Go Go Claw

I saw a new game at the D on Sunday called GoGo Claw.



It appears to be a Chuck E. Cheese kind of claw game. Inside the machines are balls all of the same size and all with a piece of play money inside that do not indicate a value.

Following are the rule screens, which I'll let you interpret on your own.







Here the panel where the player chooses his bet.



Here is my interpretation of the rules.

After the player makes a bet, the game electronically determines the outcome. The part with controlling the claw is just for show. In watching other play several times, the game always at least initially grabs a ball. However, in the several times I watched, every time the ball fell out of the claw before getting to the chute.

I assume if the ball did reach the chute, the player would be notified of his win electronically somehow. The win ranges are stated in the rules and the betting screen.

I think if the player is predestined to lose, then the machine let's go of the ball. How it always initially grabs a ball, I am not sure, but it's probably trial and error, because it seems to wiggle around at the bottom until it has one.

However, I welcome all other comments.

The question for the poll is would you play Go-Go Draw?

p.s. Perhaps I should have titled this game and thread Cash Grab. It seems to be titled that way on the betting display, but the big sign on the game saw Go Go Claw.

I agree with your opinions as to how it works and would not play it.

I’m going to guess that the people inclined to play this game are going to be the same people who were not inclined to read the rules.

In fact, before I read the rules and your comments, I thought, “How could they guarantee a theoretical minimum return? How would you quantify how skilled the average person is at grabbing a ball with the claw?”

Quote: Mission146

I’m going to guess that the people inclined to play this game are going to be the same people who were not inclined to read the rules.

Based on a small sampling and just knowing human nature, I agree.

When I first saw it a guy was playing it over and over, trying desperately to impress his girlfriend, but, alas, he gave up. He seemed to believe it was a game of skill and took the joystick process very seriously.

After he left, I studied the rules carefully and then took the pictures you see. Somebody else seemed to notice my interest in the game and asked what it was. I then went into a lecture along the lines of what I just posted about the rules. After I was finished, the guy said, "So it's like the game at Chuck E. Cheese!" I explained how it was in appearance only, but he was obviously not listening to me. Instead, he took out some money and said "Mind if I play?" I said, "Be my guest," and recommend he make the minimum bet of $5, as it was surely a sucker bet. He would have nothing to do with making such a wimpy wager and bet $20. He lost and walked away without comment.

See that, it is just like Chuck E Cheese or an arcade! Guy trying to impress his girlfriend by winning on it!

Great story about that guy. Is it stupidity? Is it a tendency of people to only hear what they want to hear? Maybe it’s just a stupid tendency that likely applies to everyone at some time or another.

He’s probably a neurosurgeon, or something.

Quote: Mission146

See that, it is just like Chuck E Cheese or an arcade! Guy trying to impress his girlfriend by winning on it!

Great story about that guy. Is it stupidity? Is it a tendency of people to only hear what they want to hear? Maybe it’s just a stupid tendency that likely applies to everyone at some time or another.

He’s probably a neurosurgeon, or something.

I'm sorry to say that when it comes to games and gambling the average person is just stupid.

To make a point, ask anyone if they would do research into the law if representing themselves in a court case. Most people would say, "hell, yeah, if they couldn't afford an attorney they would definitely study the law. They intend to win"

Ask those same people if they did any studying about the slots they play or even table games and the answer is most likely "no, it's just a game. But I intend to win".

Go figure!

I'm surprised nobody is talking about the progressive jackpot aspect of this game.

At the lower bets 40% of the amount wagered is put into the jackpot. This is astronomical. I've never seen a gambling game with a meter contribution that high.

On the other hand the progressive caps at double the reset value. I've never seen such a low cap on a progressive meter.

I'm curious why they designed the game this way instead of as a traditional progressive with a low meter rise and a high or no cap.

Quote: sabre

At the lower bets 40% of the amount wagered is put into the jackpot. This is astronomical. I've never seen a gambling game with a meter contribution that high.

It says it goes up by $2 on winning bets. If we assume a win rate of 20%, then the average meter rise would be $2 * 0.2/$5 = 8%. That is still pretty high.

Given such a fast meter progression, I assume much of the return is in the jackpot. I wish I had taken notes on the jackpot amounts when I was there. One of the pictures shows a jackpot amount of $2256, which I think was for the $20 bet. My advice would be that if you must play this game, do so only if the jackpot is capped out.

Quote: Wizard

It says it goes up by $2 on winning bets. If we assume a win rate of 20%, then the average meter rise would be $2 * 0.2/$5 = 8%. That is still pretty high.

My mistake. I didn't read the rules you posted closely enough.

Incrementing on wins is a strange choice as well. I realize WMS G+ progressives do this, but most games increment on coin in.

The picture of the screen where you choose your bet shows the progressive amount at each level. Looks like the smallest bet level was maxed out.

It looks like the prizes don't perfectly scale, either, which should be no surprise given the astronomical difference in possible bet amounts:

$5.00---2x---5x---20x----100x (Jackpot Base)

$10.00---2x---5x---25x---150x (Jackpot Base)

$20.00---2x---5x---25x---100x (Jackpot Base)

$50.00---2x---6x---30x---60x (Jackpot Base)

$100.00---3x---6x---30x---50x (Jackpot Base)

Okay, so the stupidly high bet amounts clearly have more of a focus on the payouts going to the lower returns. Naturally, this doesn't give us much information as relates the specific probabilities for each bet level, which could all be different, in theory. If the probabilities were not different, for example, then a $20.00 bet would return less than a $10.00 bet would.

But, maybe it does. Why the hell not? Who cares, right?

Using Wizard's assumption of a hit rate of 1 in 5, the next question becomes whether or not the progressive can be capped and NOT represent a player advantage. As pointed out, with a 1 in 5 hit rate (being assumed) the progressive meter contribution would be a very high 8% of all monies bet.

Personally, I would think that the hit rate is lower than that, but I could be wrong.

(.2 * 2) = $0.40 (Expected Meter Contribution, per spin, at $5.00 bet)

Okay, so now let's distribute some theoretical results:

I'm going to go for a $5 bet:

2x = .18

5x = .015

20x = .004

JACKPOT: .001

Okay, so let's do that with the base jackpot and then add in the meter contribution and see if it makes sense:

(.4) + (.18 * 10) + (.015 * 25) + (.004 * 100) + (500 * .001) - (.8 * 5) = -0.525***

That represents an expected loss of 52.5 cents, per spin, on the $5 bet amount.

.525/5 = .105 or 10.5% House Edge

Okay, so now we double the progressive, which is now capped at $1,000:

(.4) + (.18 * 10) + (.015 * 25) + (.004 * 100) + (1000 * .001) - (.8 * 5) = -0.025

For this example, that represents an expected loss of 2.5 cents, so:

.025/5 = .005 or 0.5% House Edge (However, the 8% that is going to the progressive represents money that the player WOULD NOT get upon hitting the current progressive, so in effect, the player is still likely playing at a substantial disadvantage---especially without knowing the value of the next jackpot to come.)

This is all to demonstrate that it's possible that this game could be set, given the capped jackpot, to literally NEVER be at an advantage for any player. Also, the hypothetical jackpot odds I used are relatively short, so we if we distributed the payout in a fashion to cause the jackpot to have longer odds, then it would become even easier to create a situation in which this machine could never be played at an advantage.

Another thing that we would look at is that the jackpot, given our theoretical of .2 probability of some kind of win on this game, goes up an expected .40 per spin. That being the case, in order for the jackpot to double in value under these assumptions:

500/.4 = 1,250 (Expected Spins)

The jackpot would have to miss 1.25 jackpot cycles.

CONCLUSION: These numbers are for hypothetical purposes only. They are just meant to convey the notion that no advantage can be assumed, even when the jackpot is topped out...the determination of an advantage would require knowing the actual probabilities.

***NOTE: I am not claiming this is how the machine DOES WORK, I'm simply saying this is how it COULD THEORETICALLY WORK, my example is for hypothetical purposes only and is not meant to suggest an actual opinion of the returns or probabilities for this game.

Does anyone know for sure if overages carry over into the next jackpot? Even if they didn't, it's possible that the machine could still satisfy minimum jurisdictional return requirements.

It says:

Quote:

...is increased by a fixed win amount in each winning game a jackpot is not won...

But, also:

Quote:

...a jackpot is reset to its initial prize value after it is won...

Both of those things cannot be true 100% of the time if the jackpot has hit its cap. The jackpot is either not being increased by a fix amount every game a jackpot is not won, or alternatively, resets to more than its initial prize value to account for the spillover.

Either way, it's a stupid novelty game essentially meant to deceive people who do not take the time to read the rules screen, or who do, but don't understand what it is they have read. I wouldn't put it past anyone involved to have the jackpot no longer get contributions when it has hit the capped amount. Hopefully, this piece of garbage masquerading as a casino game will never get enough action for anyone to know what a capped jackpot looks like on it.