BC.GAME - CASINO-SPORTBOOK, OFFICIAL SPONSOR LEICESTER CITY!

[Hypnosis00]

The number of complaints is increasing, but I'm not seeing anyone from the team actively answering them in the scam accusation board. I don't want to assume that they are ignoring it and let someone from the third-party processor do it.
If not mistaken, only holydarkness replies to them.

...And even if you’re right that we can’t personally verify everything, they’re still licensed. They can’t just lie about that, otherwise their operation would get shut down. So think about it that way. Do we really believe they would scam users over a zero house edge claim? I don’t think so.

Licensed or not, you'll still see plenty of complaints on the Scam Accusations board. Many casinos keep operating for years despite issues, maybe not because they're provably fair or have zero house edge, but because those complaints don't violate the license provider's policies.

Most license casino suspensions or revocations happened due to aml or kyc violations. Claims about unfair play, fraud, or rigged games are not so common and are much harder to prove, which is why they rarely lead to revocation.

Maybe the situation isn't alarming yet, but if this continues, it can affect their reputation, which is possibly a ground for their license revocation. If the claim is invalid, then they must come out and say something rather than remaining silent. Gamblers need a clear view of it, and this should not be ignored for the sake of keeping their reputation.

[mirakal]

Maybe the situation isn't alarming yet, but if this continues, it can affect their reputation, which is possibly a ground for their license revocation. If the claim is invalid, then they must come out and say something rather than remaining silent. Gamblers need a clear view of it, and this should not be ignored for the sake of keeping their reputation.

It could only really be an issue if there’s a real complainant. What we’re seeing here isn’t enough to be a solid basis. Most complainants have limitations anyway, they don’t want to reveal their identity, and because of that it’s hard to build an actual case.

Complaints in general are normal. Even Stake has complaints, 1xBit has tons of them and they’re still operating.

The way I see it, BC.Game has managed to maintain a decent reputation here.
And honestly, some accusations should just be ignored, especially when they’re baseless.

[Vaculin]

Maybe they did violate something, but the complaints were never formal. Or maybe the complaints themselves are fake. Those are really the only two possibilities I see.

Because if you only lose a small amount, most people just let it go. They won’t bother filing complaints or building a case against a casino. But when the community starts noticing more and more complaints piling up, that’s when things change. At that point, people will already label the casino as a scam, even if it’s still operating with a license.

Even without an official ruling from regulators, once the community makes that judgment, it’s pretty much the end of the business for them.

I posted formal complaints on AskGamblers and CasinoGuru for their fake responsible gaming limits. Which again, are illegal and in violation of their own license terms, aggravated by the fact that they'be been aware of the issue for months (as can be seen by the only complaint, here in this forum where they acknowledged and refunded the user), and refuse to fix it, because they clearly make money off it. They ignored both. I'm posting everywhere I can about it, because what they're doing is straight up absurd. Yesterday I filed a complaint through the official Anjouan site seal page, I don't know how useful that will be.

I understand that the majority of complaints are about the INR issue, which might even be somewhat out of their hands, but this casino makes much more shady things.

I’m not really sure about that guy because he seems to complain a lot. The last issue he raised was against Blitz, where he blamed the casino for letting him gamble even though he was in a country that’s not allowed to gamble. Your case is different though. Good luck with it. I honestly hope it gets settled along with the others, since BC.Game is big enough to pay this out rather than ruin their reputation over a scam accusation.

[oantt]

I’m not really sure about that guy because he seems to complain a lot. The last issue he raised was against Blitz, where he blamed the casino for letting him gamble even though he was in a country that’s not allowed to gamble. Your case is different though. Good luck with it. I honestly hope it gets settled along with the others, since BC.Game is big enough to pay this out rather than ruin their reputation over a scam accusation.

Not sure about other complaints, I mostly cared about that one because they admitted they were in the wrong, and it's proof they were aware of their limits not working about 4 months before my case happened, refunded, and still didn't care to fix them. It really can only be interpreted in one way.

They privately acknowledged they were in the wrong to me too, offered a reward for 'reporting the bug', which was of a ridiculous amount, and after almost 2 months all limits are still broken and they refuse to answer any type of complaint. Maybe holydarkness could have done something, and they cut him off. Such a weird organization.

They're probably thinking I'll let this go eventually, which I won't

[oantt]

Maybe the situation isn't alarming yet, but if this continues, it can affect their reputation, which is possibly a ground for their license revocation. If the claim is invalid, then they must come out and say something rather than remaining silent. Gamblers need a clear view of it, and this should not be ignored for the sake of keeping their reputation.

It could only really be an issue if there’s a real complainant. What we’re seeing here isn’t enough to be a solid basis. Most complainants have limitations anyway, they don’t want to reveal their identity, and because of that it’s hard to build an actual case.

Complaints in general are normal. Even Stake has complaints, 1xBit has tons of them and they’re still operating.

The way I see it, BC.Game has managed to maintain a decent reputation here.
And honestly, some accusations should just be ignored, especially when they’re baseless.

Interesting, purposefully violating responsible gaming regulations (required by law, even by their Anjouan license) is not a solid enough basis for complaints?

[Mandoy]

Maybe they did violate something, but the complaints were never formal. Or maybe the complaints themselves are fake. Those are really the only two possibilities I see.

Because if you only lose a small amount, most people just let it go. They won’t bother filing complaints or building a case against a casino. But when the community starts noticing more and more complaints piling up, that’s when things change. At that point, people will already label the casino as a scam, even if it’s still operating with a license.

Even without an official ruling from regulators, once the community makes that judgment, it’s pretty much the end of the business for them.

I posted formal complaints on AskGamblers and CasinoGuru for their fake responsible gaming limits. Which again, are illegal and in violation of their own license terms, aggravated by the fact that they'be been aware of the issue for months (as can be seen by the only complaint, here in this forum where they acknowledged and refunded the user), and refuse to fix it, because they clearly make money off it. They ignored both. I'm posting everywhere I can about it, because what they're doing is straight up absurd. Yesterday I filed a complaint through the official Anjouan site seal page, I don't know how useful that will be.

I understand that the majority of complaints are about the INR issue, which might even be somewhat out of their hands, but this casino makes much more shady things.

I’m not really sure about that guy because he seems to complain a lot. The last issue he raised was against Blitz, where he blamed the casino for letting him gamble even though he was in a country that’s not allowed to gamble. Your case is different though. Good luck with it. I honestly hope it gets settled along with the others, since BC.Game is big enough to pay this out rather than ruin their reputation over a scam accusation.

This discussion helps to reveal the distinction between the user error and actual platform problems. Some gamblers do not file complaints when they lose small money, but recurring complaints in various forums, watchdog sites cannot be overlooked. The responsible gaming restrictions issue is particularly grave, with advertising restrictions which do not fulfill their role potentially breaking the license terms. Such problems should not be ignored. In a case of such a big brand as BC.Game, it would be prudent to address issues rather than jeopardize the long-term reputation.

[rigs3130]

I’m posting this for transparency, as there appears to be a disconnect between BC.Game’s public bonus representations and how a VIP promotion was applied in my case.

BC.Game publicly states (site / help pages / support replies) that:

Bonus funds are wagerable,

Wagering completion results in conversion of bonus funds into real money, and

Restrictions are generally framed around wagering requirements or withdrawal conditions.

However, in a VIP-only, app-specific promotion (VIP40+, SVIP level) that I was encouraged by my VIP manager to participate in and described as “free”, the following occurred:

The balance legitimately accumulated during wagering (no real-time cap or warning),

Wagering requirements were completed in full,

Upon completion, the accumulated balance was retroactively reduced to the original bonus amount,

I was later told that any amount above the original bonus is forfeited, despite this not being clearly disclosed in the promotion, rollover interface, or bonus metadata.

This creates a material question:

If winnings above the original bonus are always forfeited after wagering, why does the system allow unrestricted balance growth during wagering, and why is this consequence not clearly disclosed upfront—especially in VIP-targeted promotions?

I’m not disputing gameplay or wagering completion. I’m asking for clarification on how the publicly described “conversion to real money” reconciles with post-wagering forfeiture of accumulated balance.

This matter has now been escalated to the relevant licensing authority for review, but I’m posting here in case a BC.Game representative can clarify publicly:

Where this post-wagering forfeiture condition is explicitly disclosed before participation, and

Why no real-time enforcement or warning is applied if such a strict limit exists.

I believe this is a fair question that affects not only my case, but how players—especially VIPs—understand bonus risk.

[rigs3130]

The official VIP Prime Mission terms state that Bonus Money is credited, can be used for betting, and requires a 40x turnover to withdraw. Nowhere in the published terms, rollover interface, or bonus metadata is it stated that accumulated winnings above the original bonus amount are forfeited after wagering completion.

The system allowed unrestricted balance growth during wagering and applied forfeiture only after completion, without any real-time cap, warning, or prior disclosure.

This represents a material omission, as the forfeiture condition fundamentally alters the outcome of the promotion and is not disclosed alongside the wagering requirement in the public-facing terms.

[Sanitough]

I saw this on X, but I couldn’t find the name of the game. So I brought it here to ask if any of you guys have an idea what it’s called.

I’m looking to try something new since I’ve been pretty unlucky with the classic games lately.

https://x.com/bcgame/status/2012412790527709426

[mitchr4]

I saw this on X, but I couldn’t find the name of the game. So I brought it here to ask if any of you guys have an idea what it’s called.

I’m looking to try something new since I’ve been pretty unlucky with the classic games lately.

https://x.com/bcgame/status/2012412790527709426

That looks like The Dog House Dog or Alive from Pragmatic Play. It's a pretty popular slot with a cowboy and dog theme. Hope you have better luck with this one than the classic games!

[UmerIdrees]

I have also think about this to somehow be one of the problem they are having regarding this deposit issues all the time from there country because since they go through a means before it can be deposited it could be that those third party are the ones doing it, I have also been using fiat on this casino and deposit has always been credited after payment. To disable fiat from them is the best since the complaints is becoming much while other countries there deposit are not having problem will continue with it, perhaps after then, they can be using crypto till the casino will resolve what they should do.

That’s right, we don’t force a payment option if it has issues. Luckily for me, I don’t have any problem with fiat deposits. It’s not even a bank transfer, just a payment app, and it gets credited instantly. I gambled again last night, but I was unlucky. In less than an hour, all my money was gone playing slots. Still, I had fun, so I guess that’s part of it.

I am surprised as to why you people are still using fiat to make deposits in the crypto casino. Isn't it better and safer to use cryptocurrencies to deposit and withdraw from the gambling site? You remain anonymous and a lot of other benefits.

It will just create complications with fiat deposits as banks/credit cards' source of funds are traced, and they wouldn't like the source of the funds to be coming from gambling sites, especially in cases when gambling isn't looked at as something noble and legal.

[Sanitough]

I saw this on X, but I couldn’t find the name of the game. So I brought it here to ask if any of you guys have an idea what it’s called.

I’m looking to try something new since I’ve been pretty unlucky with the classic games lately.

https://x.com/bcgame/status/2012412790527709426

That looks like The Dog House Dog or Alive from Pragmatic Play. It's a pretty popular slot with a cowboy and dog theme. Hope you have better luck with this one than the classic games!

Thanks, it really helps. I tried using the search button with the name of the game you mentioned, and a lot of results showed up, but looks like there are different versions of it.

Anyway, I think I’ll give this game a try. Let’s see if my luck is better here compared to games like Gates of Olympus.

I am surprised as to why you people are still using fiat to make deposits in the crypto casino. Isn't it better and safer to use cryptocurrencies to deposit and withdraw from the gambling site? You remain anonymous and a lot of other benefits

Probably for convenience. With fiat, you can spend it right away after withdrawing. With crypto, you still need to convert it to fiat before you can actually use it, so that extra step makes a difference.

[Cointxz]

I saw this on X, but I couldn’t find the name of the game. So I brought it here to ask if any of you guys have an idea what it’s called.

I’m looking to try something new since I’ve been pretty unlucky with the classic games lately.

https://x.com/bcgame/status/2012412790527709426

That looks like The Dog House Dog or Alive from Pragmatic Play. It's a pretty popular slot with a cowboy and dog theme. Hope you have better luck with this one than the classic games!

Thanks, it really helps. I tried using the search button with the name of the game you mentioned, and a lot of results showed up, but looks like there are different versions of it.

Anyway, I think I’ll give this game a try. Let’s see if my luck is better here compared to games like Gates of Olympus.

It’s true that there’s a lot version for the dog house slot games franchise but the one @mitchr4 mentioned which is the dog or alive which is the exact one on the screenshot.

That’s the specific version I frequently played. Pragmatic always releases tons of version on their popular slot games that makes it very confusing sometimes what to choose.

[Sanitough]

Anyway, I think I’ll give this game a try. Let’s see if my luck is better here compared to games like Gates of Olympus.

It’s true that there’s a lot version for the dog house slot games franchise but the one @mitchr4 mentioned which is the dog or alive which is the exact one on the screenshot.

That’s the specific version I frequently played. Pragmatic always releases tons of version on their popular slot games that makes it very confusing sometimes what to choose.

So how was your experience with this game compared to the other popular ones from the same provider? Have you actually won big on it?

By the way, for those of you who regularly play slots, can you suggest some games I should try as well?
So far, the ones I checked aren’t blocked in my region, so I might as well try a variety of games.

Just looking to enjoy some free time and see what works for me. 

[rigs3130]

Anyway, I think I’ll give this game a try. Let’s see if my luck is better here compared to games like Gates of Olympus.

It’s true that there’s a lot version for the dog house slot games franchise but the one @mitchr4 mentioned which is the dog or alive which is the exact one on the screenshot.

That’s the specific version I frequently played. Pragmatic always releases tons of version on their popular slot games that makes it very confusing sometimes what to choose.

So how was your experience with this game compared to the other popular ones from the same provider? Have you actually won big on it?

By the way, for those of you who regularly play slots, can you suggest some games I should try as well?
So far, the ones I checked aren’t blocked in my region, so I might as well try a variety of games.

Just looking to enjoy some free time and see what works for me. 

Hey, are you an authorized BC Game representative,, can you please look into my complaint ? Or bring it forward to the people that make decisions at BC.Game please

[Haunebu]

It could only really be an issue if there’s a real complainant. What we’re seeing here isn’t enough to be a solid basis. Most complainants have limitations anyway, they don’t want to reveal their identity, and because of that it’s hard to build an actual case.

Complaints in general are normal. Even Stake has complaints, 1xBit has tons of them and they’re still operating.

The way I see it, BC.Game has managed to maintain a decent reputation here.
And honestly, some accusations should just be ignored, especially when they’re baseless.

Some of the stuff that you stated makes zero sense whatsoever. Firstly, 1xbit is a proven scam site which has a shit ton of scam accusations in this forum and elsewhere and they are only operating thanks to their connection with their sister site(1xbet). Many of the accusations are legit.

Secondly, BC.Game isn't a proven scam site like 1xbit, but many of the accusations against them are legit too(KYC, Payment processor etc). Their reputation in this forum keeps sinking with time.

[rigs3130]

I understand the skepticism, but this is not a vague or anonymous accusation, nor is it a single isolated complaint.

The issue is patterned behavior under VIP-only promotions, not a misunderstanding of generic bonus terms.

In my case, as an SVIP-level user, I was explicitly encouraged by my VIP Host to download the app to participate in VIP-only in-app promotions. Two separate promotions are relevant:

A VIP Flash promotion with a very large wagering requirement (hundreds of thousands in turnover), where the balance was allowed to accumulate normally during wagering and then retroactively reduced after completion.

A separate VIP Prime Mission (in-app) promotion with a 40x turnover requirement, where the exact same thing occurred:
– unrestricted balance growth during wagering
– wagering fully completed
– accumulated winnings forfeited after completion, leaving only the original bonus amount

In both cases:

There was no explicit disclosure in the app, promotion page, rollover interface, or bonus metadata stating that winnings above the original bonus would be forfeited after wagering.

No real-time cap, warning, or notice was applied during wagering.

The forfeiture was justified only after the fact, once wagering was completed.

This isn’t about refusing to reveal identity — the issue is whether material conditions were disclosed upfront. If a promotion operates on a “only the original bonus survives” model, that is not a minor detail; it fundamentally changes the expected outcome and must be disclosed as clearly as the wagering requirement itself.

For context, BC.Game’s own published VIP Prime Mission terms state that Bonus Money is credited, can be used for betting, and requires a 40x turnover to withdraw. They do not state that accumulated winnings are voided after completion. Other BC.Game bonuses following the same turnover model allow accumulated winnings to be withdrawn once wagering is met.

That’s why this has been raised both here and on Casino Guru: it’s not an attempt to damage reputation, but to ask a straightforward question that hasn’t been answered constructively by any BC.Game representative so far:

Where is this post-wagering forfeiture condition explicitly disclosed before participation?

If it exists, it should be easy to point to. If it doesn’t, then calling the concern “baseless” isn’t accurate — it’s a disclosure issue.

[Questat]

Hey, are you an authorized BC Game representative,, can you please look into my complaint ? Or bring it forward to the people that make decisions at BC.Game please

He’s not, and there’s no authorized representative here other than BC.Game itself, since they’re the ones who created this thread.

Looking at the account, it was last online on January 13, so there’s a good chance he hasn’t even seen the recent comments yet. If you’re not satisfied with the casino’s online support, the only real option is to wait until the account comes back online and responds here.

[mirakal]

Some of the stuff that you stated makes zero sense whatsoever.

Give it 1% 

Firstly, 1xbit is a proven scam site which has a shit ton of scam accusations in this forum and elsewhere and they are only operating thanks to their connection with their sister site(1xbet). Many of the accusations are legit.

I’m pretty aware of their reputation on the forum, so yes, they’re considered a scam. What I’m saying is that despite all that, they’re still operating.
I’m not playing on those sites myself, but the fact that I can still access them right now means there are probably still users gambling there. And those users could eventually end up as new victims.

Secondly, BC.Game isn't a proven scam site like 1xbit, but many of the accusations against them are legit too(KYC, Payment processor etc). Their reputation in this forum keeps sinking with time.

Assuming you’re referring to scam accusations posted on the forum, which I honestly haven’t checked yet, it does make me wonder why the community still hasn’t tagged them. That makes me think the accusations might lack solid evidence, or at least not enough to completely damage the casino’s reputation. Around here, tags aren’t given lightly. So if nothing has happened so far, it probably means the claims aren’t strong enough yet, or they’re still being questioned by the community.

[Lakai01]

[...]
Secondly, BC.Game isn't a proven scam site like 1xbit, but many of the accusations against them are legit too(KYC, Payment processor etc). Their reputation in this forum keeps sinking with time.

What accusations are you referring to here? I haven't really been following the scam accusations here in the forum lately, but the ones I remember were all cleared up and 90% of them were legitimate payment refusals by BC.Game.

I wouldn't consider the KYC cases to be confirmed scam attempts either... BC.Game doesn't require KYC from its customers for fun, but is forced to do so by the various licenses the site holds. What you can hold against them – and many other sites – is that KYC is often only required for larger payouts. Unfortunately, this is common practice in the crypto online casino industry.