Videoslots Shocker!

snorky510238

Chief glockenspiel maker
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Location
Uk
Flip a coin 100 times and let me know when you to get to 100 flips without getting a tails.

View attachment 171225
Well, there are only 2 outcomes when flipping a coin unless you use the Evolution coin flipper, where it’s possible it can land on its edge. :laugh:

Therefore, it is more than highly probable that you will spin tails at some point before completing a hundred spins. Also you have tried to create a random situation.

Random definition: made, done, or happening without method or conscious decision.
 
Award winning Videoslots is reviewed by Casinomeister

Deeplay

New World Order
webmeister
CAG
mm1
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Location
The biG Eu
Thanks Deeplay - I mention them only to counter the assertion that my views on the world of gambling are coming from a place of 'unicorns and lollipops'.
I agree and I remember back in the day when fortune lounge we the dogs bollocks when it came to VIPS they took me for dinner etc ... they were doing the rounds in Europe visiting vips (i gambled a lot then!) and we spoke on conspiracy theories. I always remember him saying they have no reason at all to cheat. The system is inbuilt to ensure over time they get everything. His boss would complain when they would have some massive payouts but then ... it always turned around. He never went to detail but he told me there is nothing they need to do but let the games and maths model do the work. The ways they would try to influence were through promos / comping / vip treatments etc player loyalty. Everything else was built in.

Most new slots today are crap to play - but they are not bent. Just very smart math models - and I can guarantee play a game long enough you come out with a loss. Bonanaza is an extreme example because I think it has a very clever maths model - but its not bent. In the end if I felt any game online was not legit Its very simple - I would not put play it. There is nothing to see here but an ocean of tin foil hat myth and legend. But some people will always see patterns where they are none.
 

catsdeadnow

Newbie member
Joined
Jan 4, 2015
Location
Canada
Yes but the White Hats are coming from a starting position of the games being developed, tested, regulated and licensed in tightly regulated jurisdictions where the penalties for non-compliance are extremely harsh. Maybe the lack of evidence that the games aren't bent is because..... they're not bent? Why make a bent 96% game when you can just release a 94% maths model of it? You've just increased the house edge by 50% at a stroke and done it entirely within the rules.

VS are running Mystery Reels Megaways at 93.09%, a house edge of 6.91%, there's your con, right there, in plain sight! No further trickery required.

Almost anything is a possibility, it's a possibility that the entire universe is simply a construct of goatwack's imagination and we are all neurons in his intergalactic sized brain, and everything that happens in our lives is based on how happy he is with his daily God-sized sandwich. I mean, it's highly unlikely, but it's a possibility, right? It might be, right?

Random games with a house edge make money as a mathematical certainty, if the casinos want to make more money, they can run games with a lower RTP. Has Bonanza been changed? I don't know. Some people seem sure it has, and maybe they're right. But if it's certified and it makes RTP then it ultimately makes no difference anyway, I still don't understand the point of doing this when the RTP is identical and the game is so popular anyway, and yeah it would be a bit scummy to change a game without telling the players, but it's within the rules.
In fairness, any of us trying our best to be objective and open-minded would probably prefer the following:
It's possible that the lack of evidence that the games aren't bent is because..... they're not bent.
It's also possible that the games are bent, but there's no evidence because there's been no detection.
And it's also possible that bent games have been detected, but the evidence has been suppressed and not disclosed.

Surely each of is entitled to claim and argue which of the above is most and least likely to be true. And each of us is entitled to use and reference any and all insights and information we have to support our arguments.

But from what I've been reading on here, none of those insights and none of that information -- however thoughtful -- is actually proof.

Even so, I believe you and all other White Hats are entitled to have your insights and your information carefully and respectfully considered. But I believe Black Hats' entitlement is no less and no different.

For example, I'd carefully considered your comment that (eg) casinos don't have to make games bent to make more money. The headline news about Hard Rock I cited is hardly proof that slots at Rideau Carleton Raceway had been bent. It is, however, proof that, in at least this one instance, operators violated dozens and dozens of different regulations for almost two years, with one sole focus and objective: Making even more money. At 85% RTP, they were obviously already making truckloads. They didn't have to operate dishonestly and underhandedly. They chose to. The fine they paid is a mere cost-of-doing-business tax.

Seems to me your essential default is (i.e.) 'There's absolutely no need or reason to incur the potentially catastrophic risks of tinkering when simply reducing the RTP achieves the same goal legally'.

Understood - but here are the problems I'm having (over and above serious marital difficulties I was only recently advised I was actually having): What's it called and what does it mean if casino personnel claim and represent that a slot's RTP is X and in fact it's actually less than X? And if you don't believe that scenario is possible, why don't you believe it's possible?
 

ChopleyIOM

Toxic Wokesel Libtard Snowflake Remoaner Marxist
webby
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Location
IOM
Well, there are only 2 outcomes when flipping a coin unless you use the Evolution coin flipper, where it’s possible it can land on its edge. :laugh:

Therefore, it is more than highly probable that you will spin tails at some point before completing a hundred spins. Also you have tried to create a random situation.

Random definition: made, done, or happening without method or conscious decision.

It is a random situation, or rather, a random event. And by 'highly probable' we're talking odds to the extent that I'd cheerfully stake my life on it never happening in exchange for ten million quid if every person on the planet started flipping coins today and did nothing else until they died or flipped 100 heads on the trot - and if they got 100 heads I'd be killed on the spot, or forced to play Starburst for the rest of my life (I'm not sure which would be worse).

A random slot is kind of just a coin except it has billions of sides instead of two, if you add up every single possible result, with each generation of a result costing £1, then on average each result returns 96p.

I'd do the bag of balls thing but goatwack has already sent a shot across the bows on that front.....
 

snorky510238

Chief glockenspiel maker
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Location
Uk
But that’s my exact point. A true random event cannot be influenced in any way. Using these examples, where outcomes are influenced heavily by the structure of the activity cannot be classified as random. They are more predetermined.

I don’t see any difference between a slot that is classified as compensated and a slot classified as random.

A compensated slot pays the said percentage so if it says 96% payout, that is what it should do.

A random slot pays 96% rtp so that means that it is what it should do.

Where is the difference here?
 

satchnz

Experienced Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2021
Location
Essex, UK
This thread has become a battle between experiences and theories. Experiences are something you know. Theories are something you have to believe. It’s human nature to believe your experiences over theories.

(I’m attempting to be deep here, but I’m several bourbons into the afternoon so none of this may make sense - apologies)
 

pinnit2014

Ueber Meister
PABnoaccred
mm1
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Location
Glasgow and Home - N Ireland
This thread has become a battle between experiences and theories. Experiences are something you know. Theories are something you have to believe. It’s human nature to believe your experiences over theories.

(I’m attempting to be deep here, but I’m several bourbons into the afternoon so none of this may make sense - apologies)
Nothing beats a bit of daytime drinking.

Even better if you're winning on the slots at the same time

Though - that can, and has gone, horribly wrong: what do you mean i shouldn't spin on 10's? I'm invincible!

30 minutes later - a teary drunk emerges from the bathroom.
 

satchnz

Experienced Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2021
Location
Essex, UK
Nothing beats a bit of daytime drinking.

Even better if you're winning on the slots at the same time

Though - that can, and has gone, horribly wrong: what do you mean i shouldn't spin on 10's? I'm invincible!

30 minutes later - a teary drunk emerges from the bathroom.
Purely a low roller my friend. Down only £23 for four hours of entertainment. My bankroll would never sustain more than five £10 spins so that’s never going to happen. Finished for the day now 😊
 

paul7388

Ueber Meister
MM
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Location
glasgow scotland
This thread has become a battle between experiences and theories. Experiences are something you know. Theories are something you have to believe. It’s human nature to believe your experiences over theories.

(I’m attempting to be deep here, but I’m several bourbons into the afternoon so none of this may make sense - apologies)
I know the feeling I just ate a full packet of bourbons with my coffee now feel a bit sick lol.
 
Last edited:

brianmon

Ueber Meister
webby
mm4
Joined
May 22, 2013
Location
Cumbria
As far as I'm aware, one of the most important things to a casino is the 'hold'.
That's the amount of cash they constantly retain. Basically the cashflow

This is probably why they're so keen on the new ultra-high variance games.
Sure, they're likely to have to pay out a huge win now and again. But day to day, these UHV slots will probably be running under RTP

Don't forget, the TRTP% is for the game, at the provider's end. It's not what the casinos are 'guaranteed' or what the player is 'guaranteed'.
This may be why some existing games would be changed. Increase Variance means an increased hold.

Plus, the higher the variance, the fewer withdrawal, possibly not the £/$ value of withdrawals, but the actual number.
What's better for a casino? 1000 withdrawals of £200 a day or 30 withdrawals of £5000 and the occasional withdrawal of £50,000.
Less staff needed to do the withdrawals. less payment provider fees.

I don't know how internet line leasing for businesses works. But won't it cost more, the more traffic you have?
If a deposit can last for 30 minutes. Won't that be better and cheaper for both the casino and the provider than players getting hours and hours of playtime per deposit?

Then there are bonuses. a smaller percentage of players will manage to complete wagering on UHV slots (and increased variance existing slots) all adding to the hold

Just my thoughts on why an existing game might be changed
 
Last edited:

ChopleyIOM

Toxic Wokesel Libtard Snowflake Remoaner Marxist
webby
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Location
IOM
Seems to me your essential default is (i.e.) 'There's absolutely no need or reason to incur the potentially catastrophic risks of tinkering when simply reducing the RTP achieves the same goal legally'.

Understood - but here are the problems I'm having (over and above serious marital difficulties I was only recently advised I was actually having): What's it called and what does it mean if casino personnel claim and represent that a slot's RTP is X and in fact it's actually less than X? And if you don't believe that scenario is possible, why don't you believe it's possible?

I haven't said it isn't possible, I've said that it's the least likely option for a casino to take if it wants to increase its profits and/or offset increased operating costs, there are so many different legal levers available to pull, that to choose the one marked 'PULL THIS LEVER TO RISK A MASSIVE FINE, POSSIBLE LOSS OF OPERATING LICENCE AND POTENTIAL CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS' seems daft.

I totally get that casinos are caught breaking other rules and get done for it, I've never for one single second suggested I think the industry is as pure as the driven snow (quite the opposite), but I still don't see how the dodgy games angle pans out, and there's certainly no evidence for it happening.

I'm prepared to accept that Bonanza might have been messed with in terms of its volatility and its maths model, (brianmon makes some good points in his post just above), it still doesn't entirely make sense to me as to why they'd bother, but enough seasoned players seem convinced of it for me to concede the point as as possibility, I don't however believe that it doesn't make RTP - because that's the one thing everyone involved could really get slapped on the arse for.

If I were running VS and Bonanza was turning in 94% for a couple of months on the trot, I'd be worried about it and I'd be onto BTG, because that'd say to me the game wasn't running right, wasn't making its certified RTP, and that there was a problem that'd need addressing. (VS list the actual achieved RTP of all slots on their site, it's publicly available information, unless we're now saying that they're falsifying those numbers? Because you can pick any month you want and it's always very close to 96%.)
 

MickeyVonDickey

Newbie member
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Location
Wales, UK
A bit of a 'noob' so please forgive my ignorance. Am I right in thinking that trtp is worked out at a testing house that comes to an average rtp on any given slot over 10 billion + spins.

If this is the case then the only people who can falsify this is the testing house themselves, as the 'average joe' (or possibly even regulators) wouldn't have the ability, technology, industry know-how or indeed, willingness to test this themselves.

So whatever figure is stated by the testing house (within fine margins) would be taken as gospel and displayed at each online casino as the trtp for that particular online slot.

Is this roughly how it works?
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
Nothing beats a bit of daytime drinking.

Even better if you're winning on the slots at the same time

Though - that can, and has gone, horribly wrong: what do you mean i shouldn't spin on 10's? I'm invincible!

30 minutes later - a teary drunk emerges from the bathroom.

How naïve and nice and none judgmental am I ?

I thought he was referring to the biscuits when I first read his post.

Friday = knackered o' clock :oops:
 

Jono777

Ueber Meister
CAG
mm1
mm4
Joined
May 13, 2014
Location
Wolverhampton
I haven't said it isn't possible, I've said that it's the least likely option for a casino to take if it wants to increase its profits and/or offset increased operating costs, there are so many different legal levers available to pull, that to choose the one marked 'PULL THIS LEVER TO RISK A MASSIVE FINE, POSSIBLE LOSS OF OPERATING LICENCE AND POTENTIAL CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS' seems daft.

I totally get that casinos are caught breaking other rules and get done for it, I've never for one single second suggested I think the industry is as pure as the driven snow (quite the opposite), but I still don't see how the dodgy games angle pans out, and there's certainly no evidence for it happening.

I'm prepared to accept that Bonanza might have been messed with in terms of its volatility and its maths model, (brianmon makes some good points in his post just above), it still doesn't entirely make sense to me as to why they'd bother, but enough seasoned players seem convinced of it for me to concede the point as as possibility, I don't however believe that it doesn't make RTP - because that's the one thing everyone involved could really get slapped on the arse for.

If I were running VS and Bonanza was turning in 94% for a couple of months on the trot, I'd be worried about it and I'd be onto BTG, because that'd say to me the game wasn't running right, wasn't making its certified RTP, and that there was a problem that'd need addressing. (VS list the actual achieved RTP of all slots on their site, it's publicly available information, unless we're now saying that they're falsifying those numbers? Because you can pick any month you want and it's always very close to 96%.)

....where the chance of actually getting caught due to extremely clever programming and other protective measures make this less than 1% chance of the fine happening.

I'd take the risk as an operator to make even more money.

Apologies but this thread is going nowhere now, those who believe and those who don't (and possibly are also TOO trusting)

Ever industry has its loopholes and exploits and I-Gaming is no exception.
 

snorky510238

Chief glockenspiel maker
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Location
Uk
I haven't said it isn't possible, I've said that it's the least likely option for a casino to take if it wants to increase its profits and/or offset increased operating costs, there are so many different legal levers available to pull, that to choose the one marked 'PULL THIS LEVER TO RISK A MASSIVE FINE, POSSIBLE LOSS OF OPERATING LICENCE AND POTENTIAL CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS' seems daft.

I totally get that casinos are caught breaking other rules and get done for it, I've never for one single second suggested I think the industry is as pure as the driven snow (quite the opposite), but I still don't see how the dodgy games angle pans out, and there's certainly no evidence for it happening.

I'm prepared to accept that Bonanza might have been messed with in terms of its volatility and its maths model, (brianmon makes some good points in his post just above), it still doesn't entirely make sense to me as to why they'd bother, but enough seasoned players seem convinced of it for me to concede the point as as possibility, I don't however believe that it doesn't make RTP - because that's the one thing everyone involved could really get slapped on the arse for.

If I were running VS and Bonanza was turning in 94% for a couple of months on the trot, I'd be worried about it and I'd be onto BTG, because that'd say to me the game wasn't running right, wasn't making its certified RTP, and that there was a problem that'd need addressing. (VS list the actual achieved RTP of all slots on their site, it's publicly available information, unless we're now saying that they're falsifying those numbers? Because you can pick any month you want and it's always very close to 96%.)
So what about the rtp I posted for Bonanza at Spinrider, showing 87% over a 5 year period?

You have come up with some very lengthy answers for certain questions and continually asked for some substance to the accusations but when I attempt to make it available, you choose to conveniently, ignore it completely,
 

ChopleyIOM

Toxic Wokesel Libtard Snowflake Remoaner Marxist
webby
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Location
IOM
So what about the rtp I posted for Bonanza at Spinrider, showing 87% over a 5 year period?

You have come up with some very lengthy answers for certain questions and continually asked for some substance to the accusations but when I attempt to make it available, you choose to conveniently, ignore it completely,

How many spins did you do over that five year period? That's the number that makes the 87% RTP meaningful, I know you said 'lots' but without an actual number to attach to it, I can't really say one way or another.
 

Reelsoffun

When it comes to gambling, timing is everything.
Joined
Feb 24, 2018
Location
UK
Well snorks, you’re not really helping yourself of people taking you seriously when your asked to provide your lifetime RTP at VS as it’s them you’re accusing of wrongdoing then post your 87% stats on bonanza from another casino completely?

But I will answer you in regards to the spin rider stats, it’s most likely a below average amount of luck on that game there, too few games, or even some stake deviation, something that gets overlooked a lot. It’s so easy to skew personal RTP on any slot by playing higher or lower than normal stakes and getting lucky or unlucky.

When are people going to realise that just because a slot has a long term TRTP of 96% it does not mean that every player is going to eventually achieve said RTP. There will be a small minority of players that are running way above, many will be below and providing they have all played sufficient games, the vast bulk of the players with be very close to expected RTP.

Its no secret that I made hundreds of slot simulators and had a hand in some real land based slots, they might only be sims, but have real slot math and perform just as real slots and If I was to give a set amount of members on here an exact copy of one of them and got them to all play the same x amount of spins, you would probably find some very interesting results, I would expect some to do way better than others etc, online games will be no different.
 

ChopleyIOM

Toxic Wokesel Libtard Snowflake Remoaner Marxist
webby
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Location
IOM
....where the chance of actually getting caught due to extremely clever programming and other protective measures make this less than 1% chance of the fine happening.

I'd take the risk as an operator to make even more money.

Apologies but this thread is going nowhere now, those who believe and those who don't (and possibly are also TOO trusting)

Ever industry has its loopholes and exploits and I-Gaming is no exception.

I'd respectfully refer you to this post I made last night Jono, I'm the one who's actually stopped playing the bloody things! (Not because I think the games are bent, but because of all the other crap I didn't like. But even as I type this message I've got a slot running over at 3Dice whilst playing Trials Rising, I choose to play at a casino that doesn't gimp their RTPs, doesn't introduce feature buys, doesn't invite me to gamble my features, doesn't gimp their bonuses and VIP offers, doesn't introduce mega-HV games it's borderline impossible to ever actually win on, and all the rest of it. Other options are available, anyone who's complaining about the slots they're playing being cheaty or bent or dishonest, or changing their gameplay without informing them (3Dice give you a popup you have to click through on the very rare occasions they make a change to a slot), whilst still depositing money to play them, is above all else, letting themselves down.)

Videoslots Shocker! - Page 11 - Casinomeister Forum

1660934547360.png
 

goatwack

Love grows where my rosemary goes
CAG
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Location
Londonia
A bit of a 'noob' so please forgive my ignorance. Am I right in thinking that trtp is worked out at a testing house that comes to an average rtp on any given slot over 10 billion + spins.

If this is the case then the only people who can falsify this is the testing house themselves, as the 'average joe' (or possibly even regulators) wouldn't have the ability, technology, industry know-how or indeed, willingness to test this themselves.

So whatever figure is stated by the testing house (within fine margins) would be taken as gospel and displayed at each online casino as the trtp for that particular online slot.

Is this roughly how it works?
TRTP is, as you say, the testing carried out by the software house to attach a game's percentage, run in-house over millions and sometimes billions of spins.

One's own RTP is therefore always likely to veer away from the exact figure stated, given the much smaller sample size, which often leads to these types of discussions due to the variables. But many also take issue with how these TRTP figures are obtained, never mind vetted, given that the processes are never fully disclosed to your average Joe.

Throw in developers releasing various versions of their games, and welcome to 2022!

And yes, disputing one's own experiences versus a theoretical figure does cause jip :laugh:
 

catsdeadnow

Newbie member
Joined
Jan 4, 2015
Location
Canada
I haven't said it isn't possible, I've said that it's the least likely option for a casino to take if it wants to increase its profits and/or offset increased operating costs, there are so many different legal levers available to pull, that to choose the one marked 'PULL THIS LEVER TO RISK A MASSIVE FINE, POSSIBLE LOSS OF OPERATING LICENCE AND POTENTIAL CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS' seems daft.

I totally get that casinos are caught breaking other rules and get done for it, I've never for one single second suggested I think the industry is as pure as the driven snow (quite the opposite), but I still don't see how the dodgy games angle pans out, and there's certainly no evidence for it happening.

I'm prepared to accept that Bonanza might have been messed with in terms of its volatility and its maths model, (brianmon makes some good points in his post just above), it still doesn't entirely make sense to me as to why they'd bother, but enough seasoned players seem convinced of it for me to concede the point as as possibility, I don't however believe that it doesn't make RTP - because that's the one thing everyone involved could really get slapped on the arse for.

If I were running VS and Bonanza was turning in 94% for a couple of months on the trot, I'd be worried about it and I'd be onto BTG, because that'd say to me the game wasn't running right, wasn't making its certified RTP, and that there was a problem that'd need addressing. (VS list the actual achieved RTP of all slots on their site, it's publicly available information, unless we're now saying that they're falsifying those numbers? Because you can pick any month you want and it's always very close to 96%.)
I've cobbled together excerpts from your various posts on this thread (my only interest is in learning generally ... and, more specifically, trying to better understand why my go-to Immortal Romance is such a drastically different game than it was back in the day ... ).

And you've given me no reason to be anything except appreciative of the time, effort and thought you've been investing in those posts - thank you.

So I've taken the liberty of generalizing what I've learned from you - in your own words.
  • "I don't however believe that it doesn't make RTP because"
  • "that's the one thing everyone involved could really get slapped on the arse for" - and
  • "VS list the actual achieved RTP of all slots on their site, it's publicly available information" - and because there's
  • "Never, ever, ever, one single solitary shred of evidence to back any of the claims up" (that are implying or alleging hanky-panky).
I trust this compilation doesn't strike you as a crude or insulting over simplification (we Canadians may be polite, but we're not rude😉) - truth is you do acknowledge (at least in the case of Bonanza) that if a seasoned/experienced player feels/believes/claims a game doesn't play/feel right, that game "might have been messed with in terms of its volatility and its maths model".

I dove into this thread wanting to better understand why I'd been forced to terminate my longstanding relationship with Immortal Romance. You've given me one perspective to consider - thank you. I know you recognize and respect that there are also others.
 
Last edited:

ChopleyIOM

Toxic Wokesel Libtard Snowflake Remoaner Marxist
webby
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Location
IOM
I've cobbled together excerpts from your various posts on this thread (my only interest is in learning generally ... and, more specifically, trying to better understand why my go-to Immortal Romance is such a drastically different game than it was back in the day ... ).

And you've given me no reason to be anything except appreciative of the time, effort and thought you've been investing in those posts - thank you.

So I've taken the liberty of generalizing what I've learned from you - in your own words.
  • "I don't however believe that it doesn't make RTP because"
  • "that's the one thing everyone involved could really get slapped on the arse for" - and
  • "VS list the actual achieved RTP of all slots on their site, it's publicly available information" - and because there's
  • "Never, ever, ever, one single solitary shred of evidence to back any of the claims up" (that are implying or alleging hanky-panky).
I trust this compilation doesn't strike you as a crude or insulting over simplification (we Canadians may be polite, but we're not rude😉) - truth is you do acknowledge (at least in the case of Bonanza) that if a seasoned/experienced player feels/believes/claims a game doesn't play/feel right, that game "might have been messed with in terms of its volatility and its maths model".

I dove into this thread wanting to better understand why I'd been forced to terminate my longstanding relationship with Immortal Romance. You've given me one perspective to consider - thank you. I know you recognize and respect that there are also others.

Yes I would say that is a fair summary of my position on this.

Speaking as someone who loved Immortal Romance back in the day, I'd say the HTML5 remake of it was a travesty from an aesthetic perspective if nothing else, and we also know for a fact that MG kicked out different maths models for it as well. Did they mess with the 'full fat' 96% version of it in the process? Honestly I didn't do enough spins to come to any sort of conclusion, the way the slot looked and sounded in its HTML5 incarnation was enough to put me off.

I maintain to this day that the original Viper Client version of Immortal Romance is one of the finest online slots ever made. Solid RTP, spicy but sensible volatility, and enough going on in terms of base game wins, feature hit frequency and progression with unlocking the different characters, and of course the Wild Desire feature - to make it perfectly balanced. And of course we could always choose our feature, go for Amber if we wanted a quick hit potential, or choose Michael with the Rolling Reels if we wanted something to go on for a while, with Troy and Sarah offering different options.

I don't know if MG messed with the volatility/maths model of Immortal Romance when it migrated to its current incarnation, I do know that I didn't enjoy playing it (even the music sample bitrate had been downgraded), so I stopped playing it.

So I guess what I'm saying here is that I totally understand when a player says something doesn't 'feel' right to them anymore, but what I don't do is keep plugging away at the thing that doesn't feel right for months and months and months and tens upon tens of deposits, I just find somewhere else and something else to play instead, and I don't call shenanigans in the process.
 
Last edited:

snorky510238

Chief glockenspiel maker
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Location
Uk
So I guess what I'm saying here is that I totally understand when a player says something doesn't 'feel' right to them anymore, but what I don't do is keep plugging away at the thing that doesn't feel right for months and months and months and tens upon tens of deposits, I just find somewhere else and something else to play instead, and I don't call shenanigans in the process.

But it’s perfectly okay for you to make the same old point and post a thousand times. Dear me, Choppers you need to take the blinkers off kid. :rolleyes:
 

goatwack

Love grows where my rosemary goes
CAG
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Location
Londonia
I don't subscribe to the theory that one should simply 'stop playing' whatever game they happen to enjoy, based on the judgement doled out by those that seek to shut down someone's findings with a game, moreover if the person playing also - unbelievably - wishes to be proven wrong themselves, that their outlook could well be flawed, their figures skewed.

After all, far better to let these games play out as intended, so that the maths rights the wrongs of the world. You'd be surprised how many punters positively yearn to be proven wrong by the White Hat posse, it's an oft-overlooked fact in these discussions.

Still doesn't explain how refraining from participating in said game(s) in any way excuses or validates days/weeks/months of inexplicable losses and shonky gameplay, nor does the 'stop playing it, buffoon' card absolve foul play from possibly being afoot. It's all too convenient an excuse to shut down objectors, with not enough consideration being given to the people paying good money and waste their time, only to see the opposite happening to what's being espoused.

I could go into KFC and visibly shake with anger that the Colonel's changed his secret recipe whilst still enjoying their offerings. I don't see how someone is (predictably) chastised time and again on these hallowed pages when breaching the supposed 'integrity' of slot design. It's almost like an auto-immune response to shield this industry from any form of criticism!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top