Pulse
SLOTS FOCUS - INNOVATION REALISTIC GAMES, KALAMBA GAMES, FUNFAIR GAMES, EVOPLAY
Roundtable: Lost in Random
Despite variable RTP in slots existing in the land-based sector for many years, the feature is now slowly becoming more popular in the online space. Realistic Games, Kalamba Games, Evoplay and FunFair Games examine the benefits and challenges associated with implementing variable RTP.
To what extent does offering a variable RTP in games benefit both supplier and operator? How does this differ across markets with tighter regulatory restrictions?
Robert Lee, Commercial Director at Realistic Games: For us as a supplier, the main benefit is simply that it allows us to keep working closely with existing partners and deliver what they need. It also broadens the scope for new business.
For the operator, it’s about the extra profit margins. Tere’s not much research into it as far as I’m aware but what some operators have told us is that they’ve carried out significant AB testing when they’re operating games with different RTP levels. On the lower-level games, they’re seeing no difference in player burnout and no drop-in session times.
If you lower an RTP by 1.5 per cent, most players aren’t playing enough games to notice the difference during an average session. Of course, there are smarter players who will go to the help files and check, but they tend to be few and far between. Most have a favourite site that they play on and don’t often stray far from it, so they won’t care what the RTP is and play their games regardless.
Andrew Crosby, Chief Commercial Officer at Kalamba Games: In today’s climate, we see the need for varying RTP percentages for regulated markets. In Germany, the RTP level can be very low compared to the standard 96.6 per cent we have previously been used to, as operators need to offset the high turnover tax in the country.
UK operators have also been lowering RTP, not just because of the tax, but also looking ahead at regulatory changes that seem inevitable by the UKGC in the future. Being able to be flexible depending on the specific market needs is crucial, and we have seen an increased demand from operators demanding variable RTP.
P116 WIRE / PULSE / INSIGHT / REPORTS
Carlo Cooke, Commercial Director at FunFair Games: Variable RTP is currently a hot topic of discussion in the iGaming space and one which divides opinions. Since the introduction of variable RTP levels, we have seen a shift towards a lower default RTP, benefitting both the supplier and the operator by providing bigger margins.
Variable RTP also allows us to build games with a lower percentage and then increase the number if needed, which is easier than decreasing RTP as an afterthought. Designing lower meaning creating a better experience for players at the lower RTP, rather than simply reducing RTP to meet market demands, whilst maintaining integrity of the game.
When we say integrity, we are referring to the left side of the win curve and wins that create additional bets for players. To that end, given that the RTP is lower, it is easier for mathematicians to add wins, for example in the
If you lower an RTP by 1.5 per cent, most players aren’t playing enough games to
notice the difference during an average session. Of course,
there are smarter players who will go to the help files and check, but they tend to be few and far between. Most have a
favourite site that they play on and don’t often stray far from it, so they won’t care what the RTP is and play their games regardless.
50-70x range. Tis yields a stronger player experience, and ultimately benefits both the operator and supplier.
A variable RTP strategy gives operators flexibility and allows them to meet the needs of respective regulatory bodies, without impacting player experience and bottom-line revenues. Tighter regulations would normally impact operations, but thanks to lower default RTPs we can act quickly.
Operators are constantly under pressure to adhere to the ever-changing regulatory landscape and as a supplier, our job is to work and liaise with them to understand their needs and requirements for respective markets. We work with them to assist in supplying our games with the relevant RTP.
Ivan Kravchuk, Chief Executive Officer at Evoplay: If we speak about volumes, RTP has an influence on the revenues of both suppliers and operators, though the market sets its own rules and limits for the framework that they can operate within.
Te difference between the RTPs that vendors offer – with some casinos providing a lower pay-out percentage – can significantly impact a player’s attitude, though it doesn’t influence a specific gaming experience.
As we know, Regulatory bodies oversee the setting of limits for minimum RTP percentages, which varies considerably across different jurisdictions. Game suppliers that can be flexible enough to offer a vast range of RTPs within their products, with operators given the opportunity to choose which ones cater to their audience can really make a difference.
It guarantees fair play for gamblers, boosting their confidence in the figures provided on an operator’s website. Of course, this can vary greatly, with Germany being a prime example.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156
