Wtf happened to Dead or Alive

[goatwack]

If I based Gem Rocks on my first session having hit 4000x I'd think it was a beaut of a game.
Having gone back to it another session, it's a goddamned money eater

Same as IR - I've hit whacks of 5X character and several bonus rounds in a sessions and then I've not hit one bloody bonus in 25 visits.
For me, 100 spins only tells me if I find the game interesting - and even then if I hit bonus.

Having just beta tested an upcoming game, my first impression of several hundred spins I rather enjoyed it.
The next session of several hundred spins I wouldnt put more than a tenner into it.

I said few hundred not couple of hundred you bloody objector

 

[dionysus]

I said few hundred not couple of hundred you bloody objector

my bad, my bad
(though realisitically, I probably beta tested several thousand )

 

[trancemonkey]

Change of tune?:

“The DOA stats, and the fact it's now allowed at some casinos, means they have probably (not definitely) turned down the volatility.”

Not at all... my words were chosen very carefully. And also, the joys of opinions and beliefs is that we are allowed to be wrong. And the good thing is, some of us can even admit when we are

As it turns out it looks like I was wrong here...

He has said he's going to get them to look in to the dodgy scatters landing above the reels and below though..

 

[Jono777]

Not at all... my words were chosen very carefully. And also, the joys of opinions and beliefs is that we are allowed to be wrong. And the good thing is, some of us can even admit when we are

As it turns out it looks like I was wrong here...

He has said he's going to get them to look in to the dodgy scatters landing above the reels and below though..

Ahhh, the perfect excuse to twerk the RTP again, bet there's a book full of "reasons" lined up *ducks*

 

[interlog]

Not at all... my words were chosen very carefully. And also, the joys of opinions and beliefs is that we are allowed to be wrong. And the good thing is, some of us can even admit when we are

As it turns out it looks like I was wrong here...

He has said he's going to get them to look in to the dodgy scatters landing above the reels and below though..

Maybe ask them to get a competent beta tester too. Why didn't they pick that dodgy scatter landing malarkey up?

Edit: Oh, I forgot.... they have gone to dogsh*t. Not the slot developer they used to be once upon a time.

 

[aceking123]

Ohh this is a super hot thread now )

 

[bebo67]

holy hannah- now its a point of contention how one friend reaches out to another?
99% of people I connect with is through FB even though I have their cell numbers for calls and text, their linkedin or skype or email.
Because I cant be arsed to constantly pick up my phone whilst on the pc, my phone is by and large a glorified e reader

Same. I need to get a hold of someone, it will be through facebook. The phone and email is for business purposes only.

 

[goatwack]

Ohh this is a super hot thread now )

Whaaaat did you just say? How dare you!

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

 

[paul7388]

Same. I need to get a hold of someone, it will be through facebook. The phone and email is for business purposes only.

I am the opposite.

I want to get hold of someone i phone or text them and get a just about immediate answer.

 

[dionysus]

lol, just not 10 minutes ago was a perfect example; my mother had phoned while I was putting the dogs down to pee - if i hadnt happened to see my phone because i was moving it, id never have seen the message, though fb pings to my phone, my tablet and flashes on my pc

 

[goatwack]

That should sort the problem. Let's have Netent, BTG & MG production staff leave their numbers here so we can give em a quick bell.

For those tricky questions that cannot get resolved here!

 

[dionysus]

i suspect any numbers left will begin with 555

 

[pedroxante]

He has said he's going to get them to look in to the dodgy scatters landing above the reels and below though..

Is this about scatters being on a reel (i.e reelset) they're not supposed to?

If so, I've an idea what the problem is. NE is quite protective of their maths.

So the symbols shown during a spin (e.g when the reels are still spinning) are not an actual representation (as in order and/or frequency) of the symbols of the reel (in the HTML5 version), as they don't want to too easily reveal the reel data of a game.

They do not, however, want to give the impression that there are certain symbols where they shouldn't be. So I guess in this case they kind of failed in that regard.

 

[trancemonkey]

Is this about scatters being on a reel (i.e reelset) they're not supposed to?

If so, I've an idea what the problem is. NE is quite protective of their maths.

So the symbols shown during a spin (e.g when the reels are still spinning) are not an actual representation (as in order and/or frequency) of the symbols of the reel (in the HTML5 version), as they don't want to too easily reveal the reel data of a game.

They do not, however, want to give the impression that there are certain symbols where they shouldn't be. So I guess in this case they kind of failed in that regard.

Even if that were true, and it's entirely possible that is the reason, they shouldn't show symbols above and below the reels that can't physically be there - that's just shoddy programming.

 

[slotter999]

Is this about scatters being on a reel (i.e reelset) they're not supposed to?

If so, I've an idea what the problem is. NE is quite protective of their maths.

So the symbols shown during a spin (e.g when the reels are still spinning) are not an actual representation (as in order and/or frequency) of the symbols of the reel (in the HTML5 version), as they don't want to too easily reveal the reel data of a game.

They do not, however, want to give the impression that there are certain symbols where they shouldn't be. So I guess in this case they kind of failed in that regard.

Netent do not expose the reelstrips anywhere as far as I can tell. If you poke through the code you can find the javascript which is used to generate the "spinning reel". It's all client side pseudo random stuff which slides images around.

Even if that were true, and it's entirely possible that is the reason, they shouldn't show symbols above and below the reels that can't physically be there - that's just shoddy programming.

If the symbol is outside of an actual winline - are there any rules about what is allowed in terms of "just above" or "just below". I know you couldn't put something on a winline which couldn't actually happen but doing that outside of the win lines seems fair game i.e. scatter tease consistently appearing to be just one position under a winline or the scatters being just above in the case of DOA.

 

[Nate]

My assumption is that majority of the contributors to this thread would be of the opinion that he's not being entirely honest. I personally believe him simply because there is no overwhelming reason to be dishonest and no overwhelming reason to change the game.

But lets assume the head of products at netent cannot be trusted to tell the truth. What then should I think about the statements of someone saying they are a games producer on an internet forum?

Here is the interview: -

https://www.casinomeister.com/gambling-news/interview-netents-cpo-simon-hammond/

CM: Personally, I enjoy some of the older MGS slots – mainly for nostalgia sake. NetEnt – I’m drawn to Aloha (naturally), and Koi Princess – just to name two. Which brings me to 20/20 hindsight: if you could have changed a game after its launch – what would it have been? What would you have changed?

Simon Hammon:

When a game is launched I always feel it can be dangerous to change it as player expectations can be impacted. We have done some HTML 5 upgrades recently which haven’t touched any of the maths, mechanics or largely the design to ensure we keep as close to the original flash version as possible. Changes here are only to ensure the longevity and reliability of the game as flash dies. There are always pros and cons to revisiting games post-launch, but I am more in favor of taking any lessons learned into future productions. A game that we originally looked at a potential of a release was Boom Brothers, which is a fantastic looking production with innovative features and functionality but did not do as well as expected. We were tempted to tweak some items but again the game in its current form still has a very loyal following who love that math flow so to do so would be unfair to them.

Been reading this thread and I can only echo some of the sentiments presented here. I am a LONG TIME DOA player and introduced a bit of the hype surrounding this slot on the forum a few years back. Many members will attest to this. Multiple Wildlines, Multiple 5 Scatters, Monster Max Bet Wins, Horrible sessions and enough play on the slot to boast a wild line on almost EVERY Coin size from 0.09c to 18 Eur a spin.

Simply go into the Show me the money screenshot thread and look for DOA screenies. Compare the LACK of HTML 5 hits to the abundance of Flash hits and that will paint a pretty picture on its own.

That statement from Simon is so VAGUE and can be left open to interpretation just like Bill Clintons' infamous quote 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'

The fact that Simon states they done 'some' HTML 5 Upgrades and not touched the maths does not infer that ALL HTML 5 upgrades are devoid of changes. A simple statement like 'ALL of our HTML 5 Upgrades have not included any math changes' would simply end any speculation. Why didn't he say that?

The statement itself is typical (whether intended or not) corporate BS which ultimately does not give any clarity on whether DOA has changed. That statement means nothing at all IMPO. It actually leaves me wondering which slots have changed and which haven't.

Do I think that the math has changed? I can only speak from my complete lack of success since the HTML 5 version was introduced and say yes... It does not play or feel the same. I still play it but I believe it was converted from Dead or Alive to Bled while Alive by our friends at NetBent.

Nate

 

[SpinUk]

Been reading this thread and I can only echo some of the sentiments presented here. I am a LONG TIME DOA player and introduced a bit of the hype surrounding this slot on the forum a few years back. Many members will attest to this. Multiple Wildlines, Multiple 5 Scatters, Monster Max Bet Wins, Horrible sessions and enough play on the slot to boast a wild line on almost EVERY Coin size from 0.09c to 18 Eur a spin.

Simply go into the Show me the money screenshot thread and look for DOA screenies. Compare the LACK of HTML 5 hits to the abundance of Flash hits and that will paint a pretty picture on its own.

That statement from Simon is so VAGUE and can be left open to interpretation just like Bill Clintons' infamous quote 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'

The fact that Simon states they done 'some' HTML 5 Upgrades and not touched the maths does not infer that ALL HTML 5 upgrades are devoid of changes. A simple statement like 'ALL of our HTML 5 Upgrades have not included any math changes' would simply end any speculation. Why didn't he say that?

The statement itself is typical (whether intended or not) corporate BS which ultimately does not give any clarity on whether DOA has changed. That statement means nothing at all IMPO. It actually leaves me wondering which slots have changed and which haven't.

Do I think that the math has changed? I can only speak from my complete lack of success since the HTML 5 version was introduced and say yes... It does not play or feel the same. I still play it but it I believe it was converted from Dead or Alive to Bled while Alive by our friends at NetBent.

Nate

Yep.

Case for a change:

1. 5000 bonus rounds of records showing a 300% reduction of 1000x wins.
2. Inexplicable widespread U-turn on casinos bringing back on board dead or alive for bonus play.
3. Ambiguous/generalised official statement from Netent on changing html5 maths.
4. Widespread suspicion from experienced, veteran players who have played 100s of thousands of spins on the game.

Case against a change:

1. Trancemonkey spoke to a mate at Netent who has worked there a month.
2. Er...that’s it.

 

[dionysus]

Case against a change:

1. Trancemonkey spoke to a mate at Netent who has worked there a month.
2. Er...that’s it.

Well if Bryan opens a new category for a cherry-picking award, this gets my vote

 

[asghan]

Ok so I checked my stats from old DoA.

6200 bonus rounds.

24 wins 1000xbet

1000xbet 1 in 258 features.

So my stats are not so different than those from Slot Tracker.

I say this again, it's just my personal opinion, I know many people here don't agree and I respect that, but those numbers are way too small to draw any definitive conclusions. You would need at least ten times more.

I'm still on the fence whether they changed it or not but I'm more inclined to believe that they didn't.

 

[SpinUk]

Well if Bryan opens a new category for a cherry-picking award, this gets my vote

If Bryan is opening a new catagory for least constructive post I think you may be in with a chance too.

 

[dionysus]

nah, thatll go to the tinfoil hatters who trot out the same 'feelings' time and agiain - he could give it gold stars

 

[Jono777]

As a guilty tin foil hatter (now and then, part time these days ) I have to say there is a big difference between foil hatting and obvious "stand out" changes.

I'll be happily ridiculed for the rest of my CM days but DoA, along with numerous other slots HAVE changed - not saying RTP but they way their mechanics work etc, pity it won't stop either as bottom line, the developers, providers, heck even casinos will confidently sit back knowing that NONE of us will truly ever know.

 

[trancemonkey]

Netent do not expose the reelstrips anywhere as far as I can tell. If you poke through the code you can find the javascript which is used to generate the "spinning reel". It's all client side pseudo random stuff which slides images around.



If the symbol is outside of an actual winline - are there any rules about what is allowed in terms of "just above" or "just below". I know you couldn't put something on a winline which couldn't actually happen but doing that outside of the win lines seems fair game i.e. scatter tease consistently appearing to be just one position under a winline or the scatters being just above in the case of DOA.

There are no rules as such with regards to what lands above / below the reels (i.e just out of view) but it's just shoddy coding, and definitely different to the previous Flash version

 

[brianmon]

There are no rules as such with regards to what lands above / below the reels (i.e just out of view) but it's just shoddy coding, and definitely different to the previous Flash version

Aren't there rules about 'near misses' though, which are what those scatters are trying to be.
EVERY time 2 scatters land, a 3rd (or even more) can be seen landing above the paylines.
I think they did make some adjustments to this, not long after it was released.
Because, initially, the number of scatters landing above the paylines was ridiculous.
I'd had spins where there where 3 scatters triggering a bonus, but there were still a scatter on each reel, above the paylines.
I don't think it's accidental or shoddy programming, I'm pretty sure it's intentional

 

[trancemonkey]

Aren't there rules about 'near misses' though, which are what those scatters are trying to be.
EVERY time 2 scatters land, a 3rd (or even more) can be seen landing above the paylines.
I think they did make some adjustments to this, not long after it was released.
Because, initially, the number of scatters landing above the paylines was ridiculous.
I'd had spins where there where 3 scatters triggering a bonus, but there were still a scatter on each reel, above the paylines.
I don't think it's accidental or shoddy programming, I'm pretty sure it's intentional

There are rules on the near miss - and this doesn't explicitly state "in view" and you could easily argue that above / below the win-line could be classed as a near miss, and therefore it is likely that you could argue that this breaks the "near miss" rules. But it's also possible that the test-houses wouldn't consider this a near miss - it's a good point though brianmon

 

[bebo67]

There are rules on the near miss - and this doesn't explicitly state "in view" and you could easily argue that above / below the win-line could be classed as a near miss, and therefore it is likely that you could argue that this breaks the "near miss" rules. But it's also possible that the test-houses wouldn't consider this a near miss - it's a good point though brianmon

There is a lot of near misses on Pimp

 

[pedroxante]

As a guilty tin foil hatter (now and then, part time these days ) I have to say there is a big difference between foil hatting and obvious "stand out" changes.

I'll be happily ridiculed for the rest of my CM days but DoA, along with numerous other slots HAVE changed - not saying RTP but they way their mechanics work etc, pity it won't stop either as bottom line, the developers, providers, heck even casinos will confidently sit back knowing that NONE of us will truly ever know.

I'm going to remove myself from this conversation now, but I would like to say from my perspective, who has been in the organisation previously and probably have 50+ acquaintances and around 20 people I still see and talk to on a regular basis there.

That I've never heard from anyone that they've changed the Math of any game they've converted. And I've directly asked several people about this (with different positions within the company) ever since these theories began to show up on this forum.

And I've also asked people (that should know) but aren't still in the organisation, and they've all said the same thing.

So if they've changed it, they've been pretty good at hiding it from the majority of the people within the company. Or most of them are liars (which I don't believe).

 

[subsoil]

Guys ... i guess its enough. This debate is endless. Even if Apache himself pops up and confirmes that nothing has changed, they will still be people who believe whatever they want to believe. And thats fine. Just play DoA, or leave it. For myself, i stick with my addiction, ehm, i mean DoA.

 

[dunover]

Been reading this thread and I can only echo some of the sentiments presented here. I am a LONG TIME DOA player and introduced a bit of the hype surrounding this slot on the forum a few years back. Many members will attest to this. Multiple Wildlines, Multiple 5 Scatters, Monster Max Bet Wins, Horrible sessions and enough play on the slot to boast a wild line on almost EVERY Coin size from 0.09c to 18 Eur a spin.

Simply go into the Show me the money screenshot thread and look for DOA screenies. Compare the LACK of HTML 5 hits to the abundance of Flash hits and that will paint a pretty picture on its own.

That statement from Simon is so VAGUE and can be left open to interpretation just like Bill Clintons' infamous quote 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'

The fact that Simon states they done 'some' HTML 5 Upgrades and not touched the maths does not infer that ALL HTML 5 upgrades are devoid of changes. A simple statement like 'ALL of our HTML 5 Upgrades have not included any math changes' would simply end any speculation. Why didn't he say that?

The statement itself is typical (whether intended or not) corporate BS which ultimately does not give any clarity on whether DOA has changed. That statement means nothing at all IMPO. It actually leaves me wondering which slots have changed and which haven't.

Do I think that the math has changed? I can only speak from my complete lack of success since the HTML 5 version was introduced and say yes... It does not play or feel the same. I still play it but I believe it was converted from Dead or Alive to Bled while Alive by our friends at NetBent.

Nate

Two ways to view that - no bastard plays it much nowadays due to far superior slots such as B*n*nz* which are the new darlings OR it really is shit. IMO I feel the base game IS slightly different from before and I rarely visit the game now. It looks like your sponsored video will be the first and last time I ever hit big on it lol

P.S. a third reason could be that certain people on here bullied old 'Rolastan' off the forum who seemed to do nothing else but play this game! His opinion would be most helpful now.

 

[brianmon]

Two ways to view that - no bastard plays it much nowadays due to far superior slots such as B*n*nz* which are the new darlings OR it really is shit. IMO I feel the base game IS slightly different from before and I rarely visit the game now. It looks like your sponsored video will be the first and last time I ever hit big on it lol

P.S. a third reason could be that certain people on here bullied old 'Rolastan' off the forum who seemed to do nothing else but play this game! His opinion would be most helpful now.

Wasn't Rolastan banned from CM by Bryan for being very abusive to the CS of a (possibly accredited) casino, over their refusal to give him a bonus?
I think he ignored most of the posts criticising or questioning him.

But I'd also love to hear his opinion.

 

[TheAddict]

Wasn't Rolastan banned from CM by Bryan for being very abusive to the CS of a (possibly accredited) casino, over their refusal to give him a bonus?
I think he ignored most of the posts criticising or questioning him.

But I'd also love to hear his opinion.

Indeed.
"Shove your bonus up your ass" was the persuading comment iirc.

Ive pretty much only played doa for the past 2.5years when punting online. Ive said it before a long time ago but fwiw i do feel the variance has changed. Seem to get more average paying bonus rounds of 300-1000x , often paying 500-1000x with wilds all over the place..but less of the monster line hits. and to me it does feel as if getting 5 extrs spins is not as exciting anymore, where before if getting them it felt like there was a realistic sense of hope when they played out... rather than 40 attempts at reaching a situation of needing 1 more wild for a line and it missing everytime, for when it does finally drop in it conveniently arrieves on the last effing spin ;p

 

[goatwack]

I'll be first to admit that having got a couple of 'fairly recent' wildlines at BGO, I shouldn't even be complaining as such. Having also played it extensively at PowerSpins, Stan James and LeoVegas I still feel the base game plays more loosely.

Bonuses have always been rubbish- let's not gloss over that fact- but on the whole they feature more average wins than before. It was more boom or bust with the old DOA. It's hard to even get that excited over DOA's bonus rounds anymore. I used to on the old version!

 

[mcgameboy]

Two ways to view that - no bastard plays it much nowadays due to far superior slots such as B*n*nz* which are the new darlings OR it really is shit. IMO I feel the base game IS slightly different from before and I rarely visit the game now. It looks like your sponsored video will be the first and last time I ever hit big on it lol

P.S. a third reason could be that certain people on here bullied old 'Rolastan' off the forum who seemed to do nothing else but play this game! His opinion would be most helpful now.

That is incorrect mate. He got banned for the reasons brianmon mentioned in the post after yours.

I would however agree that there were quite a few members here who weren't exactly sad or sorry to see him go. I should know, because I was one of them.

And apart from anything else, Bryan (IIRC) did give him the opportunity to get his ban lifted. All he had to do was eat humble pie and apologise for his behaviour.
But he chose not to, hence his ban stayed permanent.

So with all due respect Mr. D, to say he was "bullied" is a bit of a stretch. He is no longer here because of his actions, not ours.

 

[goatwack]

Who cares about Doastan, where the hell did Johnnygothebon go? Poster of the decade

 

[mcgameboy]

Maybe he had to go get a new bone. Clearly he has never heard of Poundland....

 

[pinnit2014]

Who cares about Doastan, where the hell did Johnnygothebon go? Poster of the decade

He's still seen in AG the odd time...likes to tell people how much money he's canning in

 

[dusky]

Apart from SlotsMillions / Ladylucks who else has brought it back from the dead as such? Even with these two it’s still set at 50% of WR to entice so I don’t see how it’s been given as proof that the game has changed and needs to be reintroduced for bonuses.

The game is ridiculously variant, as already mentioned unless it’s a good million spins I don’t see how anything can be proved.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I was one of the critics when the HTML5 version was released, especially because of the constant scatter near-misses.

My observations over the last year have shown that it has not changed at all from the amount of play time I get with my balance. What my stats though indicate is that if I lose 100x bet on it, 98/100 i will not recover even close to my starting balance. Hence, I play it now to the "t" up to that threshold, when I bet $1.80 - $3.60, I allow $360 in losses (if the balance is large enough). Similar if I bet smaller.

Today, I was getting close to a $900 loss, I was betting $3.60 - $9.00. The WL hit after losing $864. And it was close to a triple WL.

Each WL I had on the HTML5 version came within the 100x bet threshold. And they still come like buses..... I used to play DOA daily and would have periods with 4 - 5 WL or 5 scatter within a week and then 4 - 6 weeks nothing, nada, zilch. Exactly the same with the HTML5 version, I played 8 serious sessions on DOA this year and scored 3 WL. The 5 without a WL I left the slot after losing 100x average bet.

 

[dave1888]

I was one of the critics when the HTML5 version was released, especially because of the constant scatter near-misses.

My observations over the last year have shown that it has not changed at all from the amount of play time I get with my balance. What my stats though indicate is that if I lose 100x bet on it, 98/100 i will not recover even close to my starting balance. Hence, I play it now to the "t" up to that threshold, when I bet $1.80 - $3.60, I allow $360 in losses (if the balance is large enough). Similar if I bet smaller.

Today, I was getting close to a $900 loss, I was betting $3.60 - $9.00. The WL hit after losing $864. And it was close to a triple WL.

Each WL I had on the HTML5 version came within the 100x bet threshold. And they still come like buses..... I used to play DOA daily and would have periods with 4 - 5 WL or 5 scatter within a week and then 4 - 6 weeks nothing, nada, zilch. Exactly the same with the HTML5 version, I played 8 serious sessions on DOA this year and scored 3 WL. The 5 without a WL I left the slot after losing 100x average bet.

View attachment 89362

All in favour that Harry does the next comp at Remarkable day at Videoslots ?. In all seriousness though! Congratulations!

 

[TradaCasino]

This thread has been an interesting read! I do believe that there were no mathematical changes in the HTML5 version, but I also prefer the old version for some reason.

We added the 'classic' version of Dead or Alive to the site, so now players have both options

Rachel.

 

[pinnit2014]

Think this should be a challenge for Harry to see if he can emulate his ‘New’ wins on the flash version. I’d offer but I don’t think my 25 quid deposit would cut it

 

[slotter999]

This thread has been an interesting read! I do believe that there were no mathematical changes in the HTML5 version, but I also prefer the old version for some reason.

We added the 'classic' version of Dead or Alive to the site, so now players have both options

Rachel.

Hi Rachel,

Seeing as you are officially a customer of netent - maybe you could ask them the question formally and revert back with their response?

According to some of the posters to this thread the changes have been made to somehow appease the casinos. It would seem odd for them to do that and not tell you about it right?

 

[TradaCasino]

Hi Rachel,

Seeing as you are officially a customer of netent - maybe you could ask them the question formally and revert back with their response?

According to some of the posters to this thread the changes have been made to somehow appease the casinos. It would seem odd for them to do that and not tell you about it right?

Hey Slotter999,

I used to work at NetEnt, I can confidently say that they do not change the mathematics of their games when changing to HTML5. I had mentioned it at ICE this year too and was told this policy remains unchanged.

Thanks,

Rachel.

 

[interlog]

So there you have it out of the horses mouth (not that Rachel is a horse of course )

Queue the next post saying it is still rigged and changed.

 

[goatwack]

It's still rigged and changed?


*ok not rigged but changed

 

[Jono777]

Just as I finally binned my foil hat forever too Goaty

 

[Gonzo]

Gonzos, DoA. flowers, piggy ritches and viktorius is changed 100%%

 

[Gonzo]

And no not rigged just changed to rape players

 

[SpinUk]

This thread has been an interesting read! I do believe that there were no mathematical changes in the HTML5 version, but I also prefer the old version for some reason.

We added the 'classic' version of Dead or Alive to the site, so now players have both options

Rachel.

Can we play it with a bonus too

 

[trancemonkey]

Gonzos, DoA. flowers, piggy ritches and viktorius is changed 100%%

So unless someone tells you its rigged, you won't believe them. What a great mentality that is

Remind me again why you play? It's a weird duality isn't it:

1. It's all rigged!
2. I still play though