"Hand of god cheats in slot machines"
May 18th, 2020 at 9:59:16 PM
permalink
https://www.nicelydonegaming.com/HandOfGodEthics.pdf
MArk Nicely writes :
Colleagues from the Class II world (slot machines with purely random, fully
independent outcomes as found in fully-regulated jurisdictions like Nevada, New
Jersey, Mississippi, Canada, etc.) are sometimes shocked at game “cheats” that I
help develop for social casinos.
Such “cheats”, sometimes referred to as “hand of god” tweaks, are strictly
prohibited in every Class III jurisdiction I’ve ever worked in. Near miss control
is probably best known of these. When first tried in Class III machines, the
manufacturer used standard and approved mechanism to generate an initial
outcome. If the outcome was a winner, it was shown as generated but if not a
winner, a secondary mechanism was used that was much more likely to show
near misses, such as 7 – 7 – (almost) 7.
These games got much more play than regular games but regulators felt it was
deceitful and banned its use. Regulators additionally established rules
associated with Telnes-style weighted reels to limit over-generation of nearmisses via standard game mechanisms. Class II slot machines (based on bingobased or central server electronic pull-tabs for many Native American casinos)
have much less regulatory control than Class III devices and so near-miss
methods were legal to use.
I am unaware of any of major Class III slot providers who also place product in
Class II markets taking advantage of this extra flexibility but smaller, Class-IIonly concerns have leveraged this power. This may be why so many of the
smaller players have able to keep so much floor space in Class II casinos despite
the onslaught of the biggest players. However, near miss techniques only really
work if done subtlety. If cash players can detect that they are being teased
and/or that the reel strips they see during spins and losers don’t jibe with the
kinds of wins they get, this can easily become a walk-away-forever event.
But social casinos are different. Players have lots of experience with obviously
scripted outcomes when they first start playing at a given Facebook casino, and
sometimes when starting new games on the same casino. This lower-
Copyright 2015 Mark C. Nicely. All rights reserved.
expectation for true fairness and the lack of real cash at stake allows for much
greater latitude in hand-of-god outcome manipulation. Unfortunately, too many
game developers are so ham-handed with their cheats, the desired effect is
greatly reduced by player detection. Just because casual players are more
likely to tolerate obvious hand-of-god manipulation does mean one should crank
up the tricks. This is definitely a case where less is more – the most effective
cheats are the ones that aren’t noticed.
So back to my shocked Class III colleagues. Is the inclusion of hand-of-god
tweaks in social casino games ethical? Relative to player expectation, I would
say absolutely – it’s a different environment with different standards and
practices than one would find with cash gaming. Class II slot machines, on the
other hand, are trickier, especially as more and more Class III titles appear in
Class II markets. I think that the major Class III manufacturers have made the
right call: if a game exists in both Class II and Class III, I agree in having both
versions play as comparably as possible.
MArk Nicely writes :
Colleagues from the Class II world (slot machines with purely random, fully
independent outcomes as found in fully-regulated jurisdictions like Nevada, New
Jersey, Mississippi, Canada, etc.) are sometimes shocked at game “cheats” that I
help develop for social casinos.
Such “cheats”, sometimes referred to as “hand of god” tweaks, are strictly
prohibited in every Class III jurisdiction I’ve ever worked in. Near miss control
is probably best known of these. When first tried in Class III machines, the
manufacturer used standard and approved mechanism to generate an initial
outcome. If the outcome was a winner, it was shown as generated but if not a
winner, a secondary mechanism was used that was much more likely to show
near misses, such as 7 – 7 – (almost) 7.
These games got much more play than regular games but regulators felt it was
deceitful and banned its use. Regulators additionally established rules
associated with Telnes-style weighted reels to limit over-generation of nearmisses via standard game mechanisms. Class II slot machines (based on bingobased or central server electronic pull-tabs for many Native American casinos)
have much less regulatory control than Class III devices and so near-miss
methods were legal to use.
I am unaware of any of major Class III slot providers who also place product in
Class II markets taking advantage of this extra flexibility but smaller, Class-IIonly concerns have leveraged this power. This may be why so many of the
smaller players have able to keep so much floor space in Class II casinos despite
the onslaught of the biggest players. However, near miss techniques only really
work if done subtlety. If cash players can detect that they are being teased
and/or that the reel strips they see during spins and losers don’t jibe with the
kinds of wins they get, this can easily become a walk-away-forever event.
But social casinos are different. Players have lots of experience with obviously
scripted outcomes when they first start playing at a given Facebook casino, and
sometimes when starting new games on the same casino. This lower-
Copyright 2015 Mark C. Nicely. All rights reserved.
expectation for true fairness and the lack of real cash at stake allows for much
greater latitude in hand-of-god outcome manipulation. Unfortunately, too many
game developers are so ham-handed with their cheats, the desired effect is
greatly reduced by player detection. Just because casual players are more
likely to tolerate obvious hand-of-god manipulation does mean one should crank
up the tricks. This is definitely a case where less is more – the most effective
cheats are the ones that aren’t noticed.
So back to my shocked Class III colleagues. Is the inclusion of hand-of-god
tweaks in social casino games ethical? Relative to player expectation, I would
say absolutely – it’s a different environment with different standards and
practices than one would find with cash gaming. Class II slot machines, on the
other hand, are trickier, especially as more and more Class III titles appear in
Class II markets. I think that the major Class III manufacturers have made the
right call: if a game exists in both Class II and Class III, I agree in having both
versions play as comparably as possible.
May 18th, 2020 at 10:39:55 PM
permalink
Is there a clear definition for what a "social casino" is?
May 18th, 2020 at 10:57:15 PM
permalink
Quote: VenthusIs there a clear definition for what a "social casino" is?
List of his clients....
has myvegas in there...
https://www.nicelydonegaming.com/Mark_Nicely_Casino_Games_Portfolio.pdf
May 19th, 2020 at 6:44:52 AM
permalink
Aristocrat is now in the Class II market after their purchase of VGT which makes the Class II "red screen" games that a lot of Indian casinos use. In fact, they've now made a Class II Buffalo themed slot.
May 19th, 2020 at 12:38:10 PM
permalink
I've gotta figure my homegame casino games throw in a level of difficulty and crank it up to eleven because no way should games be this freakin' awful. I'll have to go to a real table game to see if there's better luck available.
