• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

InnoGames' Casino Model

lemur

Well-Known Member
There has been a disturbing trend in the way that InnoGames operates its continual "special" events. In recent years, these events are based upon players getting a "chance" to win "fabulous" prizes. Players commonly acquire more chances by spending their time (to complete numerous quests) or real money (by purchasing diamonds).

A more honest approach would be for InnoGames to give prizes in direct exchange for time or diamonds. In fact, that is how InnoGames ran their events once upon a time. A few years ago it seems that the company realized it would be more profitable and exciting to act less like a merchant and more like a casino operator, thereby adding gambling addiction to their business model. The company now uses games of chance that purport to be "random" trials, despite mounting evidence that such trials (the spin of a wheel, the opening of a box, the making of a recipe, etc.) are not independent events and are, therefore, not random. Experienced players know that the game is rife with "streaks" — leading to windfall rewards for some, while others get screwed.

The larger question is why the internet has developed into a place where there are few impediments to exploitation. In an age of failed states and social breakdown, perhaps such developments should be no surprise to us. The Wild West rides again.
 

kmc11

Member
Idm the casino stuff. Friend got 6 dailies in one table on fall event, i mostly none or 1-2.
That's life. The chances are pretty evened out with the amount of currencies you get. I spent the same event currency on dozens of worlds and the end result is more or less the average plus minus one.. Not too big of a difference tbh
 

P C C

Member
The company now uses games of chance that purport to be "random" trials, despite mounting evidence that such trials (the spin of a wheel, the opening of a box, the making of a recipe, etc.) are not independent events and are, therefore, not random. Experienced players know that the game is rife with "streaks" — leading to windfall rewards for some while others get screwed.
I'd be interested in seeing the data behind this assertion. I remember from one of my early stats/probability courses that true randomness with independent outcomes produces significantly more long streaks than people expect. If someone is asked to write out a list of 100 H and T to represent heads/tails from coin flips, they will generally produce fewer/shorter streaks than you get on average from 100 independent Bernoulli outcomes. Or when presented with one sequence with streaks as expected and one with shorter streaks they will pick the one with a shorter streaks as being more correct.

That isn't to say that the pseudo-RNG used is great. I just haven't seen anything that has raised alarms for me. (Moreover, lack of independence is not the same as lack of randomness. You can have correlated random variables.)
 

P C C

Member
How is correlated different than dependent?
Correlated variables are dependent but that doesn't make them non-random. Random and independent are not the same.

Suppose you have two outcomes, 50% chance of 0 or 1 the first time and then if the first is 0 you have 75% chance of 0 and 25% chance of 1 on the second while if the first is 1 you have 25% chance of 0 and 75% chance of 1 on the second. they are not independent but you still have randomness for both outcomes, and overall you have 50/50 expected results for both the first and the second.
 

rajavno1

Active Member
There has been a disturbing trend in the way that InnoGames operates its continual "special" events. In recent years, these events are based upon players getting a "chance" to win "fabulous" prizes. Players commonly acquire more chances by spending their time (to complete numerous quests) or real money (by purchasing diamonds).

A more honest approach would be for InnoGames to give prizes in direct exchange for time or diamonds. In fact, that is how InnoGames ran their events once upon a time. A few years ago it seems that the company realized it would be more profitable and exciting to act less like a merchant and more like a casino operator, thereby adding gambling addiction to their business model. The company now uses games of chance that purport to be "random" trials, despite mounting evidence that such trials (the spin of a wheel, the opening of a box, the making of a recipe, etc.) are not independent events and are, therefore, not random. Experienced players know that the game is rife with "streaks" — leading to windfall rewards for some, while others get screwed.

The larger question is why the internet has developed into a place where there are few impediments to exploitation. In an age of failed states and social breakdown, perhaps such developments should be no surprise to us. The Wild West rides again.
This is basically what's happening globally across all games. Loot boxes. It is a controversial topic... so I will leave it at that. I don't think at an individual level it is healthy for me, so since the summer event I try not to get too aggressive about events. Though what the game developer does is what's profitable for them...can't blame them for that.

It's also interesting how most of the reaction is "I got this, so it's okay" or "you didn't get this, that's why you whine.." rather than the topic itself.
 

rajavno1

Active Member
I'd be interested in seeing the data behind this assertion. I remember from one of my early stats/probability courses that true randomness with independent outcomes produces significantly more long streaks than people expect. If someone is asked to write out a list of 100 H and T to represent heads/tails from coin flips, they will generally produce fewer/shorter streaks than you get on average from 100 independent Bernoulli outcomes. Or when presented with one sequence with streaks as expected and one with shorter streaks they will pick the one with a shorter streaks as being more correct.

That isn't to say that the pseudo-RNG used is great. I just haven't seen anything that has raised alarms for me. (Moreover, lack of independence is not the same as lack of randomness. You can have correlated random variables.)
Yes the famous number 53 in venice lottery. The same reason why we are surprised when we dont get that 1BP while we have dozens of others. Or in my personal case, regret building the Blue Galaxy haha.
 

wolfhoundtoo

Well-Known Member
they are being honest as the game setup is pretty clear that is it random rather than a direct exchange. You are confusing what you believe to be fair for honest. A common mistake but still a mistake. You also seem to be confusing the animations (the wheel for example) with having some impact on the outcome (or lack thereof) somehow proving that it isn't random. It is an animation the randomness occurs elsewhere as your prize is determined when you opt to spend the game currency not when you hit the end of the wheel.

They've gone with this model because people spend more money that way and that's what they want obviously. In most events you can achieve the grand prize without spending diamonds (I won't say all because frankly I've never bothered to review them that way but I remember various posts for most events that say otherwise and someone usually comes along and shows how it can be done).
 
I used to be annoyed by some of these events, where the big prize was not obtainable without diamonds despite doing everything possible in the event.

But now? Nah, there’s so much diamonds to be made in the game rather easily, GE/Farm (even one farm can make a big difference and requires very little effort).
 

lemur

Well-Known Member
Random and independent are not the same.
Isn't independence a prerequisite for randomness?

Moreover, lack of independence is not the same as lack of randomness.
It seems that a trial is random only if it is independent of all others. I found this reference, written by a former UCLA computer science professor:

"A random sequence is one in which each number in the sequence is independent and equally probable."
.
 
Last edited:

P C C

Member
That is a mathematical definition of a 'random sequence' rather than of randomness. I'd agree that a pseudo-RNG should try to produce as close to independent equally likely outcomes as possible (my discussion of streaks was indeed under that assumption) and should have assumed that you were only referring to that context and left off the parenthetical remark. I was taking the statistical viewpoint in which neither independence nor equally likely outcomes (nor identical distribution) is required.
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
Almost always, I'm able to get the fully upgraded main prize without spending diamonds. When such is the case, I'm not much concerned how Inno chooses to structure the way they give me free stuff, I'm just happy to get the fully upgraded free stuff, for free. However, in recent events, Inno has started cutting it too close. Giving just enough event currency to squeak by as long as the RNG performs at spec or better. If it breaks wrong for any length of time during the event, you're stuck.

There have been a few times this year that I've needed to dip into my diamond supply to get the last upgrade needed. so far, the diamonds I've used I've earned for free, so... still all good for the time being, but...

This event, I'll have to dip into diamonds, but it's mostly my fault. RL has gotten in the way such that I've not been able to complete a few DCs or collect all the incidents. That I need to without missing one is too close for comfort. It's definitely a turn off.