Forum

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Look, my view on this is simple: it is wrong for VideoSlots to introduce lower RTP versions of some games and not inform players about that change in a manner which ensures they will see it, such as an email. Burying the news on your site on a page you know from analytics most players don’t see is poor behaviour.

Lower RTP does make a difference to how a game will play for the average user session. Book of Dead for example will be less likely to bring in premium win lines and less likely to bonus on its lower RTP versions.

Yes it is on a player to check the RTP of a game before they play but you cannot reasonably expect them to do this every single time they log in and deposit for every game.

To use you food analogy, this is more like you going to McDonald’s every day where you pay up front then get your food, so one day you go in, make your normal choice, pay the money and then find after that the burgers are smaller and you only get half the fries you used to. I think you’d be within your rights to be annoyed if they did that and didn’t make sure you knew in advance of ordering that change had happened.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

The two relevant facts here are 1) the more spins you have on a slot the closer your actual results will trend towards the theoretical RTP and 2) even small variations in theoretical RTP can make a large difference to the actual RTP over a smaller sample of spins.

Both these facts are mathematically demonstrable. When you say if you’re playing a couple of hundred spins, it doesn’t make a difference whether you’re playing a 92% or 96% version because the sample size is too small to be impacted, you are simply wrong. The reason for this is RTP is adjusted by altering the probabilities of wins occurring, in practice by changing the spread and frequency of symbols on the reelsets and behaviour of bonus rounds.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

@trr420

 This is why an RTP for anyone that plays a slot  is not as important over 10,000 spins as it is 10,000,000

This is not really true; it is correct that the theoretical RTP is calculated over the long term and on a lower RTP slot, of course in an average player session of a few hundred spins you can still get big wins and finish in profit.

But the fact is depending on various game design factors, the difference to the average player in say 92% versus 96% long term RTP can be massive. It can mean across 10 separate sessions of 1000 spins, the chances of being in profit at the end of those spins drops from 3 in 10 or 4 in 10 to just 1 in 10. Other sessions which overall lost might experience returns of 60-70% rather 70-90%. This is an example, the numbers will vary depending on the slot but mathematically even a slight change to the number of higher value symbols across a reel set can make this difference. This is very easily demonstrated by simulation on a backend.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

I never had back-to-back on Bonanza, I’ve had first spin and I’ve had about seven bonuses within a block of 50 spins, but closest I’ve ever come to a twofer is a bonus then a missing tease on the next.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Seedy the forum is your barbecue and I’ll eat burgers burned to charcoal, but maybe it’s thread locking time what with the approximately 8 pages since the topic drifted away from the streaming bubble?

Come on guys (and girls), we’ve managed to largely avoid the threads descending to unpleasant mud slinging since a certain two members got the boot. I like a bit of heated debate, keeps the forum interesting, but I’d rather it was quiet than a dozen pages of “You’re a cunt”, “No you’re a cunt” back and forth.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Also good to highlight when so many people are always going ohh funny how streamers can hit these massive bonuses first spin or get whatever wins or deposit twenty quid and cash out a grand and it never happens for everyone else that actually, yes it does. If you play slots regularly you will get these monster hits and unlikely occurrences because they do happen.

I can also add two I’ve just remembered from Danger High Voltage to my list:

Gates of Hell, gave me 9 as the symbol, none showed up in the entire bonus.

High Voltage – the wild reel didn’t land at all in 15 spins. I don’t even mean it landed but didn’t connect with anything, I mean it actually didn’t appear on the screen.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Yeah I think it’s when your graphics card (or lack of one) can’t keep up with the game!

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Yeah I used to get that but it was when I had a slightly crappier computer. Used to know straight away from “the jitter” as I called it whether a bonus was dropping. Saw it on Book of Ra, Book of Ra 6 and Captain Venture.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Eightblack wrote:

 

Alright Mr B?

Nah Mr B would never defend casinos and argue they should if anything pay less tax. His world was one where the punter should be free to gamble and keep going as long as they’re winning, but claim a full no-questions-asked refund as soon as they lost too much. He retains his hard earned title as Backinamo’s most loopy member.

I can actually (and have done) win more money from a 92% RTP slot than 98% RTP slot.

So this one is worth a mention. Yes of course you can get big wins off lower RTP slots because it’s a long term measure but the lower RTP by definition means those games will pay out less overall than slots with a higher RTP. That’s what RTP literally means – return to player – and is a measure of the percentage of funds paid in which will be paid out in the long term. The fact that you’ve had some decent wins off a 92% slot doesn’t mean it pays out just as much as a 98% or that the difference is somehow one of semantics, in fact the difference between 92% and 98% is absolutely enormous in terms of how it will affect the average playing session.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

eejit101 wrote:

Who is upset? Im pointing out the facts from my life, work, and career. One which is use to push for fairer treatment of players and better regulation.

 

As the brilliant argyl said, what is your source of these Facts you are claiming please? I did a BBC entire search for any news with the word “gambling” in, and have read….

1 – MPs asked for a limit similar to £2 max stake online. The goverment and the betting council will never approve this as it literally pushes anyone who would contribute to the economy to an offshore site. So that wont happen. Ever.

2 – Uk gambling shares year on year down 4-12%. Well yeah… you cut off the bookmakers FOBT and this will happen. The fact it is this low a drop shows the stregnth of online.

3 – Proposed ban on credit cards online. This is support and hope comes in ASAP.

 

This was hysterical from the MP who pushed it – “We do not see the justification for having slot machine style games online with staking levels above £2. If they are not acceptable in land-based venues they should not be allowed online.”

Umm… i can think of 45 justifications. Wealth, income, profitablity, capacity, fun etc. If checks and SOW are done then people can do what they want in my opinion. I am not sorry for anyone who earns 50k a year and blows it online. Thats their choice. They can get help, they have the NHS now with courses. Its a risky thing to say, especially here, but control is the same for all people on all things. Addiction is bad, but its our own fault.

Also the MP who said it is wrong; you can stake more than £2 in many land based venues. These venues are called “casinos” and they’ve been around longer than FOBTs have been in high street bookmakers.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

@trr420 just to cut through all the chaff, as you’re adamant this point is a fact and not your personal opinion; what is your source for the claimed fact that gambling streams, videos and affiliation links are to be banned in the UK?

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Streamers playing slots will be fine in terms of retaining their audience on £2 stakes, if it ever happens, though I can imagine many losing their shit at not being able to stake silly money anymore. If they introduced a £2 limit on live roulette, on the other hand….well, that’s quick balance building and the likes of Rocknrolla done for.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Last year I played dozens of Bonanza bonuses and found +5 to be a fairly reliable curse. Why? Because it usually lands on a drop after GOLD, or sometimes GOL where the D and +5 both drop at once.

Interesting stat: In my experience playing Bonanza, 80% of bonuses which hit off a tease were terrible or below average, whereas the opposite was true if GOLD smashed in entirely without a tease. The only bonus I ever had which breached 1000x came off GOLD +5 dropping in at once with no tease.

Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not. So I’ve heard, every bonus spin in Bonanza is random so you wouldn’t expect the trigger to tell you anything, but that doesn’t necessarily mean there aren’t other pre-determined parameters to a bonus and it’s only random within those.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

If there’s one thing I hope we can all agree on, it’s that the biggest cunt out there by a mile is dunover aka dazza g.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

StevieG wrote:

Additionally, I love Rocknrolla but the guy clearly has a massive gambling problem. He’s not taking a break by choice, he’s gone broke.

Really great guy, serious issues. I do massively respect his sheer balls when it comes to gambling though – I’ve seen him get a few lucky sequential hits on roulette which take him from a starting balance as low as £40 to £4000 in the space of 2 minutes, but he does that by placing bets I would never risk even if I was a millionaire. I’ve seen him have a grand in the balance and stick it all on about 6 numbers. It’s an epic watch when it lands but fuck me I would never take that kind of risk. Then again, Immersive is probably going to shaft you even if you have 36 numbers covered, as I’ve found out from personal experience, so maybe the better strategy is to just go for it.

[Author]

Posts