U.S. patent application number 13/180844 was filed with the patent office on 2011-12-08 for methods and systems for intelligent dispute resolution within next generation casino games.
Invention is credited to Thierry Brunet De Courssou, Cameron Anthony FILIPOUR, Alexander Popovich, Adam Singer.
Application Number | 20110300949 13/180844 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 41464808 |
Filed Date | 2011-12-08 |
United States Patent
Application |
20110300949 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
FILIPOUR; Cameron Anthony ;
et al. |
December 8, 2011 |
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR INTELLIGENT DISPUTE RESOLUTION WITHIN NEXT
GENERATION CASINO GAMES
Abstract
A dispute resolution model for next generation action/skill
casino games comprising a variety of friendly onscreen methods to
demonstrate the fairness of a disputed game or simply to allow the
player to eliminate confusion created by fast action wagering. Such
methods may include running on-demand instant replays of segments
of wagered games to allow both players and operators to verify
those games' fairness and providing the player with historical
information regarding the operation of the casino game and/or the
gaming machine. The historical information includes historical win
information to demonstrate the distribution of previous wins; Skill
vs. luck historical information to demonstrate the exact role both
luck and skill played in a player's game outcome; and peer
comparison historical information to enable the player to compare
the recent payback history of a given game to identical games on
the casino floor, and to show the player which machines have been
the luckiest over a given period of time.
Inventors: |
FILIPOUR; Cameron Anthony;
(Las Vegas, NV) ; De Courssou; Thierry Brunet;
(Missilac, FR) ; Popovich; Alexander; (Henderson,
NV) ; Singer; Adam; (Las Vegas, NV) |
Family ID: |
41464808 |
Appl. No.: |
13/180844 |
Filed: |
July 12, 2011 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
12497806 |
Jul 6, 2009 |
|
|
|
13180844 |
|
|
|
|
61078419 |
Jul 6, 2008 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
463/43 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G07F 17/3227 20130101;
G07F 17/3241 20130101; G07F 17/3232 20130101; G07F 17/3237
20130101; G07F 17/3255 20130101; G07F 17/3295 20130101; G07F
17/3244 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
463/43 |
International
Class: |
A63F 9/24 20060101
A63F009/24 |
Claims
1-47. (canceled)
48. A method, comprising: enabling a regulated gaming machine to
interact with a player; receiving, by the regulated gaming machine
and via a first player interaction with the regulated gaming
machine, an indication that the player wishes to view historical
information for at least one of the regulated gaming machine and a
regulated game available for game play on the regulated gaming
machine, and responsive to the first player interaction and the
received indication, providing the historical information to the
player, the historical information including payout information
specific to at least one of the regulated gaming machine with which
the player is interacting and the regulated game.
49. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
includes at least one of an indication of an amount of luck
experienced by the player during game play of the regulated game
and an amount of skill exhibited by the player during game play of
the regulated game.
50. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
providing step is carried out with the historical information
detailing an historical operation of at least one of: the regulated
game available for game play on the regulated gaming machine, and a
plurality of regulated games having been played on the regulated
gaming machine.
51. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
includes how frequently wins have been achieved on the regulated
gaming machine.
52. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
includes how frequently wins have been achieved on the regulated
game.
53. The method of claim 52, wherein the historical information
includes how frequently wins have been achieved in the regulated
game on the regulated gaming machine.
54. The method of claim 52, wherein the historical information
includes how frequently wins have been achieved in the regulated
game across all regulated gaming machine having the regulated game
available thereon.
55. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
providing step is carried out with the historical information
providing a payback frequency of the regulated gaining machine as
compared to other regulated gaming machines playing the regulated
game.
56. The method of claim 55, wherein the playback and/or historical
information providing step is carried out such that the playback
and historical information are provided to the player upon
request.
57. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
providing step is carried out with the historical information
providing an indication of a role that at least one of both luck
and player skill played in determining an outcome of the regulated
game.
58. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
includes historical win information that provides a frequency with
which different symbol combinations, hands or events have
historically occurred on at least one of the regulated game and the
regulated gaming machine.
59. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
includes historical win information that provides a number of games
that have elapsed since a selected symbol combination, hand or
event has occurred.
60. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
includes peer comparison information that provides an indication of
how lucky the regulated gaming machine has been, the indication of
how lucky the regulated gaming machine has been being related to an
actual Return-To-Player (RTP) of at least the regulated game on at
least the regulated gaming machine.
61. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
includes how many games have been played since at least one of the
regulated game and the regulated gaming machine has paid a
jackpot.
62. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information
includes luck and skill information that provides the player with
an indication of a manner in which an outcome of the regulated game
was influenced by at least one of randomness and a measured skill
of the player.
63. The method of claim 48, wherein the historical information is
provided compared to other regulated gaming machines that also
offer the regulated game.
64. A regulated gaming machine, comprising: a regulated game
configured to run on the regulated gaming machine; at least one
display; a user interface configured to enable a player to interact
with the regulated gaming machine and to request historical
information, the requested historical information being displayed
on the at least one display and including payout information
specific to at least one of the regulated gaming machine with which
the player is interacting and the regulated game.
65. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information is displayed compared to other regulated
gaming machines that also offer the regulated game.
66. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes at least one of an indication of an
amount of luck experienced by the player during game play of the
regulated game and an amount of skill exhibited by the player
during game play of the regulated game.
67. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information details an historical operation of at least
one of: the regulated game available for game play on the regulated
gaming machine, and a plurality of regulated games having been
played on the regulated gaming machine.
68. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes how frequently wins have been
achieved on the regulated gaining machine.
69. The regulated gaining machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes how frequently wins have been
achieved on the regulated game.
70. The regulated gaming machine of claim 69, wherein the
historical information includes how frequently wins have been
achieved in the regulated game on the regulated gaming machine.
71. The regulated gaming machine of claim 69, wherein the
historical information includes how frequently wins have been
achieved in the regulated game across all regulated gaming machine
having the regulated game available thereon.
72. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes a payback frequency of the
regulated gaming machine as compared to other regulated gaming
machines playing the regulated game.
73. The regulated gaming machine of claim 72, wherein the playback
and/or historical information are configured to be provided to the
player upon request.
74. The regulated gaining machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes an indication of a role that at
least one of both luck and player skill played in determining an
outcome of the regulated game.
75. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes historical win information that
provides a frequency with which different symbol combinations,
hands or events have historically occurred on at least one of the
regulated game and the regulated gaming machine.
76. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes historical win information that
provides a number of games that have elapsed since a selected
symbol combination, hand or event has occurred.
77. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes peer comparison information that
provides an indication of how lucky the regulated gaming machine
has been, the indication of how lucky the regulated gaming machine
has been being related to an actual Return-To-Player (RTP) of at
least the regulated game on at least the regulated gaming
machine.
78. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes how many games have been played
since at least one of the regulated game and the regulated gaming
machine has paid a jackpot.
79. The regulated gaming machine of claim 64, wherein the
historical information includes luck and skill information that
provides the player with an indication of a manner in which an
outcome of the regulated game was influenced by at least one of
randomness and a measured skill of the player.
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS
[0001] This application is a continuation of application Ser. No.
12/497,806, filed Jul. 6, 2009, which application is hereby
incorporated herein by reference in its entirety and from which
application priority is hereby claimed under 35 U.S.C.
.sctn.120.
[0002] Embodiments of the present inventions relate generally to
the field of regulated electronic games of chance.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Summary of the Invention
[0003] The embodiments of the methods and systems for intelligent
dispute resolution within next generation casino games disclosed
herein facilitate the evolution of casino gaming by: 1) improving
both the speed and quality of dispute resolution for common legacy
game patron disputes; 2) anticipating new varieties of patron
disputes that will arise when fully interactive, skill-based games
grow prevalent on the casino floor; and 3) devising a multi-tiered
method to resolve the anticipated disputes efficiently.
[0004] As casino games begin to measure a more complete player
skill set that includes manual dexterity or other player skill
sets, casino game operators will be forced to address a new variety
of player disputes that focus on more complex player interactions.
The most high profile electronic casino game disputes of the past
have centered on non-payment of jackpots due to malfunction. Other,
less publicized disputes occur when slot machine players and video
poker players dispute the frequency of winning symbols or winning
card combinations appearing within their games (i.e. the player
questions a game's randomness or payback frequency). The next
generation dispute resolution methods disclosed herein will better
address these existing classes of game disputes. In addition, the
disclosed Patron Dispute Resolution Model (referred to hereafter by
the acronym PDRM) according to embodiments of the present
inventions will address a more complicated brand of disputes that
is likely to arise when players in the future dispute how onscreen
game assets behave or respond to player input. Existing dispute
resolution models (which involve referring a majority of dispute
claims to local gaming control boards and handling a minority of
dispute claims by generating slow in-house reports and
investigations) will not likely be able to handle the complexity or
volume of this new class of future dispute in a satisfactory
manner.
[0005] A significant component of the disclosed PDRM, according to
embodiments of the present inventions, is the ability for the
patron or game operator to generate on-demand reports on the actual
gaming machine on which the patron played and that is the subject
of his or her complaint or concern. Such on-demand reports may
answer the patron's questions and ultimately resolve his or her
concerns. In addition, the reporting paradigm used to demonstrate
that games are operating fairly must be reinvented. In the past,
local gaming authorities have addressed payout frequency disputes
by two varieties of simple reports.
[0006] The first such conventional report type displays a brief
game history for a disputed game. Regulations vary from
jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but many local gaming commissions
require that a game store basic regulatory accounting information
for its last 10 wagered games. Typically stored information
includes the time of the player's bet, the player's bet size, the
player's balance before the wager, the player's balance after the
wager, whether there was a bonus achieved, whether there was a
jackpot achieved, and the size of the player's win. Many machines
also allow for graphical game recall of the few games stored in
memory. In practice, these reports and graphical recalls are not
regularly used to resolve patron disputes because they do not
contain much data and because it is not particularly convenient for
busy slot managers or technicians to run them. When the reports are
used, it is often to discourage players from making false claims
about a machine owing them a win.
[0007] The second conventional report type used to resolve patron
disputes ensures that each game is returning a fair percentage of
funds to the player (a concept referred to hereafter as "Return to
Player" or RTP) statistically over time. If, for example, a game
was legally required to return no less than 85% of funds input to
players, and a patron launched a dispute of the fairness of that
game, a report would be generated to establish the actual RTP of
the disputed game. If the RTP was determined to be greater than or
equal to 85%, then the game would be considered fair and the
dispute would be dismissed. If, however, the RTP was determined to
be less than 85%, then the game would be considered unfair and the
owner of the dispute would be entitled to some monetary
compensation (and, in some cases, the game operator would face
fines or sanctions).
[0008] While fair, the existing model and report types do not
resolve disputes in a manner that is especially clear or
satisfactory to the player. While the vast majority of payout
frequency disputes end up being dismissed, it would be advantageous
to better explain the reasons for these dismissals to players and
to educate players why a particular dispute lacked merit. The
current system of dismissing the player's concerns by citing an RTP
report that the player may not understand can be improved upon.
[0009] Players, unlike casino operators, do not typically think
about a casino game in terms of its mathematical expectation (i.e.
RTP); players are more likely to think about a game in terms of how
frequently it outputs money. A video poker player who complains to
a game operator that a particular machine has not dealt him any
four-of-a-kind hands in two days is far more likely to be satisfied
by a report showing how many four-of-a-kinds the machine has dealt
out in the past day or week than he or she would be by a report
showing that the machine's RTP for the current week is 88.7%. The
legacy game history reports cannot satisfy this need because they
do not store all of the useful data, are seldom used, and do not
store data over a long enough timeframe.
[0010] The described fundamental disconnect in the way that players
and operators think and talk about games makes legacy payout
frequency dispute resolution models sub-optimal. The reports these
models output are intended to ease player concerns but are couched
in language understood mainly by the operator. While flawed, these
models have not been improved for a variety of reasons, including:
1) the inefficiency of funneling a large percentage of disputes
through a local gaming commission causes a lot of patrons to drop
their claims rather than complete a lengthy claim submission
process; 2) allowing a local gaming commission to, handle most
patron disputes reduces the casino operator's workload; 3) adding
steps to the current process to better educate the player would
increase the operator's workload; and 4) a satisfactory replacement
model has not, to date, been available.
[0011] As gaming models become increasingly complicated and
disputes become more common, the language used in dispute
resolution reports will need to become clearer to the player or
casino operators will run the risk of eroding the confidence of
their player base. The embodiments of the PDRM disclosed herein
will accomplish this aim by allowing operators to provide players
with one or more of the following onscreen reports quickly and
efficiently: 1) instant replays which may be captured for all
games--not just the last ten--to demonstrate visually that past
games involved no abnormal events, that the game responded to
player input in a timely manner, that'winning symbols were or were
not achieved, etc.; 2) Historical Win reports to demonstrate that a
gaming machine is and has been awarding wins to players; 3) Skill
vs. Luck reports to demonstrate to players how much of their result
in a given game was dictated by luck and how much was dictated by
their relative skill level; and 4) Peer Comparison reports to
demonstrate how a gaming machine's payouts compare to the payouts
of similar games on the casino floor. Because these reports may be
generated by the patron with either no or minimal operator
intervention, the new features offered within this PDRM will not
come at the expense of adding to the operator's workload in a
significant manner.
[0012] Accordingly, an embodiment of the present inventions is a
method that includes steps of providing a regulated gaming machine;
providing a regulated game that is configured to run on the
regulated gaming machine; enabling a player to play the regulated
game on the provided regulated gaming machine; receiving, via a
first player interaction, with the regulated gaming machine, an
indication that the player wishes to initiate a dispute in the
regulated game, and responsive to the received indication of the
initiated dispute, enabling the player to view a playback of at
least a portion of the played regulated game, and selectively
generating and providing the player with historical information
regarding an operation of the regulated game and/or the regulated
gaming machine.
[0013] According to further embodiments, the method may also
include a step of receiving, via a second player interaction, an
indication that the player's dispute remains unresolved. Responsive
to the received second player indication, the method further may
include a step of summoning live help to attempt to resolve the
player's dispute. The playback and the historical information may
be provided on display(s) of the regulated gaming machine. The
historical information providing step may be carried out such that
the historical information includes an indication of an amount of
luck experienced by the player during game play of the regulated
game and/or an amount (or degree) of skill exhibited by the player
during game play of the regulated game. The playback providing step
may include a step of providing a visual indication of player input
as the provided playback unfolds. The visual indication of player
input may include joystick (or other controller/player input)
movement and buttons pressed. The playback providing step may
include a step of providing player controls configured to enable
the player to pause, step, fast forward and/or rewind the playback.
The playback providing step may be carried out by storing key
events during game play and thereafter reconstructing game play
using the stored key events. Alternatively, the playback providing
step may be carried out by recording game play and playing back the
recorded game play on demand. The playback providing step may
include enabling the player to tag relevant moments during the
playback.
[0014] The historical information providing step may be carried out
with the historical information including information regarding an
historical operation of the regulated game played on the regulated
gaming machine, and/or a plurality of regulated games having been
played on the regulated gaming machine. The historical information
providing step may be carried out with the historical information
providing how frequently wins have been achieved on the regulated
gaming machine. The historical information providing step may be
carried out with the historical information providing a payback
frequency of the regulated gaming machine as compared to other
regulated gaming machines playing the (e.g., same) regulated game.
The playback and/or historical information providing step may be
carried out such that the playback and historical information are
provided to the player upon request (e.g., by the player or casino
attendant). The historical information providing step may be
carried out with the historical information providing an indication
of the role that both luck and skill played in determining the
outcome of the regulated game. The method may further include a
step of recording and storing every game played over a selectable
time interval. The method may also include a step of providing the
player who has caused a dispute to be initiated the ability to
cause the playback to be stored for later access and retrieval.
[0015] The method may also include a step of displaying a wizard on
the regulated gaming machine, the wizard enabling the player to
identify a nature of the initiated dispute and to select
appropriate historical information to generate and provide to the
player, in a step-by-step format. The historical information
providing step may be carried out with the historical information
including historical win information that provides a frequency with
which different symbol combinations, hands or events (for example)
have historically occurred on the regulated game and/or the
regulated gaming machine.
[0016] The historical information providing step may be carried out
with the historical information including historical win
information that provides a number of games that have elapsed since
a selected symbol combination, hand or event (for example) has
occurred. The historical information providing step may be carried
out with the historical information including peer comparison
information that provides an indication of how lucky the regulated
gaming machine has been, the indication of how lucky the regulated
gaming machine has been being related to an actual Return-To-Player
(RTP) of the regulated game (and/or other regulated games) on the
regulated gaming machine (or other regulated gaming machines).
[0017] The historical information providing step may also be
carried out with the historical information displaying how many
games have been played since at least one of the regulated game and
the regulated gaming machine has paid a jackpot (or some other
predetermined payout or prize). The historical information
providing step may be carried out with the historical information
including luck and skill information that provides the player with
an indication of a manner in which the outcome of the regulated
game was influenced by randomness and by a measured skill of the
player.
[0018] Another embodiment of the present inventions is a regulated
gaming machine. Such a regulated gaming machine may include (or
have access to) a regulated game configured to run on the regulated
gaming machine; one or more displays; a button configured to enable
the player to initiate a dispute. The regulated gaming machine is
configured to, responsive to the player pressing the button
(mechanical, electro-mechanical or displayed on a touch screen, for
example), or otherwise initiating a dispute, enabling the player to
view a playback of at least a portion of the played regulated game,
and selectively generating and providing the player with historical
information regarding an operation of the regulated game and/or the
regulated gaming machine.
[0019] The regulated gaming machine may be further configured to
issue, upon receipt of input from the player, an indication that
the player's dispute remains unresolved. The regulated gaming
machine may further include a button (or other user interaction
functionality) configured to summon live help to attempt to resolve
the player's dispute.
[0020] The regulated gaming machine may be configured such that the
historical information displayed on the display(s) includes an
indication of an amount of luck (randomness) experienced by the
player during game play of the regulated game and/or an amount of
skill exhibited by the player during game play of the regulated
game. The regulated gaming machine may be configured such that the
playback displayed on the display(s) provides a visual indication
of player input as the provided playback unfolds. The visual
indication of player input may include, for example, joystick
movement, buttons pressed or other interaction with the regulated
game's user interface. The playback providing step may include a
step of providing player controls configured to enable the player
to pause, step, fast forward and/or rewind the playback. The
playback may be generated by storing key events during game play
and thereafter reconstructing game play using the stored key
events. The regulated gaming machine may also be configured such
that the playback is generated by recording game play and
thereafter playing back the recorded game play. The regulated
gaming machine may be configured to enable the player to tag
relevant moments during the playback.
[0021] The regulated gaming machine may be configured such that the
historical information includes information regarding an historical
operation of the regulated game played on the regulated gaming
machine and/or a plurality of regulated games having been played on
the regulated gaming machine. The regulated gaming machine may be
configured such that the historical information displayed on the
display(s) provides (e.g., shows) how frequently wins have been
achieved on the regulated gaming machine. The regulated gaming
machine may be configured such that the historical information
displayed on the display(s) includes information regarding a
payback frequency of the regulated gaming machine as compared to
other regulated gaming machines playing the (e.g., same) regulated
game.
[0022] The regulated gaming machine may be configured such that the
historical information and/or playback displayed on the display(s)
are provided to the player upon request (e.g., by the player,
casino attendant or someone else). The regulated gaming machine may
be configured such that the historical information displayed on the
display(s) provides an indication of a role that both luck (i.e.,
randomness) and the player's measured skill played in determining
an outcome of the regulated game. The regulated gaming machine may
be configured to record and store every game played over a
selectable time interval (e.g., last 24, hours, last week, etc.).
The regulated gaming machine may be configured to enable the player
who has caused a dispute to be initiated to cause the playback to
be stored for later access and retrieval.
[0023] The regulated gaming machine may further include (a software
module that generates) a wizard displayed on the at least one
display, the wizard being configured to enable the player to
identify the nature of the initiated dispute and to select an
appropriate playback and/or appropriate historical information to
generate and provide to the player, in a step-by-step format. The
regulated gaming machine may be configured such that the historical
information includes historical win information that provides a
frequency with which different symbol combinations, hands or events
(for example) have historically occurred on the (and/or other)
regulated gaming machine. The regulated gaming machine may be
configured such that the historical information includes historical
win information that provides a number of games that have elapsed
since a selected symbol combination, hand or event has occurred.
The regulated gaming machine may be configured such that the
historical information includes peer comparison information that
provides an indication of how lucky the regulated gaming machine
has been, the indication of how "lucky" (from the player's pint of
view) the regulated gaming machine has been being related to an
actual (i.e., measured) Return-To-Player (RTP) of the regulated
game (and/or other regulated games) on the regulated gaming,
machine (and/or other regulated gaming machines). The regulated
gaming machine may be configured such that the historical
information includes (e.g., provides, displays) how many games have
been played since the regulated game and/or the regulated gaming
machine has paid a jackpot or some other selected predetermined
prize. The regulated gaming machine is configured such that the
historical information includes luck and skill information that
provides the player with an indication of a manner in which the
outcome of the regulated game was influenced by randomness and by
the measured skill of the player.
[0024] According to further embodiments, the present invention is a
method that may include enabling a gaming machine to interact with
a player; receiving, by the regulated gaming machine and via a
first player interaction with the regulated gaming machine, an
indication that the player wishes to view historical information
for at least one of the regulated gaming machine and a regulated
game available for game play on the regulated gaming machine, and
responsive to the first player interaction and the received
indication, providing the historical information to the player, the
historical information including payout information specific to at
least one of the regulated gaming machine with which the player is
interacting and the regulated game.
[0025] The historical information may include at least one of an
indication of an amount of luck experienced by the player during
game play of the regulated game and an amount of skill exhibited by
the player during game play of the regulated game. The historical
information may detail an historical operation of the regulated
game available for game play on the regulated gaining machine,
and/or a plurality of regulated games having been played on the
regulated gaming machine. The historical information may include
how frequently wins have been achieved on the regulated gaming
machine. The historical information may include how frequently wins
have been achieved on the regulated game. The historical
information may include how frequently wins have been achieved in
the regulated game on the regulated gaming machine. The historical
information may include how frequently wins have been achieved in
the regulated game across all regulated gaming machine having the
regulated game available thereon. The historical information may
include or provide a payback frequency of the regulated gaining
machine as compared to other regulated gaming machines playing the
regulated game. The playback and/or historical information may be
provided to the player upon request. The historical information may
provide an indication of a role that luck and/or player skill
played in determining an outcome of the regulated game. The
historical information may include historical win information that
provides a frequency with which different symbol combinations,
hands or events have historically occurred on at least one of the
regulated game and the regulated gaming machine. The historical
information may include historical win information that provides a
number of games that have elapsed since a selected symbol
combination, hand or event has occurred. The historical information
may include peer comparison information that provides an indication
of how lucky the regulated gaming machine has been, the indication
of how lucky the regulated gaming machine has been being related to
an actual Return-To-Player (RTP) of at least the regulated game on
at least the regulated gaming machine. The historical information
may include how many games have been played since at least one of
the regulated game and the regulated gaming machine has paid a
jackpot. The historical information may include luck and skill
information that provides the player with an indication of a manner
in which an outcome of the regulated game was influenced by at
least one of randomness and a measured skill of the player. The
historical information provided may be compared to other regulated
gaming machines that also offer the regulated game.
[0026] According to another embodiment thereof, the present
invention is a regulated gaming machine that may include a
regulated game configured to run on the regulated gaming machine;
at least one display; and a user interface configured to enable a
player to interact with the regulated gaming machine and to request
historical information, the requested historical information being
displayed on the at least one display and including payout
information specific to at least one of the regulated gaming
machine with which the player is interacting and the regulated
game.
[0027] The historical information may be displayed compared to
other regulated gaming machines that also offer the regulated game.
The historical information may include an indication of an amount
of luck experienced by the player during game play of the regulated
game and/or an amount of skill exhibited by the player during game
play of the regulated game. The historical information details an
historical operation of the regulated game available for game play
on the regulated gaming machine, and/or a plurality of regulated
games having been played on the regulated gaming machine. The
historical information may include how frequently wins have been
achieved on the regulated gaming machine. The historical
information may include how frequently wins have been achieved on
the regulated game. The historical information may include how
frequently wins have been achieved in the regulated game on the
regulated gaming machine. The historical information may include
how frequently wins have been achieved in the regulated game across
all regulated gaming machine having the regulated game available
thereon. The historical information may include a payback frequency
of the regulated gaming machine as compared to other regulated
gaming machines playing the regulated game. The playback and/or
historical information may be configured to be provided to the
player upon request. The historical information may include an
indication of a role that luck and/or player skill played in
determining an outcome of the regulated game. The historical
information may include historical win information that provides a
frequency with which different symbol combinations, hands or events
have historically occurred on at least one of the regulated game
and the regulated gaming machine. The historical information may
include historical win information that provides a number of games
that have elapsed since a selected symbol combination, hand or
event has occurred. The historical information may include peer
comparison information that provides an indication of how lucky the
regulated gaming machine has been, the indication of how lucky the
regulated gaming machine has been being related to an actual
Return-To-Player (RTP) of at least the regulated game on at least
the regulated gaming machine. The historical information may
include how many games have been played since at least one of the
regulated game and the regulated gaming machine has paid a jackpot.
The historical information may include luck and skill information
that provides the player with an indication of a manner in which an
outcome of the regulated game was influenced by randomness and/or a
measured skill of the player.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0028] Prior art FIG. 1 depicts the legacy patron dispute
resolution model for disputes of payback frequency.
[0029] FIG. 2 depicts a payback frequency dispute resolution model
for next generation casino games, according to embodiments of the
present invention.
[0030] FIG. 3 depicts a player skill measurement dispute resolution
model for next generation casino games, according to embodiments of
the present invention.
[0031] FIG. 4 depicts a jackpot non-payment dispute resolution
model for next generation casino games, according to embodiments of
the present invention.
[0032] FIG. 5 demonstrates how patron disputes may be addressed via
onscreen reporting, according to embodiments of the present
invention.
[0033] FIG. 6 depicts one possible Historical Win Report format
which displays the frequency of symbol combinations occurring,
according to embodiments of the present invention.
[0034] FIG. 7 depicts a second possible Historical Win Report
format which displays the number of games that have been played
since a particular symbol combination has occurred, according to
embodiments of the present invention.
[0035] FIG. 8 depicts one possible Peer Comparison Report format
displaying the "luckiness" of each gaming machine, according to
embodiments of the present invention.
[0036] FIG. 9 depicts a second possible Peer Comparison Report
format displaying how many games have been played since each gaming
machine has paid a jackpot, according to embodiments of the present
invention.
[0037] FIG. 10 demonstrates how patron disputes on next generation
games may be resolved via game instant replays according to
embodiments of the present invention.
[0038] FIG. 11 depicts one possible. Luck vs. Skill Report format,
according to embodiments of the present invention.
[0039] FIG. 12 depicts one possible screen within a Patron Dispute
Resolution Wizard, according to embodiments of the present
invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0040] In the following detailed description of exemplary
embodiments of the invention, reference is made to the accompanying
drawings, which form a part hereof, and in which is shown by way of
illustration, specific exemplary embodiments in which the invention
may be practiced. These embodiments are described in sufficient
detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice the
invention, and it is to be understood that other embodiments may be
utilized and that logical, mechanical, electrical and other changes
may be made without departing from the spirit or scope of the
present invention. The following detailed description is,
therefore, not to be taken in a limiting sense, and the scope of
the present invention is defined only by the appended claims.
[0041] Prior art FIG. 1 depicts the legacy patron dispute
resolution model for disputes of payback frequency. In this model,
when a player 102 disputes the fairness of a gaming machine 104 he
has been playing, he is typically referred to the local gaming
control board in the jurisdiction in which he is playing, as
suggested at 106. The rules in this process differ from
jurisdiction to jurisdiction but generally, for disputes involving
more than $500.00, the casino is legally obligated to contact the
local gaming control board. For disputes involving smaller sums of
money, the casino is typically legally obligated to inform the
player of his or her right to file a claim with the local gaining
control board, but is not obligated to contact the gaming board
themselves.
[0042] Casinos often consider payback frequency disputes to be a
nuisance. Indeed, because their business relies on keeping very
close tabs on the payback percentages of each machine on their
gaming floor, casino operators know that their games, except in
extremely rare cases, are fair. Given this assurance, casinos are
often happy to refer this variety of dispute to the local gaming
control board so as not to waste valuable man-hours. A further
advantage of this stance, from the casino's perspective, is that
only a small percentage of players who have been referred to the
local gaming board actually go through the time and effort of
following a claim. When a patron does file a claim with a gaming
control board 108, then that organization will investigate the
situation as shown at 110, usually by gathering data to confirm the
RTP of the gaming machine in question. In many jurisdictions, the
gaming board is legally obligated to complete their investigation
within thirty days of the patron filing a claim, meaning this
process, in a worst case scenario, takes a month, as shown at
112.
[0043] In some cases, the casino operator will attempt to address a
patron's concern in-house, as shown at 114. In instances in which
the player is falsely claiming a win, the slot manager or attendant
may pull data on the last 10 games as shown at 116 from the
machine's attendant menu 118 to display that no win was in fact
earned. In other instances, the slot manager may pull data from the
Casino Management System ("CMS") 120 to investigate the RTP of the
game in question. An RTP report 122 can be generated to prove that
the game is paying out a percentage of funds input by the player
that is both expected and within that gaming jurisdiction's legal
range. While such an in-house investigation is resolved
considerably faster (typically, one day, as shown at 124) than a
claim filed with the local gaming control board, it is rarely
resolved instantaneously since data is usually gathered in the back
of the house. In some cases, data generated during an in-house
investigation will be submitted to the local gaining control board
for use in an investigation generated by that organization.
[0044] FIG. 2 depicts a payback frequency dispute resolution model
for next generation casino games, according to embodiments of the
present invention. In the disclosed PDRM, when players 202 dispute
the fairness of a gaming machine 204, the majority of such claims,
as shown at 206, may be handled instantaneously by, for example,
generating a report on a display of the gaming machine 204, as
shown at 206. The player may view a variety of reports in these
cases including, for example, a Historical Win Report 208 which
demonstrates how frequently wins have been achieved on the gaming
machine in question and/or a Peer Comparison Report 210 which
charts a gaming machine's payback frequency relative to identical
games on the casino floor (note that with the advent of the
server-based gaming paradigm in which multiple gaming titles may be
played on multiple gaming machines, a "game" may be defined as a
specific gaming software title running on a specific gaming
machine). Casino operators may elect to allow players to generate
these dispute resolution reports themselves or they may be
generated when slot technicians or slot managers input a special
code or key or card into the gaming machine. In any case, the
reports may be generated instantaneously or near instantaneously.
Because these reports focus on simplified concepts couched in the
player's language (i.e. how often did the machine issue a
particular winning symbol combination or how "lucky" is a given
machine relative to its peers), they are likely to satisfy most
payback frequency disputes quickly and efficiently.
[0045] Players who are not satisfied by the reports detailed above
will still have the option of filing a dispute with their local
gaming commission, as suggested at 214. In that case, the process
may work just as it did in the legacy model, with the gaming
control board 216 investigating the situation, generating an
investigation into the game's payback frequency 218, and providing
a ruling to the player within 30 days, as shown at 220. The gaming
control board may use data and dispute resolution reports generated
by the casino to aid in their investigation.
[0046] Similarly, the casino operator would also retain the ability
to satisfy the patron's concerns 222 by using data contained within
the Attendant Menus or Casino Management System ("CMS") 224 to view
the traditional reports 226 as were used in legacy dispute
resolution models.
[0047] FIG. 3 depicts a player skill measurement dispute resolution
model for next generation casino games according to embodiments of
the present invention. In the disclosed PDRM, when a player 302
disputes the way his skill (or other player-related criterion) has
been measured or assessed on a gaming machine 304 he has been
playing, most of the time as suggested by 306, his dispute may be
handled instantaneously or nearly instantaneously, by showing the
player an instant replay or report generated on the gaming screen
in front of him.
[0048] In the disclosed PDRM, replays 308 may be stored for all
games played on the gaming machine and a button may be provided
that allows the player to tag problematic segments of their games
on the gaming machine and then view them later in a convenient
format. For console style games, a feature may be added to display
the player's input into the game (i.e. joystick movement, buttons
pressed) as a replay of the game unfolds. This feature would allow
the player to track his or her input into the game with a visual
display of the correlation between that input and the way it
affected the game unfolding onscreen. A full explanation of how
instant replays may be used for dispute resolution is given
hereunder with reference to FIG. 10.
[0049] Luck vs. Skill reports 310 demonstrate to players the exact
role both luck and skill (and/or other player criterion) played in
determining their game outcome. These reports will help players
understand their results in greater detail, thus reducing disputes
caused by ignorance of the gaming process. A full explanation of
how Luck vs. Skill reports may be used for dispute resolution is
given hereunder with reference to FIG. 11. One key advantage of
both instant replays and Luck vs. Skill reports is that they may be
generated instantaneously or nearly instantaneously (or, in event
quickly; that is, during or just after the player's gaming session
or game), as suggested by reference numeral 312. According to
further embodiments, such reports may be generated well after the
player's game or gaming session.
[0050] Players who are not satisfied by instant replays or
on-demand reports will still have the option of filing a dispute
with their local gaming commission, as shown at 314. In this case,
the process will work just as it did in the legacy model, with the
gaming control board 316 investigating the situation, analyzing
data on the game's payback frequency 318, and providing a ruling to
the player within 30 days as shown at 320. Because current gaming
models do not include instant replays or Skill vs. Luck Reports,
the disclosed PDRM may provide valuable input into the local gaming
control board's future investigations.
[0051] FIG. 4 depicts a jackpot non-payment dispute resolution
model for next generation casino games according to embodiments of
the present invention. Jackpot non-payment disputes are easily the
highest profile disputes faced by casino operators of the current
era. In the past, a number of casinos have endured considerable
negative publicity when patrons who claimed to have won a jackpot
that was not honored also claimed that slot technicians opened
machines and tampered with them before local gaming control board
members could launch an investigation. In many of these incidents,
the only relevant forensic evidence that either the casino or the
patron was able to draw upon was the casino's surveillance video.
More and more machines now are equipped with graphical replays
which should protect the player's rights; however, many of these
replays are only stored for a small number of games and may, in
some cases, be erased or overwritten by an unscrupulous operator or
attendant. A significant feature of the embodiments of PDRM is full
game playback, a feature in which every game--not just the last
10--is stored for later analysis (games may be eventually erased,
but not on a timetable shorter than 24 hours) so that the player is
protected against key data being overwritten.
[0052] According to embodiments of the PDRM, when a player 402
feels that a gaming machine 404 has not paid out a jackpot to which
the player believes that he or she is entitled, the player may
launch a preliminary investigation him or herself, as shown at 406.
To do so, the player may activate an onscreen command labeled
"DISPUTE" or "STORE REPLAY" or "INVESTIGATE GAME" 408 or any other
of a number of possible labeling schemes which causes the gamine
machine to tag a previous segment of play in the game's memory for
convenient retrieval later (patrons will then have the ability to
view the tagged replay 410 and be provided with the ability to
rewind, fast-forward, pause, watch the game in slow motion and the
like, with familiar video playback controls). In cases in which the
gaming operator wants to exert tighter control, the patron may be
able to press an onscreen "STORE REPLAY" button to tag the disputed
segment of video and alert a slot technician or slot manager to
come investigate the situation by viewing the instant replay
themselves 410 or, for operators who want even tighter control, the
replay in question may be stored and only accessed by the local
gaming commission. In any of these cases, the casino and player now
have improved forensic evidence relative to conventional dispute
resolution methods and are able to resolve most issues on a
considerably faster timetable than previous methods have afforded,
as suggested at 412. Within the present context, the term "instant"
and "instantaneous" may be replaced with "rapid," "quick,"
"near-instantaneous" or other similar term intended to convey a
speedy resolution of the dispute, most often during or just after
the player's gaming session or game.
[0053] Because this type of dispute typically involves large sums
of money, the majority of these claims, as suggested at 414, will
be referred to the local gaming control board 416. However, some
potential claims that were made in error may be dismissed by the
patron him or herself after viewing the game replay. The local
gaming control board will investigate those claims that the patron
wishes to pursue 418 within the legally defined time limits for
that jurisdiction, usually 30 days, as suggested at 420. The gaming
control board's investigation, now with the benefit of protected
game instant replays 422, will likely lead to more accurate rulings
than previous evidence collection methods have made possible.
[0054] FIG. 5 demonstrates how patron disputes may be addressed via
onscreen reporting, according to embodiments of the present
invention. Existing gaming machines of the prior art 502 featuring
conventional peripherals such as bill acceptors 504, ticket
printers 506, primary gaming screens 508 and secondary gaming
screens 510 and may be configured, according to embodiments of the
present invention, to enable the present next generation patron
dispute model. In some embodiments of the inventions disclosed
herein, one or more "DISPUTE" or "STORE REPLAY" or "INVESTIGATE
GAME" buttons 512 (either hardware or by software, via a
touchscreen, for example) maybe be added to the gaming machine to
allow the patron to initiate self-service dispute resolution.
[0055] The gaming machine in FIG. 5 illustrates that an onscreen
report 514 may be displayed on the gaming machine's top or
secondary gaming screen 510. In some cases onscreen reports may
assume the popular "wizard" format, allowing patrons to view
relevant reports or replays and resolve their own disputes in a
step-by-step format. In these cases, touchscreen interactivity may
be preferred, causing the reports to be displayed on the gaming
machine's primary screen 508. Some dispute resolution reports may
make use of both gaming screens concurrently or successively.
[0056] FIG. 6 depicts one possible Historical Win Report format
which displays the frequency of symbol combinations occurring,
according to embodiments of the present invention. When evaluating
the fairness or attractiveness of a game, the typical
players--particularly slot machine players--are more likely to
prefer a report detailing how many wins that game has paid out,
rather than a report of the game's measured RTP. The Historical Win
Report 602 is designed to calm the player's anxieties or
superstitions and ease his concerns by demonstrating, in simple
terms, that the machine is issuing wins. FIG. 6 depicts one
possible format for this report, although numerous formats are
possible.
[0057] The depicted report features a representation of the gaming
machine 604 being disputed, as well as a unique identifier 606 for
that machine, which unique identifier may be useful for later
identification. The disputed game's title 608, in this case "Hot
Hot Stars," may be depicted as well as some text explaining the
purpose of the report, the time range covered by the report, and
any other information 610 that the operator deems relevant.
[0058] The principal value of the report is a table demonstrating
how many specific win types the machine has paid out over a given
time period 612. The depicted table shows, for example, that the
winning symbol combination of "777" 614 has, as shown at 616, been
achieved 217 times on the Hot Hot Stars game over the week of May
12, 2008-May 17, 2008, the time range shown at 610. Depending on
how casino operators wish to configure their games, players may
have the ability to alter the time range of the report and look at
how machines have paid out, for example, in the last hour, day,
week, month or year (or any player selectable time range). Given
the advent of server-based gaming models in which multiple gaming
titles may be played on multiple gaming machines, casino operators
may configure the machines to display payouts by gaming title (i.e.
show results for players playing Hot Hot Stars on any gaming
machine in the casino) or by distinct combination of gaming title
and gaming machine (i.e. show results for players playing Hot Hot
Stars on the specific gaming machine on which the report was
generated).
[0059] It should also be noted that while the depicted gaming
machine shows symbol payouts for a slot machine game, Historical
Win Reports could be configured to display the prevalence of
specific hands being dealt in a video poker game, of specific
levels or milestones being reached in a next generation casino
(e.g., arcade or console-style) video game, of a specific number of
trivia questions being answered correctly in a casino trivia game,
of a specific number of puzzles being completed successfully in a
casino puzzle game, etc.
[0060] FIG. 7 depicts a second possible Historical Win Report
format which displays the number of games that have elapsed since a
particular symbol combination has occurred, according to
embodiments of the present invention. The superstitions of the
casino patron tend to vary from player to player. While some
players believe that a game that is paying out certain winning
symbol combinations frequently is "hot" and should be played, other
players think that a game in which those winning symbol
combinations have not occurred over a long period of time is "due
for a win" and is thus attractive to play. The depicted Drought
Report 702 is one possible embodiment of a report designed for this
second type of player, the player who thinks a machine may be "due
for a win."
[0061] The depicted report features a representation of the gaming
machine 704 being disputed, as well as a unique identifier 706 for
that machine, which unique identifier may be useful for later
identification. The disputed game's title 708, in this case "Hot
Hot Stars," may be depicted as well as some text explaining the
purpose of the report and any other information 710 that the
operator deems relevant.
[0062] The principal value of the report is a table demonstrating
how many spins or games have occurred since key winning symbol
combinations have been achieved on the machine 712. The depicted
table shows, for example, that the winning symbol combination of
"777" 714 has, as shown at 716, not been achieved in the last 91
spins. Given the advent of server-based gaming models in which
multiple gaming titles may be played on multiple gaming machines,
casino operators may configure the machines to display payouts by
gaming title (i.e. show results for players playing Hot Hot Stars
on any gaming machine in the casino) or by distinct combination of
gaming title and gaming machine (i.e. show results for players
playing Hot Hot Stars on the specific gaming machine on which the
report was generated).
[0063] It should also be noted that while the depicted gaming
machine shows symbol payouts for a slot machine game, Historical
Win Reports could be configured to display the infrequency of
specific hands being dealt in a video poker game, of specific
levels or milestones being reached in a next generation casino
(e.g. arcade or console-style) video game, of a specific number of
trivia questions being answered correctly in a casino trivia game,
of a specific number of puzzles being completed successfully in a
casino puzzle game, etc.
[0064] FIG. 8 depicts one possible format for a Peer Comparison
Report, according to embodiments of the present invention. When
evaluating the fairness or attractiveness of a game, players are
more likely to think in terms of how "lucky" the machine is than
about that machine's specific mathematical expectation or RTP. The
Peer Comparison Report 802 is designed to display to the player how
a machine's actual return compares to its expected return using
terms to which the player can relate. A player who hasn't won on a
machine for some time may actually experience some relief from a
confirmation that a particular machine has been "unlucky." Players
are also less likely to feel cheated when the machine delivers this
degree of transparency.
[0065] The player also has the ability to use this report to see
which machines have been lucky over the short term. This feature is
likely to be of value to the game operator as it may cause an
unlucky player who was considering quitting to continue playing on
a machine that has been lucky. The game operator knows, of course,
that the past performance of the machine has no bearing on its
future operation or expected return to player percentage.
[0066] Like the Historical Win Report depicted in FIG. 6, the Peer
Comparison Report 802 may feature a representation of the gaming
machine being disputed 804 as well as a unique identifier 806 for
that machine, which may be used for later identification. The
game's title 808, in this case "Hot Hot Stars," may be depicted as
well as the game's status 810 (in terms the player can understand,
e.g., how lucky the game has been) and some text providing the
player more specifics on how lucky or unlucky the machine has been,
on which date or dates the report covers, and for which casino 812
the report is being generated.
[0067] The depicted Peer Comparison Report also provides
information about other gaming machines in the disputed machine's
bank of games 814. Such information may include, for example, each
game's title 816, a visual representation 818 of each game, a
unique game identifier 820 for each game, and the current status
822 of each game. The game in dispute may be highlighted as
suggested at 824 so its position in the game bank relative to the
other games is apparent and the game in dispute's status 826 may be
repeated next to the status of the other games.
[0068] In many cases, players will intuitively seek out the game
with the most favorable status, in this case Hot Hot Stars GM2033
with a status of "Very Lucky" 828. Casino operators may fear that
this natural instinct would cause competition among players for the
luckiest machines or may discourage play on machines that had been
previously unlucky. In practice, however, server-based gaming
models of the future will allow for many distinct gaming
machine/software combinations and, as a result, many "lucky" games.
For example, the hypothetical player who has generated Peer
Comparison Report 802 may seek out GM2033 since, for Hot Hot Stars,
it has been lucky. However, the player playing a different gaming
title next to him--for example the hypothetical game "Hot Hot
Horseshoes"--may generate a report showing that for, Hot Hot
Horseshoes, GM2931 is "Very Lucky." When these reports are
configured to display data for distinct gaming machine/game
software combinations, machines will be lucky for some games and
unlucky for others. And, of course, this data will be constantly
changing.
[0069] Furthermore, operators may intelligently adjust the
parameters in these reports to stimulate play. For example,
operators may wish to display only reports tabulated over smaller
time frames (thirty minutes, for example, or an hour) that show the
performance of all game titles on a given gaming machine. By
shortening in the timeframe in which these reports are tabulating
data, more machines are likely to be "hot" or "lucky" (negative
expectation games like slot machines or video poker machines are
more unfavorable to players over longer durations than they are
over shorter durations).
[0070] Game operators may also wish to allow players to view the
status of games outside of the bank in which they are playing. A
"See More Games" button 830 may be provided to allow players to
view other physical gaming machines on the casino floor, other
gaming titles, or both.
[0071] In should be noted that the mathematics used to determine a
game's status may be handled in a variety of ways at the operator's
discretion. A game's status may be calculated relative to a games
peers or it may be calculated relative to a baseline such as, for
example, winning or non-winning. If the game's status is calculated
relative to the winning/non-winning baseline, then only games that
have paid out more than they have taken in over a measured time
frame may be reported to players as "mildly lucky," "lucky," "very
lucky," etc. If, however, a game's status is calculated relative to
its peers, a game that has taken more funds from players than it
has paid out may still be labeled on the "lucky" end of the
lucky/unlucky spectrum if it has taken less funds than its peers.
According to an embodiment of the present inventions, a
winning/non-winning baseline may be employed, as it is believed
that dispute resolution methods that are more intuitive to the
player and more transparent are superior. However, the manner in
which the math is handled in these cases is ultimately up to the
game operator.
[0072] FIG. 9 depicts a second possible Peer Comparison Report
format displaying how many games have been played since each gaming
machine has paid a jackpot, according to embodiments of the present
invention. Some players believe that a gaming machine that has not
issued a jackpot over a long period of time is a good candidate for
play since it must be "due" to pay out a jackpot. The casino
operator may cater to this form of player superstition by making a
report of this information available such as the depicted Last
Jackpot Report 902 which is designed to display to the player how a
machine's jackpot history compares to the jackpot history of other
machines in the casino.
[0073] Like the Historical Win Report depicted in FIG. 6, the Last
Jackpot Report 902 may feature a representation of the gaming
machine being disputed 904 as well as a unique identifier 906 for
that machine, which may be used for later identification. The
game's title 908, in this case "Hot Hot Stars," may be depicted as
well as some text providing the player more specifics on what the
report displays 910.
[0074] The depicted Last Jackpot Report may provide information
about other gaming machines in the disputed machine's bank of games
912 (as depicted in FIG. 9) or in multiple banks of games. Such
information may include, for example, each game's title 914, a
visual representation 916 of each game, a unique game identifier
918 for each game, and how many games have occurred on each gaming
machine since the last jackpot was paid 920. The game in dispute
may be highlighted as suggested at 922 so its position in the game
bank relative to the other games is apparent and the game in
dispute's status 924 may be repeated next to the status of the
other games.
[0075] Players who believe that games that have not paid out
jackpots over a longer timetable are "due for a win" will seek out
the game with the longest jackpot drought, in this case Hot Hot
Stars GM2931 that has not paid out a jackpot in 14,555 games 924.
In this example, GM2931 is the machine on which the player is
currently playing which, in practice, may convince the player to
continue his gaming session.
[0076] Game operators may also wish to allow players to view the
status of games outside of the bank in which they are playing. A
"See More Games" button 926 may be provided to allow players to
view other physical gaming machines on the casino floor, other
gaming titles, or both.
[0077] It should also he noted that while FIG. 9 depicts a Last
Jackpot report that displays the number of games that have been
played since a jackpot was issued, reports that use other metrics
are possible, such as a report that depicts how much time has
elapsed since a jackpot was issued. Further still, reports may
display more than one set of jackpot metrics side by side, such as
a report that displays both how many games have been played since
that last jackpot on each machine and how much time has
elapsed.
[0078] FIG. 10 demonstrates how patron disputes on next generation
games may be resolved via game instant replays, according to
embodiments of the present invention. Instant replays of
traditional games such as slot machines are captured within this
PDRM to provide additional forensic evidence for patron disputes
such as jackpot non-payment disputes instant replays of next
generation casino games such as skill-based console style games are
also captured and may be used to demonstrate the fairness of
previously played games.
[0079] The depicted gaming machine is running a next generation
casino game based on the arcade classic Space Invaders.RTM. 1002 on
its primary gaming screen 1004. As is disclosed in commonly
assigned and co-pending application Ser. No. 11/277,026, filed Mar.
20, 2006, which application is hereby incorporated herein by
reference in its entirety, a media services blade 1006 may appear
on the gaming screen featuring touchscreen commands to allow the
player to play back a previously stored game, fast forward or
rewind it, pause it, etc., as shown at reference numeral 1008 (the
replay controls may take on the traditional media player paradigm
such as is shown at 1008 or may use other paradigms such as the
slider depicted at 1010). Alternatively, commands that allow the
player to play back the replay, fast forward it, rewind it, etc.,
may be made available to the player in a bladeless interface.
[0080] As the game replay unfolds, a player input panel 1012 may
appear onscreen to display the player's input at any given moment
within the game. The Space Invaders.RTM. themed game that is
depicted features two key player inputs, a joystick and a fire
button. As a result, the depicted player input panel displays a
representation of those devices onscreen as well as an indication
of how they are being used at any given time. For example, the
depicted joystick has its left turn arrow highlighted in black as
shown at 1014. This indicates that at the moment the replay is
being captured, the player was pressing his joystick left and
therefore moving his onscreen cannon 1016 left. This leftmost
movement is also supported by the trail of fire exiting the cannon.
The fire button on the player input panel is also highlighted 1018,
indicating that the player was pressing the fire button at the
moment captured in the replay. This fact is also reinforced by the
fire exiting the cannon.
[0081] The player input panel may be useful in showing the player
the correlation between his or her input and how a game unfolds. It
may also rule out disputes in which a player claims to have
performed an action in the game that is not supported by the
replay. The player input panel may appear in an unused portion of
the gaming screen or may make use of transparency so as not to
compromise the player's full view of the gaming screen.
[0082] It may be noted that the bullets (or fire) exiting the
player's cannon 1016 have reached an enemy alien and caused
collision 1020. The instant replay feature within the disclosed
PDRM may also allow the player to see the results of his
interactions as they relate to the game's payout. Because the Space
Invaders game in this example is configured to award the player a
cash payout during certain key in game events, the collision 1020
has earned the player $10.00 which is shown to the player onscreen
at 1022. In other next generation casino gaming paradigms, the
player may earn points for key in game events that are later
converted into currency based on a reward table. In such instances
the data displayed next to the collision would reflect points
earned instead of a cash amount earned.
[0083] Because gaming Machines in the disclosed PDRM are configured
to store large amounts of replay data, a management system must be
employed to allow both players and operators to efficiently recall
relevant moments within larger game replays. In some embodiments of
the inventions described herein, replays may be tagged when the
player presses a button on the machine, in this case labeled as a
"STORE REPLAY" button 1024 located on the gaming cabinet. This
action will attach tags to one or more segments within the replay
which may be accessed later and conveniently toggled through using
forward/backwards buttons such as are shown at 1008. It should be
noted that the large volume of replay data necessary to support the
disclosed PDRM may be stored using several distinct strategies. One
strategy involves storing only the key game events associated to a
replay and then reconstructing or rending them into a video when
requested. This first strategy is very efficient since it does not
require an entire replay to be retained but carries the
disadvantage of requiring modifications to existing games to
support it. A second strategy involves storing the complete actual
video. This second strategy has the advantage of requiring no
modification to existing games but has the disadvantage of taking
up a lot of memory.
[0084] It should also be noted that the complete replay data stored
by the disclosed PDRM may have additional value to the game
operator and game designer past dispute resolution. Focus groups
have been notoriously ineffective in predicting the habits and
preferences of gamblers since players who gamble in a laboratory
environment or with pretend funds or funds that have been given to
them for the purposes of experiment do not tend to behave in
consistent ways with players who gamble with their own money in an
actual casino. If used correctly, the data captured by the
disclosed PDRM will be more valuable than observing a focus group
as the data will represent actual live play. By analyzing the
moments in which players add money to games, launch disputes, quit,
etc., operators and game developers will be able to better
understand what players like and don't like and create more
attractive games.
[0085] FIG. 11 depicts one possible Luck vs. Skill Report format,
according to embodiments of the present invention. Next generation
casino gaming models and particularly console style games will
increase the correlation between a player's skill and a player's
rewards. Whereas the player's results in a legacy slot machine are
determined completely at random, the player's results in many next
generation games will be determined by a combination of randomness
and the player's measured skill (broadly defined, "skill" may
include, for example, the player's manual dexterity, alertness;
mental acuity, strategic thinking and any other player
characteristic). This added layer of complexity may prove difficult
for players to understand. The role of the Luck vs. Skill Report
1102 is designed to demonstrate to players how much of their reward
in a given game was determined by luck and how much their reward
was determined by their skill.
[0086] Like the Historical Win Report depicted in FIG. 6, the Luck
vs. Skill Report may feature a representation of the gaming machine
being disputed 1104, as well as a unique identifier 1106 for that
machine, which may be used for later identification. The game's
title 1108, in this case "Casino Space Invaders.RTM." may be
depicted as well as the players skill rating 1110 (the game's
estimation of the player's skill level) and the player's luck
rating 1112 (simply, how lucky the player has been).
[0087] The Player's Luck Rating Report may also be displayed in a
more visual format, in this case as a pie chart 1114. The casino
operator may configure the back end mathematics of the PDRM to
calculate the patron's luck figure in a number of ways. In one
embodiment, a patron's luck score could simply be a measure of the
player's luck adjusted maximum win's percentile rank when compared
with every other player's luck adjusted maximum win over a measured
period of time (the player's luck adjusted maximum win may be
defined as the win the player would have achieved within the game
if the player demonstrated perfect skill). In this model, if the
player randomly achieved a luck adjusted maximum win of $6.74 in
his game and only 4% of players randomly achieved higher luck
adjusted maximum wins then the player's Luck Rating would be 96,
meaning the player was in the 96.sup.th percentile of luck.
[0088] The Player's Skill Rating may also be displayed visually, in
this case as a pie chart 1116. The casino operator may configure
the back end mathematics of the PDRM to calculate the patron's
skill figure in a number of ways. In one embodiment, a patron's
skill score could simply be a measure of the player's percentage of
luck adjusted maximum win achieved. For example, if the player's
luck adjusted maximum win in a given game was $4.00 and the player
actually earned $2.00, then the player's skill score could be
assessed as 50.
[0089] Alternatively, a patron's skill score could be the
percentile rank of the player's percentage of luck adjusted maximum
win achieved when compared with the percentile rank of every other
player's percentage of luck adjusted maximum win achieved over a
measured period of time. For example, if the player's luck adjusted
maximum win was $4.00 and the player actually earned $2.00 but only
1% of players over the measured period of time achieved greater
than 50% of their luck adjusted maximum wins on the player's game,
then the player's skill score could be assessed as 99.
[0090] Additionally, the player's final reward may also be
displayed visually, in this case in the form of a pie chart 1118.
The casino operator may configure the back end mathematics of the
PDRM to display the patron's visual reward display in a number of
ways. In the displayed embodiment, the operator has configured the
pie chart to show what percentage of the player's theoretical
maximum reward (which assumes perfect luck and perfect skill) the
player has actually achieved (since the player's theoretical
maximum win in the displayed game is $10.00, 1120 and the player's
actual reward was $5.60, 1122, the player has earned 56% of his
possible reward). Alternatively, the operator could display a
visual representation of what percentage of the player's luck
adjusted reward 1124 the player achieved. This second figure would
lead to higher reward scores; in the given example the player
earned $5.60 of a possible luck adjusted win of $6.20, meaning the
player earned 90% of his possible win.
[0091] It should be noted that the chief benefit of the Luck vs.
Skill report to the player are the easy-to-read pie charts
demonstrating the relative luck or skill that has occurred in a
given game. While the back end math used to calculate these ratings
can be somewhat complicated, few players will concern themselves
with the manner in which the numbers were derived, although the
formulas used could certainly be included in the PDRM tool's help
menus.
[0092] It should also be noted that the depicted interface shows
the player's Luck vs. Skill balance for the last game played. If
desired, operators could configure games to allow players to view
their historical games by providing them with a mechanism to view
and select past games played by the title of the game played, the
time the game was played, the financial result of the game, and/or
a unique game identifier for each game played. In this model,
reports could be generated to show how a player's luck and skill
have changed over time. It is to be understood that the Luck vs.
Skill Report 1102 of FIG. 11 is but one illustrative and exemplary
manner of providing the player with this information. Those of
skill in this art will undoubtedly develop many more formats
presenting such information to the players, and all such formats
are deemed to fall within the purview of the present invention.
[0093] FIG. 12 depicts one possible screen within a Patron Dispute
Resolution Wizard. In an effort to further automate the patron
dispute process, operators may configure games to allow patrons to
research and resolve their own disputes using a step-by-step tool
that will lead them to the relevant instant replays and reports
most likely to address their concerns. The depicted Patron Dispute
Resolution Wizard 1202 features a representation of the disputed
gaming machine 1204 as well as a unique gaming machine identifier
1206 which may be used for later identification. The wizard may
also list the title of the game being disputed 1208 as well as
additional information about the game according to the operator's
discretion.
[0094] The significant functions of the wizard may include: a) to
determine the nature of the patron's dispute 1210, which may be
accomplished (for example) by allowing the patron to pick from a
list of possible disputes in an onscreen menu 1212; and b) to
provide the patron with tools designed to resolve his specific
issue. If the patron's dispute is not included in the list of
choices, a button 1214 may be made available that the patron may
press to get live help. This help may take the form of a slot
attendant or slot manager being dispatched to the gaming machine or
it may take other forms. For example, remote help centers may be
set up to provide the player with a virtual attendant, a
particularly attractive option for operators who offer with a
relatively small number of games and/or are situated in remote
locations (common scenarios in gas stations, convenience stores,
supermarkets, etc.). In these cases, two possible communication
methods between the player and the virtual attendant include a
touchscreen keyboard appearing onscreen or a microphone and the
game's speaker being used to facilitate conversation. Other
mechanisms for enabling the patron to state their dispute may be
provided within the context of the present invention, the
embodiments disclosed herein not being limited to pull-down menus
or live help buttons.
[0095] As the patron answers questions designed to diagnose his or
her problem, relevant replays or reports may be presented to
resolve his or her concerns, as shown at 1216. In addition, the
patron may be given the opportunity to view game replays at any
time, as shown at 1218. In the displayed embodiment of the
invention disclosed herein, the player may make use of standard
forward and backwards keys 1220 to toggle back and forth between
previously tagged replays and may make use of a slider device 1222
to fast forward, rewind, or pause a replay. The patron may also use
onscreen buttons to navigate the wizard menus moving forward and
backwards or cancelling a dispute as desired 1224.
[0096] In the event that a patron is not able to resolve his or her
dispute independently, a slot technician or manager may be alerted
to address the problem. The data entered by the patron will assist
the alerted casino staff in assisting the patron in a more timely
fashion than would have been possible in the absence of that
information.
[0097] The automated dispute resolution method presented in FIG. 12
not only grants operators the ability to resolve patron disputes
more efficiently, it also gives operators and game designers the
ability to better understand and eliminate the root cause
underlying disputes. By studying data related to recurrent
disputes, the game operators may chose to eliminate games from
their menus that are frequently disputed or game designers may make
necessary changes to segments of games that often trigger
disputes.
[0098] In addition, just as merchants have been known to assign
ratings to customers so that they may target their marketing
towards customers who they rate as attractive and discourage the
business of customers who they rate as unattractive (customers who
complain too much, return too much merchandise, etc.), casino
operators may tie the dispute patterns of players to their player
card numbers and rate them accordingly. For example, players who
launch no disputes may receive coupons and attractive offers in the
mail and players who launch many may receive no such incentives or
promotions, or receive fewer of them.
* * * * *