Videoslots Shocker!

[bamberfishcake]

So even both sides can agree that some games feel changed.

The majority of companies will pull a fast one if the risk of being caught is minimal and they can make more money. There are shareholders to impress and the industry, like so many others, is not just results-driven but demands continual improvement year on year. Greed is what spurs companies to do shoddy things, even those that make billions.

I don't think it is inconceivable to think Microgaming took the HTML revamp as an opportunity to take a massively popular game and tweak it to play in a different way to drive profits and catch regulars out. Would not be hard to change the volatility or swap average wins but still maintain RTP and stick it back in the lobby with an updated certificate.

Must admit, I don't hear of anything about defective slots. Often, a game will need some work after initial testing and delay the release, but I am not sure what kind of work. Perhaps it paid out too much, perhaps it paid out too little, and perhaps there are other things the developers want to be checked. Would be interesting to speak to someone from a test house and find out more about the actual process and what slots get rejected, and what kind of rework is needed for those that don't cut the mustard.

Maybe the expected max win was not achieved over 10 billion spins, so the developers go for another run, because in reality, they worked out the maths to pay max 1 in 20 billion

Perhaps, we don't hear of anything because they actually are squeaky clean and let's face it, all slots make money if played, but the absence of any product compensation cases or dodgy product headlines from the industry itself could be seen as conspicuous to some.

So, what do we have to go on as players? Only the image portrayed and what we are told by the industry, compared to what we actually experience and our gut feeling as a result, plus the evidence from players like the Evolution Gaming videos and fake money streamers. It's no wonder players believe some games have been tampered with. It's probably more logical to admit a little goes on than believe everything is above board in the real world.

There are multiple RTP models for nearly every slot, they test games over billions of spins now to achieve max wins, cap win potential, hide RTP, fund fake streamers, don't pay out and call game errors in live casino productions, stall large withdrawals by perverting regulations, ignore customer complaints and don't train staff - all in the pursuit of squeezing more profits.

The industry is very competitive, and regardless of the regulation, not very transparent at the product end. Game developers need to deliver more value for money than the competition to keep good relationships and get top lobby spots.

It's not hard to find a motive and believe some tampering goes on when the industry is as it is and when the risks seem so minute for a small tweak here and there.

 

[catsdeadnow]

I don't see how someone is (predictably) chastised time and again on these hallowed pages when breaching the supposed 'integrity' of slot design.

I have to agree - which explains my having resisted posting in other threads before now: Among threads in the past in which someone dared raise the notion of possible shenanigans, the reflexive and near-immediate response would almost always mention tin foil ...

And something else was equally predictable: Sooner or later a White Hat would demand the one thing they themselves don't have either: Proof.

Accomplished little. Illuminated nothing.

 

[mack341]

I think this ukgc paper is from 2019/20.

Not saying it's conclusive proof of anything, but fair to conclude a concern about possible manipulation and the ukgc not having a robust enough system to detect and deter.

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

Consultation on test houses framework development

The current framework by which test houses are approved and deliver their services has been in place since 2007.

We plan to develop our levels of assurance about the independence, competence and overall suitability of the companies and individuals that are entrusted with testing the games that are offered to consumers.

There are 15 test houses, 11 of which are based overseas and acquire their accreditation by nonUK accreditation bodies. The accreditation required is ISO 17025, which is a universally accepted accreditation standard.

Our recent compliance assessment of accreditation arrangements showed variance in the standards that are being used. For example, there are different versions of ISO 17025 in use. We also have specific requirements under our Technical Standards and Testing Strategies. Our recent compliance assessments indicate that some test houses are not incorporating these standards into their testing methodologies.

Within test houses, there are key roles that have responsibility for the way in which a test house operates, and the technical aspects of the testing undertaken. Currently the information collected regarding these individuals is limited. This impedes our ability to make an ongoing assessment of the individual’s suitability and independence.

...We further propose that critical individuals, such as those that perform testing, should be personally accredited.

As part of our application process, we look at the ownership structure and the financing arrangements for test houses. This is a key indicator of the independence of a test house. We also seek to understand the people and/or organisations that have an influence over the way in which the test house is operated.

This means we need to understand who has a controlling interest in the organisation. A controlling interest is determined by having a controlling shareholding or voting rights. The Commission proposes to view anyone with a 10% shareholding as having an influence over the test house.

 

[catsdeadnow]

"The agency had found that Volkswagen had intentionally programmed turbocharged direct injection (TDI) diesel engines to activate their emissions controls only during laboratory emissions testing, which caused the vehicles' NOx output to meet US standards during regulatory testing."

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

Yes, Virginia -- and as Juno already observed -- there is actually something called "extremely clever programming" ...

 

[goatwack]

I have to agree - which explains my having resisted posting in other threads before now: Among threads in the past in which someone dared raise the notion of possible shenanigans, the reflexive and near-immediate response would almost always mention tin foil ...

And something else was equally predictable: Sooner or later a White Hat would demand the one thing they themselves don't have either: Proof.

Accomplished little. Illuminated nothing.

The very reason you'll now be firmly put in the 'Black Hat' pit of despair, despite your neutrality and commendable attempts to play devil's advocate. Welcome to the club!

And yet, I'd also imagine opinions can be shaped over time, evolve to be something else, with new information coming to light, or simply people changing their mind on something - all the hallmarks of normal behaviour.

Absolutes aren't really conducive to healthy debate, and with neither side willing to acknowledge the other's views, it is like you say, accomplishing nothing - the hallmark of these types of threads, as you've clearly noticed!

Made all the worse as neither 'side' has definitive proof. When that happens, it just comes down to who can shout the loudest, or who can be seen to be the most right. Do I believe this industry's beyond reproach and take its word in contrast to my own experiences? No

Do I believe Snorky's version of events based on his extensive experiences with Bonanza? No. I mean yes, YES. I meant YES

 

[goatwack]

I think this ukgc paper is from 2019/20.

Not saying it's conclusive proof of anything, but fair to conclude a concern about possible manipulation and the ukgc not having a robust enough system to detect and deter.

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

Consultation on test houses framework development

The current framework by which test houses are approved and deliver their services has been in place since 2007.

We plan to develop our levels of assurance about the independence, competence and overall suitability of the companies and individuals that are entrusted with testing the games that are offered to consumers.

There are 15 test houses, 11 of which are based overseas and acquire their accreditation by nonUK accreditation bodies. The accreditation required is ISO 17025, which is a universally accepted accreditation standard.

Our recent compliance assessment of accreditation arrangements showed variance in the standards that are being used. For example, there are different versions of ISO 17025 in use. We also have specific requirements under our Technical Standards and Testing Strategies. Our recent compliance assessments indicate that some test houses are not incorporating these standards into their testing methodologies.

Within test houses, there are key roles that have responsibility for the way in which a test house operates, and the technical aspects of the testing undertaken. Currently the information collected regarding these individuals is limited. This impedes our ability to make an ongoing assessment of the individual’s suitability and independence.

...We further propose that critical individuals, such as those that perform testing, should be personally accredited.

As part of our application process, we look at the ownership structure and the financing arrangements for test houses. This is a key indicator of the independence of a test house. We also seek to understand the people and/or organisations that have an influence over the way in which the test house is operated.

This means we need to understand who has a controlling interest in the organisation. A controlling interest is determined by having a controlling shareholding or voting rights. The Commission proposes to view anyone with a 10% shareholding as having an influence over the test house.

I dunno Mack. Looks to me like you're implying these independent tests are somehow shaped by external factors, in secret locations by people with differing agendas

 

[mack341]

I dunno Mack. Looks to me like you're implying these independent tests are somehow shaped by external factors, in secret locations by people with differing agendas

 

[catsdeadnow]

Welcome to the club!

Not only do I graciously and humbly accept your kind invitation - but, for over seven years now, I've been dithering over different possible avatars for my profile on here.
Eureka - got one now, Goat, thank you.

 

[ergosum]

I agree completely with your post mate, to be honest I had considered it might be slanted towards UK players, but who knows, could be the same everywhere. I am finding more and more casinos are just a race to the bottom. I deposit quite large amounts, generally £500-£1000 a day, over the last 12 months I have had less and less withdrawals, add to that the constant interruptions (Genting are a bloody nightmare for blocking you halfway through a game until you have spoken to live chat every other week!!) it really is taking all the fun out of it. A few years ago the deposits would last a lot longer, casinos like Guts were great, and you could hit a big win maybe once a month that would pay for your play for a couple more months, now it's horrendous. As an example I have played through £1k today on Virgin games, highest win was a £94 on big bass, every other game barely 10-20x wins. Videoslots specifically I have given up on, I think my lifetime RTP there was around 36%, like a bucket with a hole in, I experienced the same as you, deposits with no wins, sacked it off now and won't be going back.

 

[snorky510238]

All the industry has done for the past 18 months is to exploit every avenue possible, to speed up the process via which players lose money.

In some areas it’s blatant, in others, it’s very subtle and done in the shadows. Any business looks to become more efficient and effective, usually at the customers expense.

Just a few of the things Casinos/Providers have done lately, include; reducing rtp, reducing/stopping the amount of freebies on offer, offloading affiliates, unscrupulously and even down to minute detail, such as speeding up the spins on games that were a bit slow, like DOA.

All greed on their part and geared towards maximising profit. Given that they have even gone as far as speeding games up and that every little avenue is being used to squeeze as much cash out of the players as possible, we would have to be extremely naive to think that providers haven’t exploited the following loophole.

As I understand it, when these games are audited (and I use that term very lightly, whilst trying not to piss myself with laughter), there has to be some leeway, which again works in the providers favour. As I understand it the game should ideally be running within a couple of percent of rtp.

If that is true, you cannot tell me that providers wouldn’t be exploiting that loophole. These programmers will be the best in the profession, they will be way ahead of the guy from the auditors with his ZX Spectrum.

Advertise a game at 96%, that is actually programmed to pay 95%, even 94%. Apparently all above board and bingo, another £10,000,000 profit for the year, just like that. Can’t tell me things along these lines aren’t happening.

 

[shadow123]

Would be interesting to know more about the testing procedures and how deep they go,whether the entire code is checked
or just simulations run to determine the rtp.The latter tells you nothing about what is going on when the games are run in the real
world.
I would say the chance of skullduggery in coding is 100% and very easy to hide unless is checked line by line by a top notch programmer.
Years ago a programmer at Bell Fruit was caught scamming a certain model of land based machine using some procedure they devised
to pay out jackpots,so there is a precendence for naughtiness

 

[pinnit2014]

I think this ukgc paper is from 2019/20.

Not saying it's conclusive proof of anything, but fair to conclude a concern about possible manipulation and the ukgc not having a robust enough system to detect and deter.

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

Consultation on test houses framework development

The current framework by which test houses are approved and deliver their services has been in place since 2007.

We plan to develop our levels of assurance about the independence, competence and overall suitability of the companies and individuals that are entrusted with testing the games that are offered to consumers.

There are 15 test houses, 11 of which are based overseas and acquire their accreditation by nonUK accreditation bodies. The accreditation required is ISO 17025, which is a universally accepted accreditation standard.

Our recent compliance assessment of accreditation arrangements showed variance in the standards that are being used. For example, there are different versions of ISO 17025 in use. We also have specific requirements under our Technical Standards and Testing Strategies. Our recent compliance assessments indicate that some test houses are not incorporating these standards into their testing methodologies.

Within test houses, there are key roles that have responsibility for the way in which a test house operates, and the technical aspects of the testing undertaken. Currently the information collected regarding these individuals is limited. This impedes our ability to make an ongoing assessment of the individual’s suitability and independence.

...We further propose that critical individuals, such as those that perform testing, should be personally accredited.

As part of our application process, we look at the ownership structure and the financing arrangements for test houses. This is a key indicator of the independence of a test house. We also seek to understand the people and/or organisations that have an influence over the way in which the test house is operated.

This means we need to understand who has a controlling interest in the organisation. A controlling interest is determined by having a controlling shareholding or voting rights. The Commission proposes to view anyone with a 10% shareholding as having an influence over the test house.

Along the lines of ISO - same as BSI or any other accredited standards, a lot of the times dependent on who you get round to re-certify you each year. Worked in places were the ISO guy would come round, apply would could only be described as a 'light touch' regime and hey presto: certified for another year and a lot of surprised departmental faces

Obviously they're probably the best you can place (not absolute) assurance on but by no means does it mean you're bullet proof. We used to have the ISO people contact us in advance and it allowed us to strategically hand certain, cherry picked files over to him with 2 days to 'touch them up'

Same as the HSE - 2 companies, 2 identical issues of non-compliance, not uncommon to see 2 completely different inspector reports.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

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.

Blinkers for what? I can't repeat this often enough, I'm the one who stopped playing the bloody things! And if I'm making the same old point a thousand times it's because it's entirely relevant in a thread where nearly everyone is saying how sure they are that the industry is bent, whilst still continuing to voluntarily give it their money.

I've made three deposits to Unibet in the last twelve months, two of which I made a withdrawal from (and that was only to play the old 98% NetEnt slots, which they still have on their books for some reason).

Nothing anywhere else, at all, except for 3Dice, which is basically the only casino I play at because I've been there for ten years and I trust them not to dick me over. (I've done over 21,000 spins there this month so far, and that number will grow again tonight when I have another session.)

As I said in my post last night, Immortal Romance felt wrong to me, it was like MG had made a cheap knockoff of their own game, half the animations had gone, the sample rate had been downgraded on the music, the Wild Desire behaviour had changed (at least from a graphical perspective), the whole thing felt clonky and crap compared to the old Viper Client version - so I was like, 'Nahhh, not playing this'.

I used to be a very regular depositor and player at loads of different casinos, but I think the whole thing has gone to the dogs in loads of different ways over the last couple of years so I've just stopped doing it - to my mind it's the only logical choice to make.

I still don't think slots that are advertised and certified at 96% RTP have secretly been downgraded to 95% or 94% to shave a bit extra off the top, you know what Unibet do when they want a 94% game? This....

Or in the case of Immortal Romance we have this, when we all know the full-fat version is 96.86%.

So not only did they completely fuck the slot up aesthetically, they decided to help themselves to a massively increased house edge.

Once again, I'm out.

But hey, maybe I'm wrong and you're right, sure, maybe they are cheating on RTP too, I'll acknowledge the possibility, but I'm still the one here who's stopped tipping my money over to them. I absolutely cannot get my head around anyone who thinks a casino is scamming them (beyond anything other than taking the house edge off them over time, which is transparently built into the game), who also continues to give said casino their money.

 

[bamberfishcake]

I think this ukgc paper is from 2019/20.

Not saying it's conclusive proof of anything, but fair to conclude a concern about possible manipulation and the ukgc not having a robust enough system to detect and deter.

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

Consultation on test houses framework development

The current framework by which test houses are approved and deliver their services has been in place since 2007.

We plan to develop our levels of assurance about the independence, competence and overall suitability of the companies and individuals that are entrusted with testing the games that are offered to consumers.

There are 15 test houses, 11 of which are based overseas and acquire their accreditation by nonUK accreditation bodies. The accreditation required is ISO 17025, which is a universally accepted accreditation standard.

Our recent compliance assessment of accreditation arrangements showed variance in the standards that are being used. For example, there are different versions of ISO 17025 in use. We also have specific requirements under our Technical Standards and Testing Strategies. Our recent compliance assessments indicate that some test houses are not incorporating these standards into their testing methodologies.

Within test houses, there are key roles that have responsibility for the way in which a test house operates, and the technical aspects of the testing undertaken. Currently the information collected regarding these individuals is limited. This impedes our ability to make an ongoing assessment of the individual’s suitability and independence.

...We further propose that critical individuals, such as those that perform testing, should be personally accredited.

As part of our application process, we look at the ownership structure and the financing arrangements for test houses. This is a key indicator of the independence of a test house. We also seek to understand the people and/or organisations that have an influence over the way in which the test house is operated.

This means we need to understand who has a controlling interest in the organisation. A controlling interest is determined by having a controlling shareholding or voting rights. The Commission proposes to view anyone with a 10% shareholding as having an influence over the test house.

Good stuff Mack, thanks for the link.

So it seems the current process is that once a test house has been approved via ISO accreditation, they work to a self-governed framework, pretty much unchecked. And the UKGC acknowledge some test houses are not incorporating their standard into the testing strategies, and are not currently background checked for conflict of interest.

Good to see some movement from the UKGC towards something more serious, and agree that the current system is not adequate enough to install any confidence all is above board.

 

[goatwack]

Blinkers for what? I can't repeat this often enough, I'm the one who stopped playing the bloody things! And if I'm making the same old point a thousand times it's because it's entirely relevant in a thread where nearly everyone is saying how sure they are that the industry is bent, whilst still continuing to voluntarily give it their money.

I've made three deposits to Unibet in the last twelve months, two of which I made a withdrawal from (and that was only to play the old 98% NetEnt slots, which they still have on their books for some reason).

Nothing anywhere else, at all, except for 3Dice, which is basically the only casino I play at because I've been there for ten years and I trust them not to dick me over. (I've done over 21,000 spins there this month so far, and that number will grow again tonight when I have another session.)

As I said in my post last night, Immortal Romance felt wrong to me, it was like MG had made a cheap knockoff of their own game, half the animations had gone, the sample rate had been downgraded on the music, the Wild Desire behaviour had changed (at least from a graphical perspective), the whole thing felt clonky and crap compared to the old Viper Client version - so I was like, 'Nahhh, not playing this'.

I used to be a very regular depositor and player at loads of different casinos, but I think the whole thing has gone to the dogs in loads of different ways over the last couple of years so I've just stopped doing it - to my mind it's the only logical choice to make.

I still don't think slots that are advertised and certified at 96% RTP have secretly been downgraded to 95% or 94% to shave a bit extra off the top, you know what Unibet do when they want a 94% game? This....

View attachment 171256

Or in the case of Immortal Romance we have this, when we all know the full-fat version is 96.86%.

So not only did they completely fuck the slot up aesthetically, they decided to help themselves to a massively increased house edge.

Once again, I'm out.

View attachment 171257

But hey, maybe I'm wrong and you're right, sure, maybe they are cheating on RTP too, I'll acknowledge the possibility, but I'm still the one here who's stopped tipping my money over to them. I absolutely cannot get my head around anyone who thinks a casino is scamming them (beyond anything other than taking the house edge off them over time, which is transparently built into the game), who also continues to give said casino their money.

What's this obsession with insisting everyone stop doing what they're doing, or else they're culpable and complicit in some way?

And for argument's sake, if someone were to 'cease their activity' on the game in question, at which point do they do that, to 'suit'? 10,000 spins? 100,000? It's a nonsense....

Moreover, even if stopped, is someone allowed to query their figures based on what they've invested heavily in, or is that not allowed?

I guess that would make them the perfect customers, consume the slop, don't ask questions!

 

[mack341]

Good stuff Mack, thanks for the link.

So it seems the current process is that once a test house has been approved via ISO accreditation, they work to a self-governed framework, pretty much unchecked. And the UKGC acknowledge some test houses are not incorporating their standard into the testing strategies, and are not currently background checked for conflict of interest.

Good to see some movement from the UKGC towards something more serious, and agree that the current system is not adequate enough to install any confidence all is above board.

The other thing that gave me a slight 'hmm' was the licensee [the slot maker I presume] chooses the test house, a phrase comes to mind 'you don't bite the hand that feeds you' but that would only really apply if they chose the same test house every time rather than spread things around.

I suppose they could want the most thorough, meticulous test house as that would save them money [or risk] later on, from having to pull a game gone to market and retests etc..

 

[ChopleyIOM]

What's this obsession with insisting everyone stop doing what they're doing, or else they're culpable and complicit in some way?

And for argument's sake, if someone were to 'cease their activity' on the game in question, at which point do they do that, to 'suit'? 10,000 spins? 100,000? It's a nonsense....

Moreover, even if stopped, is someone allowed to query their figures based on what they've invested heavily in, or is that not allowed?

I guess that would make them the perfect customers, consume the slop, don't ask questions!

Because it's a wildly inconsistent position that makes no sense, the lengths people are going to in order to cast doubt on the fairness of the games they are actively playing, leaves me slightly questioning their sanity.

By all means if someone has drawn a line in the sand, stopped playing, and wants to analyse their stats looking for problems then fine, I can understand that.

But where the process goes:

1) THESE GAMES ARE CHEATING ME because of X, Y and Z
2) Deposits money, plays games
3) ANOTHER TERRIBLE SESSION, THESE GAMES ARE CHEATING ME
4) Return to 1

If you go through that cycle more than once, then TBH there's a problem.

STORY TIME WITH CHOPLEY -

I've mentioned before about the terrible start I got to on Arctic Adventure at 3Dice, which went on a run from hell for me for an extended period of time right out of the gates, in fact the thread is probably still here at CM, I'll see if I can find it, Enzo (head honcho at 3Ddice) was answering my questions about it because it was running so badly, including assuring me that the bonus rounds were not controlled in any way, that the spins in the bonus round were entirely random like in the base game, that the four scatters wasn't predetermined to pay any more and would only do so through random chance due it awarding an extra pick (I'd been tracking my features on it and thought the numbers were looking a bit 'odd', sound familiar?......), and so on.

What 3Dice did agree with me on was that my numbers on it were awful, and I was being very unlucky, I remember they threw quite a few comps my way as a means to try and balance things out a bit, but above and beyond all else I was absolutely assured by them that the game was fair and random, had been extensively tested by them prior to release, and that the stats for it across all their players as a whole were where they expected them to be.

So at that point I had a decision to make, did I believe them and carry on plugging away at it (I mean, at this point the main guy at the casino, who designs and programs their games, had told me how they work), understanding that a fair and random game would eventually gravitate towards T-RTP, or did I decide there was something shady going on and call foul? (And for the record, I'd lost quite a bit of money on the game at this point, to the extent that Enzo actually opened up a private conversation with me on the site one evening to politely suggest that sometimes taking a break from a game was a good idea.)

I went with the former and believed what I was being told, and yes, over time, the slot levelled out, I've actually had some very good runs on it over the years now and it's one of my favourite games there, despite the way it can be extremely lumpy, and looking back with years and years of experience playing it, I can understand the run I had early on was indeed unfortunate, but within the scope of the variance it can deliver.

But I cannot stress this enough, if I had decided there was something shady going on, they'd have never seen another penny off me, because how dumb would it be to become convinced in your own head that a game was cheating you, and then carry on playing that game?

These stats are old now, I'll ask Anna for my lifetime stats again, these are the oldest stats from the old download casino client, look how bad they are on Arctic, over 64,000 spins and running at 92.6%, the game has an RTP of 95.43%

Then they moved to their new web based platform, these stats are from 2020, at the time I'd only done 30K spins on the game, but as you can see I'm running over RTP on it. (Honestly, I think this number might have got better since then, as I've hit a decent number of the top bonus rounds on it, something I found nearly impossible to do early on.)

This is I suppose a very long-winded way of me saying that for god's sake if you think you're being cheated then stop playing!

The point has been made more than once in this thread (and by several people) that the one number we really need here is snorky's lifetime stats on Bonanza at VS, how many spins has he done, and what is his RTP. Not just the last year or suchlike (which we already know is bad from what he's said) - but lifetime.

 

[perunamies]

Agree with Chopley. Makes zero sense to keep on depositing day in and day out if you're sure the slots you still keep on playing day in and day out are bent.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Right, I've found the thread, and there's some interesting reading, old Chopley used to be a bit of a tinfoil hatter

I'd suggest starting from Page 6, but by all means read it from the start if you want to - NEW SLOT Artic Treasure Adventure.... STAY COOL - Page 6 - Casinomeister Forum

Page 7 is where Enzo himself comes in and clears up how the slot works.

On Page 8 Chopley has a 'feeling' about things ?‍?

At 30,000 real money spins, my RTP was at 83.18% (!)

Anyway, it's all there if you want to read it. I mention all this not to hijack the thread, but to demonstrate how I went down the rabbit hole back in the day. In one of the posts on Page 10 I report back on how Enzo actually went through my stats with me across the whole site, to make better sense of the numbers overall.

Looking back on it now, my experience with Arctic was quite a formative experience in me really getting my head around how random games work, and how variance and randomness between them can make the numbers look very weird and suspicious. This was all nine years ago and I feel I've learned a lot about how games work since then, so my input to this thread is not based on wanting to berate or belittle anyone, and my apologies if I am coming across like that.

When it comes to shitty runs on slots, wondering what the hell is going on and losing deposit after deposit and not understanding how my numbers could be what they were, I've been there, done that and got the t-shirt, my postings at CM on these topics are based on 15 years of experience playing slots, and really doing some deep dives, as I did with Arctic back in 2013, and being fortunate enough to have Enzo on hand to take the time to teach me about how this stuff works (and hopefully a few folks at CM in the process too).

For me folks, the RTP is the RTP, if it says 96%, then it's 96%, if it says 94%, it's 94% - and it'll get there eventually.

 

[mack341]

Agree with Chopley. Makes zero sense to keep on depositing day in and day out if you're sure the slots you still keep on playing day in and day out are bent.

I don't think most people are 'sure'

For myself I am suspicious and wondering about sessions that have a distinct pattern of dead spins at the same time as hard to bonus etc... kind of doesn't fit with my image of what random would do.

A feeling something has changed across the board, much harder to win on old favourites and deposits get eaten faster. [96% rtp slots not the butchered 94% bastards]

Chopley's 3dice games, and I'm going from memory here of watching a few of his sessions, look like they have more of a basic mechanic, you can plug away for a while without getting your arse ripped. [edit: they are inhouse games too, so no sharing the revenue]

 

[snorky510238]

Can one of the mods change the thread title to @ChopleyIOM’s 3 dice promotion thread.

Thanks

 

[Jono777]

I don't think most people are 'sure'

For myself I am suspicious and wondering about sessions that have a distinct pattern of dead spins at the same time as hard to bonus etc... kind of doesn't fit with my image of what random would do.

A feeling something has changed across the board, much harder to win on old favourites and deposits get eaten faster. [96% rtp slots not the butchered 94% bastards]

Chopley's 3dice games, and I'm going from memory here of watching a few of his sessions, look like they have more of a basic mechanic, you can plug away for a while without getting your arse ripped. [edit: they are inhouse games too, so no sharing the revenue]

Not too long ago, most games were like this, then greed crept in

 

[perunamies]

Not too long ago, most games were like this, then greed crept in

Yeah, because casinos were never greedy before the year 2022.

 

[pinnit2014]

Can one of the mods change the thread title to @ChopleyIOM’s 3 dice promotion thread.

Thanks

Never heard them mentioned: are they less bent?

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I occasionally drop them into my posts, but in a highly skilled and subtle manner so that no one will ever consciously notice.

 

[Jono777]

Yeah, because casinos were never greedy before the year 2022.

Yeah alright.

It gone downhill since about 2017.

Been playing online since 2003, gambling in general since 1990 so like to think I have a rough idea what I am on about.

 

[perunamies]

Yeah alright.

It gone downhill since about 2017.

Been playing online since 2003, gambling in general since 1990 so like to think I have a rough idea what I am on about.

Ok, so you still keep playing even though it's been going downhill for the past 5 years? Seems intelligent.

 

[Kroffe]

Guess we better keep track of this stuff.

List of fair slots: Attic adventure

List of slots that still might be rigged: The rest of them

Conclusion: More testing needed.

 

[Jono777]

Ok, so you still keep playing even though it's been going downhill for the past 5 years? Seems intelligent.

Fuck me, I ain't getting into a debate or row, or maybe I will after tea, who knows? For now.....

I do cry rigged from time to time, however my play is well under control and I deposit willing to lose what I can comfortably afford to lose. If I win, then it is a bonus, if not, quick moan and "Ho-Hum"

Its just the winning sessions are nowhere as frequent as they used to be.

I blame less casinos for UK players to chose from, less, in fact NO bonuses to top balance up and today's slots way too volatile, these with a touch of shadyness going on too.

FWIW: Rare I blow my own trumpet but I am very intelligent, cheers

 

[snorky510238]

I occasionally drop them into my posts, but in a highly skilled and subtle manner so that no one will ever consciously notice.

But again me old sunflower, it’s okay for you to question things when you got some really shite gameplay but it’s not okay for me to do it?

You were told that the game was random and chose to carry on playing it. Things turned around and your decision was justified but what if you had continued to be unlucky?

I have PM’s from BTG, telling me nothing has changed and so I believed them. I carried on playing and it just got worse so then I began questioning it, as I now absolutely don’t believe them.

P.S. I am not ignoring your question about the stats from Spinrider. I have requested them but they are not the quickest to release information but they do eventually.

 

[sufferinsilence]

Guess we better keep track of this stuff.

View attachment 171278

List of fair slots: Attic adventure

List of slots that still might be rigged: The rest of them

Conclusion: More testing needed.

What goes on in my attic is none of your business!

 

[ChopleyIOM]

But again me old sunflower, it’s okay for you to question things when you got some really shite gameplay but it’s not okay for me to do it?

You were told that the game was random and chose to carry on playing it. Things turned around and your decision was justified but what if you had continued to be unlucky?

I have PM’s from BTG, telling me nothing has changed and so I believed them. I carried on playing and it just got worse so then I began questioning it, as I now absolutely don’t believe them.

P.S. I am not ignoring your question about the stats from Spinrider. I have requested them but they are not the quickest to release information but they do eventually.

It's a reasonable point you make there snorky, and that was why I brought the 3Dice stuff into this thread, to show that I'm not claiming to be some sort of all-seeing and all-knowing deity on this stuff, I learned the hard way, up to and including binning £2000 at 3Dice in a single month chasing RTP on Arctic Adventure (in one of the later pages of the thread I linked earlier, I show my Neteller deposits for the month, they weren't pretty!).

But to be clear here, I'm not saying it's not OK to question things, quite the opposite, of course we should question things and not blindly accept what we're told, in the case of Arctic and the kicking it dished out to me, I was lucky enough to basically have the head honcho of the casino explain here at CM, and also in several private conversations we had at 3Dice itself (they have a proper chat client type thing) what was going on.

If the BTG rep has told you nothing has changed with Bonanza when they have actually changed the volatility/maths/profile of the game without adjusting the RTP, then of course that is wrong and I would never defend it for one second - I've never said I didn't believe they'd changed the game (and indeed deferred to highly seasoned players such as yourself on that point), what I did say is that I didn't believe it wouldn't make RTP.

For me personally, and based on comments from other folks, including @dunover for example who has extensive experience with the game, I still think it's more likely that Bonanza just has some sort of evil genius maths profile that is exceptionally good at draining balances, we already know for a fact it has a huge amount of RTP in the base game, and a very rare feature trigger with an unusually high average pay (1/460 @ 96x or something utterly fucking batshit like that? That stat alone is going to generate some really bizarre shit depending on where you land on the curve).

As for your question about what if I had continued to be unlucky on Arctic, you have to remember that this was offset by the games I'd been really lucky on, I remember Enzo going through my stats and showing me the games where I was way, way ahead of the curve, and even taking into account the games I was doing worst on at 3Dice, overall my stats were pretty much within the margin of error, even at my real money game sample of the time which was around 150K as I recall - I'd just been really, really unlucky on Arctic. (Fortune Falls hated me for a good while as well.)

The key point is that once all those numbers have been crunched, I've landed where I was expected to land, which is that, on average, over time, aggregated across all games, I've had my stake returned to me, less the house edge, every time those reels spin, or I get dealt a hand of cards, or spin the roulette wheel, or whatever else. This is why I'd still respectfully ask you snorky, to just ask VS for your lifetime stats on Bonanza, because I'd honestly bet a tenner on you being +/- 1% of 96%.

EDIT TO ADD - I've asked Anna for my latest lifetime stats at 3Dice, I'm probably at about 1.2m real money game rounds there now (something in that ballpark), and I'll bet in advance I'm within the margin of error on T-RTP aggregated across all games.

 

[Kroffe]

I dont understand what asking for lifetime rtp is supposed to prove, looking at that will tell you nothing about if the slot is playing under advertised rtp or not.

Im slightly above rtp on Whos the bride, say they sneakily lower it to 93% and i add 100k spins playing that version, it wouldnt even put me below 96% because i have such a large number of spins made on the slot, so im still well within the so called 'margin of error' even when i have been cheated for the last 100k spins.

Lifetime rtp proves nothing if you have a large amount of spins on the slot prior to a sneaky change in rtp, it would take forever to push you into 'suspiciously low' territory.
And for new players the problem is the opposite, its a volatile slot so being 4% off after 30-40k spins is not weird and nobody would bat an eye.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I dont understand what asking for lifetime rtp is supposed to prove, looking at that will tell you nothing about if the slot is playing under advertised rtp or not.

Im slightly above rtp on Whos the bride, say they sneakily lower it to 93% and i add 100k spins playing that version, it wouldnt even put me below 96% because i have such a large number of spins made on the slot, so im still well within the so called 'margin of error'

Lifetime rtp proves nothing if you have a large amount of spins on the slot prior to a sneaky change in rtp, it would take forever to push you into 'suspiciously low' territory.
And for new players the problem is the opposite, its a volatile slot so being 4-5% off after 30-40k spins is not weird and nobody would bat an eye.

But then we're once again into the sinister dark world of ominous conspiracy theories, if BTG knocked out a secret version of Bonanza that actually paid out 95% RTP, then how would anyone prove the difference against their lifetime stats? Is that where we're at now? BUT WHAT IF THE MOON WAS MADE OF CHEESE AFTER ALL?

I dunno what to say here Kroffe, I'm really trying to meet folks halfway on this, but if the overriding goal is just to never believe that the games people are playing (VOLUNTARILY AND WITH THEIR OWN MONEY) aren't cheating them, up to and including the single most significant overall stat of lifetime RTP, they I don't know what else I can really suggest beyond, and I'll say this again because repetition is my thing - just stop bloody well playing them then.

There comes a point where this just crosses over into sore loser territory. If we all accept at a base level that in the long term we will always be losers when playing random games with a house edge, then the question becomes will we become a sore loser or a loser that accepts maths has eventually done its thing, pesky mathematical certainties! (I'm, sure @trancemonkey and @Reelsoffun can help out here, if they have the mental energy for it.....)

There are no sneaky changes in RTP! Immortal Romance used to be 96.86% at Unibet, now it's 94.12%, no sneakiness is required, they literally just get on the phone to their account manager at Microgaming and say 'Yeah we'll have the pisstake versions of your games please' - mission accomplished. For me, that's the point where I say 'Well fuck you, I won't play your game any more'.

It's the one thing, above all else, they absolutely and completely don't need to cheat on, if they want to drop the RTP, they just take a lower RTP maths model of the game. But instead we go into this Dr Evil style alternate reality where VS are cooking up strange versions of Bonanza that no one has any evidence whatsoever of ever having existed and deciding that's the source of their travails.

(And yes I know Bonanza only has one maths model outside of Germany, so they're definitely cheating on Bonanza elsewhere, right?)

 

[Kroffe]

But then we're once again into the sinister dark world of ominous conspiracy theories, if BTG knocked out a secret version of Bonanza that actually paid out 95% RTP, then how would anyone prove the difference against their lifetime stats? Is that where we're at now? BUT WHAT IF THE MOON WAS MADE OF CHEESE AFTER ALL?

I dunno what to say here Kroffe, I'm really trying to meet folks halfway on this, but if the overriding goal is just to never believe that the games people are playing (VOLUNTARILY AND WITH THEIR OWN MONEY) aren't cheating them, up to and including the single most significant overall stat of lifetime RTP, they I don't know what else I can really suggest beyond, and I'll say this again because repetition is my thing - just stop bloody well playing them then.

There comes a point where this just crosses over into sore loser territory. If we all accept at a base level that in the long term we will always be losers when playing random games with a house edge, then the question becomes will we become a sore loser or a loser that accepts maths has eventually done its thing, pesky mathematical certainties! (I'm, sure @trancemonkey and @Reelsoffun can help out here, if they have the mental energy for it.....)

There are no sneaky changes in RTP! Immortal Romance used to be 96.86% at Unibet, now it's 94.12%, no sneakiness is required, they literally just get on the phone to their account manager at Microgaming and say 'Yeah we'll have the pisstake versions of your games please' - mission accomplished. For me, that's the point where I say 'Well fuck you, I won't play your game any more'.

It's the one thing, above all else, they absolutely and completely don't need to cheat on, if they want to drop the RTP, they just take a lower RTP maths model of the game. But instead we go into this Dr Evil style alternate reality where VS are cooking up strange versions of Bonanza that no one has any evidence whatsoever of ever having existed and deciding that's the source of their travails.

(And yes I know Bonanza only has one maths model outside of Germany, so they're definitely cheating on Bonanza elsewhere, right?)

View attachment 171281

So we agree that if the slot runs below advertised rtp, lifetime rtp is pointless to look at.
Thats what the thread is about, slots possibly running below advertised rtp, but you keep harping on about lifetime rtp so i thought that you did not understand it was pointless to look at that.

Of course they dont need to cheat to make more money, but lowering to 94% will lose you a % of players, the ones that dont play slots under 95% rtp.
If you want the profits a 94% slot gives and also the playerbase of a 96% slot, what could a greedy person do to achieve that?
They dont need to break regulations to increase profits either, but they do, over and over again despite the 'severe' punishment it may bring.
Hell BTG even faked screenshots to win their own comp, is that something they need to do?

Nobody is saying the moon is made out of cheese, we are saying that its not crazy to suspect that people that have been caught ignoring the rules several times in the past might be ignoring a rule again.
I know you think that sounds crazy, but with the history of casinos&providers breaking rules over and over i cant for the life of me understand why you think that.

Bonus points for not mentioning how great 3Dice is in that post tho, i know how hard that is for you.

 

[snorky510238]

This is one of my gripes. I was running at around 98% on Bonanza at VS for a long while and probably a minimum of 250,000 spins. Then within a year I go from there to running at around 90% for the 12 months.

If this had been a mixture of results over 5 and half years, then I would perhaps be more inclined to say fair enough but to run a couple of percent over for that length of time and then run so bad for a year, just doesn’t seem random. To bring my rtp down like that shows how shite my gameplay must have been.

I will concede that there is a much stronger possibility that they have messed with the maths model, than, there is that the game doesn’t meet rtp but I wouldn’t put it beyond doubt that both have happened.

I will state without doubt and put my own life on it, that the maths model which obviously affects the win ratio and frequency of bonus rounds and the size of the wins HAS CHANGES DRAMATICALLY. My history of playing Bonanza, if it could be made into one huge video would leave nobody in any doubt.

I am not saying you are wrong @ChopleyIOM, I never have and never will, without proof and you are right, I don’t have enough and probably never will have.

Given that you obviously have or have had some gripes of your own. Let’s see if we can find some middle ground on other things that’s, let’s say I find interesting and would like your opinion as you are at least educated in your slotting knowledge.


So let’s put it to one-side for a moment and have a more balanced discussion on some other things.

What do you think the process is for logging into a game? I don’t know whether you have read my posts where I have stated a few times that I am able to carry on playing a game whilst actually not being logged into the Casino. I find that strange and my gameplay seems to always take a turn for the worst in this situation. To the point where, if I hit a shite spell, I have started to check if that has happened. It usually has, 9 times out of 10.

Do you also think the Casino has thousands of versions and you randomly log into one of those or are you always logging into a version that is unique to you and only accessible with your user details?

Interested to know what you think on this.

 

[TheAddict]

Yo, Chop.
I know you like BDBA. I do too. I'm not just saying this, but since they had a chance to "update" that game to the now gloriously shite graphical abomination that is on offer, I have not had 5oak of the gems with a wild in the base game. I'd hit it many, many times prior to that.
Have you even hit it on that game? I've done millions of spins prior to that update, hitting that top symbol, in the base game with a wild many a time, and it never went near as long as this without seeing that win. Curious, have you hit it since they "changed" it? lol.
Im sure it's just a coincidence, I mean, I am genuinely that pathetically, ridiculously unlucky. Who cares if it keeps me coming back.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

So let’s put it to one-side for a moment and have a more balanced discussion on some other things.

What do you think the process is for logging into a game? I don’t know whether you have read my posts where I have stated a few times that I am able to carry on playing a game whilst actually not being logged into the Casino. I find that strange and my gameplay seems to always take a turn for the worst in this situation. To the point where, if I hit a shite spell, I have started to check if that has happened. It usually has, 9 times out of 10.

Do you also think the Casino has thousands of versions and you randomly log into one of those or are you always logging into a version that is unique to you and only accessible with your user details?

Interested to know what you think on this.

In honesty I'm not really qualified to comment, I don't know enough about how the the backend casino integration stuff works, especially in today's world of loads of different providers being aggregated into single casinos, plus there are quite a few different platforms as I understand it too. Obviously something in the system needs to track the player to resume games after lost connections and whatnot.

What I'd expect to happen though, at a basic level, is that your client sends a request for a game result, and somewhere on the backend that is passed to a server which pulls a random result and sends it back to your client.

However we know that some games must have more to them than that, any game that has a 'build' mechanic for example, needs to maintain knowledge of where you're up to, for example building up to a free spins round in Marching Legions, it needs to know how far along you are to triggering a free spins round, and thus must maintain details of your specific extended session. (Or even going back to something like Immortal Romance, the server needs to remember which characters you've unlocked, so there is clearly some persistence on the backend that maintains details of your specific client ID.)

When it comes to the details of how that all hangs together, I can't say. It does mean though, clearly, that an online slot isn't just a virtual roulette wheel that has no 'memory' and doesn't 'know' who's playing it, as something on the backend knows who you are and what your history is. Is this used for nefarious purposes, i.e. compensation for example? Well, that's where you have to make your own mind up

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Yo, Chop.
I know you like BDBA. I do too. I'm not just saying this, but since they had a chance to "update" that game to the now gloriously shite graphical abomination that is on offer, I have not had 5oak of the gems with a wild in the base game. I'd hit it many, many times prior to that.
Have you even hit it on that game? I've done millions of spins prior to that update, hitting that top symbol, in the base game with a wild many a time, and it never went near as long as this without seeing that win. Curious, have you hit it since they "changed" it? lol.
Im sure it's just a coincidence, I mean, I am genuinely that pathetically, ridiculously unlucky. Who cares if it keeps me coming back.

TBH the new version of BDBA is so disgustingly awful I couldn't bring myself to put more than a few spins through it, despite how much I liked the original Viper Client version.

They've also gimped the RTP so it's now 94.03% at Unibet, when it was originally 95.43%, so they've clearly messed with it to get the reduced RTP.

From memory I did play a few spins through it in one of my old videos, and was like 'Jesus, what the fuck have they done to it, this is horrible', and closed the game down. (This was before they gimped the RTP as well.)

 

[snorky510238]

In honesty I'm not really qualified to comment, I don't know enough about how the the backend casino integration stuff works, especially in today's world of loads of different providers being aggregated into single casinos, plus there are quite a few different platforms as I understand it too. Obviously something in the system needs to track the player to resume games after lost connections and whatnot.

What I'd expect to happen though, at a basic level, is that your client sends a request for a game result, and somewhere on the backend that is passed to a server which pulls a random result and sends it back to your client.

However we know that some games must have more to them than that, any game that has a 'build' mechanic for example, needs to maintain knowledge of where you're up to, for example building up to a free spins round in Marching Legions, it needs to know how far along you are to triggering a free spins round, and thus must maintain details of your specific extended session. (Or even going back to something like Immortal Romance, the server needs to remember which characters you've unlocked, so there is clearly some persistence on the backend that maintains details of your specific client ID.)

When it comes to the details of how that all hangs together, I can't say. It does mean though, clearly, that an online slot isn't just a virtual roulette wheel that has no 'memory' and doesn't 'know' who's playing it, as something on the backend knows who you are and what your history is. Is this used for nefarious purposes, i.e. compensation for example? Well, that's where you have to make your own mind up

The last paragraph is kind of what I was alluding to. I gave a hypothetical scenario earlier in the thread, comparing B+M Casinos to online and this was what I was getting at really.

When I asked if you expected players in a land based Casino to meet the trtp, you said, absolutely. I would expect quite the opposite because I believe every game on line tracks your play irrespective of whether it’s a game that needs to or not. Whereas in a B+M Casino the machine doesn’t know who’s playing (unless you insert a members card but that may be for nothing more than to claim points).

What I am saying is that the slot you want to play could be available on 20 machines so you have an option of which one to play. This brings luck into the scenario and if your unlucky you could get it wrong every time or vice-versa.

It all seems a bit to convenient for my liking that if you play online, your overall rtp is usually somewhere near as long as you play a reasonable variety of different games. I am fairly convinced that if you carried out my experiment in a land based that this would not be the case because other players are influencing the results by being able to play that slot.

Online, I am convinced that the slot is unique to yourself, i.e. no other player can influence your results. Take Bonanza for instance, a game that shouldn’t need to track your gameplay. When it first came out, iirc, upon loading, it always went to the default page, where it shows the G,O and L.

After a while and whether it was after a “patch” or change of platform, I can’t remember but at certain sites, it would load to the exact screen from where you left off, maybe two weeks previously. That is evidence that your play is being tracked, presumably, unnecessarily.

Imo, that is the only way that ensures, that if you play the game for long enough, your rtp will be somewhere near. If games like Bonanza that has billions of outcomes was truly random, then you could theoretically have some vastly differing rtp’s, even after 2,000,000 spins.

There are other things that point to games not being truly random as well. Again, as I have stated, Bonanza has billions of possible outcomes so I think it’s fair to say, that there are millions of winning combinations possible. Obviously there will be more losing combinations but if you were genuinely picking results up randomly, from that amount of possible outcomes, then why is it that you never get say more than 5 winning spins in a row but you very often get 15 consecutive losing spins? Even with a highly weighted ratio against, it would still be extremely unlikely to happen on such a regular basis.

My conclusion is, that you must be playing your own personal version and whilst, it will be programmed to create some turbulence along the way, if you play it for long enough, your guaranteed to lose because other players have no influence over your results, which in a land based, they would. I know the counter argument is, your bound to lose anyway because of the maths but I don’t really buy into that and I think something far more cynical ensures that you are kept in check.

 

[6HellsBells6]

I know this might be a bit off topic and trying to deter to the rigged side and I will also admit that I am a bit of a degen or full blown one, that is slowly regaining his grip, but I will give you my two examples that I recall and I have many more but these two stick out in my mind.

A few years ago, I joined Bethard and over the course of the month I lost in the region of 1500euro and my average spins are 60c -1e, right.

I got frustrated and pissed off and contacted Cs saying how bad my play has been and could they provide a bonus.

They done this and threw me 25euro.

From there it did not matter what game I opened or played and there was 15 odd games that day that I tried but every fucking one of these slots were hot and hitting bonuses within a few spins, I could do no wrong.

I ended up on the pragmatic pirate one and was doing 8euro spins in the end and reached about 2700. I wanted 3000 and you know, the rest is history and I played that motherfucker to zero.

Weather the hot streak was real and the slots were truly random, I don't know but for sure I could not break that 3k and this has happened many times on different sites that it just seems controlled and within range of your deposits on what your allowed to win.

Number two and this is the worst and lowest that I have ever been in my 15years plus of online slotting.

Over the couple of years of the Covid lockdown, I ripped through nearly 12k on one site again, average 60c- 1e spins and nothing over 50e or rarely on each deposit at a time.



But after about a year and a half with -12k in deposited, I deposited 30 euro and ran that up to 9k over 6 hours, I went to withdraw that cash and all functions to deposit and withdraw were disabled. Because over 35 days earlier they had asked for SOW but I could continue freely to deposit up until that morning.

At that time there were alot of Sow talk on CM and whatever way it happened and since I could not withdraw in that moment and went onto a low variant Playtech slot that I had being plugging away at for at least 6 months but I went crazy on it and done 45euro spins.

I think I hit once a 10x max on it during the course of 3 hours to reach zero and a few 5x hits here and there, yet before this and that was the reason I went back to it, I usually got a bit of play and hits from it ranging from 20x 50x 100 and even 200x hits on 90cent and 2.25euro.


Anyway, to cut a long story short, for me it does not seem to be random, its like the Casino's can setup a range on your account and you win when they let you, I'm not saying all Casinos are like that but there seems to be a few that operate like that from my experience anyway.

The likes of Bet365 would not need to do this but lesser known Casinos with not much of a customer base could milk a Degen like me dry on a whim.

I am not a Conspiracy tinfoil hatter but that is just a couple of experiences from many many sessions and different online casinos.

I think, I am also putting that out here because I am just about done with them all, after all these years and 10s of thousands lost.

Make of it what you will but like it has been said here before Greed has gotten far worse and maybe the Casino's know their time is short and people are waking up to their ways, along with maybe Crypto Casino's being the new thing. ( I don't know, Just a guess)

 

[aceking123]

Well blo me down, bunch of tin foil h

The last paragraph is kind of what I was alluding to. I gave a hypothetical scenario earlier in the thread, comparing B+M Casinos to online and this was what I was getting at really.

When I asked if you expected players in a land based Casino to meet the trtp, you said, absolutely. I would expect quite the opposite because I believe every game on line tracks your play irrespective of whether it’s a game that needs to or not. Whereas in a B+M Casino the machine doesn’t know who’s playing (unless you insert a members card but that may be for nothing more than to claim points).

What I am saying is that the slot you want to play could be available on 20 machines so you have an option of which one to play. This brings luck into the scenario and if your unlucky you could get it wrong every time or vice-versa.

It all seems a bit to convenient for my liking that if you play online, your overall rtp is usually somewhere near as long as you play a reasonable variety of different games. I am fairly convinced that if you carried out my experiment in a land based that this would not be the case because other players are influencing the results by being able to play that slot.

Online, I am convinced that the slot is unique to yourself, i.e. no other player can influence your results. Take Bonanza for instance, a game that shouldn’t need to track your gameplay. When it first came out, iirc, upon loading, it always went to the default page, where it shows the G,O and L.

After a while and whether it was after a “patch” or change of platform, I can’t remember but at certain sites, it would load to the exact screen from where you left off, maybe two weeks previously. That is evidence that your play is being tracked, presumably, unnecessarily.

Imo, that is the only way that ensures, that if you play the game for long enough, your rtp will be somewhere near. If games like Bonanza that has billions of outcomes was truly random, then you could theoretically have some vastly differing rtp’s, even after 2,000,000 spins.

There are other things that point to games not being truly random as well. Again, as I have stated, Bonanza has billions of possible outcomes so I think it’s fair to say, that there are millions of winning combinations possible. Obviously there will be more losing combinations but if you were genuinely picking results up randomly, from that amount of possible outcomes, then why is it that you never get say more than 5 winning spins in a row but you very often get 15 consecutive losing spins? Even with a highly weighted ratio against, it would still be extremely unlikely to happen on such a regular basis.

My conclusion is, that you must be playing your own personal version and whilst, it will be programmed to create some turbulence along the way, if you play it for long enough, your guaranteed to lose because other players have no influence over your results, which in a land based, they would. I know the counter argument is, your bound to lose anyway because of the maths but I don’t really buy into that and I think something far more cynical ensures that you are kept in check.

There's a few older members have already tried the debates on what's sent to & from the server I think me, Harry, & a couple of others where trying to find out it's never really been answered even to this day.

I think trance also tried to help, it was a grey area, from my point of view every single player online has to be tracked in some way, certain games have to know your unique number,code or whatever else they use, so that should tell you something.

Also it would need the balance, ip & all the rest of it, or you wouldn't be able to play.

Something must be ongoing in background, it's not to say your tracked, but i would take a educational guess with a high degree, that the servers are the ones with the loggings of your play.

Not just your current casino. Each player must have a unique number,code etc etc

 

[snorky510238]

I think there is something in that, the honeymoon period so to speak.

The first Casino I joined was Thrills and it was like being on drug specifically designed for slot players.

I couldn’t believe the frequency of the features. I only had to deposit £20 on most occasions and within a few spins, BOOM, feature, £40, a few spins later, feature, £30, etc. Move games and the same kept happening. This went on for ages and I specifically remember thinking one night that something was wrong, when I had to deposit £60 without getting a feature. Nowadays I have regularly deposited £300 without seeing a single one.

I didn’t used to withdraw the money instantly either, such was my faith in the fairness of slotting at that time. I even remember one instance where I deposited £20 (usually 40p stakes) and gradually built the balance up and after 2 weeks of playing everyday, I withdrew £900. That was a really fun session, with regular swings of £200-£400 either way. I absolutely guarantee that is unachievable nowadays.

Every deposit either hits zero in record time or occasionally you get a win quite quickly. What is more than apparent (through years of experience) is that there is a cap on your win and if you try and push for more, you are guaranteed to be wiped out. From seemingly being invincible, suddenly every slot plays as if it’s broken.

For the seasoned players who will recognise exactly what I am saying and will be able to relay very similar experiences, ask yourself one question. When was the last time you had a session where every slot you played seemed “hot”?

If you’re anything like me, it happened that long ago, you wouldn’t know for sure, not even to the year, never mind the month.

 

[6HellsBells6]

I think there is something in that, the honeymoon period so to speak.

The first Casino I joined was Thrills and it was like being on drug specifically designed for slot players.

I couldn’t believe the frequency of the features. I only had to deposit £20 on most occasions and within a few spins, BOOM, feature, £40, a few spins later, feature, £30, etc. Move games and the same kept happening. This went on for ages and I specifically remember thinking one night that something was wrong, when I had to deposit £60 without getting a feature. Nowadays I have regularly deposited £300 without seeing a single one.

I didn’t used to withdraw the money instantly either, such was my faith in the fairness of slotting at that time. I even remember one instance where I deposited £20 (usually 40p stakes) and gradually built the balance up and after 2 weeks of playing everyday, I withdrew £900. That was a really fun session, with regular swings of £200-£400 either way. I absolutely guarantee that is unachievable nowadays.

Every deposit either hits zero in record time or occasionally you get a win quite quickly. What is more than apparent (through years of experience) is that there is a cap on your win and if you try and push for more, you are guaranteed to be wiped out. From seemingly being invincible, suddenly every slot plays as if it’s broken.

For the seasoned players who will recognise exactly what I am saying and will be able to relay very similar experiences, ask yourself one question. When was the last time you had a session where every slot you played seemed “hot”?

If you’re anything like me, it happened that long ago, you wouldn’t know for sure, not even to the year, never mind the month.

Truth! Exact same experience more or less.

 

[6HellsBells6]

Also, weather I am a full blown degen or not, Brings me to my play like this, if over a year I make 100 odd 30 to 50 euro deposits and maybe a few times I will get that up to 500 or 600 and on rare occasions over the 1k mark.

This is were my rational thinks, I'm hardly ever gonna get the chance to up my bets and push it too as far it will go.

But every time you reach a certain limit and it is like hitting a brick wall, no matter what game you play or strategy you try, you cannot get past a certain limit. And too me then that is were it pretty obvious Casinos have full control of player accounts.

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

And finally this is what I'm like on a session!

 

[ChopleyIOM]

We've been having a good chat over at Desert Island Fruits about random machines that operate under some slightly strange UK technical standards (this was off the back of the video I reuploaded the other week about random games killing compensated AWPs in the UK).

One of the members there has availed himself of the UK technical standards and done some thought experiments as to how you could create some pretty weird play profiles whilst still having a 'random' game that obeys the technical standards.

Now to be clear here, I'm not accusing online slots of doing this, but these machines certainly exist in UK arcades - so it's an interesting conversation.

The thread isn't viewable as a guest so here is some relevant information from it.

----------------------------

 

[snorky510238]

 

[pinnit2014]

Even though closed my account with them, might see if they can give/still have my stats at Rizk casino because i think it's probably very similar to that 87% (maybe more bets but similar RTP)

Never went nuts on the site but just a series of 50-100 quid deposits over a number of years, each time thinking' surely it can't go on like that for another deposit' and each time it did

IIRC best x win was something like 150x

 

[Jono777]

Back in my winning days and also when I had a bigger playing pot, Rizk was one casino I could never crack, don't think I ever had more than one or two sessions where I got above starting balance.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

View attachment 171439

Those are bad numbers, no doubt about it, and getting on for about the outer edge of where I'd expect someone to be after 45K spins, at 8.15% adrift of RTP - honestly though, I think you're within the realms of what can be explained by simple bad luck.

Just other day I got my lifetime stats from 3Dice, which now includes data on over 1.2m real money game rounds, so not a trivial amount of play.

I don't have any outliers as big as yours there, but then again 3Dice don't run anything with a batshit maths model like Bonanza has.

However, here are some of the 'most adrift' ones, as a point of reference.

43.5K spins on Berrini's Fortune and I was 4.5% ahead of RTP.

My next 48K spins were pretty much bang on RTP. (It's the same game but it counts as a different game in the stats as they added the sitewide videoslots progressive to all their games.)

Now this one is 'only' 10K spins, but I'm 15% ahead of RTP!

This is Enchanted Spins on the old download casino, just over 5% ahead of RTP after 68K spins.

I've since done another 190K spins on the game on the new web based casino, as you can see, it's evened out now.

Spin size here isn't great, but Payola is a really low volatility game, I'm 10% under RTP. This is on the old download casino, on the new web based casino I've done 18K spins and I'm running at 97.7% RTP, so ahead of RTP by about 2.5%.

Take all 1.2m game rounds, and aggregate the RTP across them all, and I'm within the margin of error on T-RTP, but as you can see, contained within those numbers can be some pretty big outliers.

So overall I'd say your Bonanza stats at Spin Rider are bad, you were certainly very unlucky there, but honestly, I'd say bad luck is all it is.

My final aggregated RTP across all games at 3Dice, from over ten years and 1.2m game rounds is 95.585%, and at a casino where near enough all the games run somewhere between 95% and 96%, that's basically bang on