external image

RTP of Accredited Casinos

Which of the following do you think Accredited Casinos should be required to provide?

  • Theoretical RTP settings

    Votes: 15 13.6%
  • Theoretical RTP settings + Current Actual RTP

    Votes: 67 60.9%
  • Current Actual RTP ONLY

    Votes: 21 19.1%
  • None of the above/The information is not important to me

    Votes: 7 6.4%

  • Total voters
    110
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Location
Turn right, then right. then right again
Hi Gang

I've been reading some threads lately regarding RTP in reference to Accredited Casinos, and other casinos as well.

I have formed the opinion that it would be reasonable for Bryan to require Accred Casinos to publish their game RTP's on a regular basis, and perhaps the theoretical RTP along with them. Of course, it is up to Bryan whether he wants to do this, but I thought it would be a useful exercise to find out what the membership feels about the importance of RTP settings and ongoing measurements of RTP over set periods.

I know that some casinos provide this on their website, and some casinos have told Bryan what their RTP settings are, but I feel it would be a very helpful tool for players, and a great display of integrity and transparency to inspire even more confidence in choosing Accredited Casinos over other operators.

Personally, I think if Accred Casino A has an RTP setting of 91%, and the Accred Casino B has 95%, then players should know about it....and those casinos with higher RTPs would then reap the rewards of having better payouts in comparison to others. In fact, some kind of RTP category could be created where higher settings are recognized with a different "class" or sub-category, similar to the one I suggested for payout speeds. Each Accred Casino could have a Gold, Silver, or Bronze star next to their listing under two new columns of "Payout Speed" and "RTP" to allow potential players to make informed choices. E.G. Gold could be RTP 96+, Silver 93-95 and Bronze <92 or something similar. It might also create a more competitive atmosphere i,e, lower RTP operators could increase their settings to gain a higher rating etc, which is win-win - more players means more profits, and the increase in RTP would more be more than covered by the increase in turnover (assuming their marketing of such is sound)

Anyway, submit your vote and let's see what pans out.
 
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.
I agree, this is an excellent suggestion! :thumbsup:

One thing you didn't say (or at least, it wasn't 100% clear) is that we want to see the RTP of each and every game separately.
i.e. The casino saying "our slots have a theoretical RTP of 95%" is just not good enough IMO - we want to see the RTP of EACH slot.

IGT, NetEnt and Rival (and maybe some others?) already do this - it's about time ALL casinos published these figures.

KK
 

I agree.

The transparency involved would really go a long way into helping players feel safer at the casinos.

And its not as if the RTP will let players know variance or any of the other elements of the payout- It'll just give them something to shoot for. :P

I see this as a win-win for everyone. Players who feel safer depositing will deposit more, and the Casinos win because players who feel safer will deposit more. (This message brought to you by the Redundancy Council on Redundancy.)
 
I agree but it won't be that easy. I have had lots of conversations about RTP with different casinos over the past 2 or 3 years and there are varying reasons why this would be tricky. In some cases it appears the casinos don't even know the game RTP's themselves! Some are happy to publish of course, some have no choice, others think it will be counter-productive, some think it will lead to issues on forums if they publish, some see land-based as setting a precedent. I'd love to see them published too but the bottom line is it would has to come from the software provider like IGT do in their paytables to be credible, accurate and maintained effectively.

In addition, if it came any other way, there would need to be some sort of control process in place as they can change. On top of that, you have the trust issue that you are being told the right percentage. I recently saw a software manufacturer game PR sheet that had a vastly different RTP to that shown on the game itself for example (the game was right incidentally).
 
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.
Nifty, I like your idea very much.

I would also suggest that simply publishing "ranges" on each slot is not allowed as well, as is happening at IGT/wagerworks these days.

For example, publishing that "This slot has an RTP in the range of 92-95%" is pretty useless imo, might as well just not publish it.

I very very much like the way virgin casino just publishes the exact RTP for everything. Completely open and you have to respect them for that.
 
Nice idea Nifty, but like Simmo said there are a number of roadblocks. One not mentioned yet is old info. I grabbed an old RTP page from another casino to illustrate my point.

Lets say you were using these sheets to decide what to play and where... and your game was Pai Gow Poker. At the start of December you check and see that the recent RTP at this casino was 98.2%. Woo-Hoo and away you go. At the end of December you're one of the players who made up the 92.25% RTP for that month... not what you were expecting... so you switch to another casino... only from their RTP to drop and the one you left to go up again. Unless the info is given real time (never gonna happen imo) then it's still a bit of a gamble.

Then there is verifying the numbers. I guess everyone would have to use central monitoring services which some operators understandably dont want to pay for. I'm also not sure I agree that this would make players feel any safer. I think you get that by processing withdrawals and dealing with any issues that arise quickly and effectively.

Yet another poll I shall be watching with interest :)

Old Attachment (Invalid)
 
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.
so I asked to close my account back in feb and they offered me this free chip. I took the chip but closed my account shortly after.

We can grant you an exclusive $100 chip for your fidelity and suggest you our hottest slots:
Mister Money with an RTP of 130.6%
Boy Kings Treasure with an RTP of 120.9%
Field of Green with an RTP of 120.3%
I hope you will get lucky with this chip.
If you wish to try your luck please come in chat and request for $100 free we will be more then welcome to grant it for you.
 
Great post Nifty and I am interested to see the final results to the poll. :thumbsup:

I just wanted to make a couple comments and clarify something. Where you mentioned the Theoretical RTP settings I assume that this is regarding sites that use software where the RTP can be adjusted as with Netent, Microgaming and Playtech the theoretical RTP cannot be adjusted.

With regards to the Theoretical RTP for each game, at Nordicbet when you open a game and then click "Game Rules" a new page will open with game information and the Theoretical RTP for that game.

As a casino manager I have no issues at all with displaying the current actual RTP for the entire casino and wanted to know if this was interesting for anyone. Basically I would have a widget developed that would show the RTP for the previous day and also month to date which we would update on a daily basis.

Cheers,

Ben
 
I noticed that the theoretical RTP was a popular choice in the poll so far, but that seems to me as it could potentially be open to abuse if it was made a standard. Is the theoretical RTP measured on an average figure taken from previous measurements or is it a calculation presented by the software developer. Either way, I think actual RTP is the only true representation if it is going to be done fairly.
 
The "actual" RTP (as in what % has actually been paid back recently) is only an illusion. Displaying this will only fuel conspiracy and rigged theorists (which nifty hates just as much as me!). The theoritical RTP (as long as it is the truth and is not a lie) is all that matters.

This should be displayed in the paytables of all games as standard. I like to play slots but I like a house edge of 6% max on the slots I play. Displaying this as standard on all software providers would help me choose where to spend my money wisely. I am willing to give the casino my money here, all I am asking in return is that they let me make an informed decision. It will only increase my trust in them and help build the relationahip.
 
Theoretical RTP is the figure needed, as this is based on a mathematical calculation of all possible outcomes over an infinite number of spins. Actual RTP can vary from month to month, and cannot be used to predict the future, or indeed relied upon when deciding where to play, or where to close an account. Over the long term, actual RTP will move ever closer to the theoretical RTP, so if only one figure is to be published, it should be the theoretical RTP. The actual RTP is more of an audit tool, and provided the dataset is big enough, it can be used to boost trust that the theoretical figure is correct. RTP to one decimal place is enough.

Operators that find excuses for keeping this information hidden only make themselves look a little "dodgy", as the figures are not hidden in the interests of players, but so that the casino can manipulate the figures it DOES publish, such as a claim that "we offer more and bigger bonuses than any other casino". If a casino turns the RTP right down, it can afford to offer such big bonuses, yet still make a profit, whereas other operators stuck with 95% RTP slots set in stone have no way to compete on a level playing field, as if they offered big bonuses on the same terms, the higher RTP would ensure they went bust.

One reason operators don't want it known that they use a low RTP setting is that players can find out that the "good" promotional offer is actually a very "bad" one, probably far worse than a more modest offering from a casino which offers games with a higher RTP.

Experienced players know which softwares can be adjusted, and that they cannot necessarily be trusted to offer the same RTP between different operators.

Microgaming was thoroughly investigated a while back by the player community, and this only provided hard evidence that the slots really WERE on around 95%, and were the same wherever you played. The same cannot be said of RTG, Rival, nor Top Game it seems.
 
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.
Great post m8ty :thumbsup:, I for one would like to see the theoretical RTP on display and see how much it affects the likes of the mega MGS Jackpot slots like TSII/IR etc, imho I would much prefer these jackpots to be lowered considerably to around x2000 bet size in normal play and obviously higher for when in feature rounds, I want that added buzz of knowing I have an outside chance of winning a jackpot when playing a slot, and not, as in 99.99% of the time when hitting a feature like wild storm/desire thinking to yourself "What a fcking waste of time this will be", nearly six years of playing online and I still have yet to hit a true slot jackpot :mad:.

Slots like TSII/IR/GJ etc have huge potential for hitting monster wins in feature rounds (not just the jackpot features), I have yet to hit anywhere near the potential that say Loki`s/Sarah`s feature has to offer, now when they work out the actual RTP for these slots all these factors must be taken into consideration, bearing in mind these hits are rarer than rocking horse shit I would definitely be interested in how the actual RTP is affected by this!!.
 
Theoretical RTP for me.

I can think of no valid reason why the theoretical RTP of each and every game isn't included on the paytable. It's certainly possible - (IGT do it, Jackpot Party do it, Jackpot Party even make clear the distinction between the payout on the the base game (around 92%) and what is given over to the progressives (3%)) - so why don't all the casinos do it?

Personally speaking the lack of a game-per-game RTP on the Microgaming slots is the main reason I often defect to one of the casinos that offer the IGT slots, as I can always see the RTP right there in the paytable. (Although IGT's recent trend of stating the RTP as a range is both meaningless and downright insulting, and I don't much care for the 'depends on the player always making the right choices' disclaimer either, as such I always choose slots that have no player choices.)

The 'one size fits all' RTP figure that we're given for Microgaming slots is insufficient information IMO. Do the RTPs of the slots vary? Do some slots have higher RTPs than others? Will they up the RTP on new games to make them more attractive to players and lower the RTP of older games to compensate?

As a very simple example when Immortal Romance was released they could have given that an RTP of 98% and dropped Thunderstruck II down to 92% - the overall RTP for those two games is still 95%. Multiply that sort of behaviour across the full suite of Microgaming slots and it's easy to achieve an overall RTP of 95% but with wide variances across different games.
 
.


I also think that theoretical RTP is what players need to know. Current actual RTP is nice to know, but I do not except that casinos have this information available for their customers. I also do not see this information as necessary.

As Ben from Nordicbet said, operators who use reputable suppliers like Playtech, Net Entertainment or Microgaming have no opportunity to change or adjust theoretical RTP. So I think that Nifty`s gold/silver/bronze-suggestion is only relevant for operators who use software where they actually have the opportunity to adjust or choose RTP settings.

Theoretical RTP is what players want because it shows what kind of a RTP games are designed to achieve in a long term perspective. As mentioned in the thread, Net Entertainment and IGT already have this information available for each game. I also believe that this information should be available from all suppliers. Information leads to knowledge, and it is good to know. But some suppliers still don`t get this.

I would also like to add that players should not be too focused on RTP. Games with a RTP of 98% may still kill you every single time you play if they are designed as high variance games. As discussed on this forum before, players would most likely have a better playing experience if they knew more about volatility and focused a bit less on RTP.
 
Just logged in to Desert Nights and suddenly remembered this thread when I got a message from them. ;)

174% RTP on their Hockey Hero slot! That would indeed be a "hot slot". No mention of what time it was measured over though (I'm assuming it's not the RTP delivered by RTG).

Sounds a bit like misleading info to me, maybe there should be some guidance on it in the rules for an accredited CM casino?
 

Attachments

  • Capture.webp
    Capture.webp
    25.4 KB · Views: 194
Last edited:
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.
Sounds a bit like misleading info to me, maybe there should be some guidance on it in the rules for an accredited CM casino?
I have to say - I agree with you.
If they don't say exactly HOW that RTP figure was measured, then it is VERY deceptive marketing and NOT the sort of thing I want to see ANY casinos doing, accredited or not. :(

KK
 
I have to say - I agree with you.
If they don't say exactly HOW that RTP figure was measured, then it is VERY deceptive marketing and NOT the sort of thing I want to see ANY casinos doing, accredited or not. :(

KK

It may be simply a misinterpretation of the term "RTP" on behalf of casino marketing but even so, that seems like false advertising to me. No slot has an RTP of 174%. In fact, I can't ever recollect having seen an online slot with an RTP of more than 97.x%.

I've pointed the Rep at this thread so they can re-evaluate it.
 
I've seen it before, but usually it's pointed out just a few games and their actual RTP for the last month or so. All of them was ofcourse over a 100%.
Superior casino used to have that kind of marketing before, and it's the same guy working for Sloto now so it might explains it.
Probably it was a good way of tricking players to deposit playing those games.

174% was probably a RJ that went of a few days before;)
 
What I'd like to see is the theo RTP for each slot listed. This lets us know what to expect.

If not too complicated to keep up to date, a table compiling the actual RTP at the end of the month for each slot would be nice. Not required by me... just nice to look at. :)

oh... and ....
174% was probably a RJ that went of a few days before
If that marketing RTP is true.... that tells us a hell of a lot about how much an nice fat RJ is worth in the overall RTP dontcha think? LOL
 
I didn't see it mentioned but I really like 3Dice's Zeitgeist page, you can find it
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
which gives live updating RTP. I'm certainly not a math head as some of you are but I think there is useful information there. One interesting stat assuming you look at it today is that the medium variance slots only paid 90.72% yesterday. Which........makes me very glad that I didn't play there yesterday. lol

I think it would be awesome if more casino's could have a page such as this.


Added.......Something else I'd like to see is average # of spins before hitting bonus rounds. I know it relates to variance but it was nice to see this info before you choose your game. Yes, I know I'm dreaming. lol
 
Last edited:
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.
One interesting stat assuming you look at it today is that the medium variance slots only paid 90.72% yesterday. Which........makes me very glad that I didn't play there yesterday. lol

This might be blindingly obvious and sorry if it is BB28 :D But as every spin is an independent and totally random event, even if the RTP yesterday was 1% and today was 200%, each spin you'd have had would still be no less or more likely to win today than it would have been yesterday.

Er...that sounded confusing reading it back LOL! Put simply: your play would have influenced that figure, that figure wouldn't have influenced your play :thumbsup:

The Zeitgeist is fun but you shouldn't read anything into it.
 
The Zeitgeist is fun but ultimately doesn't affect anything at all.
I disagree - I think it improves the player's confidence that 3Dice run an honest & open operation. :thumbsup:

Added.......Something else I'd like to see is average # of spins before hitting bonus rounds. I know it relates to variance but it was nice to see this info before you choose your game. Yes, I know I'm dreaming. lol
I started trying to gather this info for my SlotBeaters site, but it is incredibly difficult & time-consuming to acquire without getting some help from the software providers or casinos - and they aren't exactly forthcoming with this info... :(
We do know the figures for a few MG games, four 3Dice ones (which Enzo posted on this forum) and IGT's Cleopatra, which is 1 in 140.

KK
 

I can't see the relevance in knowing that at all.
Sometimes you get the bonusround three times in ten spins, and the next you don't get it at all.
I would only feel more cheated if someone says that it's supposed to be happen every 140 spins, and then it would still be the same as now.

I do like to know that the RTP is set at 95% or higher in a casino or I don't want to play there at all. Other than that or for each game, I think it would destroy the pleasure of me playing, since I want to play the games I like.
You can hit high even with a low RTPsetting for a game, but if I saw it was low for the day I might not dare to touch it.
 
I can't see the relevance in knowing that at all.
Sometimes you get the bonusround three times in ten spins, and the next you don't get it at all.
I would only feel more cheated if someone says that it's supposed to be happen every 140 spins, and then it would still be the same as now.

I do like to know that the RTP is set at 95% or higher in a casino or I don't want to play there at all. Other than that or for each game, I think it would destroy the pleasure of me playing, since I want to play the games I like.
You can hit high even with a low RTPsetting for a game, but if I saw it was low for the day I might not dare to touch it.
Each to their own! ;)
Personally I would ALWAYS like to know the odds of getting the features - this definitely has an effect on which games I chose to play, and how I play them.
But knowing the RTP for the last day, week or month is completely irrelevant for me personally - the only RTP figure I want to know is the theoretical long term one. Even then, this has very little effect on my play - unless it's diabolically low.

KK
 
Each to their own! ;)
Personally I would ALWAYS like to know the odds of getting the features - this definitely has an effect on which games I chose to play, and how I play them.
But knowing the RTP for the last day, week or month is completely irrelevant for me personally - the only RTP figure I want to know is the theoretical long term one. Even then, this has very little effect on my play - unless it's diabolically low.

KK

I believe you maybe take each session a little more serious than I am also.
I only play for entertainment, or escaping the world a little;), so if I win it's a bonus,
but it's playtime and fun that I want.
A casinos dreamcustomer:D
Except that I can't afford to entertain myself as much as I want:p
 
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.
IMO the average feature hit figure is pretty much like the current RTP.

Just because the feature might hit every 140 spins on average, doesn't mean it will. It might go 1130 spins without hitting, and go off every spin for the next 10 spins. It doesn't take variance into account, and neither does RTP (which FYI for any newbs is why you can still lose you shirt on a 150% RTP slot). In fact, knowing the feature average sometimes spoils my play, as I involuntarily start to get pissed when it doesn't come up within the advertised window, and find myself playing more spins than I planned to at times.

The feature information can also create, surprisingly, mistrust regarding the games, especially if a player finds it tough to hit the feature for whatever reason in their first few sessions, only to learn afterwards that it hits on average every 90 spins. The first reaction would be "90 spins? Bullshit! Obviously a crock of crap to lure me in!" or other such thoughts.

Knowledge is power, but I also think one can know too much about things they cannot control, like slots. I like to know the theoretical RTP of a game, but beyond that I can take it or leave it. You can never know too much about games like Hold 'Em etc, where your actions and skills play a big part, as it can control the outcome. All the stats and information and payout histories in the world won't help you push the button any better....it can only help you choose which button to push, on what game, and where....the rest is up to the RNG gods.
 
Theoretical RTP

I agree that every Casino should be required to publish their T-RTPs for each game, as I think I've made pretty apparent in my other mind-barfs. Having them available provides you with the ability to do quantitative comparison shopping. No need to try out the games if you don't feel like it.

<tangent> To make a fully informed buying decision, especially regarding Slots, Keno, and even Video Pokers, there is also the importance of variance. And, to be completely accurate, there is also the issue of bonuses (that bonus money has to come from somewhere), and customer service (those salaries have to come from somewhere). But all of that is the substance for another thread. </tangent>

As has been noted in this thread, and in many others I have read, NetEnt, IGT and Rival all publish their T-RTPs. So, um, good show to them. But in even those cases, I find fault.

Having spent some time climbing around in those jungle gyms, I would like, nay!, I demand that those three suppliers make it a little bit easier to actually get the accurate values. I will explain why I'm focusing on accuracy specifically in a bit.

1. NetEnt: To get these values you need to download the game (yes, you can do this in free play mode), and then open the game’s help file. NetEnt’s game files tend to be HUGE, and take a long time to download. (Sometimes, unfortunately not infrequently, the download fails entirely, and I have to give it another go. But again, all that is for another thread.)

I liken this to going into a grocery store to buy some ice cream. There are no prices on the packages, or on the shelves, or anywhere. In fact, the flavor of the ice cream isn't even listed. You need to take the package up to the front of the store, show it to someone, and ask them for the price and flavor.

If that price/flavor combo is not to your liking, you bring the product back to the freezer section, get another package, bring that up to the front of the store, ask for the price and flavor, lather, rinse, repeat.

Granted, they at least tell you the price beforehand, rather than just removing the money from your wallet, which is what casinos that do not offer the T-RTP's are essentially doing. (Now there is the perfect Casino model – enter Casino, open wallet, remove money from wallet, exit Casino.)

But it would be great if they just had a nice, neat, tidy list of their games, and that game’s T-RTP. NetEnt are no fools. They know the importance of T-RTP. They can hold their heads high in saying that they publish this data. They should want to make this widely and easily available via multiple channels.

It would take a NetEnt web person maybe an hour or two to create my suggested nice, neat, tidy web page list. I thus infer, from the fact that NetEnt has not done this, that they have not done this for a reason, and I conclude that this reason is “provide but obfuscate”. I'm not sure why they would do this, since their T-RTP's are good. Again, they should want to promulgate the data.

Playing Devil's advocate, the possibility is also there that they made this choice to only put the T-RTP in the game because that provides them with good “top-down” control (i.e. they don't need to distribute new RTP tables to clients. They simply update games). But even assuming this beneficent motivation, making an easy-to-access chart with all of their T-RTP's is doable and desired, and as such, its absence must be explained. Still, Devil's advocate yet again, many NetEnt casinos make the T-RTP's available up front. But as I have said before, I demand perfection, and I demand it from the top down.

I recognize that many of criticisms of NetEnt are quibbles, and that is why they are the ones getting my money.

2. IGT: As with NetEnt, I give kudos to any company that is revealing their T-RTP's. But IGT makes it very difficult to trust their numbers, or even find them. They provide them, and their client casinos do seem to generally make them available, but one doesn't have to dig very deep to find inconsistencies.

For example, using the list of IGT/Wagerworks casinos from Casinomeister (which is out of date, both Paddy Power and Boyle seem to have switched entirely to Playtech), I checked a variety of their casinos. Only some of them provide the list of T-RTP's, meaning there is no mandate from IGT, and some of them seem to just copy what is available on IGT's website.

For example, At The Races casino provides the T-RTP upfront, but they provide ranges straight from IGT's brochures, as with the The 100,000 Pyramid, where the possible range is listed as 92.78% to 95.03% at both IGT's website and the casino. How... helpful.

Virgin Casino is a major operator with all T-RTP's available, which is good. But even games for which solid numbers are available from IGT, they don't always line up. For example, Old / Expired Link IGT lists Battleship: Search and Destroy as being 94.48% fixed, but Virgin Casino lists the same game as 92.06%.

Inconsistencies such as those make me doubt all information from IGT. This will further support my point about accuracy later on.

3. Rival: Rival does provide T-RTP's, but they don't even have a website. They are decentralized and I trust them about as far as I can throw them.


Current Actual RTP

When I first saw the Poll’s option, I was a bit confused. By that, I mean I didn't know when you wrote Current Actual RTP, whether you meant what are the RTP values for today, or for the past 30 days right up until now, or what?

However, when I read “publish their game RTP's on a regular basis” and “ongoing measurements of RTP over set periods” within the body of your post, I inferred that you were talking about the monthly RTP audits that are conducted by various companies like CFG, TST, and eCOGRA.

Nifty, am I correct in this inference?

Proceeding under the assumption that my inference is correct:

I agree that every Casino should be required to do this, and publish the results, for a number of different reasons.

  • For those that don’t, and apparently won’t, publish their T-RTPs (Microgaming, Playtech, Cryptologic/Wagerlogic, RTG, I'm looking at you), at least these types of reports give us something to go on as far as comparison shopping.
  • For those that do publish their T-RTPs, these reports allow us to verify, to a limited extent anyway, that those Theoretical RTP numbers weren’t just created out of thin air.
Two things that weren’t specifically mentioned in your original post that may have been assumed on your part:

1. The monthly RTP Audit needs to be conducted by an approved company/organization, not by the Casino itself.

2. These monthly audits need to be more than just a financial summary. They should also include a series of statistical evaluations of the game results. (I’ve read that the data submitted to the testing lab for the monthly audit can be easily manipulated if the lab just does a financial summary, but if a number (a large number?) of statistical tests of the game results are also performed, then screwing with the submitted logs is a lot harder (read: a lot harder to get away with).

And now we come to why I underlined “and publish the results” above and then reiterated the importance of accuracy: I’ve seen a number of Casinos (Liberty Slots, for example) that say that they have these audits done, and even have on their web site the graphic of one of these testing labs, but no audit results are provided. (I’ve seen the same thing with TST Certified RNG statements – they have the TST logo on the web site, but rather than pointing to the TST RNG Certificate, it just launches a window to TST’s home page.)

Something else that I would add: require that they provide links to more than just the most recent audit report. Lets say that they get a great (for the Player) RTP for June, a really bad one in July, and a better one (again, for the Player) in August. Unless you are a regular visitor to the site, and you routinely check these audit reports, the Casino can simply leave June’s up through July, and then publish August's.

I’d say that they should have a minimum of 6 contiguous months available. (I would also like to see six months of data going into the future. I understand that this would require time travel, so all casinos better get on buying Deloreans. I am an impatient man. I am undoubtedly more impatient in the future.)

Regarding my statement above: “These monthly audits need to be more than just a financial summary.” Based on what I have seen from the three labs I mentioned above, only CFG complies with this requirement. I've linked to stuff from Eliot Jacobson before, who is an employee/owner/founder, and he seems to be the only one providing this level of analysis. I'm sure that major analysis and underwriting firms would do the same, but few (if any) casinos are using these firms.

To see what I mean, here is a typical TST Audit Report.
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
a typical eCOGRA audit report, which funny enough still has the PriceWaterhouseCoopers name in the link. And finally,
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
a typical report from Certified Fair Gambling.

This is the one area where NetEnt fails me. While I doubt that they are cheating me, I truly have no way of telling. I am, essentially, taking their numbers on faith. Again, I am relatively confident that NetEnt is completely on the up-and-up, and they should proudly broadcast that.

This doesn't specifically have to do with the thread subject, but I think that it is important to note that including statistical analysis in the monthly audits also provides for catching errors or bugs in the software. This can include new games, but it can also include old games. (As it did here. Yes, this particular bug was caught before the audit, but if it hadn’t been then it most certainly would have been caught by the impending audit.)

Looking back to the inconsistency at IGT and Virgin; is that a bug? Is it a lie? What's correct? A proper audit would help to determine this.


Theoretical RTP versus Current Actual RTP

As I’ve said, I want Theoretical RTP for comparison shopping, and I want Monthly RTP Audits, with statistical analysis, as proof that all is on the up-and-up. In other words, I want both, but for different reasons.

However, what if you could only choose one?

In that case, I would choose Monthly RTP Audits with statistical testing. Theoretical RTP gives me one thing: claimed T-RTP. A proper monthly audit gives me so much more.


P.S.

I'm very disappointed in the casinos' time machine performance. They should have read this post in the future and had it all done last week. Tsk tsk.
 
Well, operators seem to dismiss the RTP as "unimportant" when it comes to the player experience, but not so "unimportant" that the likes of RTG don't spend extra money on 3 reelsets and back end setting options rather than have a single "set in stone" configuration for all games once developed.

It is clearly VERY important to operators to have games set to the "right RTP", so important that they would rather have all the complications of multiple settings for the games rather than the simplicity of one setting cast in stone on release. This is despite the fact that they have many other tools for balancing the books, such as comp point rates, generosity of promotions, charges, etc.
 
This might be blindingly obvious and sorry if it is BB28 :D But as every spin is an independent and totally random event, even if the RTP yesterday was 1% and today was 200%, each spin you'd have had would still be no less or more likely to win today than it would have been yesterday.

Er...that sounded confusing reading it back LOL! Put simply: your play would have influenced that figure, that figure wouldn't have influenced your play :thumbsup:

The Zeitgeist is fun but you shouldn't read anything into it.

I had to read it twice in order to get what you meant.......but I got it. lol

You are right and I hadn't thought of it like that as in how each spin is independent.

I do like the fact that 3D puts it out there which translates to me that they are transparent in regards to RTP which can not be said for RTG casino's, usually.
 
2. IGT: As with NetEnt, I give kudos to any company that is revealing their T-RTP's. But IGT makes it very difficult to trust their numbers, or even find them.

So, including the RTP in every paytable on every game we make is difficult to find?

As for trust, the RTP numbers are accurate. The fact is, we create multiple math models for most of our games, both online and in casinos. We cannot dictate which math model a casino wishes to use, so we have to list the RTP as a range. A tip to the range, you can know that one math model is the lowest and one is the highest number. In cases where there are more than two math models, we might have one or two more in-between those numbers.

I agree with the fact that I wish we didn't have to list ranges, but with regulations the way they are we don't have much of a choice for games with multiple math models. It's either list a range, or don't list it at all.

PS. For those who don't know, I'm the product manager for IGT Interactive. :)
 
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.

Bonkerjerks, thank you for being upfront and forthright with us about how this stuff works 'behind the scenes' as it were, but I have to say that my own personal feeling is that the 'RTP ranges' presented for some IGT slots are absolutely infuriating to me as a player.

When we're dealing with what is already a high variance slot such as Siberian Storm, being told that the RTP is 'between 92.52% and 96%' is dreadful.

The screenshot below is how kerching.com reports the RTP of this game.

You may not be able to dictate which math model any given casino uses, but you should surely be able to put the actual RTP on the paytable for that casino depending on which math model they have chosen, instead of a 'range' which is potentially misleading at best, dishonest at worst, and almost certainly confusing.

The difference between 92.52% and 96% RTP might not sound like much, but any seasoned slot player will know (as will you!), especially when it comes to high variance games such as Siberian Storm - that it can make all the difference in the world over many tens of thousands of spins, which is the kind of session you have to have in mind if you take on a high variance slot.

I do like IGT slots, there is much to enjoy about your game design, graphics, sound and music - but when I see 'RTP ranges' being presented I have to admit I get cold feet and often play elsewhere.

Old Attachment (Invalid)
 
You may not be able to dictate which math model any given casino uses, but you should surely be able to put the actual RTP on the paytable for that casino depending on which math model they have chosen, instead of a 'range' which is potentially misleading at best, dishonest at worst, and almost certainly confusing.

I'm with you that its not the best solution, but the approval processes in various juristictions mean its the only way to have the RTP on the slot paytable (or anywhere on the game for that matter). I'd love to have a dynamic number that displays the casino's chosen RTP, but the regulations weren't written to allow that. Each paytable has to follow specific guidelines. To list seperate RTPs for the different paymodels would mean that we would have to submit seperate games for each RTP for approval (we already get approval on the math models seperately). This would mean that every game we make would have to go through the approval process in every juristiction at least twice if not more. It's just not practical.

We are a compliance driven company, dedicated to following all applicable laws in all applicable juristictions. As we all know, lawmakers sometimes (most times) don't fully understand the implications of regulations they pass. We can try and change them to make them work better, but we're stuck following them in the meantime.
 

Thankyou for the input.

Could you please clarify "the casinos chosen RTP"?. I thought IGT/WW operators could not alter RTPs on the fly.
 
174% RTP on their Hockey Hero slot! That would indeed be a "hot slot". No mention of what time it was measured over though (I'm assuming it's not the RTP delivered by RTG).

Sounds a bit like misleading info to me, maybe there should be some guidance on it in the rules for an accredited CM casino?

I agree. Seems like it must be a typo or one heck of a promo.
 

Thats is the best proposal I have heard in a long time,well said.
 
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.
What does RTP stand for as I though RNG represented random payout.

Call me stupid but I have no idea what RTP is.
 
I didn't vote cause unless an OC has someone like TST, or another party is checking this on a regular basis then what's the point?

Constant random testing on every site along with that sites results is the only way and then results shared to the player.

Posting it on the site from an OC means nothing IMO without an approved lab to back it up and I don't mean just the software, it should be the site / software on a regular basis.

Example being I wouldn't want to go to an RTG site and see TST approved the RTG software only. I want to see that TST approved the RTG software and is monitoring RTP and the site using their software and when it was last tested. RNG, RTP, whatever.

So wouldn't it be better to see this information coming from the lab rather than being provided by an online casino just posting it on their site?

Correct me but honestly I'm a bit confused on how anyone could trust most OC's posting this information just because they need too and without a reliable lab to back it up, not once but on a regular basis. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.
Hi All

The payout for Hockey Hero was taken from March 1st to March 26th, we have taken onboard your comments and on any future promotional mails the period will be listed.

Best Regards

Ms Sloto
 
So, including the RTP in every paytable on every game we make is difficult to find?

Yes. Where on IGT's website can I find the numbers? I want information direct from the horses mouth.

As for trust, the RTP numbers are accurate. The fact is, we create multiple math models for most of our games, both online and in casinos. We cannot dictate which math model a casino wishes to use, so we have to list the RTP as a range. A tip to the range, you can know that one math model is the lowest and one is the highest number. In cases where there are more than two math models, we might have one or two more in-between those numbers.

I don't know that, though. You have provided no evidence to support the statement. I want deep, statistical analysis of the games à la Certified Fair Gambling.
 
Could you please clarify "the casinos chosen RTP"?. I thought IGT/WW operators could not alter RTPs on the fly.

Using Siberian Storm as an example, we provide three math models for the game with different RTPs. Any of our casino partners can choose which math model they want to offer their customers. They can't change the RTP on the fly, like while you are playing the game, but they can take the initially offered game down and then put up a different math model if they so choose.

The same thing happens in land-based casinos as well. For example, some casinos like to offer a bank of video poker whose RTP, with perfect play, exceeds 100%. They will use this as promotion to bring in players. Most video poker is set in the 98-99% range at most casinos.
 
Using Siberian Storm as an example, we provide three math models for the game with different RTPs. Any of our casino partners can choose which math model they want to offer their customers. They can't change the RTP on the fly, like while you are playing the game, but they can take the initially offered game down and then put up a different math model if they so choose.

The same thing happens in land-based casinos as well. For example, some casinos like to offer a bank of video poker whose RTP, with perfect play, exceeds 100%. They will use this as promotion to bring in players. Most video poker is set in the 98-99% range at most casinos.

Ok.

So, the casino can choose between 3 RTP variants at any time.

I assume the player will not know or be advised of such a change? In that case, it would seem we have the same issue with your casinos as we do with RTG casinos I.e. the casino can "change the game" on the player.

IMO this is a very significant admission.

Now....where are all the members who have been roasting RTG for years for the same thing?
 
Casinomeister Accredited Casinos have been tried and tested by our forum members.


Write your reply...

Users who are viewing this thread

Accredited Casinos

Read about our rating system and how it's done.
Back
Top