New Malta RTP regs

[jetset]

MGA PUBLISHES RTP DIRECTIVE

Along with proposed monitoring system.

The Malta Gambling Authority (MGA) has published new minimum return to player (RTP) obligations on operators licensed in terms of the Remote Gaming Regulations.

The new regulation 46A requires that specified casino-type games offered under a remote gaming licence abide by a minimum average RTP of 92 percent or any such higher percentage as stipulated through the licence condition.

Further clarity to these requirements are established in tandem with the publishing of the Return to Player Directive (Directive 1 of 2016). This Directive specifies the games for which the minimum average return to player obligation is applicable, as well as the methodology which the MGA may use in ensuring compliance with the requirement such as periodic checks, and / or certification.

The new regulation 49A further requires licensees to make information, related to fees and average winnings, available to players to enhance consumer protection measures in terms of transparency and fairness of games.

Legal Notice 131 of 2016 also introduces the new Part XVIII on the power of the MGA to implement a monitoring system following public consultation and stakeholder interaction.

The Enhanced Automated Reporting Platform (EARP) for remote gaming is intended to streamline, automate and enhance certain reporting and compliance processes, reducing complexities in investigations and strengthening the regulatory framework, the MGA said.

New regulations 61 to 63 empower the MGA to operate the platform, connect it to licensees’ systems and set out parameters for which the platform may be used.

 

[Simmo!]

I think this is excellent news. Be interesting to see if it starts a trend.

 

[goatwack]

Just how do you ensure a 92% RTP, if the slots are supposed to be random? And how is this to be enforced over an ongoing, endless cycle of spins?

Perhaps if the criteria were to be within 100,000 spins or something, but as it is, it looks like games will truly be rigged after all. Bring on the tinfoil!

 

[dunover]

Having said that, in Europe it's hard to find (aside from Playtech hell) any slots or casinos games that pay <92%.

As Simmo knows and those who compile or take note of game RTP's it's unusual to get one. You won't find a Netent/WMS/MG/Nextgen etc. that low anyway IIRC.

I think the objective is to provide a baseline for future offerings the MGA licenses rather than altering any existing games, or to ensure licensees in the future don't offer shite games.

It sounds good, but given it'd be suicide for casinos to offer such poor games, what effect will it actually have? Seems like a bit of posturing to me....

Goatwack - it actually refers to TRTP, the accepted figure when the games are audited and licensed. Look at siites like VS which show current RTP's on any given game (I think it's VS?) and they seldom deviate too much from the TRTP in any case.

 

[Simmo!]

It sounds good, but given it'd be suicide for casinos to offer such poor games, what effect will it actually have? Seems like a bit of posturing to me....

What it might do is at least temper attempts to reduce RTP with "new versions" as we saw with the Marvel Slots 50-line games, which dipped below 92% and shaved around 2-3% off the 20/25 line versions. Or at the very least, it sets a floor and gives players some sort of safety net, especially with games where the RTP isn't always easy to find or is published as a range.

 

[dunover]

What it might do is at least temper attempts to reduce RTP with "new versions" as we saw with the Marvel Slots 50-line games, which dipped below 92% and shaved around 2-3% off the 20/25 line versions. Or at the very least, it sets a floor and gives players some sort of safety net, especially with games where the RTP isn't always easy to find or is published as a range.

Yes - hence my 'Playtech hell' comment! Actually I have taken a look at the 'range' TRTP games (usually IGT/Barcrest) and they hugely start at a lower figure in excess of 92%. So if it only affects Playtake games, all the better!

 

[Slotplayer83]

Just how do you ensure a 92% RTP, if the slots are supposed to be random? And how is this to be enforced over an ongoing, endless cycle of spins?

Perhaps if the criteria were to be within 100,000 spins or something, but as it is, it looks like games will truly be rigged after all. Bring on the tinfoil!

Slots are indeed random, but always within a set of parameters. Hence why either the maths behind it ensure or the alrogithm of the slot or rheels in general, assure. These things get tested. Playing on a 92% is'nt bad really as long as the volatility is'nt taken to the moon. And that is the problem with online slots these days. It consumes so much and it gives such ridiculous wins out; what happend with inserting a bill, pressing play for 3 times, hitting a bonus and walk away? Nah. Any game these days requires a minimum of 50 spins before something happens. And some 300 spins. Its killing the good vibe.

 

[Gaz237]

Slots are indeed random, but always within a set of parameters. Hence why either the maths behind it ensure or the alrogithm of the slot or rheels in general, assure. These things get tested. Playing on a 92% is'nt bad really as long as the volatility is'nt taken to the moon. And that is the problem with online slots these days. It consumes so much and it gives such ridiculous wins out; what happend with inserting a bill, pressing play for 3 times, hitting a bonus and walk away? Nah. Any game these days requires a minimum of 50 spins before something happens. And some 300 spins. Its killing the good vibe.

Your 5 years too late for the party.