Feature enable to avoid self ban completely

[swogerino]

As always I thought maybe somethings have changed now that I passed a lot of time without gambling and played Pragmatic Gates of Olympus Super Scatter, which of course got to near 3000 spins without giving the bonus through normal game play, now if this is not something to be sued this f*cking provider then I don't know what it is.

I was wondering because of this maybe casinos could add a feature where you expel and ban only a provider or some providers instead of completely self ban option. For example an option to never show again Pragmatic ever again to me and this be non changeable after the user accepts it.

[TedMosby]

What's different from filtering the games based on the category, like by game providers? Does it not work in your case? But yeah, I can see the recommended or featured games usually come from Pragmatic Play. Personally, I don't have problems with this game provider. Based on my experience, the result I got from playing the same slot game from the same game provider on different casino sites are different. But I'm not sure if this is just coincidence, luck, or the algorithm being reset when I jump into another casino site. However, I agree with you. If we can get a more personalized dashboard (front page dashboard), maybe it will help us avoid the games from providers we don't like.

[Cointxz]

As always I thought maybe somethings have changed now that I passed a lot of time without gambling and played Pragmatic Gates of Olympus Super Scatter, which of course got to near 3000 spins without giving the bonus through normal game play, now if this is not something to be sued this f*cking provider then I don't know what it is.

I was wondering because of this maybe casinos could add a feature where you expel and ban only a provider or some providers instead of completely self ban option. For example an option to never show again Pragmatic ever again to me and this be non changeable after the user accepts it.

This is a good idea but so far I don’t see any feature that will limit a game provider on the casino, maybe it can be part of the self exclusion since casino already improving the self exclusion that already includes deposit limits, wager limits and other limitations related to casino account.

Pragmatic play is mostly very brutal on their slot games that has high max win.

I have no luck on that Gates. Sweet Bonanza occasionally give me some lucky win.

[TopT3ns]

As always I thought maybe somethings have changed now that I passed a lot of time without gambling and played Pragmatic Gates of Olympus Super Scatter, which of course got to near 3000 spins without giving the bonus through normal game play, now if this is not something to be sued this f*cking provider then I don't know what it is.

I was wondering because of this maybe casinos could add a feature where you expel and ban only a provider or some providers instead of completely self ban option. For example an option to never show again Pragmatic ever again to me and this be non changeable after the user accepts it.

Even the slightest negative experience with one provider may lead to a huge frustration among players. The notion of permanently blocking a specific provider is a brilliant idea, since it allows gaining a higher level of self control, without necessarily closing an account. One of the key requirements would be transparency, and this can become one of the features that can enable the users to have a comfortable experience playing the game without being distracted by a malfunctioning gameplay.

[Outhue]

Casinos and providers rely on eachother, I hope you know that some casinos won't function without game providers because that's all they have to offer, but not all of them, I don't see how banning will help anyone, not even the gamblers, listen to yourself, you gambled severally and you expected to atleast get something back, you now think that banning provider should be a solution, I think you are angry for not getting anything back.

If bonus is what you are so concern about I think you should find casinos that gradually gives bonuses, online casinos will never add such filter to avoid some providers on their casinos, maybe they exist but not from those ones that I know, but assuming you have a particular game provider in mind that you trust more you can search for their games.

[WhoYouCantKill]

Honestly, I believe that could actually be a great feature. Sometimes, it's not even gambling generally that messes with you or makes you to lose your cool but a particular game, and being able to just get rid that particular game permanently could actually help you maintain somewhat level of control of your gambling activities and not always have to always leave the casino with some messed up mood. The only thing is that, this wouldn't really help everyone, because some folks can easily reach out to other casinos to access that particular if they go long enough without playing that game and really misses it.

[Free Market Capitalist]

I was wondering because of this maybe casinos could add a feature where you expel and ban only a provider or some providers instead of completely self ban option.

There is no way they are going to develop and implement something like that. Besides, it wouldn't do you any good. What you can do is set up a filter, as you've been told, but if what you want is to protect yourself from falling back into playing with the same provider, as you say

For example an option to never show again Pragmatic ever again to me and this be non changeable after the user accepts it.

If you were to feel the urge to gamble, nothing would stop you from signing up at another casino that uses the same software provider and placing bets there. That’s the problem with self-exclusion measures—they’re not very effective online. At least in brick-and-mortar casinos, they work on a national level.

[swogerino]

No other provider ever goes near 3000 spins without a bonus which is why I said these guys need to be sued so they can learn their lesson, how come they pass an Audit from gambling big auditors when their slot behaves like this, probably they change their behavior when they get an audit. Even NoLimitCity which is notoriously known for giving bonuses much rarely compared to other providers does not go this far that is why I insist casinos should implement this feature, probably a far less self exclusion and account closing.

[Karl_3000]

Because you do not like a game provider which is a third party on a gambling site, you may just prefer not to use the  gambling site again. I think most people will continue to use the gambling site, but not use the game provider. I do not think any gambling site can do what you say about this and this is because most gamblers are not thinking like that, no much requests about it. Gambling sites may not do what their customers are not requesting, they may even not think in such direction.

[michellee]

The thing prevents you playing one provider is when the provider don't allow your country to play their games. Casino don't have that feature but the providers can prohibit you from playing the games.

If you don't want to play the slot from one provider, you should stay away and choose slot from other providers. No need any feature to do this but you should skip it by yourself.

[EarnOnVictor]

Your idea is nice, as it helps your psychology and tailors your preference. However, I don't think this request is possible anywhere yet, as providers protect themselves with documented regulatory compliance. For now, you can only ask support to block specific providers, or use the full self-exclusion feature. Regarding legal action, because game outcomes are dictated by certified Random Number Generators, any legal steps for unfavorable outcomes will be unsuccessful.

[swogerino]

Your idea is nice, as it helps your psychology and tailors your preference. However, I don't think this request is possible anywhere yet, as providers protect themselves with documented regulatory compliance. For now, you can only ask support to block specific providers, or use the full self-exclusion feature. Regarding legal action, because game outcomes are dictated by certified Random Number Generators, any legal steps for unfavorable outcomes will be unsuccessful.

I get your point but near 3000 spins without bonus giving is criminal to say the least and against criminals legal action is the preferred way to deal with them. I can block myself through my Firewall the rules to not allow Pragmatic servers but there is no point in that as I can disable the rules any time I want to. The best way is to enable as you say from support for example through their cyber team that for my IP or endpoint where I usually play from when asked by me Pragmatic Ip-s to be blocked.

[Agbamoni]

I was wondering because of this maybe casinos could add a feature where you expel and ban only a provider or some providers instead of completely self ban option. For example an option to never show again Pragmatic ever again to me and this be non changeable after the user accepts it.

Some casinos have the filter option. It wont ban Pragmatic Play from their platform because it is a general feature, but it will take out Pragmatic games and leave the other games for you. But this is how it works: choose the provider you want from the filter option, and every other one will be excluded.

[CryptSafe]

This would be a good feature on casino games if implemented. Maybe filtering a particular game out of your profile through this option would make some sense if one does not want to see that game provider on their list of games. I was also thinking about such options but I thought of using the search box but still then, it is not possible to use the search box to completely avoid some game providers because there are some games from that provider that might interest you and you will still be tempted to play such game over and over so I think this idea of yours is nice and should be looked into or reviewed by casinos.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

I was wondering because of this maybe casinos could add a feature where you expel and ban only a provider or some providers instead of completely self ban option. For example an option to never show again Pragmatic ever again to me and this be non changeable after the user accepts it.

I don't think it will be a good idea for the casino operators to implement on this, firstly, people will abuse it, second, some will take advantage of it and try to ban any game provider they are making loss upon, and the moment many are discovering to do the same shows that the casino are not going to have a upper edge in seeing gamblers playing a particular game under their providers, sometimes gamblers decisions are also triggered by their feelings because they make losses and this may not be a genuine action the intended to do on a normal day, if not because of the loss.

[danherbias07]

I like the idea. I also have some hated slot providers because of the lack of RTP, and it's like you have to spend money first before they give anything back. Always like that when I deposit money and start playing again. I mean, it's not like the other providers, where you feel like you are continuing where you left off.
I don't like Pragmatic Play too and I might put it in my list to be banned. Then, there are the very high volatility type slot providers that feel like you are not going to win anything for a very long time, or maybe until they deplete all your savings.
It's actually a good idea, but I highly doubt they will do it.

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

Because you do not like a game provider which is a third party on a gambling site, you may just prefer not to use the  gambling site again. I think most people will continue to use the gambling site, but not use the game provider. I do not think any gambling site can do what you say about this and this is because most gamblers are not thinking like that, no much requests about it. Gambling sites may not do what their customers are not requesting, they may even not think in such direction.

Pragmatic Play is equally one of the most popular game provider, and I'm pretty sure they provide more than 50% of the games on each casino, and likewise generate casinos most of the profits. But it's just sad to hear that O.P gambled over 3000 spins but yet never got any bonus offer. So why it comes to O.Ps request that casinos should enable a feature to block certain game providers, I'm pretty much sure that casinos won't implement such feature, because they will be scared, many people might block the very game provider which is generating them the most revenue. So in a situation like this, I think to manually avoid all games provided by Pragmatic Play should be the best option for now.

[mcdouglasx]

If you know how to program and you play on a PC, you could create a user script with Tampermonkey that recognizes this provider and hides their games, if that makes you comfortable, since I don't think the casino itself will focus on giving you that option. Alternatively, you could have a favorites list and only go to the ones you like. It's frustrating, but I doubt casinos will give you options to hide any of their games from view.

[swogerino]

I like the idea. I also have some hated slot providers because of the lack of RTP, and it's like you have to spend money first before they give anything back. Always like that when I deposit money and start playing again. I mean, it's not like the other providers, where you feel like you are continuing where you left off.
I don't like Pragmatic Play too and I might put it in my list to be banned. Then, there are the very high volatility type slot providers that feel like you are not going to win anything for a very long time, or maybe until they deplete all your savings.
It's actually a good idea, but I highly doubt they will do it.

As I said the cyber team of the casino with request can do it easily, also the other providers I have never experienced near 3000 spins without getting the feature option in each of their slots, even slots with x500.000 max win give you the minimum feature more often that these crazy bastards do. I wonder how come they pass the audits, audits would never permit such a thing, in fact NoLimitCity in their games description sometimes give an approximate spins when you receive bonus like for example, average 171 to 999 spins to be guaranteed a bonus feature, that is easy to do, I am not saying do not crush me, crush me but crush me by also giving the bonus feature so I continue gambling and do not stop there if that is the end result. I just want to be deceived by the bonus feature to think it is maybe going to help me when in fact it will absolutely not do this.

[Strongkored]

I don't know whether the casino will see this feature as something important to implement because in my opinion, it's just like a player complaining for being unlucky.  
Regarding slot games that have a super scatter type, I also had a bad experience, so I never thought of playing them again, and even Pragmaticplay became a bad provider in my opinion.