We go new ways in math. Our goal is not to serve average values, no gambler has ever won the average. All gamblers win cutouts of that and that is what we call the psychological task of our work: styling these parts in a way that optimises the mathematical course of the game. Also, we look at the not that attractive seeming parts of a game: the non-winnings. These are ‘the operative point’ for the total game. They decide over trust or distrust.
Winnings are nothing without losses.
This is true. Gambling is a game that serves always both, there is no escape. If we say instead of ‘winning’ and ‘losses’ the words ‘hope’ and ‘despair’, it falls into place that too much hope (winning) or too much despair (losses) is destroying the trust into the whole game.
The part of math, that finally creates the game, can be done in some ways (and this also means that the game can be done in some ways). A well-known way is to create reel strips and let the random generator do the rest. The consequences are that volatility is directly a result of them and gives us only a limited look ‘inside’. And that is, in our view, not enough for today.
Our math is unlike this. We configure the interplay between random generator and rules in a new way. So, we can regulate the results of that interaction. Of course, all that we do is random, that’s an important point because gambling has to be entirely random. So, all we do is creating new rules, which are, in this case, not game rules but math rules.
This brings our games nearer to the needs of the gamblers and executes an important task. After finishing the math for a game there are nevertheless shares of the RTP which are not necessary. To move these for example 10% to other features can increase the prospects of success explicitly. For that, one has to find out which elements are replaceable.
How do we realize this?
Our games are playable in every design phase. At the end, we have the game on our monitors exactly like it is later on when the game is produced. Normally we play between 50.000 and 100.000 spins per game. That’s the reason why we have insights which motivate us to change things, from which we think that they are necessary to realise our plan. Likewise, we can find out what is not enough assertive.
This all sounds simple, but it isn’t. The reason is the different behaviour of the gamblers. For example, playing a game with high bets is close to gambling another game. The psychological (not the mathematical) effects are very different to playing the same game with low bets. Another point of more arises when gamblers change their bets often. Look at the sentence under our logo below and understand that the math of a slot game exists not only in simple data but creates also something ‘alive’. This is it what strengthens the trust in a game – or not.