RTP of games, how is it monitored, by whom and at what point is action taken?

[deleted-user-20240310]

Hello!

I was just wondering how can a game (Tombstone) advertised at approx 96% RTP run at significantly lower RTP for a very long time? In my knowledge, the only sites which show the true RTP of games are videoslots.com and mrvegas.com. I know for a fact, that mrvegas is approx one year old, and their RTP shows 87.9%. Videoslots has been around for years, and I guess they have had Tombstone from the games publication - yet it still has approx 4% lower RTP than this game should have (92.1%). I know the game is volatile, but there has most certainly been billions of spins on this game in this timeframe. All casinos say that the RTP should come close to the TRTP over time, but in my opinion 4% (let alone 9%) is quite a difference.

So, at what point is the RTP checked and by who and what actions are taken if the game constantly runs on too low RTP?

Obviously the game exists on plenty other casinos as well, so it might be that some of them is sporting way over 100%RTP over the years, but the only available data is from the sites showing the true RTP. And videoslots is quite popular site..

PS. Before anyone says the game is not popular enough, I checked on mrvegas.com, Tombstone is on page 525/544 when sorted by least played ascending (10/page)...

PPS. For instance Bonanza is spot on (96%) on both casinos.

 

[NolimitCity - Pelle]

@bamberfishcake We monitor across the network - and also on specific markets. Never had to "rectify" so don't know - and I hope that we never need to either.

 

[bamberfishcake]

@manttih

Dont know if you can read the graph but its on the UKGC website.

It shows the allowed deviation, which as you may be able to tell is much more than 1% during its initial life span and tightens the more the slot is played.

I mean there is a time allowed for the RTP to settle when I said 'bed in'.

 

[BCKings]

Depending on where you come from Videoslots uses different RTPs. In Germany the RTP on Tombstone is 90.27%.

Still a difference to 87.9 but maybe they run it even lower in other countries, who knows?!

It is lower in Germany because the tax is higher and they need to somehow make a profit. It might be the case for other countries too.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

@bamberfishcake , I'm not sure were discussing the same thing. The graph you send shows up to million spins. I do understand that RTP may vary A LOT initially, but it should stabilize close to TRTP around 1000 000 spins (as shown on chart). However, that shows only medium -volatility games. So there must be some rules for high-volatile games such as Tombstone - and I am pretty sure its not 'billions of spins'.

**

EDIT:

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

.That page should have a chart showing exactly the difference between low-medium-high volatibility games, but for some reason the chart is missing I might ask this directly from UKGC, not sure how fondly they answer to players not on their region. I'm very sure MGA wont even answer this question...

 

[bamberfishcake]

@bamberfishcake , I'm not sure were discussing the same thing. The graph you send shows up to million spins. I do understand that RTP may vary A LOT initially, but it should stabilize close to TRTP around 1000 000 spins (as shown on chart). However, that shows only medium -volatility games. So there must be some rules for high-volatile games such as Tombstone - and I am pretty sure its not 'billions of spins'.

We are talking about the same thing - deviation.

Chart uses a mid-vol game as an example but the allowable deviation will be the same no matter because it's based on RTP, not volatility. (I think)

 

[bamberfishcake]

@bamberfishcake We monitor across the network - and also on specific markets. Never had to "rectify" so don't know - and I hope that we never need to either.

Thanks Pelle,

Appreciate you have never had to rectify but am I right in thinking you have a process ready?

Can't imagine you would all run around the office waving your hands in the air crying 'what do we do!'

Maybe you cant say, which is fine, I respect that. But I have to ask, what's the procedure if it does need correcting?

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

@bamberfishcake , exactly - this is why I started this thread The only data available to players is trough videoslots / mrvegas, and on both of them, the game is running below TRTP. I am quite sure both sites have way over million spins played over the years (I managed over 2000 in couple of hours without autoplay or stopping the spins before they're finished). There is always the possibility of some sites running over 100% RTP, but there is no way for us players to know this.

 

[abuyang]

2. Can you be more specific on This is reviewed by the regulators as well? How often, between how many spins and what's the approved deviation in x number of spins? You can understand why you monitoring the game is not enough, as you get income from games running at too low RTP (4% lower over 1000 000 spins is A LOT of money).

I am afraid we will never get a clear answer to this question. Moreover, we know well what the answer is: nobody REALLY controls what casino games providers do.
I believe there was an incentive for the big providers of the past to keep the games fair. But, since the market was flooded with the new providers in the last 5-6 years, this fair play incentive was substituted by the fierce competition which eventually led to the reduced rtp across all the industry and, of course, the outright rigging of the games (real rtp has nothing to do with the advertised one).

 

[NolimitCity - Pelle]

Nah, I'm just not part of that process more than I'm checking the reports of it. The procedures are all in place if something happens - stipulated by each regulatory market - if an alarm goes off or something is off in general. There are other dudes at Nolimit that's working if those bits fails, so I don't have any hands-on reponsibility for it myself and don't know the procedures.

 

[bamberfishcake]

Thanks Pelle,

@trancemonkey sorry to put you on the spot. I understand if you cannot say.

What's the corrective procedure by game studios to bring RTP back in line?

 

[EngrishJonny]

I never really understood RTP either.

In my early slotting days I'd ask Chat questions, like how the RTP can say 96% if my balance say 0, and things of that nature.

Never trusted a single Chat agent since

Ok so RTP means Return to Player / it’s is a setting that is programmed Into every game. - Keep in mind this is based on Very Large , like very very large data sets - so imagine 1,000,000 people playing the same slot 20 hours a day for 20,000 years kinda numbers.

But it’s a basic yardpost of the odds of winninng - so if RTP is 90% - In a perfect world you start with $100 - you would walk away with $90.

The casino sets the RTP if given the option by provider (BTG you cannot change ; play and go has about 3 settings)

The lower the RTP the shitter the odds

Smart money would stay away from online Casinos like Mr Vegas , Video slots etc as they will always pick the worst odds for the player giving the house a better edge.

Now - as we are all gambler and sometimes games are “hot”’or “on a roll” or “cold” - Some sites show your PERSONAL RTP (Amount spent Vs Amount Won); and some show “current conditions” -
If you were wondering why they all look different.

 

[SpinUk]

@Reelsoffun has described it all very well. As a provider, if you want to be 100% safe and remove issues caused by large bet sizes, you would monitor cash in / cash out for each stake independently. I know some providers do that, but i'm not sure how many.

@manttih All games are independently tested and verified - at least in regulated markets. RTP's are checked and certified. Does that mean that mistakes don't happen and some games run under / over? No - look at NetEnt's streetfighter for example.

I'm well aware of casinos panicking and asking us to check games for being over percentage as well as being under. However, the regulators only have to be informed if the game is under-paying as this is not in the players benefit. Of course, the provider will be told if it's over, and will be expected to check and fix if necessary

Be interested to know how common a game is underpaying or overpaying. If underpaying what are the steps taken apart from the regulator being told. Do players need to be told / are they compensated? Is there a threshold of reporting moneytary or percentage-wise? Is there annual reporting to the regulator of real rtp numbers against expected?

 

[Kroffe]

Do players need to be told / are they compensated?

 

[satchnz]

Be interested to know how common a game is underpaying or overpaying. If underpaying what are the steps taken apart from the regulator being told. Do players need to be told / are they compensated? Is there a threshold of reporting moneytary or percentage-wise? Is there annual reporting to the regulator of real rtp numbers against expected?

Was Baron Bloodmore and the Crimson Castle one of these games? That seemed to pay very well on release, then suddenly it was pulled for a few weeks and now it just doesn’t play the same (aka it’s now tight af).

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

@SpinUk Do players need to be told / are they compensated?.

That is the reason I started the thread. Say a game like Tombstone runs a year on 87%. TRTP is 94%, so there is a deviation of 7%. If some action is taken at this point, what happens to the money already lost by players playing the game on (way too) low RTP? I bet it isnt returned to players.

Which brings the question: If games can run on too low RTP without anyone doing anything about it, why wouldnt providers/casinos set it to run on too low RTP? 7% deviation means a lot more money to the ones offering these games.

 

[bamberfishcake]

Exactly, and personally think you have hit the nail on the head.

I think the ambiguity around the monitoring and correcting of RTP tells the story.

If it was all clear and above board there would be detailed information and a clear response from those in the know.

Hopefully, one of us stumbles across some concrete proof, or, at least somebody who is willing to shed some light on the process. Until then, it feels like banging your head against a brick wall trying to get a direct answer.

Personally, I think it's as simple as a game developer monitoring and then throwing out some big hits when needed to keep it legit. Of course, that won't be admitted because it destroys the 'each spin is random' claim.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

Probably a coincidence, but when mrvegas had been running for 8 months, I asked about Tombstone RTP (which at the time was around 75%). Couple of months later it had gone 10% up.

 

[andym]

Dont try to understand a ‚random concept‘ which is not random at all.

 

[neon claws]

so if RTP is 90% - In a perfect world you start with $100 - you would walk away with $90.

No.
If you did a single $100 bet, your average loss would be $10 PER SPIN.
Any RTP less than 100% assures you of walking away with $0, eventually.

Regarding "compensation" I've heard mainly of games that pay over RTP due to bugs, the only one I recall paying under was one that had an unwinnable jackpot? And they compensated everyone who had played it which was a pretty impressive bookmaking feat. Can't remember the game or casino though.

What it comes down to is the game providers say "we are regulated by so-and-so", and certain players will always say "well we don't trust so-and-so" to which the game providers can only say "so?"

The reason I trust RTP to be as stated is there's no reason for it not to be.

 

[bamberfishcake]

The reason I trust RTP to be as stated is there's no reason for it not to be

Come on, you really believe that statement?

No reason for RTP to not be legit? I didn't think you were that naive.

Not saying it's not, but there are clear motives for it not to be.

 

[neon claws]

Come on, you really believe that statement?

No reason for RTP to not be legit? I didn't think you were that naive.

Not saying it's not, but there are clear motives for it not to be.

1. A higher RTP slot provides a more enjoyable user experience
2. Anything below 100% will result in the casino getting all your money eventually anyway
3. The lower it is the quicker you'll lose certainly but that's not good for player retention
4. The risk of being caught out either by rogue employees or statistical analysis would be almost a certainty

 

[brianmon]

1. A higher RTP slot provides a more enjoyable user experience
2. Anything below 100% will result in the casino getting all your money eventually anyway
3. The lower it is the quicker you'll lose certainly but that's not good for player retention
4. The risk of being caught out either by rogue employees or statistical analysis would be almost a certainty

IF that's the case, WHY are casinos opting for lower RTP games?
It doesn't seem like good business sense, if all it does is make the experience less enjoyable and is bad for player retention.

IF that's the case why not have slots running at 99% RTP. Why not give players the BEST experience?

 

[bamberfishcake]

1. A higher RTP slot provides a more enjoyable user experience
2. Anything below 100% will result in the casino getting all your money eventually anyway
3. The lower it is the quicker you'll lose certainly but that's not good for player retention
4. The risk of being caught out either by rogue employees or statistical analysis would be almost a certainty

Absolutely agree with all points except for the last.

Agree the risk of being caught out by a rogue employee is a real one.

Statistical analysis is secretive and spread out and the knowledge around how it's monitored, audited and corrected is vague and missing

 

[neon claws]

IF that's the case, WHY are casinos opting for lower RTP games?
It doesn't seem like good business sense, if all it does is make the experience less enjoyable and is bad for player retention.

IF that's the case why not have slots running at 99% RTP. Why not give players the BEST experience?

I don't believe most casinos are opting for lower RTP slots, some of them are, no doubt, and that may just be because the bosses at these joints intuitively believe that lower RTP= more profit, it would not be the first time a business had acted against it's own long term self interest due to greed and ignorance.
Perhaps also with a higher RTP on today's high volatility slots there is concern with exposure to high initial payouts in the early stages of a games release being more risky than a casino would like to deal with, most people are more comfortable raising their bets when a machine is playing nicely rather than taking them to the cleaners.
To your second question; some slots do run at 99%, not many certainly but I'm pretty sure if you plotted people's ratings (enjoyment) of a game vs the games' RTP you would see positive correlation.

I suppose one way to look at it is if you ran a casino and you could have only slots that paid either 1% RTP or 99% RTP which would you choose? Option 1 would get you your first days profit a few hours quicker than option 2 but I don't think you'd have many people coming back on day 2.

 

[neon claws]

Statistical analysis is secretive and spread out and the knowledge around how it's monitored, audited and corrected is vague and missing

Not sure what you mean.
If you doubt a games trtp you write a script to send a few million spins and see how close it ends up. If you don't believe the demo mode is the same and want to use real money, different accounts, bets etc you use something like slot tracker.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

1. A higher RTP slot provides a more enjoyable user experience
2. Anything below 100% will result in the casino getting all your money eventually anyway
3. The lower it is the quicker you'll lose certainly but that's not good for player retention
4. The risk of being caught out either by rogue employees or statistical analysis would be almost a certainty

1. We are constantly told on this this forum that 'there is no difference in play' whether the game runs at 94-98% (I think eg. @trancemonkey told this on another thread I read). This should be the case if the RTP is calculated on LOADS of spins. So I dont think a lower RTP affects the user experience?
2. You do realize the difference, if house edge is eg. 4% - 8%. If we are talking a billion 1€ spins, 92% RTP means that casino/provider gets 4% more of that money (as a VERY simplified example).
3. see parts 1.2.
4. Rogue employees might be a thing , true. But as proven by this thread, it seems no one either knows or tells if this is even monitored by anyone not gaining direct income from lowered RTP.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

Not sure what you mean.
If you doubt a games trtp you write a script to send a few million spins and see how close it ends up. If you don't believe the demo mode is the same and want to use real money, different accounts, bets etc you use something like slot tracker.

I am sure that videoslots and mrvegas has been played 'a few million' spins. You cannot expect a single player to play 'a few million' spins on real money - and even if they do, the reply would be 'not enough spins played'.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

No.
If you did a single $100 bet, your average loss would be $10 PER SPIN.
Any RTP less than 100% assures you of walking away with $0, eventually.

Regarding "compensation" I've heard mainly of games that pay over RTP due to bugs, the only one I recall paying under was one that had an unwinnable jackpot? And they compensated everyone who had played it which was a pretty impressive bookmaking feat. Can't remember the game or casino though.

What it comes down to is the game providers say "we are regulated by so-and-so", and certain players will always say "well we don't trust so-and-so" to which the game providers can only say "so?"

The reason I trust RTP to be as stated is there's no reason for it not to be.

I don't thik it is 'impressive bookmakin feat' if it is against the law to advertise a jackpot which cannot be won? Isn't it the least a casino could do? To return the money to players who were lied to? Anyways, I would love to know more about this case, can it be found somewhere on the internet?

Also, the providers can say so much more than 'so?'. I have asked several times the simple question on this thread:

Is there anyone monitoring the RTP who doesn't gain direct income from the games running at lower RTP? If so, how often is the RTP tested and what happens if the game runs at too low RTP - is the money returned to the players? What is the approved RTP deviation in high-volatile games?

Basic, simple questions which still hasn't been answered by anyone of 'people in the industry'.

 

[bamberfishcake]

Not sure what you mean.
If you doubt a games trtp you write a script to send a few million spins and see how close it ends up. If you don't believe the demo mode is the same and want to use real money, different accounts, bets etc you use something like slot tracker.

Read the thread or the last few comments for a better understanding of what I mean and the entire purpose of the thread

When you do that I may consider writing a script for a few million spins - hilarious

 

[abuyang]

Double post deleted

 

[abuyang]

If there was only one gaming software provider out there - the argument by Neon Claw could be quite legible. In fact, for many years the situation was quite similar to that with only 3-4 big players (MG, Playtech, Netent…) sharing the whole market. Then we had an influx of the dozens and dozens new providers which happened around year 2016. And this is when the troubles with the ‘flexible and reduced RTP’ were introduced for the first time in the almost 20 years of the online casino gambling history.
In my opinion, the gaming providers (RNG games providers) industry should be strictly regulated and controlled (in the LIVE MODE regime) with the number of available licenses limited to no more than 5. Otherwise, we might never see the fair online gambling ever again.

 

[neon claws]

1. We are constantly told on this this forum that 'there is no difference in play' whether the game runs at 94-98% (I think eg. @trancemonkey told this on another thread I read). This should be the case if the RTP is calculated on LOADS of spins. So I dont think a lower RTP affects the user experience?
2. You do realize the difference, if house edge is eg. 4% - 8%. If we are talking a billion 1€ spins, 92% RTP means that casino/provider gets 4% more of that money (as a VERY simplified example).
3. see parts 1.2.
4. Rogue employees might be a thing , true. But as proven by this thread, it seems no one either knows or tells if this is even monitored by anyone not gaining direct income from lowered RTP.

1. I don't recall anyone ever saying there's no difference in play for different RTP versions, nor would I know why they'd say that.
2. Any house edge results in the casino getting the players entire bankroll. A higher house edge just means they get it in fewer spins. Reducing RTP by 4% does not magically make the player have 4% more money in their bank account to lose.
4. Your argument here is predicated upon lowered RTP being profitable and there is no source of accountability that you would be satisfied with. I could tell you that it is monitored by the pope himself and you'd say he's on the payroll. Slot Tracker exists, also so you can check actual RTP over many thousands of users game sessions.

 

[neon claws]

If there was only one gaming software provider out there - the argument by Neon Claw could be quite legible. In fact, for many years the situation was quite similar to that with only 3-4 big players (MG, Playtech, Netent…) sharing the whole market. Then we had an influx of the dozens and dozens new providers which happened around year 2016. And this is when the troubles with the ‘flexible and reduced RTP’ were introduced for the first time in the almost 20 years of the online casino gambling history.
In my opinion, the gaming providers (RNG games providers) industry should be strictly regulated and controlled (in the LIVE MODE regime) with the number of available licenses limited to no more than 5. Otherwise, we might never see the fair online gambling ever again.

Why would the number of providers affect anything I've said? Since when do monopolies result in market fairness? Why 5? Who gets to choose those five?

 

[goatwack]

So the industry is regularly audited by......Slot Tracker?

Are companies beholden to it as the golden standard? Because if say a game ran at 79% for that month, would the game's RTP be read as 79%?

And if the 'overall spins' figure is a few percentage points off the companies' advertized RTP, does that fall under the pretext of TRTP? Or have not enough spins been run through it yet, like e.g several billion?

 

[neon claws]

I advised slot tracker because I do not know who runs the audits, I'm just a regular player, and I know that whoever does run the audits will not be satisfactory for the people in these threads, so it would seem that a solution to crowd source real life slot statistics, aka slot tracker, should be exactly what they'd be after if they had any interest in attempting to prove their point about fake RTP's.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

1. I don't recall anyone ever saying there's no difference in play for different RTP versions, nor would I know why they'd say that.
2. Any house edge results in the casino getting the players entire bankroll. A higher house edge just means they get it in fewer spins. Reducing RTP by 4% does not magically make the player have 4% more money in their bank account to lose.
4. Your argument here is predicated upon lowered RTP being profitable and there is no source of accountability that you would be satisfied with. I could tell you that it is monitored by the pope himself and you'd say he's on the payroll. Slot Tracker exists, also so you can check actual RTP over many thousands of users game sessions.

1. the thread was this one: RTP is too low.. - Casinomeister Forum. eg. @trancemonkey said: Upping the RTP to 98% would make very little difference to how it feels. The games would be very dull if the RTP is exact short -term, but that is not the point of this thread.
2. exactly, that's why I said it was very simplified example. One also has to consider other factors (such as 4% lower RTP games causes less withdrawals eg.). However, the RTP is the only thing a player can follow.
4. What? I dont care what you say (if you are not in the industry) This is an industry where players play these games on promises on randomness, honesty etc. Dont you agree that a player has the right to know who does this testing constantly? Why would you believe providers / casinos blindly, they make money of these games? Industry people here ask why would they lower RTP, The true question is why wouldn't they (which still isn't answered properly).

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

I advised slot tracker because I do not know who runs the audits, I'm just a regular player, and I know that whoever does run the audits will not be satisfactory for the people in these threads, so it would seem that a solution to crowd source real life slot statistics, aka slot tracker, should be exactly what they'd be after if they had any interest in attempting to prove their point about fake RTP's.

Why would you think we wouldnt be satisfied in the answer - how would you know if no answer at all is given?

 

[neon claws]

And if the 'overall spins' figure is a few percentage points off the companies' advertized RTP, does that fall under the pretext of TRTP? Or have not enough spins been run through it yet, like e.g several billion?

If you're that interested you can work out exactly how probable an outcome is based on whatever sized sample you choose

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

but generally speaking for all but the highest volatility games they should regress to the mean fairly rapidly, so if it's a little bit off the trtp you can at least see how it's trending and extrapolate.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

If you're that interested you can work out exactly how probable an outcome is based on whatever sized sample you choose

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

but generally speaking for all but the highest volatility games they should regress to the mean fairly rapidly, so if it's a little bit off the trtp you can at least see how it's trending and extrapolate.

As said previously in this thread, medium-volatility-games approved deviation (as said by UKGC) is approx 1% in million spins. No data is available what's the case with highest volatility games.

 

[neon claws]

Why would you think we wouldnt be satisfied in the answer - how would you know if no answer at all is given?

Ok, if all you want to know is who's testing the games then here's a bunch of them: vegasslotsonline.com/gaming-fairness-and-testing-companies/

As to ongoing monitoring; you're proposing that they might have a high RTP slot cleared through the testing house and then push out a lower RTP version under the radar? Or that the initial testing just got the RTP wrong?

The first scenario you'd need to ask an actual dev what protections are in place there, the second you'd need to ask a mathematician.

As I'm neither I'm tapping out of the thread.

 

[bamberfishcake]

I advised slot tracker because I do not know who runs the audits, I'm just a regular player, and I know that whoever does run the audits will not be satisfactory for the people in these threads, so it would seem that a solution to crowd source real life slot statistics, aka slot tracker, should be exactly what they'd be after if they had any interest in attempting to prove their point about fake RTP's.

That's very assumptive of you to declare that any audit would be sniffed at.

The whole point of this thread is to seek and find some kind of audited proof or some definition of a system.

I choose not to use slot tracker because I don't want bucket loads of apps on my computer, it might interfere with my script writing for my million spins test run.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

Ok, if all you want to know is who's testing the games then here's a bunch of them: vegasslotsonline.com/gaming-fairness-and-testing-companies/

As to ongoing monitoring; you're proposing that they might have a high RTP slot cleared through the testing house and then push out a lower RTP version under the radar? Or that the initial testing just got the RTP wrong?

The first scenario you'd need to ask an actual dev what protections are in place there, the second you'd need to ask a mathematician.

As I'm neither I'm tapping out of the thread.

Yes, I know all about the independent testers. If I was cynical, I would ask who tests the testers, as someone asked on another thread. Provided they are truly independent: if games are tested only once before publication by independent tester, who is to say a lower RTP version isn't inserted on casinos / the game isn't changed after this? That is exactly what we are trying to figure out on this thread. There was a thread a while ago about some BTG game, which immediately after publishing provided some serious bugs - how is this possible if the independent testers had thoroughly tested the game?

 

[brianmon]

'Back in the day', IIRC, the Microgaming 'download casinos' used to advertise that they were audited by Egogra.

Ecogra was founded by Roger Raatgever in 2003, who purely by coincidence was the CEO of Microgaming.

 

[LoopsterAU]

When it comes to testing of slots I wonder what testing is done other than simulating the same bet over and over again x amount of times.

I doubt it would take into account real world play such as raising stakes etc.

Remember Dieselgate where the cars computer would detect that its under an audit and behave completely different to real world, doubt these games would be any different especially when there's a lot of money at stake.

As for Ecogra and Microgaming, I always found that funny where the auditor and one being audited are controlled by the same people, no conflict of interest there.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

@LoopsterAU , especially as it would be ridicilously easy to do this (game playing differently under an audit)

 

[abuyang]

Why would the number of providers affect anything I've said? Since when do monopolies result in market fairness? Why 5? Who gets to choose those five?

Because monopolists or even 3-4 big players (and I refer to this specific industry of RNG games providers ONLY) have a great market share and their positions are stable. Why would they risk everything by changing anything (like suddenly introducing ridiculous 84% RTP slots, for example)? The excessive competition in this industry inevitably results in the reduced RTP rat race across all the market plus hugely increases the probability of the providers rigging their games in order to fight the competition. This is exactly what we see in the current market and what supports my views more than anything else could.

 

[trancemonkey]

Thanks Pelle,

@trancemonkey sorry to put you on the spot. I understand if you cannot say.

What's the corrective procedure by game studios to bring RTP back in line?

Corrective procedure would be to fix the game. If a game has overpaid, then under certain circumstances the provider may be liable for lost revenue to the casino(s) - depends on the contract i would imagine. If the game has underpaid, then unless it's on specific feature or something that you could narrow down so you could pay the players specific losses, then i believe that the different sometimes is made up in the way of "fines" or "donations to gambling charities" or suchlike. Again, it would depend on the regulator.

Someone earlier asked why you would admit to this if you were a casino or game provider - the answer is very simple. If you don't, and the regulators get complaints from players, or they do a random audit, and they find out - you're almost certain to lose your license or face huge penalties. So yes, to some extent it's self-policing - but so are many things. But if you get caught not self-policing, there are huge risks and penalties.

 

[deleted-user-20240310]

@trancemonkey, thanks for the reply! So the money is not returned to players but as taken fines - to whom, gambling commisions? Isn't there a conflict of interest here, as I understand casinos pay gambling commissions for their license?

The question indeed is why wouldn't they. I once asked MGA about a certain games RTP , they dismissed me with the notion the game is high volatile / the game is entertainment - without even checking the data I sent them. So, what is the place a player can send complaint to? Why would gambling commission do a random audit (let alone take action) if they get their money as licenses from casinos?

Are there any examples in casinos / proviers getting these sort of fines?

These might be stupid questions, but worth asking

 

[trancemonkey]

Come on, you really believe that statement?

No reason for RTP to not be legit? I didn't think you were that naive.

Not saying it's not, but there are clear motives for it not to be.

No there aren't clear motives - not for any regulated company. But there will always be dodgy ones - play at any non-gamstop casino or any unregulated market, and you'll meet the dodgy ones for sure. For everyone else, the loss of license and their business is normally risk enough.

You are right to be skeptical, and i'm sure there are dodgy people and companies in the industry - but they will be the minority, not the majority

 

[trancemonkey]

1. We are constantly told on this this forum that 'there is no difference in play' whether the game runs at 94-98% (I think eg. @trancemonkey told this on another thread I read). This should be the case if the RTP is calculated on LOADS of spins. So I dont think a lower RTP affects the user experience?
2. You do realize the difference, if house edge is eg. 4% - 8%. If we are talking a billion 1€ spins, 92% RTP means that casino/provider gets 4% more of that money (as a VERY simplified example).
3. see parts 1.2.
4. Rogue employees might be a thing , true. But as proven by this thread, it seems no one either knows or tells if this is even monitored by anyone not gaining direct income from lowered RTP.

I've never said number 1 - there HAS to be a difference, but how we lower the RTP in a game can mask the difference more or less depending on how you do it. For example, let's just say you have a 98% game, and 6% of all wins are over 1000x (which will be very rare). If you somehow lower that to 2% instead of 6%, the game will be almost identical with the difference being that the very high wins will be 66% less often.