More Game Rules Shenanigans - this time from Wazdan

[jasonuk]

I know much has been made of the Jammin' Jars situation in recent years regarding dishonest game rules... but I spotted this curious one from Wazdan on their "Hold The Jackpot" game series:

How can "the outcome of each and every game [be] completely independent" when your game design is fundamentally about stored value (temporary or permanently sticky symbols).

It's a common statement in game rules, I know that WMS have used it for years... (and in their case is true because there is no stored value)

I understand what they are trying to infer (about randomness) but that statement is completely bogus on a stored value game - especially one that can persist across hundreds of game rounds (which Wazdan games are notorious for - hold the boredom more like ).

As a related aside, it doesn't help when their promotions are similarly misleading - a "£4m" prize pool which has been calculated by multiplying 100,000 boxes by the top £40 prize, even though there are four prize tiers (£5, £10, £20, £40) with no information on the distribution. So they know internally what the expected prize pool is, but decide to lie about it instead... I'm surprised a five month old promotion hasn't been zapped by advertising standards, because that's ridiculous...

 

[viewsource]

I know much has been made of the Jammin' Jars situation in recent years regarding dishonest game rules... but I spotted this curious one from Wazdan on their "Hold The Jackpot" game series:

View attachment 201217

How can "the outcome of each and every game [be] completely independent" when your game design is fundamentally about stored value (temporary or permanently sticky symbols).

It's a common statement in game rules, I know that WMS have used it for years... (and in their case is true because there is no stored value) View attachment 201218

I understand what they are trying to infer (about randomness) but that statement is completely bogus on a stored value game - especially one that can persist across hundreds of game rounds (which Wazdan games are notorious for - hold the boredom more like ).

As a related aside, it doesn't help when their promotions are similarly misleading - a "£4m" prize pool which has been calculated by multiplying 100,000 boxes by the top £40 prize, even though there are four prize tiers (£5, £10, £20, £40) with no information on the distribution. So they know internally what the expected prize pool is, but decide to lie about it instead... I'm surprised a five month old promotion hasn't been zapped by advertising standards, because that's ridiculous...

I recently had a red persistent coin with a value of 15x on one of these games. After exhausting my balance, I had to redeposit which also necessitated a refresh of the game to pick up my new balance at which point the red coin was gone. Fool me once, shame on you and all that so on the provider ban list they go.