Skill based slots: Anything interesting in this year's G2E?
Quote: vegasEspecially when casinos are mostly filled with seniors. It was a stab to try and get young people interested but it's hard to play a skill game and text on your phone!
its hard to play a skill game when the skill aspects are hidden or made so difficult that no one can win.
for example one game you had to kill at least 7 robots to win any profit but the rules stated there was a rng that determined if there were ever more than 6 available to kill.
so basically the rng now determined if u even had a chance to win AND then u had to have the skill to profit
Quote: heatmapAll of the skill slots are filling up the dark alleys of pa
I dont know if doing it with hookers is considered playing skill slots
Quote: darkozI dont know if doing it with hookers is considered playing skill slots
that was quick and amazing thank you...
but seriously everywhere i look now, in most dark corners is a skill slot...
Maybe something simple like if you perform a skill feat (knowledge, dexterity etc.) you get four random bonus picks instead of three, or maybe an extra free spin. I don't know.
I remember seeing a game from last year that was like a computer fantasy roleplay game. You pay something like $50 an hour and wander around a VR world looking for treasure (i.e. cash). It might be lying around or you might have to perform a skill feat (such as slaying a monster) to get it. Treasures are randomly generated. When the hour ends you take your loot ticket (hopefully more than $50) and cash it in. Cool idea but not very brick and mortar friendly.
i like that idea.Quote: GialmereMaybe something simple like if you perform a skill feat (knowledge, dexterity etc.) you get four random bonus picks instead of three, or maybe an extra free spin. I don't know.
an extra game mechanic instead of outright cash.
The two main points made by the Gamblit staff were:
- they prefer the term "interactive gaming" to "skill based gaming"
- under the hood, it's always slot math
A description of the inner-workings of the word game explained both these points. The underlying payout-mechanism was their basic slot engine. The length of the word determined the configuration of the "reels" and therefore the pay-table. A longer word increased the max payout but (no surprise) decreased the odds. From the standpoint of the internal software, submitting the word was equivalent to pulling the handle on a slot and spinning the reels. So the bottom line is that word-skills (i.e., speed in coming up with a long word) had little if any impact on how well you did.
The Pac-Man game did have a skill component in that players competed against each other for a chance at the prize. I saw folks playing it at both the Park and MGM Grand so I guess it is doing OK and hasn't bombed. For those who haven't seen it, the game is set up as a flat 4-sided table where each of the players has their own controls (i.e., they play simultaneously rather than taking turns). The game works as follows:
- Each player enters the amount they wish to bet. The choices are fixed (i.e., $3, $5, $25)
- The lowest amount entered becomes the amount everyone will be betting
- Once the bets are locked in the actual Pac-Man part kicks in. All players are simultaneously running the maze, chasing the cherries and avoiding the ghosts. The only new twist over the arcade version is that players can "eat" each other.
- When only one player remains, they get to pick their prize by clicking on one of about 10 prize icons (don't recall the exact number)
The logic behind the design of the prize-picking process was explained to me by the Gamblit folks. A set of prizes is randomly generated with the amounts ranging from less than to more than the individual bet amount. I didn't ask how the max amount is determined but I assume it it's a bit less than the total amount wagered. After the prize has been selected by the winning player, all prizes get revealed. That way, even if the winner only get back $2 on a $3 bet, they see that it's their own fault for not picking a bigger prize.
Quote: TumblingBonesI had a long and very enlightening conversation with the Gamblit folks on their approach to the problem. The discussion focused on their PacMan game (which I had seen on the floor at both Park MGM and MGM Grand) and an as-yet-to-be-released word-based game. The latter is a single-player game in which you have to make a word from a bunch of random letters. The longer the word, the better your odds of getting a good pay-out. The Pac-Man variant has 2 to 4 players competing for a prize.
The two main points made by the Gamblit staff were:
- they prefer the term "interactive gaming" to "skill based gaming"
- under the hood, it's always slot math
A description of the inner-workings of the word game explained both these points. The underlying payout-mechanism was their basic slot engine. The length of the word determined the configuration of the "reels" and therefore the pay-table. A longer word increased the max payout but (no surprise) decreased the odds. From the standpoint of the internal software, submitting the word was equivalent to pulling the handle on a slot and spinning the reels. So the bottom line is that word-skills (i.e., speed in coming up with a long word) had little if any impact on how well you did.
The Pac-Man game did have a skill component in that players competed against each other for a chance at the prize. I saw folks playing it at both the Park and MGM Grand so I guess it is doing OK and hasn't bombed. For those who haven't seen it, the game is set up as a flat 4-sided table where each of the players has their own controls (i.e., they play simultaneously rather than taking turns). The game works as follows:
- Each player enters the amount they wish to bet. The choices are fixed (i.e., $3, $5, $25)
- The lowest amount entered becomes the amount everyone will be betting
- Once the bets are locked in the actual Pac-Man part kicks in. All players are simultaneously running the maze, chasing the cherries and avoiding the ghosts. The only new twist over the arcade version is that players can "eat" each other.
- When only one player remains, they get to pick their prize by clicking on one of about 10 prize icons (don't recall the exact number)
The logic behind the design of the prize-picking process was explained to me by the Gamblit folks. A set of prizes is randomly generated with the amounts ranging from less than to more than the individual bet amount. I didn't ask how the max amount is determined but I assume it it's a bit less than the total amount wagered. After the prize has been selected by the winning player, all prizes get revealed. That way, even if the winner only get back $2 on a $3 bet, they see that it's their own fault for not picking a bigger prize.
That sounds extremely fun, 4 player pacman with the goal to be the last to survive (and the ability to eat other players) would be a blast (I love pacman). Prizes don't sound great, but it sounds like one of the more entertaining slot ideas I have heard of, I would play it with 4 friends genuinely for fun.
I love classic arcade games and wish more slots were based on such or some variation that allows multiplayer (competitive video game play is even more fun).
Quote: GandlerQuote: TumblingBonesI had a long and very enlightening conversation with the Gamblit folks on their approach to the problem. The discussion focused on their PacMan game (which I had seen on the floor at both Park MGM and MGM Grand) and an as-yet-to-be-released word-based game. The latter is a single-player game in which you have to make a word from a bunch of random letters. The longer the word, the better your odds of getting a good pay-out. The Pac-Man variant has 2 to 4 players competing for a prize.
The two main points made by the Gamblit staff were:
- they prefer the term "interactive gaming" to "skill based gaming"
- under the hood, it's always slot math
A description of the inner-workings of the word game explained both these points. The underlying payout-mechanism was their basic slot engine. The length of the word determined the configuration of the "reels" and therefore the pay-table. A longer word increased the max payout but (no surprise) decreased the odds. From the standpoint of the internal software, submitting the word was equivalent to pulling the handle on a slot and spinning the reels. So the bottom line is that word-skills (i.e., speed in coming up with a long word) had little if any impact on how well you did.
The Pac-Man game did have a skill component in that players competed against each other for a chance at the prize. I saw folks playing it at both the Park and MGM Grand so I guess it is doing OK and hasn't bombed. For those who haven't seen it, the game is set up as a flat 4-sided table where each of the players has their own controls (i.e., they play simultaneously rather than taking turns). The game works as follows:
- Each player enters the amount they wish to bet. The choices are fixed (i.e., $3, $5, $25)
- The lowest amount entered becomes the amount everyone will be betting
- Once the bets are locked in the actual Pac-Man part kicks in. All players are simultaneously running the maze, chasing the cherries and avoiding the ghosts. The only new twist over the arcade version is that players can "eat" each other.
- When only one player remains, they get to pick their prize by clicking on one of about 10 prize icons (don't recall the exact number)
The logic behind the design of the prize-picking process was explained to me by the Gamblit folks. A set of prizes is randomly generated with the amounts ranging from less than to more than the individual bet amount. I didn't ask how the max amount is determined but I assume it it's a bit less than the total amount wagered. After the prize has been selected by the winning player, all prizes get revealed. That way, even if the winner only get back $2 on a $3 bet, they see that it's their own fault for not picking a bigger prize.
That sounds extremely fun, 4 player pacman with the goal to be the last to survive (and the ability to eat other players) would be a blast (I love pacman). Prizes don't sound great, but it sounds like one of the more entertaining slot ideas I have heard of, I would play it with 4 friends genuinely for fun.
I love classic arcade games and wish more slots were based on such or some variation that allows multiplayer (competitive video game play is even more fun).
Not quite as fun when extremely skilled players just wait for others to join and fleece them. Skilled based player vs player games designed for recreational gamblers will never make it. Skill based single player games could make it if designed correctly. A good one hasn't hit the market yet.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13Quote: GandlerQuote: TumblingBonesI had a long and very enlightening conversation with the Gamblit folks on their approach to the problem. The discussion focused on their PacMan game (which I had seen on the floor at both Park MGM and MGM Grand) and an as-yet-to-be-released word-based game. The latter is a single-player game in which you have to make a word from a bunch of random letters. The longer the word, the better your odds of getting a good pay-out. The Pac-Man variant has 2 to 4 players competing for a prize.
The two main points made by the Gamblit staff were:
- they prefer the term "interactive gaming" to "skill based gaming"
- under the hood, it's always slot math
A description of the inner-workings of the word game explained both these points. The underlying payout-mechanism was their basic slot engine. The length of the word determined the configuration of the "reels" and therefore the pay-table. A longer word increased the max payout but (no surprise) decreased the odds. From the standpoint of the internal software, submitting the word was equivalent to pulling the handle on a slot and spinning the reels. So the bottom line is that word-skills (i.e., speed in coming up with a long word) had little if any impact on how well you did.
The Pac-Man game did have a skill component in that players competed against each other for a chance at the prize. I saw folks playing it at both the Park and MGM Grand so I guess it is doing OK and hasn't bombed. For those who haven't seen it, the game is set up as a flat 4-sided table where each of the players has their own controls (i.e., they play simultaneously rather than taking turns). The game works as follows:
- Each player enters the amount they wish to bet. The choices are fixed (i.e., $3, $5, $25)
- The lowest amount entered becomes the amount everyone will be betting
- Once the bets are locked in the actual Pac-Man part kicks in. All players are simultaneously running the maze, chasing the cherries and avoiding the ghosts. The only new twist over the arcade version is that players can "eat" each other.
- When only one player remains, they get to pick their prize by clicking on one of about 10 prize icons (don't recall the exact number)
The logic behind the design of the prize-picking process was explained to me by the Gamblit folks. A set of prizes is randomly generated with the amounts ranging from less than to more than the individual bet amount. I didn't ask how the max amount is determined but I assume it it's a bit less than the total amount wagered. After the prize has been selected by the winning player, all prizes get revealed. That way, even if the winner only get back $2 on a $3 bet, they see that it's their own fault for not picking a bigger prize.
That sounds extremely fun, 4 player pacman with the goal to be the last to survive (and the ability to eat other players) would be a blast (I love pacman). Prizes don't sound great, but it sounds like one of the more entertaining slot ideas I have heard of, I would play it with 4 friends genuinely for fun.
I love classic arcade games and wish more slots were based on such or some variation that allows multiplayer (competitive video game play is even more fun).
Not quite as fun when extremely skilled players just wait for others to join and fleece them. Skilled based player vs player games designed for recreational gamblers will never make it. Skill based single player games could make it if designed correctly. A good one hasn't hit the market yet.
ZCore13
You can say the same thing about any skill based game. There will always be players who are far better and play against weak players.
You can say the same thing about Poker.
I think it would be cool for more video and arcade games to be incorporated into gambling, even if it's just casinos hosting versus matches for a prize pool in various popular games.
Decades ago, New Jersey passed a law requiring the slot machines in Atlantic City to give the player a way to "skillfully" play the slot machine, so they did by creating the skip-stop feature. When it looks like a good symbol is on its way around, you hit the spin button again to make it stop. It's total BS because the machine was going to stop on three particular spots on the reels anyway, but it made the player feel better like they had some control over it.
The skip-stop feature still exists on most slot machines today, because lots of players want it. I often see people quickly hitting the spin button over and over and over, betting $1 or 30 cents or whatever every second.
I can see how someone could manufacture a "skill-based" slot machine where you have to pop ballons on the screen or something like that, but the bonus prize was already determined by an RNG. The only difference between an "unskilled" player and a "skilled" player would be the amount of time it takes to do the so-called "skill" bonus, yet the result is exactly the same.
I have seen people try to use the skip-stop feature on a video slot machine to try to make it stop when they see a good symbol coming around. If you watch this for a bit, you can see that the reels never stop instantly. It takes a little longer on a mechanical reel slot machine than video reels, because the computer can create the reel strip it was going to stop on anyway very quickly, whereas mechanical reels still have to spin around to the point where they were going to stop anyway. It fools a lot of people.
Quote: AxelWolfWhat's the hold on the machine?
No idea but I assume it's adjustable by the casino, just like a regular slot.
Quote: Zcore13
Not quite as fun when extremely skilled players just wait for others to join and fleece them. Skilled based player vs player games designed for recreational gamblers will never make it.
That was one of my concerns but after watching the players in the casino I realized that it's mostly a case of a bunch of friends playing it together. The idea is to appeal to millennials by combining skill will social interaction
: )
Quote: DobrijIf the game is really on skills, then always a small and maybe a big large percentage of gamblers will be win. And this is (maybe) a problem for greedy casinos
: )
It's usually skill based up to a certain payback, meaning if you play perfectly the payback percentage would be 98% (hypothetically), so even perfect players will still lose over time (like video poker).
One game that was an FPS did this by inserting various number of invincible enemies in every map capping out the kills per round, and various games have other ways to cap the payback.
So it's usually a win win for casinos, even if you play perfectly (most can't) you still lose, and if you play poorly you lose much more.
Now, if casinos start having more setups that allow player vs player gaming, it would be more interesting, and skill would be the only thing that matters. The 4 player versus pacman mentioned earlier I have not experienced yet, but that sounds awesome. It would also be cool for some team based tactical FPS where teams of friends can compete for wagers. I think casinos can appeal to more young people by incorporating skill and strategy based video games as "slots". Because many young people simply do not play as many slots currently, they tend to appeal to an older crowd.
is there any significant elements of luck in this game or is it all skill?Quote: GialmereAccording to the Wizard's latest stream, the rake for Pac-Man Battle Casino is 25%. Will groups of millennial friends really come to a casino so they can try to take each other's money while the house gouges them from the sideline? Well, some people like live keno. Then again, maybe it'll be the next generation's version of poker.
Quote: AxelWolfis there any significant elements of luck in this game or is it all skill?
I have never seen it, but Kotoku I found an article on it, its seems there is a prize wheel for the last man standing, and the prizes on the wheel are influenced by the amount of total bets
The gameplay is 100% skill based, the only thing subject to luck is the prize wheel which will be influenced by how much money is in the pot:
"You can only place bets beforehand, not during the game, so you can’t heighten the stakes if you realize you’re winning. The prize for the last Pac-Man standing isn’t determined by the bets, though. Instead, it’s all up to a prize wheel that spits out a randomly generated figure per round."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/compete.kotaku.com/casinos-take-pac-man-add-gambling-1818862785/amp
I hope this trend continues with adding more classics into competitive multi way matches.
Quote: GandlerI have never seen it, but Kotoku I found an article on it, its seems there is a prize wheel for the last man standing, and the prizes on the wheel are influenced by the amount of total bets
The gameplay is 100% skill based, the only thing subject to luck is the prize wheel which will be influenced by how much money is in the pot:
"You can only place bets beforehand, not during the game, so you can’t heighten the stakes if you realize you’re winning. The prize for the last Pac-Man standing isn’t determined by the bets, though. Instead, it’s all up to a prize wheel that spits out a randomly generated figure per round."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/compete.kotaku.com/casinos-take-pac-man-add-gambling-1818862785/amp
This is the game I saw but the console has changed significantly from that shown in the article. If I recall correctly, the top is now square rather than rectangular, which makes more sense when you have 4 players. The pedestal looks different too.
So basically someone good would have to sit around waiting for some suckers and then compete against them. I assume most people would give up after losing a few times. And since you can't bet very much I wonder if there's any money in it(it wouldn't seem so, but who knows if you had in a bunch of drunk college kids) I guess someone good enough could make the other person think they actually had a chance because they just barely lost each time.Quote: GandlerI have never seen it, but Kotoku I found an article on it, its seems there is a prize wheel for the last man standing, and the prizes on the wheel are influenced by the amount of total bets
The gameplay is 100% skill based, the only thing subject to luck is the prize wheel which will be influenced by how much money is in the pot:
"You can only place bets beforehand, not during the game, so you can’t heighten the stakes if you realize you’re winning. The prize for the last Pac-Man standing isn’t determined by the bets, though. Instead, it’s all up to a prize wheel that spits out a randomly generated figure per round."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/compete.kotaku.com/casinos-take-pac-man-add-gambling-1818862785/amp
I hope this trend continues with adding more classics into competitive multi way matches.
A 25% vig is absolutely outrageous. With that kind of VIG, I hope it fails.
Quote: AxelWolfSo basically someone good would have to sit around waiting for some suckers and then compete against them. I assume most people would give up after losing a few times. And since you can't bet very much I wonder if there's any money in it(it wouldn't seem so, but who knows if you had in a bunch of drunk college kids) I guess someone good enough could make the other person think they actually had a chance because they just barely lost each time.
A 25% vig is absolutely outrageous. With that kind of VIG, I hope it fails.
Yeah it's high, but if it's fun, it would be worth it, I have spent more than 2 dollars to play pacman Solo without any chance of winning anything other than having some fun.
This is more about entertainment than gambling (for me).
You are basically paying for a competitive pacman experience with the chance to win some money on the prize wheel for the last survivor.
for example if 3 players wager $5 and the 4th only $1then if player 4 wins he only gets a 1/5 prize wheel award?
When those pirate Gamblits came out they were terrible and always empty. I don't think they were that bad of a rake. These will fail miserably.
Quote: darkozhow does the prize wheel for last man standing take into account wagers? Is it all wagers combined? I assume its gotta be pro-rated somehow.
for example if 3 players wager $5 and the 4th only $1then if player 4 wins he only gets a 1/5 prize wheel award?
I could be wrong, but I assume all players must wager equally. Like a 2 dollar match all must put up two dollars. Or 20 dollar match (appears to be the max) each player must put 20.
Now, I would assume it also scales up for more players (obviously of you are playing 3 opponents instead of just one there is more money in play and it would also be harder to survive longer).
Quote: AxelWolf
A 25% vig is absolutely outrageous.
And illegal in nearly every other state.
Good point, I didn't even think of that.Quote: tringlomaneAnd illegal in nearly every other state.
Quote: tringlomaneAnd illegal in nearly every other state.
Why is it illegal? Just about every lottery holds more than that?
Quote: MaxPenThe group of friends might as well visit the carnival and try to make baskets into an oval rim that is to small for the ball. 25% rake is jacked.
When those pirate Gamblits came out they were terrible and always empty. I don't think they were that bad of a rake. These will fail miserably.
The last time I went to a carnival I made the basket and won this for the woman I was dating::
What did the woman you were dating do with the woman you won?Quote: DRichThe last time I went to a carnival I made the basket and won this for the woman I was dating::
Many other states outside of Nevada require casinos to have a minimum pay back higher than 75%.Quote: billryanWhy is it illegal? Just about every lottery holds more than that?
Perhaps the might have some special kind of rule for skill-based games, but I doubt it.
I can't imagine the game manufacturers didn't think of this and there's multiple different vig settings.
Quote: KevinAA"skill-based slots" can be made that are 100% fake and involve no skill whatsoever.
Decades ago, New Jersey passed a law requiring the slot machines in Atlantic City to give the player a way to "skillfully" play the slot machine, so they did by creating the skip-stop feature. When it looks like a good symbol is on its way around, you hit the spin button again to make it stop. It's total BS because the machine was going to stop on three particular spots on the reels anyway, but it made the player feel better like they had some control over it.
The skip-stop feature still exists on most slot machines today, because lots of players want it. I often see people quickly hitting the spin button over and over and over, betting $1 or 30 cents or whatever every second.
I can see how someone could manufacture a "skill-based" slot machine where you have to pop ballons on the screen or something like that, but the bonus prize was already determined by an RNG. The only difference between an "unskilled" player and a "skilled" player would be the amount of time it takes to do the so-called "skill" bonus, yet the result is exactly the same.
I have seen people try to use the skip-stop feature on a video slot machine to try to make it stop when they see a good symbol coming around. If you watch this for a bit, you can see that the reels never stop instantly. It takes a little longer on a mechanical reel slot machine than video reels, because the computer can create the reel strip it was going to stop on anyway very quickly, whereas mechanical reels still have to spin around to the point where they were going to stop anyway. It fools a lot of people.
I've tried to tell people the skip stop feature doesn't work but nobody believes me. People want to feel they can somehow affect the outcome. I use it when I get two of three feature symbols and don't want to wait to see if I get a bonus, so I just stop it. If the bonus does hit someone next to me invariably says "Nice stop".
I saw a video where someone recorded a video reel game and they hit the stop button and slowed way down you could see the symbol change to what it was supposed to be . It was so quick at full speed you couldn't really see it.
I slightly recall there being someone on this very forum (I swear it was kentry, but probably not) claiming or talking about the stop feature as if it were a thing that might work, but then someone actually showed the video how things change in slow motion.Quote: garyt1957I've tried to tell people the skip stop feature doesn't work but nobody believes me. People want to feel they can somehow affect the outcome. I use it when I get two of three feature symbols and don't want to wait to see if I get a bonus, so I just stop it. If the bonus does hit someone next to me invariably says "Nice stop".
I saw a video where someone recorded a video reel game and they hit the stop button and slowed way down you could see the symbol change to what it was supposed to be . It was so quick at full speed you couldn't really see it.
Stop features are definitely a wonderful thing, but only because it speeds up the gameplay. Obviously, that's very useful if you have an advantage.
