winners are determined and prizes allocated" is changed that missing description should also change.

It does seem that pretty much all providers fail to give the required description but the additional deception of changing the game and the likelihood and not telling the players they have only happens if they make such changes.

PT don't need full page ads but they should say what they provide that meets the bolded regulatory requirement and why they feel free to change the game likelihood - and possibly optimal play - secretly when any reasonable implementation of this regulation would result in some change to the (missing) description. A description required precisely to protect players.

It is deceptive to make unannounced changes to game play, to the likelihood of winning and possibly optimal play. Saying others do it too is not a great defence for PT or the industry.

It is also a puzzle as to why when changing the rtp or the game play there is no recertification of the game. The recertification testing would have caught the mess up of diverging real and play games but a new certificate would also cost money and reveal to players that the game had been changed. Proper certification is another regulatory requirement as are a whole range of testing and quality/change control processes that clearly failed in this case when the play and real games diverged (a regulatory breach of itself)..

There is no doubt that some regulatory conditions were broken in this case, the difficulty is working out just how many and how seriously the regulator will take such failures. Those failures undermine confidence in the regulator and all their licence holders so vigorous action is desirable. Already we have been told by Aaron of Betfred that "both the Gibraltar regulator and Betfred have asked that Playtech (and our other suppliers), in addition to our own testing programme, to commit to a full audit of their games to ensure this scenario isn’t repeated". So the regulator has initiated some action. It will be interesting to see if any other play games go offline as a result of this audit or if we get any announcements if the audit finds further games where the play and real versions operate diferently.

There is a smoking gun and it has gone bang at least twice, for two software providers, for multiple sites and for multiple games. The smoking gun seems to be at least semi automatic in its ability to keep throwing out more smoke.
 
This is the regulatory requirement:



Today we get h ii) 1 (underlined) but seemingly nothing for the bolded h and h i).

The pay table alone cannot meet h and h i so there is a supplementary regulatory requirement that they are not meeting. When the "likelihood of winning" and/or "the way the game works" (optimal play) or the "way in which winners are determined and prizes allocated" is changed that missing description should also change.

It does seem that pretty much all providers fail to give the required description but the additional deception of changing the game and the likelihood and not telling the players they have only happens if they make such changes.

PT don't need full page ads but they should say what they provide that meets the bolded regulatory requirement and why they feel free to change the game likelihood - and possibly optimal play - secretly when any reasonable implementation of this regulation would result in some change to the (missing) description. A description required precisely to protect players.

It is deceptive to make unannounced changes to game play, to the likelihood of winning and possibly optimal play. Saying others do it too is not a great defence for PT or the industry.

It is also a puzzle as to why when changing the rtp or the game play there is no recertification of the game. The recertification testing would have caught the mess up of diverging real and play games but a new certificate would also cost money and reveal to players that the game had been changed. Proper certification is another regulatory requirement as are a whole range of testing and quality/change control processes that clearly failed in this case when the play and real games diverged (a regulatory breach of itself)..

There is no doubt that some regulatory conditions were broken in this case, the difficulty is working out just how many and how seriously the regulator will take such failures. Those failures undermine confidence in the regulator and all their licence holders so vigorous action is desirable. Already we have been told by Aaron of Betfred that "both the Gibraltar regulator and Betfred have asked that Playtech (and our other suppliers), in addition to our own testing programme, to commit to a full audit of their games to ensure this scenario isn’t repeated". So the regulator has initiated some action. It will be interesting to see if any other play games go offline as a result of this audit or if we get any announcements if the audit finds further games where the play and real versions operate diferently.

There is a smoking gun and it has gone bang at least twice, for two software providers, for multiple sites and for multiple games. The smoking gun seems to be at least semi automatic in its ability to keep throwing out more smoke.

I think you're misinterpreting what I said.

I didn't "defend" PT nor the lack of clear regulation regarding RTP. I was merely stating that it is the status quo, and that it was hardly reasonable to hold PT up as doing something inherently wrong, when they are just following accepted industry practices.

The bolded part does not specifically mention RTP. I see it pertaining to a paytable and explanation of how the game functions. The regulators would most definitely know what RTP is, so the fact that they did not include it suggests to me that this section does not mean that any and all RTP information must be displayed, along with any and all changes and updates. Maybe it should, but it doesn't.

I also wasn't saying there has BEEN no smoking gun. I was stating that nothing that VWM speculated is a smoking gun. Big difference.

I would also say that not all of what appears to be "smoke" is smoke at all. Some of it is a mixture of hot air and methane, and with all the speculating and guesswork going on, it is becoming harder to sort out one from the other.

You make a lot of sense richas, and you and I agree on much, mainly because you deal with the facts and don't make wild assessments and create conspiracies where there aren't any. You just got the wrong end of the stick here IMO.
 
So, why so many updates that appear to fix nothing, change nothing, and for existing games with no bugs in them; yet games that have VISIBLE, if minor, bugs do NOT get updated with a fix?

If these updates don't fix anything obvious, they must be fixing something "under the bonnet", and the most obvious candidate for this would be the game play, which would alter the RTP.

We all speak of RTP but what's being missed here, how is this RTP being met?

I'm not a low roller and I can easily burn $2K in an hour.

I've noticed a high decline in the larger pay-table wins (over the last 12 months) on Break da Bank Again and the free spin feature is horrid. It's hard enough at times getting these to hit and apart from getting extra spins, if they pay 4x to 5x my bet returned it's common these days. If I get anything at all. It's also not uncommon to have back to back $0 wins in the free spins.

Larger pay-table wins have gone MIA.

Up until 12 months ago (or there a bouts) I was winning and losing on BDBA. These losses/wins were within what I expected on such a high variance slot. But then things changed and BDBA got really tight. At first I put it down to having a bad run. Though I also started seeing a disturbing pattern emerge. Each month I was depositing more, getting less play time and winning less and less. I could easily burn $5K in a few hours. A lot of near misses but nothing actually hitting.

Reviewing my game play for this 12 month period is a eye opener. I've dropped over $150K and the top pay-table wins which I were getting previously have all but disappeared.

Getting back to my statement, how is this RTP is being met?

No one knows and MGS wont comment.

In Australia I can approach any Government Gaming Commission and request a pay-table payout frequency report on any slot machine available for play at my local casino, pub or club. I've requested the same from MGS per favor the online casino I play for this 12 month period above. But MGS returned saying they can not supply this information. Whether they can or not I don't know. Though it's hard to believe they don't have access to this specific data.

Given my game play on BDBA, it's my opinion while it maybe reaching its RTP, the larger pay-tables have been retarded by some means (possibly weighted reels - to my knowledge these reels no longer use strip images but operate on a dynamic reel lay-out) and there has been an increase in the lower pay-table wins. These keep you going with token wins but they certainly hinder one to reach a cash-out in High Roller terms or less for the sake of some decent game play.

I've received the same RTP/RNG doctrine from eCOGRA too.

With further research I'm now also questioning what type of RNG these casinos use. Seems a lot of online casinos use a pseudorandom RNG as apposed to a True RNG.
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


After clearly being hammered for the past 12 months I've stopped playing at MGS and have now returned to land based gaming. Least here I have a Government backed Commission which ensures no slots software updates are installed without first being approved then installed under the watchful eye of an official gaming commission officer present. Nothing can be changed on these slots without the Gaming Commission approval and RTP is guaranteed to be set in stone!
 
Last edited:
This suggests you are playing BDBA at the SAME casino. I've noticed this pattern repeteadly, like a sort of 'inertia' in the 'random' slots that occurs when you near RTP due to the large number of games you have played. By definition, variance is at its peak at the start of a selection of numbers before the levelling out occurs. A slot goes stale the more you play it.
 
This suggests you are playing BDBA at the SAME casino. I've noticed this pattern repeteadly, like a sort of 'inertia' in the 'random' slots that occurs when you near RTP due to the large number of games you have played. By definition, variance is at its peak at the start of a selection of numbers before the levelling out occurs. A slot goes stale the more you play it.

Yes this game play was at one MGS casino. Previous to the last 12 months, I considered the game play to be within expected variance. Plus I have more than enough spins to override suggestion this is a long streak of "bad luck". I'd play at least 5 separate sessions per month but have played up to 15x per month over some months.

Back to back losses month in month out. Combine all this together and IMHO casting this aside by using the "bad runs" excuse, is simply that, an excuse, a throw off. A canned response used when ever a player questions game fairness.

My game play went stale and stayed that way.
 
Yes this game play was at one MGS casino. Previous to the last 12 months, I considered the game play to be within expected variance. Plus I have more than enough spins to override suggestion this is a long streak of "bad luck". I'd play at least 5 separate sessions per month but have played up to 15x per month over some months.

Back to back losses month in month out. Combine all this together and IMHO casting this aside by using the "bad runs" excuse, is simply that, an excuse, a throw off. A canned response used when ever a player questions game fairness.

My game play went stale and stayed that way.


Thought so. Like I said because of this I tend to play a few weeks at one, quit when ahead and move on.
 
All due respect to dunover and bill, but IMO you're pushing this thread in different direction and shifting focus away from what is a factually sound issue involving PT slots.

In addition, your statements are pure speculation based on "feelings" and basically not winning what you think you should. Unless you record every bet and analyze them all over millions of spins, there is no way you can state with any credibility that BDBA has been tampered with or is using a non-random generator. In fact, it has been stated by Bryan that the bosses at MGS have told him several times that MGS games have static RTPs and cannot be altered (this is possibly why MGS promotions tend to be fairly static across the board).

Anyway, I don't want to derail any further. My advice is to start another thread like "MGS have lowered their payouts" etc.....I haven't seen too many yet this year.
 
Unless you record every bet and analyze them all over millions of spins, there is no way you can state with any credibility that BDBA has been tampered with or is using a non-random generator. In fact, it has been stated by Bryan that the bosses at MGS have told him several times that MGS games have static RTPs and cannot be altered (this is possibly why MGS promotions tend to be fairly static across the board).

With all due respect back at you mate, if you can point me to where MGS (microgaming) have directly released facts relating to these issues which keep coming up then I'd like to seem them. Other than that, all I've heard is a verbatim of claimed "hearsay".

Further more the fact you have no idea how much I've played, your opinions are based on assumptions. FYI I have played well in excess millions spins.

How much do you play a year? Reading your posts I'm thinking it's at most a few $1,000 a year.

No offense mate but your not in my caliber of play.
Reiterating $150,000 in 12 months and back to back losses over extended periods of time. I think you need to re-read my post.

Also if CM or one of his indentured servants instructs me that this is off topic, then I'll abide by his or their request.

I do agree my posts relating to MGS are not directly associated to the OP.
As I'm unable to move these posts, I would request they are moved to a new thread by staff, thanks :)
 
With all due respect back at you mate, if you can point me to where MGS (microgaming) have directly released facts relating to these issues which keep coming up then I'd like to seem them. Other than that, all I've heard is a verbatim of claimed "hearsay".

Further more the fact you have no idea how much I've played, your opinions are based on assumptions. FYI I have played well in excess millions spins.

How much do you play a year? Reading your posts I'm thinking it's at most a few $1,000 a year.

No offense mate but your not in my caliber of play.
Reiterating $150,000 in 12 months and back to back losses over extended periods of time. I think you need to re-read my post.

Also if CM or one of his indentured servants instructs me that this is off topic, then I'll abide by his or their request.


LOL. So how much you spend dictates how valid your opinion is. Right.

It makes no difference if you played a billion spins if you didn't record and analyze them.

As for how much I play....well I only discuss my financials and wagering with selected members. You have not been selected. Of course, you can base your speculation on.....oh that's right.....nothing....unless that (what you think is) "high calibre gambling" that makes you such a big man also adorns you with ESP. :rolleyes:

If you see Bryan's word from informed sources as "hearsay", then I suggest you take it up with him.....or better still, post a question in the ICE questions thread.....although I guess all the answers would be "hearsay", and therefore pointless. So, on second thoughts, don't bother.

You do know that how much you deposit and cashout (I.e. lose or win) does not indicate your RTP? You can lose all your dough, and still have an RTP in the expected range, or even above it.....which is why you need to record and analyze all your play, or ask the casino for a personal RTP figure. Anyway, what am I saying, a man of your calibre already knows all this stuff.

If you're going to say "with all due respect", make sure you actually have some, or don't bother.

Apologies for the derail, but since Bill was insulting all members who spend/lose less than $150k, I wanted to address it and point out that all opinions here at CM are equal.
 
With all due respect back at you mate, if you can point me to where MGS (microgaming) have directly released facts relating to these issues which keep coming up then I'd like to seem them. Other than that, all I've heard is a verbatim of claimed "hearsay".

Further more the fact you have no idea how much I've played, your opinions are based on assumptions. FYI I have played well in excess millions spins.

How much do you play a year? Reading your posts I'm thinking it's at most a few $1,000 a year.

No offense mate but your not in my caliber of play.
Reiterating $150,000 in 12 months and back to back losses over extended periods of time. I think you need to re-read my post.

Also if CM or one of his indentured servants instructs me that this is off topic, then I'll abide by his or their request.

I do agree my posts relating to MGS are not directly associated to the OP.
As I'm unable to move these posts, I would request they are moved to a new thread by staff, thanks :)

indentured servants?
 
It makes no difference if you played a billion spins if you didn't record and analyze them.

You seem to base your opinions on a lot of assumptions and construct these into false facts. And if that fails you twist what you say around.

If what you claim about MGS is legit then by proxy their PlayCheck is valid. My play data has been scrutinised by a 3'rd party audit. I should include it took over 13 weeks to receive 6 months of game play data from the time I requested it.

The rest of my play data was claimed by MGS to be stored off-site. That eventually arrived too.

Without actually going back checking that file alone (6 month play data) was around 20Meg. When it finally arrived it looked like a dogs breakfast.

Certainly nothing like past PlayCheck files I'd received.

Through its audit process it contained doubling up and triplicated entries to the same wins scattered all over the place on different sessions. So much so the auditor requested my depositing history so he could cross reference it against the PlayCheck data, even before he commence his game play audit.

Before you start sprouting more assumptions and clouding things further, I suggest you only respond with facts, thank you.

And btw if it's off topic why are you replying :rolleyes:
 
Perhaps this will lead to a sting of offenses, throughout many casinos and that there will be a massive rebate to ALL.

Wayhay, we all feel robbed at times.
 
All due respect to dunover and bill, but IMO you're pushing this thread in different direction and shifting focus away from what is a factually sound issue involving PT slots.

In addition, your statements are pure speculation based on "feelings" and basically not winning what you think you should. Unless you record every bet and analyze them all over millions of spins, there is no way you can state with any credibility that BDBA has been tampered with or is using a non-random generator. In fact, it has been stated by Bryan that the bosses at MGS have told him several times that MGS games have static RTPs and cannot be altered (this is possibly why MGS promotions tend to be fairly static across the board).

Anyway, I don't want to derail any further. My advice is to start another thread like "MGS have lowered their payouts" etc.....I haven't seen too many yet this year.

Fair enough, PT it is.
I'm just showing the bloke that I know where he is coming from and it's not just based on a 'feeling'. Statistically you will get near your RTP the more spins you have. that is a fact, as over time variance becomes less pronounced. We have seen this before in other threads and posters have mentioned this effect when they've been long-term players at any one site. If he plays large amounts he will no doubt have accelerated this levelling. That's what he's saying.

Anyway, as you say, we digress and not another word on the matter.
 
You seem to base your opinions on a lot of assumptions and construct these into false facts. And if that fails you twist what you say around.

If what you claim about MGS is legit then by proxy their PlayCheck is valid. My play data has been scrutinised by a 3'rd party audit. I should include it took over 13 weeks to receive 6 months of game play data from the time I requested it.

The rest of my play data was claimed by MGS to be stored off-site. That eventually arrived too.

Without actually going back checking that file alone (6 month play data) was around 20Meg. When it finally arrived it looked like a dogs breakfast.

Certainly nothing like past PlayCheck files I'd received.

Through its audit process it contained doubling up and triplicated entries to the same wins scattered all over the place on different sessions. So much so the auditor requested my depositing history so he could cross reference it against the PlayCheck data, even before he commence his game play audit.

Before you start sprouting more assumptions and clouding things further, I suggest you only respond with facts, thank you.

And btw if it's off topic why are you replying :rolleyes:

The details you gave above looks very much like the Audit I conducted on your Microgaming game play last year. FYI the report of my audit based on your six-month play history are here:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


If you now have the full data and not just the last six months I could audit the whole data.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top