math gli bmm

Has anyone ever had gli or bmm do the math for them without having to go to an independent mathematician first?

Yes, but I did the required independent report myself. For complex math requiring computer simulations of the game, there are a number of good independent gaming mathematicians. One way or another, you have to show up at the certification laboratories with the math already worked out completely in a detailed report.

The way it works is that the game designer is expected to produce the initial (and complete) math report, and BMM or GLI certifies that math. GLI/BMM does not do the homework, they simply check the homework, so to speak.

The independent math is where you shake out many issues, or even re-design the game, to get it into a ready state, then GLI/BMM re-checks it in a single final action. Failing math once the game is in the certification laboratories is a more major issue. This is because GLI or BMM will refuse to "shake out" a game that isn't completely finished and verified.

There is an entire chapter devoted to independent math and preparing this math for the gaming laboratories, and what to look for and resolve, in the book The Essentials of Casino Game Design. There is also a sample independent math report for a commercial game in Appendix B.

Ok, and its about $5 000 for a game, and about $2 000 for a side bet?

Yes, approximately so for GLI/BMM, and perhaps half that for the independent math. A Full game may be $7,000-plus in total math, and a side bet $3,000. Plus add in the patent fees and printing work (layout, rack cards, etc.) and writing the documentation kit (Rules of Play, Dealer Procedures, demo video), and it's about $20,000 and nine months for a full game design ready for the casino floor, if they are interested - and this is with some game design efficiency. It isn't cheap.

But the hope is that the game will do well, and provide respectable income, honestly, a long uphill climb. The book has all the details for each stage of game development.

It's also expensive to start your own business in another area; my wife opened a day spa in Las Vegas, and it was a touch more to get going, with even more red tape.

+++++1

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes, approximately so for GLI/BMM, and perhaps half that for the independent math. A Full game may be $7,000-plus in total math, and a side bet $3,000. Plus add in the patent fees and printing work (layout, rack cards, etc.) and writing the documentation kit (Rules of Play, Dealer Procedures, demo video), and it's about $20,000 and nine months for a full game design ready for the casino floor, if they are interested - and this is with some game design efficiency. It isn't cheap.

But the hope is that the game will do well, and provide respectable income, honestly, a long uphill climb. The book has all the details for each stage of game development.

It's also expensive to start your own business in another area; my wife opened a day spa in Las Vegas, and it was a touch more to get going, with even more red tape.

Yes, but you have a much greater EV with a day spa than a table game, even if the top-end upside isn't as high. If that weren't true, you'd see more new table games than day spas. There might be more day spas in Las Vegas alone than different table games (actually being played) in the world. Even SHFL has a hard time getting new games to stick, yet they keep cranking them out.

Quote: MathExtremist

Yes, but you have a much greater EV with a day spa than a table game, even if the top-end upside isn't as high. If that weren't true, you'd see more new table games than day spas. There might be more day spas in Las Vegas alone than different table games (actually being played) in the world. Even SHFL has a hard time getting new games to stick, yet they keep cranking them out.

Yes. The day spa is a lot of work, but so is game design, and the spa seems to be worth it more so.
For any game designer, it is good to have other business plans and projects active, if only to prevent inventoritis.
The inability to see a dead end on what sometimes appears so promising is a risk.
SHFL can afford to crank stuff out in a game of numbers fashion; the individual with a game plan in a garage (literally) may find that life gets in the way of his great plans.

Quote: MathExtremist

Yes, but you have a much greater EV with a day spa than a table game, even if the top-end upside isn't as high. If that weren't true, you'd see more new table games than day spas. There might be more day spas in Las Vegas alone than different table games (actually being played) in the world. Even SHFL has a hard time getting new games to stick, yet they keep cranking them out.

+1

Quote: Paigowdan

Yes, approximately so for GLI/BMM, and perhaps half that for the independent math. A Full game may be $7,000-plus in total math, and a side bet $3,000. Plus add in the patent fees and printing work (layout, rack cards, etc.) and writing the documentation kit (Rules of Play, Dealer Procedures, demo video), and it's about $20,000 and nine months for a full game design ready for the casino floor, if they are interested - and this is with some game design efficiency. It isn't cheap.

It's cheap from starting a business point of view. What business can you start with $20,000, having the potential of making thousands / millions? Not to mention it's fun!!! This is THE ONE. To own a spa, you have to watch the store everyday.

Quote: UCivan

It's cheap from starting a business point of view. What business can you start with $20,000, having the potential of making thousands / millions? Not to mention it's fun!!! This is THE ONE. To own a spa, you have to watch the store everyday.

True, the spa is a bit more, and the spa has personnel that gets paid, plus electric bills, commercial washers, contractors, government red tape, insurance, the whole nine yards. A lot more work, a true vocation.
But it (a spa) has a very good chance of being successful with a good location and some straightforward work. So owning a successful business might be a bit more, but it has a phenomenally higher chance of success, - a way better EV.

The idea of being an author or game inventor, be it like a Michael Lewis (of Moneyball and Liar's Poker fame), a Steven King, or a Derek Webb of Three Card Poker may be a 1 in 500 to 1 in 20,000 shot among practitioners who start by scribbling down some good starting idea, to head on forward for THAT dream level of success. A screenwriter's chance is a budding author's chance is a budding game designer's chance: you're doing it for that chance, and in the knowledge that you'd never forgive yourself for not giving this calling a go. The vast majority of game designers FAIL for that $20,000, and when giving it a very serious go. Gaming mathematicians and gaming patent attorneys are both stunned and very pleasantly surprised when a game designer whom they assisted actually achieves success. I still do a few game consulting jobs, turning down jobs that really don't have a chance; I can't take the job or its money unless there's some light at the end of the tunnel.

The fun part of game design is in the "creationary" joy of perfecting an initial game, and rarer, in the pride of its first install. From there it then it becomes a job, a career to some degree, and only if you're exceedingly adept, talented, and fortunate to get an income foothold. Pitching games, demoing it, verifying independent math reports and later GLI/BMM lab reports, negotiating contractual agreements, verification of agreement compliance and/or fraud, paying lawyers to handle any issues that may come up, and a whole bunch of other real world work is involved. I wrote a book describing the full, long path for those who are up to giving it all a serious shot.

For very few is it like striking oil or winning the lottery. A few more get some real installs. I know so many people who spent $20,000 (which is at the low end), but up to $100,000 with one or no installs - and with shattered dreams on the ground. All were committed, and many were thankful to have given it a shot.

No, game design might not be THE ONE for most people or in most cases, and good success is seldom the case. For that matter, being a screenwriter or being a book author also is a long shot in terms of getting a jackpot "career income," but we may think it is going in. There isn't much easy money in the world. You do these things as a calling, not like applying for a new job.

I'd have to agree. The difference between owning a spa and creating a game is that the inventor's success is dependent on the casino owners. Being a spa owner gives you much more control over the success of the business, whether it is from an inventory, marketing, overhead, etc standpoint. You could do all the things right on your way to a successful game, but if casino owners don't see your vision in the same way...you're pretty much out of luck.

You have much less control than you think as a game designer, unless you set up your own licensed distributorship like Shuffle Master or Galaxy Gaming.
You can by yourself get a field trial, and if the game is at least as good as the refined and preferred products out there that its competing with, you have a chance to pitch the game to other casinos, where it might be accepted. You can also enter into an agreement with a distributor where they can sell it, and probably do a better job for a 20% or so royalty. In scenario one, you wear out your shoes and optimism because the table games manager decides whether or not the game is good and goes into the joint; in scenario two, the distributor controls the game's future - as a small part of its total catalog with no real say from you.

Ultimately, it is the gambler who decides if your game is great or not. Getting it to the casino gambler is hard; from there, the allure of your game (if it has any) trickles up from the lowly casino gambler up to the real decision makers - and through layers of casino operator and distributor executives. This is also very hard, as they'll have many other products, problems, and priorities to deal with. It's like being an indy film maker with a new and little niche film, praying to have the next Blair Witch Project when your film is shown at the Gary, Indiana film festival in freezing weather for one showing. (note here: you don't want a field trial at the Railroad Pass, and many games failed their field trials at the centrally-located Palace Station and the like.) It's a long shot to catch fire and to stay hot. Charles is right: if decision makers don't see it and proselytize the game, you have much less of a chance.

Generating patronage for the spa business is quite a contrast. We picked a decent location, my wife hired the most courteous and best students from the approved Massage school up on Charleston Blvd, we work with Yelp and local advertisers, and stay on top of the day-to-day and moment-to-moment items that need to be taken care of. And yes, it is work. It's like being a parent.

Creating a casino game, a book, or a screenplay that turns itself into some sort of a Trust Fund for the author is a huge long shot. It requires insight, work, and experience, and it still has to be protected with accountants, lawyers, and marketing people over its time frame.

If you create a game to make money, it'll probably fail; if you create a game truly for the gambler, - and this is the calling - then some success and money may - might - follow.

Quote: Paigowdan

Gaming mathematicians ... are both stunned and very pleasantly surprised when a game designer whom they assisted actually achieves success.

This is nonsense. These are complex relationships that develop over years and nothing comes as a surprise.

When you write about what you know, you are a very good writer. When you write about what you think you know about others, you often get it very wrong. Stick to what you know.

Quote: teliot

This is nonsense.

When you write about what you know, you are a very good writer. When you write about what you think others know, you often get it very wrong. Stick to what you know.

Eliot - I feel that this is malarkey from you Jacobson, as well as another instance of you taking a shot at me.

The simple fact of the matter is that both gaming mathematicians and patent attorneys who carry out the work they do for their clients know the long odds for success in this business (unless they're idiots), and they are indeed pleased when one of their clients finds success against tough odds. I have personally been told of their satisfaction in seeing instances of success, both gaming mathematicians and patent attorneys alike, when this good news happens. I've worked on a LOT of production casino games for Galaxy and DEQ and for myself, and many providers for us congratulate us on the success that they have participated in with us, stating they'd wish to see it more often. They at least say 'good for you!' - and it is very nice to see. So let ME correct YOU as to what I know and have witnessed, Jacobson.

Furthermore, gaming mathematicians and patent attorneys who work for their clients for years without success might not be doing their clients a great service for the money, although they are doing what they are asked to do.

Quote: Paigowdan

Eliot - This is Malarkey from you Jacobson, as well as another instance of you taking a shot at me.

The simple fact of the matter is that both gaming mathematicians and patent attorneys who carry out the work they do for their clients know the long odds for success in this business (unless they're idiots), and they are indeed pleased when one of their clients finds success.

Furthermore, gaming mathematicians and patent attorneys who work for their clients for years without success might not be doing their clients a great service for the money, although they are doing what they are asked to do.

"Pleased" is different from "stunned" - though neither applies in any general way.

I had a client who stole intellectual property from another client without telling me. I then developed the game and math for him and he placed it in over a dozen casinos. Do you think I was pleased when I found out that his game was ripped off?

I had a client who refused to pay me for a game, one of the best I ever helped anyone develop, that is now a mainstay game for a major company. I had to threaten to sue him to get paid. Do you think I am pleased by his success?

Was I pleased when a game I designed for a client only returned 65% RTP, but found widespread success?

Was I pleased to learn that a game I designed for a client was offered in military bases in IRAQ and that the proceeds paid for the widow's fund for those officers?

Am I pleased to have clients hire me to design intellectual property for them, and then to see my IP not get recognized in the patent, while the game gets widespread success?

Dan, get real here. It's not a shot to call you out for baseless generalities.

Quote: teliot

Pleased is different from "stunned" -

No, - in some cases it actually does come as a real surprise - and in a good way. In a "wow, good to see you got an install at the Barona!" kind of way, especially if a lot of work and hope was in it - and there's always work and hope in the new game efforts.

Quote: teliot

I had a client who stole intellectual property from another client without telling me. I then developed the game and math for him and he placed it in over a dozen casinos. Do you think I was pleased when I found out that his game was ripped off?

I'm sure you were stunned.
However, this is not an instance of success, - as this scenario is a clear instance of theft tainting this case. IP (intellectual property) theft is not legitimate success and is different, as theft's entrance into this picture, as a one-off spoiler, did spoil it all - do you see that? Aside from such things happening, the success of a client's game is both rare to see and good to see on its own terms. This was my point.

Quote: teliot

I had a client who refused to pay me for a game, one of the best I ever helped anyone develop, that is now a mainstay game for a major company. I had to threaten to sue him to get paid. Do you think I am pleased by his success?

No, but again this is because of being a victim of theft [of your fine services], so you will see only that instead.
Again, aside from such negative things entering the picture - the success of a client's game is both rare and good to see on its own terms. This was my point.

Quote: teliot

Dan, get real here. It's not a shot to call you out for baseless generalities.

Let me clarify this for you.
As a general aspect of doing work for clients, - and yes, also as a (very reasonable) generality indeed - if the work goes well for all, and with final success for the valued client, then of course the provider is happy with the outcome of his client and for his own contribution to this fine result - if he is a decent man who can share his client's joy, and his own contribution in it.

Let me add that I am sad to see that you were burned by clients (and I too have been burned in this business), but I cannot let it affect me to the point when something good happens, I am only reminded (and to re-embody) the bad experiences.

This is what I was getting at.

Quote: Paigowdan

Let me clarify this for you.
As a general aspect of doing work for clients, - and yes, also as a (very reasonable) generality indeed - if the work goes well for all, and with final success for the valued client, then of course the provider is happy with the outcome of his client and for his own contribution to this fine result - if he is a decent man who can share his client's joy, and his own contribution in it.

And if the client is a mega-corporation that doesn't give a damn, and wants to come as close to stealing other's IP as possible, and hires me to create a game that does just that?

The problem is that you don't know what it means to be a gaming mathematician. You don't understand our day-in/day-out life. Most of my clients are corporate. Those who are individuals are the worst clients, the ones who continually nag me, who require 5x the time as corporate clients, who don't want to pay what my services are worth, who want me to fix their bad ideas, who don't understand advantage play, who don't even know what a house edge means, and so on. The day-to-day inventor is the worst possible client, not just for me, but for all of us. We talk about it. We haze certain mathematicians by sending particularly bad clients to them. You think we like individual game inventors? You are so naive. Why do you think so many of us quit taking on individual inventors as clients?

Dan, what you don't get is that individual inventors, the guy-on-the-street with a game, is the bottom of the barrel for a gaming mathematician. If you could get that, then you might begin to understand what I am saying here. You are not a gaming mathematician, so you simply cannot speak reasonably about our experience. Any generalization you make is arrogant, at best.

Today I work with some of the largest corporations on the planet and I get paid very well. That's just fine by me. But being stunned, surprised or even the least be pleased about the client's success has absolutely nothing to do with the work I do. I have professional pride in the products I deliver. I do the best job I can under the constraints that any given contract imposes. But that pride has only one benefit - If my work is good enough then I might get more work.

Quote: teliot

And if the client is a mega-corporation that doesn't give a damn, and wants to come as close to stealing other's IP as possible, and hires me to create a game that does just that?

Well, you turn down a dirty and suspect job, if you have integrity to do this and can afford to do this.
1. I worked for Galaxy Gaming - where we created clones of expired Shuffle Master patented games - and I understood that expired IP allows for clones, etc.
2. I worked on nothing that violated IP rights, - with legal opinions substantiating this. Every game had a legal opinion before it got to my desk.

Quote: teliot

The problem is that you don't know what it means to be a gaming mathematician.

Wrong again, Jacobson.
Both GLI and BMM have used my independent math reports on a number of game projects. In fact, they were pleased with my reports, as coming from someone with knowledgeable game design experience. I did these reports while at distributors, for myself, and for a few clients, and never had a problem. This is a case of you not knowing, but just making assumptions.

Quote: teliot

You don't understand our day-in/day-out life. Most of my clients are corporate.

Eliot, I did corporate math reports while working at game distributors (-- how's THIS for corporate gaming math reports), along with overseeing reports from Charles Mousseau and Steve How and others, and with all reports, submitting and working with both GLI and BMM - all very fine.
You think I'm a man of few gaming skills and knowledge, this is clear.

Quote: teliot

Those who are individuals are the worst clients, the ones who continually nag me, who require 5x the time as corporate clients, who don't want to pay what my services are worth, who want me to fix their bad ideas, who don't understand advantage play, who don't even know what a house edge means, and so on. The day-to-day inventor is the worst possible client, not just for me, but for all of us. We talk about it. We haze certain mathematicians by sending particularly bad clients to them. You think we like individual game inventors? You are so naive. Why do you think so many of us quit taking on individual inventors as clients?

No, I KNOW you hate them. So do I as clients in general. I've quit taking them on, too, except a few people.
I do my own math reports, and whenever I can't because I need a big sim run done, I ship a game of mine to Steve How or CRM - where I give them good and finalized specs upfront, along with cash upfront. No issue here.
I do this because I KNOW what I want for myself as a consultant, which is to NOT be jerked around by a client. But I do not resent anyone's success, and share their joy if I had contributed to it.

Quote: teliot

Dan, what you don't get is that individual inventors, the guy-on-the-street with a game, is the bottom of the barrel for a gaming mathematician.

Eliot, I get this just fine.
But keep up this ignorant talk about what I can and won't do, or what I know or don't know about this business, or have and have not done, - and I'll start referring these beauties to you when I turn them down myself. I have your number. So far I have been sparing us. (You ready to do an 8-card Hold 'em game with three raise bets for $600 or $3,000? Trust me, it'll be a nightmare. I get it. I know this. Say that I don't - and you'll be getting choice and select referrals.)

Quote: teliot

If you could get that, then you might begin to understand what I am saying here. You are not a gaming mathematician, so you simply cannot speak reasonably about our experience..

For someone you claim isn't a gaming mathematician, BMM and GLI sure had seen and praised my math reports. Galaxy products and an AGS product. Not many in comparison to shingle-hanging gaming mathematicians, though they are real and they were fine. All were spot on. But these were for corporate clients I was on staff at, and for my own games and a couple of clients, as I too find the man on the street game inventor hard to work with. I'm not an official "shingle-hanging" gaming mathematician because I'm limited, based on my own computer routine library, but I do know the work - and it's such a rough and nasty job, that it might make me a nasty and depressed person.
I do see a few miserable gaming and ex-gaming mathematicians, and I don't wish to get like them, a bit nasty at times. I do get it.

Quote: teliot

Any generalization you make is arrogant, at best

You see? Case in point. Now we're getting nasty....

Quote: teliot

Today I work with some of the largest corporations on the planet and I get paid very well. That's just fine by me. But being stunned, surprised or even the least be pleased about the client's success has absolutely nothing to do with the work I do.

This isn't the goal of the work, as getting the work done and out is enough for most. For some games, I'm not surprised of success or failure, but for others I am indeed stunned at their selection or surprising successes. But being happy for your client's success when it happens because of your contribution, and happy with your career path is...well...all to rare, and something that only happy, non-miserable people are capable of, IMO. I try to avoid taking on a job or a career in my life that is proven to make me miserable, as it is foolish to do what makes you miserable.

In this regard, I think it has to do with something else, Eliot:

When my client does well, I have the capacity to see and feel happy for him, at least to some degree, because I know it was important to him, be it a client or a corporate supervisor who was pleased with a result. I also see at times this "good for you" joy in other full time gaming mathematicians, to include Steve How and in CRM, who actually like some clients and projects, and who are decent people.

I will also say that when I did this work for a distributor, my supervisor was pleased and he and I shared joy (or at least some good words) in some successes for the company, like Heads Up hold 'em and in other games.

True, many people don't like their jobs, and are even miserable in their careers, and dislike and ridicule their clients.
Eliot, I will grant you this.

tl;dr

Dan, if you're interested in taking on clients, I'd love to start sending some of them your way.

Quote: teliot

tl;dr

Dan, if you're interested in taking on clients, I'd love to start sending some of them your way.

equally important - send clients to his spa. It's a nice place at a good location.

Quote: teliot

Dan, if you're interested in taking on clients, I'd love to start sending some of them your way.

No thanks.
I've dealt with enough game inventors over the years.
At company one, the game acceptance record I reviewed was 0 - 20.
At another it was 3 - 104.

If a game is bad, I won't do/take the job. It's not an issue of money, it's an issue of false hopes and wasting one's own time for "the money," which I have ethical standards over. Honestly, I'd rather go back to dealing at a casino than do others' game design math and documentation kits if it came down to that.

Sometimes I'll send a real newbie game designer a copy of a game design book, one that truly gets into what game design is really about, (and wishing to send it along with a Rosary or Tefillin). Once they see what is entailed, and we all agree this is a reasonable and feasible proposition to pursue, then....

I charge a FLAT FEE on a FINAL SPEC for a game kit (which is:
1. a thorough review of the game's mechanisms+
1A. math report if specs are correct +
2. Rules of Play +
3. Dealing Procedures +
4. Game protection review +
5. Game Pitch/Demo PowerPoint +
6. patent lawyer referral (if not done)+
7. table felt/layout referral, etc.)
If the math report requires a sim I can't do, CRM gets a referral from a "No Longer Wide-eyed" and non-lunatic game inventor for that part.

Eliot, one of the things I wish to mention is that the wide-eyed game inventors do have a negative effect on gaming mathematicians, as I have often noticed a negative change of spirit or bearing in many veteran gaming mathematicians - and it IS work-related. (Steve How retained his Zen because he just threw in the towel, or more aptly took off with his beach towel and went to the beach. He occasionally does a job here and there.) The way gaming mathematicians should operate is that the spec is examined so that it can be set in stone - NO later massaging. (I have a day spa for that. This is no accident).

I spend time looking at the game's gimmick/humdinger and HE mechanisms to see if a better way is missed, - so that there is NO mid-project changes. As the late Johnny Cochran would say: "If the Spec ain't correct, you must choose to reject!" [the math job from the inventor, as you're just looking for trouble.]

I'm working on my last job, I believe, for a very nice man with a game that does have a chance. I did the math report (four hours, very straightforward game), and am doing the Rules of play, and dealing procedures (I was a dealer also for years). I had to redo his first math report from another guy (a math teacher at a mid-west community college) because he decided to do math on an 8-deck version of my associate's game that was ridiculously countable.

I understand that working as a gaming consultant for major companies, you've got to crunch through whatever pile of crap game they put on your desk. It can cause burnout, where you can't feel to be a team player happy about projects and successes. This can be bad.

Eliot, I get this business.

Quote: UCivan

equally important - send clients to his spa. It's a nice place at a good location.

It is.
Better to massage tired people, than tired math specs for casino games.

Quote: Paigowdan

Eliot, I get this business.

Yes, I know you do. You know a f**k of a lot about it. So, be honest about it from start to finish and all is good. The problem is that we all lie to cover up what a f**ked up bunch of sociopaths there are in this industry, on every side of every part of it. And, even saying that, there are actually some good people in it too.

Dan, I have a very short attention span when it comes to message board posts. Give it your best shot in 3 or 4 sentences and I'll do much better as far as reading what you write. In the mean time, I only read the very last thing you said.

By the way, Dan, my wife just asked me, "Do you even like this man?" as she saw me furiously typing. I said, quite simply, "Yes!"

Quote: teliot

Yes, I know you do. You know a f**k of a lot about it. So, be honest about it from start to finish and all is good. The problem is that we all lie to cover up what a f**ked up bunch of sociopaths there are in this industry, on every side of every part of it. And, even saying that, there are actually some good people in it too.

There are a very few good guys in this business. Being in it can make one jaded and angry. It can get to you spiritually.
A part of me believes the aggravation of this business brings a partial death, and is the wages of sin of this business. A lot of industry people quietly believe this.

Edit: Eliot, I responded to your pre-edited post, which is good and honest. +200.

Quote: teliot

By the way, Dan, my wife just asked me, "Do you even like this man?" as she saw me furiously typing. I said, quite simply, "Yes!"

I had no idea, I thought/sensed you disliked me. (I didn't feel the love here...)
Didn't know.
Happy now, glad to hear, all good with us!

Quote: Paigowdan

Edit: Eliot, I responded to your pre-edited post, which is good and honest. +200.

Seeing that, I edited it back to the stuff you quoted. Cheers.