Corrupt game maker Encore (Black Jack)
Quote: KeyserYou likely mean, YET.
By the way, I wouldn't necessarily accuse the manufacturer, but rather a rogue programmer.
That's been my premise from the very start of my first thread.
In the meantime, you need to collect quite a bit of data in order so that you can substantiate your claim. Not just some data, but lots of detailed data.
Good Luck.
Quote: KeyserHeySlick,
In the meantime, you need to collect quite a bit of data in order so that you can substantiate your claim. Not just some data, but lots of detailed data.
Good Luck.
Thanks, Unfortunately that task is easier said than done.
Quote: sc15Well, it is a brand new account who's first post is looking like it's troll bait or something.
Maybe he just had an AceHigh run at BJ?
Quote: KeyserIf you truly believe that somethings wrong with the machine, Dr. Jacobson is the person that you should contact. He's one of the few people that are qualified to investigate.
I'm happy to investigate too. I just need something more than adjectives before I start wasting my time.
Quote: HeySlick
1. Dealer hits 21, 9 times out of 10 when said player has 20 (dealer gets 21 whenever player has 21 way to often)!
2. Dealer push hands are unbelievable (repeatedly every playing session)
3. Dealer hits BJ every time player raises their bet.
4. Dealer gets 20 practically 75-80 % of the time.
No wonder you caught them. What a bunch of rank amateurs these cheaters are. Making 21 when the player has 20 is a dead giveaway and would make anybody suspicious. There were supposed to gaff it where they make 18 when the player makes 17. When the player raises the bet they are supposed to gaff it where the player gets a lot of 18's and the dealer makes 19 or 20. They gaffed it wrong and you busted them. Good work!
I'm just trying to figure out why any of this matters! It's a PC play money only game.
It matters to me --- and I feel the consumer should beware. You're right it's ONLY play money but, cheating isn't something I take easily or just accept because it's only fake money. Basically Encore is deceiving the public -- IMO why not label this product with 'Programmed games for entertainment only' and stop claiming these games are legitimate.
Quote: HeySlickthegov2k2 said
I'm just trying to figure out why any of this matters! It's a PC play money only game.
It matters to me --- and I feel the consumer should beware. You're right it's ONLY play money but, cheating isn't something I take easily or just accept because it's only fake money. Basically Encore is deceiving the public -- IMO why not label this product with 'Programmed games for entertainment only' and stop claiming these games are legitimate.
You desperately need to look up the word "programmed." All software is programmed.
Have you played the other games in the pack? Are the hearts and spades games fair?
Quote: rdw4potusYou desperately need to look up the word "programmed." All software is programmed.
Have you played the other games in the pack? Are the hearts and spades games fair?
Of course all software is programmed -- so does that give them (i.e.,Encore) the right to claim this particular game of BJ is legitimate? My biggest qualm is with the dealer getting 21 9 times out 10 whenever I get 20 - along with the repeated push hands - this game is corrupt. FYI I have beat this game on several occasions even reaching as much as 60 million (Hall of Fame). BTW that is NO easy feat.
Quote: HeySlickMy biggest qualm is with the dealer getting 21 9 times out 10 whenever I get 20 - along with the repeated push hands - this game is corrupt.
Do they shuffle after every hand? I see these games just happen to fairly land like this a fair amount. (Go get a deck of cards, shuffle fairly, deal, repeat... see how things land.)
Worry more if the game is unfair if you're playing for money instead of entertainment. As is, you didn't pay for the software, and you're not losing money because of it, as far as I can tell.
I know there's one live dealer that I always seem to lose against. I don't think he's a mechanic, and I don't think that the MD3 is gaffed. The simple reality is that the house has an edge over the player in this game.
Quote: DieterDo they shuffle after every hand? I see these games just happen to fairly land like this a fair amount. (Go get a deck of cards, shuffle fairly, deal, repeat... see how things land.)
Worry more if the game is unfair if you're playing for money instead of entertainment. As is, you didn't pay for the software, and you're not losing money because of it, as far as I can tell.
I know there's one live dealer that I always seem to lose against. I don't think he's a mechanic, and I don't think that the MD3 is gaffed. The simple reality is that the house has an edge over the player in this game.
Yes the house ALWAYS has the edge - but 9 times out 10 is WAY beyond reasonable/fair and, I contend that is CHEATING!
Quote: HeySlickI contend that is CHEATING!
What did you get cheated out of?
Is your contention that the deck was stacked? Second-dealing?
Programming is the process used to create software. Your game would not exist if it were not programed. To say a piece of software is programed is equivalent to saying a house was built or a car was manufactured. I think we all understand that you mean the game was programmed to force certain results rather than allowing random results. (rigged, gaffed fixed)Quote: HeySlickOf course all software is programmed -- so does that give them (i.e.,Encore) the right...
Quote: JimRockfordProgramming is the process used to create software. Your game would not exist if it were not programed. To say a piece of software is programed is equivalent to saying a house was built or a car was manufactured. I think we all understand that you mean the game was programmed to force certain results rather than allowing random results. (rigged, gaffed fixed)
I tried to get this across in my first reply, but this poster is in a fit of blind rage at losing their pretend money, so I don't think he cares to enter a nuanced discussion about nomenclature.
Back in the '80s, some of the folks in the office where I worked had the old game of Battleship as a program for the desktop computer. It was not player vs. player but player vs. computer. No one seemed to be able to win against the computer, and I suspected that it was not playing fair. After all, to begin you had to tell the computer where all of your ships were located!
To test whether the computer was using that info as part of the opponent strategy and not just to record hit or miss, I played just two games. For the first one, I placed all of my ships in a block, touching each other, right in the middle of the grid. In that game, the computer's opening salvo had an extraordinary percentage of shots right around the middle. For the second game, I placed all of my ships right flush along the outside edge of the grid. The result (of course) was that the computer's first salvo avoided the open area and was concentrated along the perimeter. In neither case was it anything so extreme as all shots hitting my ships, but it was clear that the computer was using my ships' known locations to plan shots, when that information was not supposed to be available to the player's opponent.
Yes, I was convinced it was a rigged game, probably because the programmer needed an easy strategy and didn't want to work very hard on one. I didn't get all bent out of shape about being cheated -- I just didn't bother to play the game any more. Easy solution.
Quote: DocBack in the '80s, some of the folks in the office where I worked had the old game of Battleship as a program for the desktop computer. It was not player vs. player but player vs. computer. No one seemed to be able to win against the computer, and I suspected that it was not playing fair. After all, to begin you had to tell the computer where all of your ships were located!.
Better than the game of Battleship I played against my father once. He didn't put out his ships at all.
And now I'm sitting here trying to decide how I'd program a simple, yet vaguely intelligent seeming AI for Battleship instead of (ostensibly) getting any work done.
Quote: AcesAndEightsI tried to get this across in my first reply, but this poster is a fit of blind rage at losing their pretend money, so I don't think he cares to enter a nuanced discussion about nomenclature.
Thanks to you et al I've become somewhat more computer literate and understand a lot of computer language --- btw thanks for the learning process (been surfing the net for computer jargon and related issues) it's been enlightening and such. Bottom - line my 2008 version is corrupt.
Quote: DocI know I posted about this before in discussing whether we trust computer games, but I can't find my old post, so I'm repeating myself.
Back in the '80s, some of the folks in the office where I worked had the old game of Battleship as a program for the desktop computer. It was not player vs. player but player vs. computer. No one seemed to be able to win against the computer, and I suspected that it was not playing fair. After all, to begin you had to tell the computer where all of your ships were located!
To test whether the computer was using that info as part of the opponent strategy and not just to record hit or miss, I played just two games. For the first one, I placed all of my ships in a block, touching each other, right in the middle of the grid. In that game, the computer's opening salvo had an extraordinary percentage of shots right around the middle. For the second game, I placed all of my ships right flush along the outside edge of the grid. The result (of course) was that the computer's first salvo avoided the open area and was concentrated along the perimeter. In neither case was it anything so extreme as all shots hitting my ships, but it was clear that the computer was using my ships' known locations to plan shots, when that information was not supposed to be available to the player's opponent.
Yes, I was convinced it was a rigged game, probably because the programmer needed an easy strategy and didn't want to work very hard on one. I didn't get all bent out of shape about being cheated -- I just didn't bother to play the game any more. Easy solution.
Great story, Doc.
7 (4 of those were in a row) 21 hands out of 9 hands - and the powers that be claim this game is legitimate BS!! I was playing this morning and this is the first time I've ever gotten a hand like this e.g. I split a pair of aces and got another pair of aces. --- This corrupt fing game maker won't EVEN allow the player to win when they get a BJ every single time said player does, the FING dealer gets one as well (this happens repeatedly). BTW some folks claim they don't get all bent out of shape about being cheated --- BS!! I despise cheaters with a passion and that includes the makers of this game. IMO this particular BJ game made by encore should be labeled with a warning about it's legitimacy. BTW Reno is the true loser,I used to enjoy going to Reno, NOT ANYMORE.
meh, they actually might be the winner's after all.Quote: HeySlickEncore the deceitful game maker IE (of the/my 2008 version of Black Jack)
7 (4 of those were in a row) 21 hands out of 9 hands - and the powers that be claim this game is legitimate BS!! I was playing this morning and this is the first time I've ever gotten a hand like this e.g. I split a pair of aces and got another pair of aces. --- This corrupt fing game maker won't EVEN allow the player to win when they get a BJ every single time said player does, the FING dealer gets one as well (this happens repeatedly). BTW some folks claim they don't get all bent out of shape about being cheated --- BS!! I despise cheaters with a passion and that includes the makers of this game. IMO this particular BJ game made by encore should be labeled with a warning about it's legitimacy. BTW Reno is the true loser,I used to enjoy going to Reno, NOT ANYMORE.
1. A hypothesis on how the game is cheating.
2. How you will gather data to prove the hypothesis.
3. The data.
4. An interpretation of the data.
I'm available to help step 4. Steps 1 and 2 also. I just need something more to go on than "This game is cheating!"
Quote: Gabes22Not to say I am skeptical of your claims, well actually I am skeptical of them. From my experience, when a dealer, or in this case a website gets on a hot streak, a player tends to forget all the times they pulled a hand completely out of their backside and only recall the times when the dealer "sucked out" on them. Just because you lost money in a session or two, or three does not mean you are dealing with a flawed or rigged program
FYI There's absolutely NO money involved in this game - The corrupt game maker (Encore) cheats and that's been MY point all along, if you trust the computer and those who write said game for Encore then that's your business - I still contend my 2008 version is corrupt.
Slick... you need some data to back up your claims.... so get a screen recorder and start playing... and play plenty of hands (I think the Wiz would be happy to discuss with you how many thousands to make the sample valid), and then go back through and summarize the results. Your hypothesis can be proven, you just need to supply the data. And it's your claim, so it's up to you to do so. Put up or shut up.
Quote: rsactuaryI forgot about this thread. An entertaining re-read, for sure.
Slick... you need some data to back up your claims.... so get a screen recorder and start playing... and play plenty of hands (I think the Wiz would be happy to discuss with you how many thousands to make the sample valid), and then go back through and summarize the results. Your hypothesis can be proven, you just need to supply the data. And it's your claim, so it's up to you to do so. Put up or shut up.
NO! I'm not going to prove my point by doing as you suggested -- My overall experiences from playing this game for hours upon hours is enough proof for me. I've played BJ at real Casinos for well over 40 years and have NEVER experienced hands like those in this game makers (Encore) version of Black Jack. Whether you or et al believe me isn't the point - my entire complaint has ALWAYS been about deceitfulness on the part of the game maker. Bottom line Encore is cheating and the consumer shouldn't be duped into believing this game is legitimate - IMO its NOT!
Over here, where people play for real money, you're not going to find many taking you seriously. Hell, I just read 8 pages of a thread about a play money game. Hahahahaha Now I feel like my sig.
Good luck to you OP. Let it go. It's certainly not worth this much effort.
Quote: texasplumrThe folks over at /r/gaming would be more sympathetic, I believe. Have you posted this over there? Maybe someone there can help substantiate your claims.
Over here, where people play for real money, you're not going to find many taking you seriously. Hell, I just read 8 pages of a thread about a play money game. Hahahahaha Now I feel like my sig.
Good luck to you OP. Let it go. It's certainly not worth this much effort.
I'm not looking for sympathy OR support from others to substantiate my claim -- my issue is and has ALWAYS been about the legitimacy of Encore the game maker of my 2008 Hoyle Card Game. Personally I wouldn't buy any games made by this game maker (btw mine was a gift). When I used to go to Reno (100 miles away) I only play BJ,if you believe that computerized BJ games are legitimate then so be it,I'm not buying it...period
Quote: Gabes22Me thinks you are the type of person who is crappy at golf and blames it on his clubs
Haven't played Golf since I came home from Viet Nam (1969) - You must/might be a golfer? Allow me to ask you how many pair of golf shoes do you take with you whenever you go golfing??
Most people will say 1 pair of golf shoes -- OK, what if you get a hole in one? That's my only connection to the game of golf.
Big mistake, this sorry corrupt fing game (Encore) really irked me today -- I had 4 double down hands and got 20 each time - and guess what the dealer got?? YEAH! the dealer got 21 - also every time I was dealt a 20 hand the dealer either pushed or pulled a 21 -- DON'T BUY THIS GAME!
Had a good laugh reading it again.
Quote: HeySlickI decided to play BJ today
Big mistake, this sorry corrupt fing game (Encore) really irked me today -- I had 4 double down hands and got 20 each time - and guess what the dealer got?? YEAH! the dealer got 21 - also every time I was dealt a 20 hand the dealer either pushed or pulled a 21 -- DON'T BUY THIS GAME!
You're pretty funny and a good story teller, but nobody believes a word you say.
It would take 30 minutes to find, install and implement a screen recording program. You could then easily show us the 4 double down opportunities you got, the 4 twenties you received and the 4 twenty ones the dealer got.
But you won't do that because the stories you are telling are not true. But nonetheless, you are still pretty funny.
ZCore13
I still don't understand why you care. It isn't real money. And I still don't understand why you think the maker of the game would create and sell a cheating game. There is no profit. That could be the only possible incentive to cheat.
Try documentation next time. Maybe then you'll find somebody who cares.
Personally I don't care if others DON'T care --- I know how corrupt this game plays out whenever I start betting big monies. BTW I despise cheaters regardless of the method or fashion of said cheat. If you and others can't understand that then so be it. FYI texasplumr all my exes live in Texas.
Quote: HeySlick
Personally I don't care if others DON'T care --- I know how corrupt this game plays out whenever I start betting big monies. BTW I despise cheaters regardless of the method or fashion of said cheat. If you and others can't understand that then so be it. FYI texasplumr all my exes live in Texas.
Let me get this right. It's a game where you never wager real money?
Quote: OnceDearLet me get this right. It's a game where you never wager real money?
SOO! you're ok with this game being corrupt because it's not real money? As I said above I despise cheaters, how come you can't understand that?
Quote: HeySlickSOO! you're ok with this game being corrupt because it's not real money? As I said above I despise cheaters, how come you can't understand that?
Because it's not corrupt. How come you can't understand that?
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13Because it's not corrupt. How come you can't understand that?
ZCore13
That's what a FOOL believes - I suppose you believe everything the government tells you. BTW I love my country BUT despise this corrupt government and its current leaders.
Is this the antiquated software you refer to?
http://support.encore.com/technicalsupport/product_detail.aspx?product_id=2471
They offered a 90 day return option.
If you bought the game, request a refund. If it was a gift, tell the giver that they have been sold a pup and that they might want to complain.
What is your loss? What is your problem? Someone wrote some allegedly bad code. Wow! It doesn't control air traffic or life support, or your central heating, and it is not taking money from you and giving it to a casino? Who have the game creators cheated? Out of what? They sold an allegedly bad bit of software for maybe 15 bucks. Life is cruel.
Oh, and there are many online Random Number Generator BlackJack games that deal perfectly fairly and are free to play.
Help me to understand.
Quote: HeySlickIt was given to me as a gift, SO getting a refund (didn't save receipt), is out of the equation. Given the conclusion you mentioned above i.e., faulty programming. Now what don't you understand about my qualm?
You were given a low value gift that is, according to your opinion, not very good. The giver possibly bought unwisely or was possibly sold a pup. It was for you to either politely say 'thank you' and then discreetly throw it away or to tell them that you were disappointed with the product but that you don't blame the giver.
The former option would be a bit sad and the latter option might be a bit cruel.
At the end of the day, is it worth a crusade? Do you think you will be the last person to receive a bit of junk as a gift?
Get some perspective. If some shitty $15 dollar crap product is worth giving yourself an ulcer for, then it's fortunate that nothing else is wrong in the world, worthy of your attention.
http://forums.encoreusa.com/tm.asp?m=33135
and
http://forums.encoreusa.com/tm.asp?m=49277
A couple of versions of card games are admittedly possibly faulty, and their official??? fix for it is to say, on their own forum...
Quote:In the lab, I have tested Hoyle Card Games 2008 on Windows 8.1. The games work. However if you run Hoyle Miami Solitaire, it may or may not run) There will be no patches to fix this issue. Users are running the program at their own risk.
Quote:The repeating game problem has been previously reported and confirmed by other MAC users. But, unfortunately, there is no fix for the problem - because the patch for Hoyle Card Games 2008 does not work on a MAC. And, since Hoyle Card Games 2009 was recently released, there will be no additional fixes for Hoyle Card Games 2008.
(Bolding was mine)
It's maybe a comical way to support a product, but dammit, it's a 7 year old bit of software. Who offers a 7 year warranty on software?
Don't get bogged down by global warming, disease, poverty, world peace, or world hunger. This crusade needs you.
Go get'em Slick $:o)
Quote: HeySlickThank you for your eloquent response -- now back to the cruel world of real life. Incidentally I'm not really a negative individual/person. IMO Integrity and honesty is lacking in our society today.
And perspective and common sense. The man-hours wasted on your crusade, by you and others, could have been better spent in a million ways. Enjoy your rant. It makes you look . . . Well I don't want to use the wrong word, so insert your own adjective.
Quote: OnceDearAnd perspective and common sense. The man-hours wasted on your crusade, by you and others, could have been better spent in a million ways. Enjoy your rant. It makes you look . . . Well I don't want to use the wrong word, so insert your own adjective.
So NOW you think you've figured ME and others out - WOW! Another entity I have disdain for,maybe you should ponder this little quote below
"The only things worth learning are the things you learn after you know it all"
- Harry S Truman -
FYI There's no period after his initial (S) because he didn't really have a middle name.
