Sega Sued For 'Rigged' Arcade Machine (polygon.com) 102
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Polygon: Sega's Key Master arcade game is causing problems for the company once again. A new lawsuit alleges that Key Master is intentionally rigged against players. It's marketed as a game of skill, but players claim machines bar against awarding successful runs, making Key Master more of a chance-based game. Marcelo Muto filed the lawsuit on Monday in a California court. It's a proposed class action lawsuit looking for $5 million in damages to be distributed amongst wronged consumers. With Sega, Play It! Amusements (which is owned by Sega and now called Sega Amusements) and Komuse America (which co-manufactures Key Master) are named in the suit.
Key Master has been the target of multiple court cases in the past, dating back to at least 2013. This 2021 lawsuit, as well as the others, claims these machines are rigged only to allow players to win prizes at certain times -- specifically, at intervals determined by player losses. You've probably seen Key Master machines in malls or arcades, touting prizes like iPads, earbuds, and other pricey electronics. To play, you must navigate a key towards a specific keyhole by stopping the automatic movement by hitting a button. If the key goes in, you win the prize. The problem, according to the lawsuit, is that these machines are programmed to only allow players the ability to win after a certain number of player failures. If the machine is not ready to award a prize, it's allegedly programmed to overshoot the keyhole -- even if the player hit the button at the correct time -- and force the player to lose.
The problem here is that Key Master isn't marketed as a game of chance. It's portrayed as "a simple game of pure skill with a straight-forward directive," lawyers said. However, lawyers said that the deception behind the machine -- that it won't award players until certain settings are met -- is laid out in the game's manual, which was provided alongside the lawsuit as evidence. In the manual, according to screenshots, the Key Master machine "will not reward a prize until the number of player attempts reaches the threshold of attempts set by [the] operator." Lawyers for Muto said the default setting is 700, but that each machine can be programmed by individual operators. "Key Master is no longer listed on the Sega Amusements website; instead, it's been re-named Prize Locker," adds Polygon. "It's the same design, but it's 100% skill-based, Sega said on the website."
"In the lawsuit, Muto's lawyers said Prize Locker and the conversion kit (which 'allows an operator of a Key Master game to convert the game' to a skill-based one) are offered because Sega itself has realized that 'many areas of the world aren't able to benefit from this outstanding category [of arcade game] due to local or state regulations prohibiting their operation.' Lawyers alleged that this is Sega 'tacitly conced[ing] that Key Master is rigged.'"
Key Master has been the target of multiple court cases in the past, dating back to at least 2013. This 2021 lawsuit, as well as the others, claims these machines are rigged only to allow players to win prizes at certain times -- specifically, at intervals determined by player losses. You've probably seen Key Master machines in malls or arcades, touting prizes like iPads, earbuds, and other pricey electronics. To play, you must navigate a key towards a specific keyhole by stopping the automatic movement by hitting a button. If the key goes in, you win the prize. The problem, according to the lawsuit, is that these machines are programmed to only allow players the ability to win after a certain number of player failures. If the machine is not ready to award a prize, it's allegedly programmed to overshoot the keyhole -- even if the player hit the button at the correct time -- and force the player to lose.
The problem here is that Key Master isn't marketed as a game of chance. It's portrayed as "a simple game of pure skill with a straight-forward directive," lawyers said. However, lawyers said that the deception behind the machine -- that it won't award players until certain settings are met -- is laid out in the game's manual, which was provided alongside the lawsuit as evidence. In the manual, according to screenshots, the Key Master machine "will not reward a prize until the number of player attempts reaches the threshold of attempts set by [the] operator." Lawyers for Muto said the default setting is 700, but that each machine can be programmed by individual operators. "Key Master is no longer listed on the Sega Amusements website; instead, it's been re-named Prize Locker," adds Polygon. "It's the same design, but it's 100% skill-based, Sega said on the website."
"In the lawsuit, Muto's lawyers said Prize Locker and the conversion kit (which 'allows an operator of a Key Master game to convert the game' to a skill-based one) are offered because Sega itself has realized that 'many areas of the world aren't able to benefit from this outstanding category [of arcade game] due to local or state regulations prohibiting their operation.' Lawyers alleged that this is Sega 'tacitly conced[ing] that Key Master is rigged.'"
Re:This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:4, Interesting)
But, this isn't a money grab per say if the claims written on the machine are misleading about it only being about skill and not chance.
Re:This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:5, Interesting)
the crane machines control the amount of strength in the claw, and don't make the claw strong enough to hold onto a heavy prize until the machine has raked in more than the prize's cost in profits.
that's why the thing you grabbed perfectly falls out of the claw as it lifts up.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I always assumed the crane machines were all rigged, but when I worked cashier at Kmart we had one by the checkouts, and when the lady would make her stops at each machine around time refilling them, there was a guy that followed her and hit up each machine in town once they were replenished. He'd walk away with 10-15 prizes each time. He didn't win every time, and he had a whole strategy that involved going for particular prizes in a particular order and failing strategically (to get prizes closer to where
Re: (Score:2)
No. This is neither a game of skill nor chance. It's a scam. The only element of "chance" here is that you might come upon a machine where someone had lost 700 times in a row before you.
In a game of chance, you must have *a chance* to win. In this thing you most deterministically, reliably and with no element of skill or randomness, are presented with inevitable 700 losses before it switches out of scam mode and becomes either skill or luck based.
Imagine the legality of a casino, where every time you win at
Re: This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:4, Informative)
Just because it's done commonly doesn't mean it's legal!
Re:This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
As I understand it, it is always a game of skill, but the level of skill required changes. Sometimes the 'claw' grips tightly and you can win with little skill (pretty much any object can be picked up). Other times it grips lightly, and the level of skill required is higher (you must select an object that is not impeded, and grip it exactly right).
Re:This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but what you describe there is a game of chance, not one of skill. If I have to get into a boxing ring and my opponent is chosen randomly to be a three year old or the current heavyweight champion, you can't tell me that my boxing skill is going to determine the outcome.
Re:This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:4, Insightful)
That doesn't make it a game of chance. If you agree to a fight without knowing who you are fighting, that is just stupidity on your part, not fraud on the part of the fight organizer. Nowhere on these games do they claim what level of skill is required, or that the level of skill is constant. Making that assumption is stupidity on the part of the player, not fraud on the part of the game.
So the necessary level of skill is determined by what? The weather? Mercury in retrograde? A random number generator? Does the machine TELL the player the necessary level of skill before they pay their money? And more importantly in this case, does the machine make it impossible for a player of ANY skill to win, by simply refusing to comply with the player's command?
I think the situation being described here is pretty much the dictionary definition of a game of chance, especially if the latter condition is found to be true by independent technicians examining the machines. To say otherwise would imply that a slot machine is a game of skill, because there's skill required to insert your coin and pull the lever, and your odds of winning are determined by that skill as much as by chance.
Whether or not it's the LEGAL definition of a game of chance is maybe a matter for dispute, which is what the courts are for (to the extent that the courts are not a game of chance).
Re:This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:4, Funny)
So the necessary level of skill is determined by what? The weather? Mercury in retrograde? A random number generator?
SEGA Lawyer: "Our engineers used a cryptographically weak PRNG. A truly skilled player could observe the millisecond variance in control response, deduce the random seed, predict the next value and act accordingly. Ergo, it's a game of skill. The defense rests."
Re: (Score:2)
You are the stupid one - arguing the metaphor (Score:4, Informative)
Also, you're stupid for your previous comment - it is NEVER a game of skill. It is ALWAYS a scam.
In all crane/claw machines player has exactly ZERO ability to hold onto/catch a prize until the number of retries OR some other retry qualifier is met. It is literally a setting inside the machine. [vox-cdn.com]
Then, "winning the prize" is super easy. A child could do it. [youtube.com]
While also being conditioned into a gambling addiction (for starters) but that's not my problem.
SEGA's and operator's problem is that the game is presented as "winnable" - when most of the time it is not.
I.e. It's not even a boxing match.
You pay to get all dressed up as a boxer and get into a ring expecting a match - then four huge guys slam you on the floor and hold you down while the fifth one jumps up and down on you until you start bleeding through your skin.
After enough people pay up and are stomped to paste - the person entering the ring will find it empty and get a belt saying "Winner!" as they exit the ring.
It's a rigged carny scam.
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't make it a game of chance. If you agree to a fight without knowing who you are fighting, that is just stupidity on your part, not fraud on the part of the fight organizer.
One can easily and fairly argue that anyone who gambles in a casino is stupid, too, since everyone knows that the House always wins in the end.
The issue is the machine itself claiming to be a 'game of skill' when in fact there's a random element involved -- or in this case, a pre-programmed payout percentage, ensuring the owner/operator makes a profit. It's misleading. If they told you up front that, say, only 10% of the time it's possible to win, say, the iPad, then it'd be different -- but under the law
Re: (Score:3)
If you agree to a fight without knowing who you are fighting, that is just stupidity on your part
So to be clear, the claw is neither a game of chance nor a game of skill, just a game played by stupid people simply because they didn't ask the vendor if the claw grip varies between rounds?
Look I get it. You're wrong, and you said something stupid. But dude seriously you gotta stop doubling down. Your posts are getting progressively more stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
I fail to see how the intelligence of the participants have any measurable impact on whether the boxing match proposed by me is a matter of chance or one of skill, care to elaborate?
Re: (Score:2)
And do you know, in advance, whether the claw will grip strongly or lightly?
If not, then it is still a game of chance.
Re: (Score:2)
Does a baseball batter know, in advance, what kind of pitch he will be getting? Does he know, in advance, if the pitcher is in a funk or is having the best game of his life? Is baseball a game of chance or a game of skill? Whether something is a 'game of chance' or not is not determined by whether or not there are known or unknown variables, but by whether or not the OUTCOME of the game is determined randomly.
Re: (Score:2)
Does a baseball batter know, in advance, what kind of pitch he will be getting? Does he know, in advance, if the pitcher is in a funk or is having the best game of his life? Is baseball a game of chance or a game of skill? Whether something is a 'game of chance' or not is not determined by whether or not there are known or unknown variables, but by whether or not the OUTCOME of the game is determined randomly.
There's a real difference between a pitcher having a good day and switching out the pitcher with a Howitzer modified to fire baseballs at several times the speed of sound. Perhaps a better analogy would be that sometimes the pitcher throws normally and sometimes the pitcher throws the ball to a random baseman and the umpire redefines the strike zone to include the area in front of the baseman's glove. I think it's pretty clear that you've gone beyond a game of skill when being able to win would require the
Re: (Score:2)
Does a baseball batter know, in advance, what kind of pitch he will be getting?
Yes. In the time after the ball leaves the pitchers hand and before it arrives at the batter there is a short window where the batter can estimate the kind of pitch he's getting.
Please tell, where is this opportunity in the case of a claw game?
Re: (Score:2)
As I understand it, it is always a game of skill, but the level of skill required changes.
If the level of skill required is usually "infinite" then you might be right. I would say that if you can divide the skill level of any user, either the most skilled or least skilled by the skill level required to win and the answer comes back either zero or undefined on the majority of plays, then it's not a skill based game. The fact is, unless there's some sort of loop or something on the item that you're trying to pick up that gets caught on one of the claws, claw machines don't grip tightly enough most
Re: (Score:2)
As I understand it, it is always a game of skill, but the level of skill required changes.
The machine owner literally sets a win rate in the machine settings.
Re: (Score:2)
"Everyone knows"
Everyone DOESN'T know. Do you think every single 11 year old kid at an arcade who see an XBox as a prize 100% knows its a scam?
It's been pretty well litigated (Score:1)
Re:It's been pretty well litigated (Score:4, Informative)
you can mess with the parameters of a game as long as there is some element of skill. This stuff was worked out in the 70s over pinball.
That is exactly wrong. The state of New York claimed pinball was a game of chance and thus illegal. When the suit was brought, a pinball "wizard" came in and showed the court how he could plunge the ball to whichever rollover he chose. Pinball is quite demonstrably NOT a game of chance according to the legal/gambling definitions.
And yes, I am a former apprentice-level wizard, and got my initials into GC more than once.
Modern pins reflex the score required to win a free game, based on the recent win history, but that happens before a game starts, is posted prominently, and does not change during a game.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that pinball machines or
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the very first pins were gambling devices, with cash payouts. Once flippers came along, they were skill games (unless the local bartender chose to pay out for games won).
There was a short time period when the credit wheel had to be covered up on the theory that you could win games but if you knew how many, that would be gambling.
That's all beside the point: that NewYork claimed there was no skill involved, and the court case proved otherwise.
Re:This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:5, Insightful)
If it's marketed as a game of skill then it's fraud and fraud is illegal.
If they market it as a game of skill and chance then no fraud is occurring.
Being against fraud ought to be kind of obvious. I don't know why you aren't, but it's tiresome.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's marketed as a game of skull and chance, I hope they have all the requisite gambling licenses. Most states don't look kindly on reward-issuing games of chance being run by randos.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a real consideration but a slightly separate issue, though obviously related.
What I'm discussing is whether it's fraud.
What you're discussing is whether it's a violation of licensing requirements.
They are both valid considerations, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I doubt that they would still be allowed to place these machines in shopping malls and highway rest stops all over the country if they were rebadged as games of chance.
At that point, it's basically a fancy slot machine and would be regulated under the state gambling laws.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, I guess... perhaps these things will get moved into casinos where they apparently belong.
Re:This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:5, Informative)
There's no such thing as a "game of skill and chance." "Game of skill" has a legal meaning [uslegal.com] that requires that the outcome be determined mainly by skill, not chance, so that there's a qualitative threshold distinguishing a game of skill from a game of chance.
Slot machines don't become unregulated games of skill merely because you add a token skill element to the play. Otherwise everyone would be doing that.
Re: (Score:2)
There's no such thing as a "game of skill and chance."
Why not? Have you ever tried to sell something as such? Has anyone?
"Game of skill" has a legal meaning
Slot machines don't become unregulated games of skill merely because you add a token skill element to the play. Otherwise everyone would be doing that.
So they'd have to follow the rules for a game of chance, perhaps, but they could still advertise the skill element.
Further, the skill element is NOT token, because it is required to win.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? You've examined the gaming laws of each state to determine how games of chance can be marketed and come to that conclusion as a result of the review?
Perhaps you need to look up what "token" means, because it's not mutually exclusive with "required." For example, "done for the sake of appearances or as a symbolic ge
Re: (Score:2)
There's no such thing as a "game of skill and chance."
Why not? Have you ever tried to sell something as such? Has anyone?
"Game of skill" has a legal meaning
Slot machines don't become unregulated games of skill merely because you add a token skill element to the play. Otherwise everyone would be doing that.
You do realize you're attempting to correct an actual lawyer, right? The name of the user might've been a clue, but check their post history and bio for confirmation.
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree that Drinkypoo is fighting a losing battle there, you do realise that in most court cases theres a lawyer who is right in their opinions and arguments and a lawyer who is wrong in their opinions and arguments, right?
Just because a lawyer says something doesn't mean they are *right* because a Judge could still rule against their understanding. Another lawyer may also come up with an argument which invalidates existing rulings on the matter and throws the law into doubt.
Re: (Score:2)
you do realise that in most court cases theres a lawyer who is right in their opinions and arguments and a lawyer who is wrong in their opinions and arguments, right?
Sure, but what does court have to do with anything? In court, lawyers have no choice but to play the hand they’re dealt. Just because a lawyer defends someone to the best of their capability, you shouldn’t take that as an indication of their opinion, a belief that they think the guy is innocent, nor should you understand a loss to mean that they are a bad lawyer, nor even that their arguments are wrong (even correct arguments can lose for various reasons).
In contrast, the things a lawyer says in
Re: (Score:2)
Lawyers are just people and they're wrong frequently. But that's not even where I was coming from. Law is constantly changing and applied extremely unevenly. Just because it says something and you think the meaning is clear, that doesn't mean that's how a case will come out in court. The simple fact that how much you spend on a lawyer substantially affects outcomes should drive that point home.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is a game a skill, but the level of skill required varies. Since they make no claim that the level of skill is always the same, there is no fraud.
Re: (Score:2)
If the level of skill required is sometimes humanly possible and sometimes not, that's chance.
Re: (Score:2)
If the level of skill required varies *by chance*, it becomes a game of chance.
If one person plays a game of skill repeatedly while maintaining consistent performance, the outcomes should be similar every time. E.g. a race car driver will generally maintain similar lap times over a great many laps, a golfer will have a similar score over a great many games on the same course, etc.
Re: (Score:1)
A game of skill does not mean that there are no variables. You cherry-picked two examples that have minimal variables. Is baseball a game of skill or a game of chance? Performance in baseball is hardly consistent, but I have never heard of anyone refer to it as a game of chance.
Re: (Score:2)
A game of skill does not mean that there are no variables. You cherry-picked two examples that have minimal variables. Is baseball a game of skill or a game of chance? Performance in baseball is hardly consistent, but I have never heard of anyone refer to it as a game of chance.
Baseball doesn't have any more random variables than golf. The variables are pretty much the same for both. Sudden change in wind speed/direction is the only thing that's much more than once-in-a-lifetime.
Re: This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:2)
A major league baseball team will beat a Slashdot baseball team 100% of the time. Full stop, end of, no wiggle room. Hitters go on cold streaks, balls take flukey bounces, but that's barely a single percentage point. At the major league level, that percentage point is enough to sometimes make a difference, because with professional athletes it becomes a game of inches, but the sport of baseball is entirely skill based, no matter what the Bad News Bears told you.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how that follows. There's nothing to suggest that the level of skill would vary.
I've seen these machines before, I'm not sure if it was literally a "Key Master" machine, but it was the same concept. It's very much like a claw machine but with one crucial difference: rather than drop a claw down, it pushes a "key" forward from the front of the machine toward the back. Like those claw machines, you position the "key" (it's a plastic bumper shaped like a key on the end of a rod that telescopes) by
Re: This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:2)
Some people aren't against fraud because they believe if your stupid enough to get duped, then that's your fault.
This isn't even to tough on politics fraud and duping people. Imagine that, a whole career path dedicated to this kind of thinking...
Now I hate to be the ass that makes this political but the point is there is a huge precedent for people getting duped and it totally being fair game.
Maybe it's not a fair comparison to compare the complexity of a republic to the singular liability of a company but
That almost sounds like English. (Score:2)
For a supposed US emigre living in China you sound awfully lot like a bot using a dictionary.
Bu what really betrays you is your middle-of-the-road lack of emotional engagement... never getting into proper conflicts... always on the agreeing side... full of compliments and fishing for those "smiles and handshakes"... while at the same time pushing for a very specific narrative.
Like what someone marketing a product might do. Except you're selling a world-view.
I.e. Propaganda.
Toodles!
Re: (Score:2)
There is casual writing and there is proper editing. In the latter you do more reviews of grammar and spelling. The point is to understand someone in casual writing.
Emotional engagement in politics is the quick path to a deeply rooted psychosis. You are literally trying to be emotionally engaged with sociopaths... same goes for most lawyers.
I have a brother. He believes if you want peace, prepare for war. For me, peace at all costs -- this is called being self-sacrificial. Since I wish to always seek a peac
Re: (Score:2)
If it's marketed as a game of skill then it's fraud and fraud is illegal.
If they market it as a game of skill and chance then no fraud is occurring.
Being against fraud ought to be kind of obvious. I don't know why you aren't, but it's tiresome.
Of course, if they claim it is a game of chance fewer people will play it.
Re: (Score:2)
If they market it as a game of skill and chance then no fraud is occurring.
Doesn't sound like it is, though. FTA:
these machines are programmed to only allow players the ability to win after a certain number of player failures. If the machine is not ready to award a prize, it's allegedly programmed to overshoot the keyhole -- even if the player hit the button at the correct time -- and force the player to lose
That's neither chance nor skill - there is no possibility of winning at those times. If you're playing poker and for four out of five hands, I don't actually give you playing cards, but, like... the joker or the card with the list of rules on it so that you can't make an actual poker hand, that's neither a game of skill nor chance. I'm just straight taking your money and providing you with no possibility of winning it back.
Now, if there was a random overshoot always ap
Re: (Score:2)
Then, every crane machine you've ever seen in your life is committing fraud, and its time to make them stop.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if they explicitly claim to be a game of skill.
Re: (Score:2)
They all claim to be a game of skill. Otherwise they would be games of chance, which in most jurisdictions are banned or only available in casinos.
Re: (Score:2)
Right. But that doesn't change the fact that if they're *explicitly* lying about it, then it's fraud. (Advertising laws are usually written to ensure *implicit* lies are acceptable)
If some get away with it, that's no reason to let others do so as well. Instead we should be cracking down on the ones getting away with it.
Re: This is a straight up money grab by the lawyer (Score:3)
Do those crane games market themselves as games of chance or skill? If they market as skill and include this win-prevention aspect, include them in the lawsuit.
Re: (Score:2)
If they operate as a game of chance in pretty much any state of the US, it is treated as gambling and regulated the same.
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't about the Sega Game being a Game of Chance that looks like a it is a game of skill.
It is sold as a Game of Skill that is actually a game of chance.
The Claw Machine, looks like it is a game of Skill, having mechanical components and interacts with a real world environment, but it rarely says it is a game of skill, and still a rigged Claw Machine, for someone with a lot of skill may be able to see particular scenarios such as getting the light reward, or finding an object that may fall with the claw
Re: (Score:3)
It's not pure random.
If the threshold is 700, then the first 700 players have 0% chance of winning
After the 700 guaranteed losers, it becomes a game of pure skill.
It's not even random for the first 700 people. They are simply guaranteed to lose. If you see someone win, you can theoretically watch the machine and wait for 700 people to guarantee fail, then you go in and have your game of skill.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Every crane machine you've ever seen in your life does this. You can find videos on YouTube explaining how and why. They're made by small companies whereas Sega has a large parent company. This is why everyone hates lawyers. This is purely parasitic.
The polygon article has a link to this Mark Rober video [youtube.com] that's a pretty good overview of the issue. As others here point out, the issue is how this machine is marketed.
^ Why are you modding this "Flamebait"? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is why everyone hates lawyers. This is purely parasitic.
Because they use the law to go after predatory dishonest practices that screw people? Yeah fuck them I guess? What next, they argue I shouldn't get life in prison for being innocent in a murder trial?
Re: (Score:2)
Every crane machine you've ever seen in your life does this. You can find videos on YouTube explaining how and why. They're made by small companies whereas Sega has a large parent company. This is why everyone hates lawyers. This is purely parasitic.
Apparently needs to be quoted against troll censorship, but why? Practically a platitude that the lawyers go where the money is. Just like the bank robbers.
Re: (Score:1)
Las Vegas (Score:2)
Vegas would be very proud of this machine.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Vegas would be very proud of this machine.
Actually, Nevada would probably put them in prison. The gaming laws are very strict, and heavily enforced, where they specify that each play of a gaming machine must be independent, rather than keeping track of the running win/loss ratio and shifting the odds on the plays.
Nevada is very tough on gaming cheats, not just on the player side, but also on the casino/equipment side of the games.
Gambling houses already have an adequate edge in the odds. The regulators ex
Skill and Chance (Score:4, Insightful)
Games of chance are defined as gambling, pretty much, everywhere in the US. If you are operating a game of chance you need a license to run a gambling operation. Sega marketing the game as purely skill-based is to get around these laws.
Sega also makes pure gambling machines. They know full well what they are doing, and what the laws are.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is that games are marketed as skill when they're really chance games.
Think skill cranes, key master, slider games, etc. These are chance games. The operator of the machine sets the win percentage in the computer and the computer obeys it.
The skill cranes have the crane power controlled by the computer - that's why it always grabs the item and then the item always seems to fall midway returning to the drop. The amount of power applied to the grabber arm is controlled by the win percentage - the c
Skill and Chance (Score:2)
I knew a guy that figured out one of the ticket games at Dave and Buster's. He could visit for 20 minutes and clear out the shared jackpot, he timed his visits based on the jackpot recharge rate. 1 play = 1 jackpot.
He was using the tickets to get the highest end items which he then sold. Making $400 a week at one point (1997 or so) for about an hour of effort including travel time. A little hobby.
Management figured this out after a few months and had him banned/blocked at the door. He started slipping
Re: (Score:2)
Management figured this out after a few months and had him banned/blocked at the door. He started slipping in with groups (invading a group space for 20 seconds isn't hard).
This is something that pisses me off. If they can't prove that you are cheating they shouldn't be allowed to ban you from the establishment. If you come up with a system that beats their system using only your natural talents then that should be the casinos problem. They shouldn't be allowed to ban you just because you are beating them and they can't prove you are cheating.
Re: (Score:2)
It became a meta-game... He switched up the days he would visit, losing a bit off the top as the timing was no longer perfect. And slinking it with groups of 4-6 is easy.
It was still annoying. Fix the game, not the player.
Re: (Score:2)
You should be pissed off - and it does not even make any sense for management to interfere with him. The ticket jackpot is the jackpot - if this guy didn't win those tickets someone else will. So the same amount of tickets get won regardless.
On to claiming the prize - the prize value in tickets is always calculated so that the the prize, divided by the marginal cost per ticket used to claim it, is set to make a nice markup for the house. They make money on you claiming the prize. This too should be obvi
No I did NOT! (Score:2)
We don't even have malls or arcades around here, you insensitive clod!
In all seriousness, I really did have to search "SEGA Key Master" on YouTube to even know what we're talking about.
Sega 'tacitly concede that Key Master is rigged (Score:2)
Interesting... (Score:4, Interesting)
Mark Rober had a similar issue with a machine in an arcade. He had built a rig to beat the machine only to realize that the game was advertised as a game of skill when in fact, it was a game of luck. Go on his YouTube channel and have a look at the video. It's an interesting one.
Have a great day.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you. Great find. I was starting on this same project and glad to know the outcome, saves a lot of time.
Yup. This is exactly why we have regulations. Hopefully there are some enforcers that can actually come down on these manufacturers/operators.
Are you kidding? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who didn't think these types of machines were rigged in some way is a fucking fool. There is no way you could be profitable with such machines if they were purely skill, cause some highly skilled person would just come by once a week and clear out all the high value prizes inside the machine every time it was "restocked" Same reason casino games of skill are generally against other patrons rather than the house. The house doesn't give a fuck if you clean out another patron, and they probably still stand to make some money if that patron desperate to get their money back comes to the casinos loan shark office to take out a loan to keep going.
They don't even need that since they take a rake of each pot in poker, for example.
There's honest odds and then there's cheating. (Score:5, Interesting)
The games against the house are all rigged. Slots that only pay out x% of whatever money taken in, card games that are highly rigged in the house's favor, etc.
It's legal for the odds to be in favor of the house. It's illegal for the odds to vary from play to play in order to insure the house always receives the set payout ratio, rather than having each play be independent and at the published odds. The player must have the published chance, on every single play (even the ones soon after a big payout), to win big.
Nevada's gaming laws on this issue are draconian, as is inspection, tip investigation, prosecution, and sentencing. It's one thing to be unlikely to win - that's part of the deal. It's another to be unable to win because the machines are cheating - even if it does insulate the house from losing money on a chance run of payoffs. If payout history odds-twiddling happens, even at a few places, and the knowledge becomes general, it jeopardizes the draw. Player patronage is expected to drop, along with revenue for the honest houses and the state.
"Lady luck has no memory." Gaming machines are required to emulate this, and it IS enforced - BIG time.
Game of chance (Score:2)
Not really. I'm not intimately familiar with each states' gambling laws. But if the probability of winning changes from play to play, it's not really a game of chance. Roulette, even with its slight bias in favor of the house is a game of chance. Since each spin stands on its own.
Pretty sure this is not the only machine like this (Score:2)
I used to work in the arcade game industry: (Score:2)
Machines like this one are similar to skill cranes [wikipedia.org] and other similar 'merchandising' machines.
They've always been teetering right on the edge of what is considered a 'skill game' and what is considered a 'game of chance' or perhaps more aptly described, a 'gambling machine', because literally 'you pay your money, you take your chances'.
Machines like this, like video card game machines and slot machines you'd find in a casino, have to be desig
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a little disappointed in Sega. Back in the day they used to be a premiere company when it came to arcade games
Same thing happened to Bally/Williams when the exited the pinball business.
It really is shameful.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't offhand know the history of Williams Electronics, whether they were like Bally or not.
Not Chance? (Score:2)
Does nobody know the definition of chance? Just because the game is rigged, and the house always wins, does not make it a game of chance. A game of chance makes it statistically impossible for all players to win given enough time. Slot machines do not automatically give the 10 thousandths pull a jackpot, that would be illegal, they give every pull a 1 in 10 thousandths chance to win.
This game is programed to win until it has made the profit margin the game is looking for and then it allows the player to win
Re: (Score:2)
Hidden "gambling" everywhere (Score:2)
Back in the day, I learned that "crane" machines were actually rigged, and they would only have enough pressure to pick up prizes every n-th attempt. Even if you had the best craning skills, it would gently stroke the toy, will not pick it up. I was a bit sad, but I avoided those machines.
Now many other things, including video games have embraced gambling to increase their profits even more. When mobile games were first introduced they were either $1, or ad supported. That meant, you need to sell a billion
Re: (Score:2)
Electronic and computer controls ruined everything - negating the skill requirement. N
Rigged just like stacker (Score:1)