My New Casino Game -- Opinions Welcome

Hi Guys.

This is my first ever casino game. I have high hopes for it. I've already started the patent process. Let me know what you think.

Here is a link to a visual of how it works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbECyVMjJO4

The game of Spades is one of the most popular card games around the world, played by millions. Yet no one has ever been able to play this hugely popular game inside the casino...until now.

WELCOME TO...CASINO SPADES

DESCRIPTION OF THE GAME Casino Spades is the home-based game of Spades adapted to be played in a traditional live casino. Anyone who has played traditional Spades will have no difficulty in adapting and learning the near- identical rules.

Casino Spades is implemented and played as follows:

1. One to four players face the dealer position at the table.

2. Players place two identical-sized wagers in front of them.

3. The dealer gives each player two cards face-down. The dealer also receives two cards also face down.

4. Each player examines their cards and determines if they have any good cards. Good cards are any Spades, (Big Joker, Little Joker, and deuce of diamonds are treated as Spades).

5. Players may and are encouraged to communicate with their fellow players as to the strength of their hand although they may not disclose what individual cards they hold. Comments should be limited to “I have one book” or “I know I can make both books” and such comments of that ilk.

6. At each player’s discretion, they can elect to join their fellow players in the books bet. Strategically, players who have good cards should move one or both of their bets onto that section of the table designated as the “Books Bet”.

The Books Bet is an all or nothing team bet. The players with pledged books must make all their books(wins) or all the(Books) bets lose and are collected at the end of the round. However, the more books pledged, the higher the payout for each wager if successfully won, so taking the Books Bet is a lucrative opportunity for the player(s).

As the Books Bet is a team bet, there must be a minimum of two bets pledged or the Books Bet is not a legal bet. If only one book is pledged, the dealer will move the single wager back to its normal payout position in front of that player. Although at least two books must be pledged, they may come from a single player if he chooses to pledge both of his two bets.

7. Once books have been pledged, dealer turns over his first card.

8. Players now choose which of their two cards they wish to play against the dealers first and second card. Players set their cards into position one and two.
Strategically, each player should try to force the win on the first card if they know they have it(and then hope for a win on the second card which is pitted against the dealers face down card). However, there are certain restrictions the player must keep in mind when setting their cards. As in the traditional game of Spades, the player who “leads” play determines the suit all players must engage if they have that card suit. In Casino Spades, the dealer always leads(and this is the primary edge for the house, the dealers card is always the leading card that determines suit). Players must match the dealers suit if they have the same suited card(even if it means a loss versus a win) or the player forfeits(reneges) both bets.

9. After setting their cards, the dealer turns over each player’s first card and determines win or loss.

10. Dealer exposes his second card.

11. Dealer turns over each player’s second card and determines win or loss.

12. Dealer determines if anyone forfeit(reneged), determines if the pledged number of Books Bid was successfully made, collects losing hands and pays out winning hands.

Special situations:

1) Non-Spade Aces.
These are played slightly differently from the other cards.

A non-spade Ace for the player is not dominated by the suited rule so they are not automatically a loss against a dealers other suit. They are not trump cards either but are somewhat in the middle.

Player Non-Spade Ace vs. dealer Spade = player loss

Player Non-Spade Ace vs. dealer same suit = player win

Player Non-Spade Ace vs. dealer different suit = push

Player Non-Spade Ace vs. dealer Non-Spade Ace = player win

2) Ties

A separate Tie (side) Bet would be available for multi-deck versions.

How many hands/hour can you deal with 1 player? With 4?

What's the house edge?

What is the penalty if a player discloses their specific holdings? If all hands are dead, it unfairly penalizes the sober player who is abiding by the rules. If only one hand is dead, how do you keep the dealer safe when the drunk violator protests? If there is no enforced penalty, players will take advantage and share freely, forcing other rule changes that could make the game unattractive.

Shared decision making will turn off many players. The stress isn't fun.

" Shared decision making will turn off many players. " While turning on teams of AP's.

To say nothing of 1 on 1 situations with that player making a decision and the dealer not.

I'd say unfortunately as constructed it has a zero chance of success. All I need as a player is to try and legally get information about the strength of the drunken sot sitting next to me's hand. When he can not exactly tell me what the cards are.... Yeah, that'll work.... And IF knowing the actual cards would result in a player advantage, well, then there will be teams descending on the tables.....
Plus making a new table game that only seats 4 players seems like a no-go from the start.

Back to the drawing board.....

There's really no reason that this game can't seat 6. But the payout odds on the book bet would need to be re-worked (if they're worked now...the video makes it sound like they may be undetermined). And there's no reason to allow any discussion among the players. I would allow no discussion, but either rotate or randomly assign the right/responsibility of first action. Then the information is passed between players according to their bets - but not by any verbal means - and each player has the ability to act in each position over the course of time. I do think time-per-round will be a big issue here. This game is going to be slower than just about all other casino games. That's going to need to be accounted for by either applying a high minimum bet, or by applying a high house advantage on each wager.

MathExtremist:

I can play 30-45 hands per hour myself. Cannot determine true time based on players making choices, no different than you can any game involving a player stalling. I have played packed tables of roulette that went much slower than this game goes.

House Edge, not sure yet. This game is still in its infancy as far as development. I have started the patent process to protect the game. Not yet gotten to hiring the mathematician.

Gamewise, the house edge is that the dealer card always determines the winning suit. But once a player is dealt the cards, they can take the advantage based on what they have been dealt by changing their bet to the Books section

Ayebarumba:

The penalty would be up to the casino in the same way any card games rules are when violated. There is no real advantage to knowing what the other players have as far as advantage play goes. If a player has extremely good cards, he's already been dealt them and there is no real point to telling other players.

The rules for not discussing other players cards are really ported over from traditional Spades(where there actually is a slight advantage.)

A conversation might go like this:

Player one: "I have the Joker, everyone"

Player Two: "Great, you should turn it into a Book Bet"

Player One: "I will. Because I have the Joker. Was gonna do that anyway, without your advice."

A lousy player might warn everyone off when they play stupid, I suppose, but most people would be able to figure out the dunce after one or two hands anyway.

Buzzard:

Shared decision making is what the game of Spades is about. Any Spades player would be disappointed without it.

I'm not sure what you mean by the 1 on 1 situation where a player makes a decision and the dealer doesn't. That doesn't happen. The dealer always makes a decision as he's always dealt two cards.

AP's will not have much to gain. The decision is to share in winning or losing with your partners at the table(with a bigger win if everyone makes their books). It does not affect what cards you are dealt, or can obtain prior to betting.

Ex: You bet a hundred bucks. You get dealt two lousy cards. Your AP friend has two great cards. He sneakily tells you he has two great cards. Great, your friend will probably win. You will probably lose a hundred bucks. Not much advantage because you don't get to change the cards you have been dealt.

Soopoo:

You are not the only who seems to have latched onto the sharing of the card info as an issue. Not sharing information is the fun way to play as per traditional Spades. It really gives no advantage to know what cards your other players have. They have good cards or they don't.

And if your partners are bidding books, then they are practically telling you they have good cards. Just not which specific ones. You might feel more confident with the Books bet if you have that knowledge but it doesn't change the two cards you've been dealt.

I would suggest taking a deck of cards and playing the game as I show it in the video.

As for the 4 players seats - take in mind that each player has to make two bets. In other words there are 8 bets made when all four seats are taken. So the same number of bets as at an eight seat table with single bets.

rdw4potus:

Thanks for your thoughts. The table has four positions each with a double bet. But I do imagine 6 seats are possible. But then the dealer would have to go through 12 decisions instead of just 8.

I spent a lot of time in the video on a single hand because I was explaining the rules as I went. The game actually goes pretty quickly.

Two cards dealt.

Players look at their two cards. Push bets forward to the center of the table if they wish to.

Dealer turns over one card.

Players leave their cards alone or move from position one to two.

Dealer turns over everyone's card.

If you cannot physically do that in 45 seconds or less, there is definitely a problem. Some players will go slower than others, but each player has two cards to look at. Not too difficult to figure out if they are good or not.

I have not done the math yet. I'm at the game rules stage, not the game math stage.

Quote: darkoz

As for the 4 players seats - take in mind that each player has to make two bets. In other words there are 8 bets made when all four seats are taken. So the same number of bets as at an eight seat table with single bets.

But not compared to any modern SHFL game with 6 or 7 player spots with 3 or 4 bets each. You don't need to compete against blackjack, you need to compete against SHFL, Galaxy, and the other new-game vendors. Bottom line, you need to know your expected win/hour. My gut tells me this game will be far too slow to earn anything close to what a casino manager will expect unless you make the edge so high that nobody will play it anyway.

Quote: darkoz

5. Players may and are encouraged to communicate with their fellow players as to the strength of their hand although they may not disclose what individual cards they hold. .

So a team of players figure out code talk for what they
have and take the casino for a mint.

Next game, please.

Quote: darkoz

Gamewise, the house edge is that the dealer card always determines the winning suit. But once a player is dealt the cards, they can take the advantage based on what they have been dealt by changing their bet to the Books section

But does the books bet pay fair odds? Does the other bet pay fair odds? You can easily add to or subtract from the dealer's native advantage by adjusting the payouts on those bets. In the video, it looks like you paid 1:2 on the non-book bet and about 3:2 on the book bet. Those proportions will radically impact the house edge on the game.

rdw4potus:

Yes, that's correct. I made those payouts in the video (as I stated) based on instinct and the number of times I've played.

I am NOT a mathematician and totally agree the edge proportions will be impacted by the payouts which I cannot lock-down till a mathematician has examined it fully.

Perhaps it was too early to post the game here(without the math worked out) but I wanted opinions on the game.

Thanks.

Dark, lots of things to think about here and the responses so far will only give you a snippet of issues to consider. One of the things that was told to me early on in the development process by a wise mathematician: "Don't get married to your game"

What he meant by this is consider what is being said and instead of putting up arguments as to why a feature doesn't work or something is too complicated or whatever, consider the input as valid and instead say "This is a perceived problem, whether I agree with it or not, how would I fix it given that it is true?"

I think you need to start with this "Shared Information concept".....several members who have looked at lots of games are coming out clammoring, you can't have shared information have any inpact on a decision the player makes during a hand. I know you have said players can't change their cards, but they do make a decision to move their bets to "Book" or not move them after getting this information about what cards are in the other players hand vs. what could possible be in dealer's hand. By definition this creates an advantage play for players to know all the other cards.

So nix the shared information and I would also nix the concept that all book bets have to win for any player to get paid on them. Players don't want to rely on others to do the right thing when their money is on the line.....this is a loser concept.

Now, a casino game based on the game of Spades.......I don't know, it is possible. Try and make it one that the player can play heads up against the dealer in the same manner that 5 players play against the dealer. No community card knowledge (you play spades with friends you know and like, you aren't going to like the folks at the Casino Spades table necessarily), no community bets that is all win or no win. These two concepts alone will kill a game.....trust the group wisdom on that.

So your next step is to design around those objections.

You are also going to have to get the math done before you can bring forth an idea. How the math works out is so critical on what you need to put in to the design of the game. There are lots of games that look interesting, until the math is done and there is no house edge or the house edge is 15%, you can't design a game without doing the math. Every game is simply a math problem with a different wrapper on that (I got that from a very smart mathematician as well, and it is true).

I'll also steer you to a couple of resources before you do anything else:

http://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Casino-Table-Game-Design/dp/1883423171/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1360028027&sr=8-6&keywords=casino+table+game+design

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmemvLZIUYw

Both great resources to get yourself some basic information on the world of Table Game Design

If winning or losing my money is dependent on the decisions of strangers at the table, I personally can't imagine sitting down and playing.

From your comments, it sounds like this game may appeal more to people that play traditional Spades. I don't fit that profile. There is too much trust being placed in random strangers. I'm guessing in traditional Spades, your partner is someone you play with regularly, and trust.

Quote: darkoz

Not sharing information is the fun way to play as per traditional Spades. It really gives no advantage to know what cards your other players have. They have good cards or they don't.

I think you will find, when the math folks dig in, that it could be a huge advantage knowing exactly what cards each other player has. Also, for many, if the "fun way to play" is the less profitable way, that can be another reason not to play.

It's great that you were able to come up with a game, and were willing to share it here, but if you are looking for honest opinions, I would agree with SOOPOO:

Quote: SOOPOO

I'd say unfortunately as constructed it has a zero chance of success

Thank you for the plug, Paradigm!

Good advice: do not get married to your game, take sugestions from casino and distributor executives seriously.
1. Simplify the game - so that the gist of the game can be pitched and gotten in 20 seconds.
2. EASY to deal and play for the same basic concept.
3. Have low expectations and a tremdous capacity for work (changes, pitching the game to distributors, casino opertors, etc.)
4. accurate house edge math: ~2% to 3% for the main bet, ~7% for the side bets; have a gaming mathematician review and advise on all.
5. patent filing and patent attorney.
6. Game is uncountable, or reasonably so. Everyone here will try to take it down for cash and profit otherwise.
7. Player's odds, and chances of winning and losing must NOT depend on any other player's actions. This is a huge factor.
8. Be very realistic: if the game is not happening, after careful thought, consideration, and repair to the game, then move on to your next game creation.

Thanks Paradigm:

I do intend to defend my game but please understand the catch22. After all, if someone didn't feel so strongly about their game, its probably not very good. Likewise, as the Wizard and others have said, most everyone is married and in love with their game and when in reality the game just sucks.

Kind of reminds me of the catch22 where an innocent person is imprisoned and is told everyone in jail professes their innocence. Then what to do? Well, the innocent person just has to bear with all the criticism until proven correct.

Briefly, the Books bet is optional so people who with to play rogue can do so. These players would never take the Books bet and whenever they win, it would be for less money than if they took the chance on their fellow players. They would never lose because of another players game, but the trade-off would be the opportunity to win more money (when the game is in your advantage) would be lost

Many people here are confessing not to be familiar with the game of Spades, so if this is you, here are two short videos that explain the game better than I can. I think you'll understand how I created the Casino variant after watching these.

Thanks

www.Youtube.com/watch?v=vVcDcUxeiWA

www.Youtube.com/watch?v=wblP8T7wO2U

Dark, I was thinking about your game mechanism, the books bet, ealier today. I think you need to take a look at utilizing some sort of Ante/Raise mechanism that allows players to win more on good hands by themselves as opposed to winning more if you play along with other players and as a community beat the dealer.

As I mentioned, I don't think that the "Spades" concept in and of itself is a horrible idea, but the community play is definitely an idea that will not work on the casino floor. If you can accept that fact and figure out a different approach, maybe there is a game built around the concept of Spades being a trump suit and a player is only allowed to play a trump card if they have a void in dealer's suit. That concept is enough of Spades to call the game Casino Spades. You don't need to add "books" and community strategy to be true to Spades in a Casino setting.

I will tell you right now and others I am sure feel the same based on what they have posted: If you hold on to the concept that communtiy play has a strategic impact on the winning of individual players, you will die on that hill and your concept Casino Spades is a dead one.

Also for what it is worth, I think that the better a game idea is, the less the developer is married to it or strongly defending it. If the game is good they don't have to be committed to the idea or promoting it, the game stands on its own merit.

1) make it for 7 players not 4

2) dont worry abotu turning the hands sideways- if they loose, the dealer shoud collect the cards and chips right then.

3) no discussion of cards would be best. Or find a way to keep the bets individual.

Thanks, Malaru

I don't mind changing number of players. It's a minor quibble. With the double betting I find it's simpler with four but not an issue worth fighting for if it hinders getting the game out there.

I'll talk about the shared community aspects elsewhere. I am surprised everyone hates this.

BUt I did want to address your concern about turning the cards sideways. I too found it instinctual to just collect the cards and chips as the player loses. Until I began the actual game mechanism.

Upon turning over the second card, if the player has reneged(not played a suit the first round that they needed to) then they forfeit both bets. That precludes collecting the cards as they need to be visually seen together.

Now the dealer has to go back to the first position and claim what had been a winning bet--but the bet isn't on the original position because it was moved by the player to the Books Bet section--and now confusion starts to ensue.

I realized I had a problem. The last thing you want is the dealer confused over whether losses have been collected or not on your new game. I needed to devise a solution.

Leaving all the chips in place and creating an easy to see visual record of the games play proved the smart thing to do. I have played thousands of hands of this game and it is very simple and necessary to do it this way.

I am not averse to changing this, but turning the cards sideways and determining losers and winners at the end was a move that grew out of the games mechanics. I just wanted you to understand I've given this game a lot of thought and what may seem like oddball ideas all have a strong thought process behind it.

Thanks

Here are some of my suggestions:
Get rid of the two jokers and "deuce of diamonds as spades" . It adds nothing that I can tell except confusion on what beats what.
Same thing with the special Ace situations.
Instead of a Books bet, give players the option of raising with good hands. After looking at their cards, players can make a raise on their first bet. After the first bet gets resolved, then they can make a raise on their second bet.
When determining if the first bet wins or loses, turn over the second card. If the player "reneged", the dealer can fix it for the player.
Get some math done. You may find the house edge is way too high and will need something else to lower it like the Ante bonus in 3 card.

And I'll plug for Miplet, because he is too modest to do it: He is good at casino math and can likely assist you in modifiying the game rules to fit a House Edge that is in the acceptable range for new games. Other members are also very capable at assisting in this area.

But like everything on the journey of game development, getting the right assistance from professionals in the legal, math and marketing worlds, it is going to take some money.

It is tough to evaluate a game without knowing the math works and my guess is once you move forward on math, the game you have now and the game that you ultimately develop to fit the math profile will be vastly different.

Take it slow, listent to the input you are receiving and I wish you all the best.

You came to the right place for good advice. Good luck!

thanks, guys.

I will be moving forward monetarily as I can. Not averse to that. I've spent well over 100 grand on feature films in my attempt to make it in Hollywood and never found distribution for those so I am somewhat battle-tested with rejection and spending large amounts on a dream.

A hundred grand only gets me a low-budget movie but it can get me a fully professionally created casino game so I am actually excited at the prospects.

The special rule for the Aces is something I've been experimenting with. Those rules can probably get thrown out or altered.

The Jokers and Deuce of Diamonds are directly rules from Classic Spades. Those are the non-spade cards with power. I'm tailoring this for the millions who are traditional Spades players so I have attempted to keep as many of the expected rules as possible. I will consider the impact of removing those three cards.

THanks

"The game of Spades is one of the most popular card games around the world, played by millions. Yet no one has ever been able to play this hugely popular game inside the casino...until now." -- darkoz

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi darkoz ... Welcome to "The Wonderful (and Risky) World of Casino Game Development" and congratulations on your first creation.

First, you sound like a true entrepreneur, which is a prerequisite in this business. You also sound like a 'smart' entrepreneur simply by virtue of your seeking input and advice on this forum.

From what I see, you have been offered invaluable advice here and I only have one thing to add, a market-related consideration that hasn't been mentioned yet; that is, just because Spades is a popular parlor card game doesn't necessarily mean it will be a popular casino table game. Please think this through from the standpoint of who plays Spades and is there a correlation between those players and casino patrons. And even if there's a strong overlap, will Spades players 'gamble' on the casino version of the game versus all the other offerings? Also consider whether non-Spades player will be willing to learn and play the game.

One case in point: a few years ago a game based on the parlor dice game 'Bunko' was introduced. The promotors cited millions or ardent players worldwide (true). Although the game's failure was obviously predictable, it managed to get a trial at a major property in Mississippi and attention from a major distributor, who exhibited it at G2E. Bunko players, of course, are ladies whose motive for playing is to have a casual distraction while socializing. Naturally, these female players did not flock to the unfamiliar environment of a casino to gamble on their favorite parlor game - and to play an intentional slow game at an uncomfortably faster pace than they are accustomed to playing. In addition, the game had some serious security and math-feasibility issues. How this game ever got placed is still a mystery to me when so many good and well-designed games never get to the casino floor.

I bring this up NOT to discourage you. Your Spades concept, even at this stage of development, is better than the Bunko concept. Work on your game as long as you believe in it, and I wish you a very sincere 'Good Luck!' as the development of your game evolves.

Thank you so much for your insight, Lucky.

I have been developing screenplays for over twenty years so I am not averse to the whole development process, people's rejections etc. And obviously, I know how to fight for my baby.

Just as in the film biz, just because you have a built in audience does not guarantee success. However, without some type of numbers to run, you have no chance of getting anything off the ground.

Transformers - millions of fans - huge success
SpeedRacer - millions of fans - huge failure.

But with all that said and done --
Frogmen from the other side of the moon - no fans(I just made it up) and probably no chance of getting produced.

I'm using the same logic moving forward with this as I've been using in my years in Hollywood.

You're absolutely right, darkoz: unless you follow through to the actual market (if possible) on a project that you believe in, then your chances of success are zero. Insight from peers is good, but sometimes the 'experts' tend to over-analyze. You're obviously very experienced and battle-tested in the arena of risky creative ventures. I'm sure you'll listen and carefully consider advice and suggestions from the industry pros ... and then go with your gut. Just what I'd do too.