Feature enable to avoid self ban completely

[Findingnemo]

Customized UI is not something of very common, and what difference does it make to simply avoid those games from the third-party providers, because it is always stated on the game page. So as a player you can simply chose which game you are going to play and if a particular game is not giving you the wins then simply chose something else.

[Fortify]

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.

I've encountered a few providers that do exactly this, allowing you to limit your view to only selected providers. I'm not sure why you'd keep going past the 500 or even 1000 soon mark though because I'd give up well before hitting that. You should also be wary about the particular casino you are playing on, because they can actually be the biggest obstacle to slots paying off. They can define their own rtp and possibly control other hidden functionality in the background. You're also not guaranteed to ever hit a bonus game, although in my experience they're a lot more common as they want you to keep playing - the buzz of those micro games are one of the funniest parts of gambling.

[DrBeer]

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.

And what is the problem with just not using games of such providers? No, I understand that filtering and hiding them is quite convenient, but you can also protect yourself from such providers ? I'm not sure that the platform itself can block the provider of the service, for which the platform receives income - it's their business.

[Grace333]

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.

And what is the problem with just not using games of such providers? No, I understand that filtering and hiding them is quite convenient, but you can also protect yourself from such providers ? I'm not sure that the platform itself can block the provider of the service, for which the platform receives income - it's their business.

Exactly, I don't think it would easy for any casino to ban or block a provider because you laid a compliant. Maybe what op needs to do is either gamble on a reputable casino or avoid the casino game he is having issues with. There are thousands of casino games and I bet you will also find the one that interests you just like this Gate of Olympus Game. Even though your request makes sense it would be a difficult choice for casinos to make because providers and casinos work hand in hand and we definitely may not have any information about their agreement.

[Porfirii]

I think you take this issue too seriously. If I don't like certain providers I simply obviate their games and look for the ones I like. In my TV I have many channels I don't usually watch, but I have not seriously considered deleting them so far, even having the option to easily do it.

I guess that this has more to do with how different we are. Those people who score high for OCT would greatly appreciate a feature like that.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

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.

I definitely understand what you mean but don't you think that some or even most gamblers could end up making the mistake of banning a provider from never showing up on their game list again simply out of a temporary anger or disappointment?

Saying from personal experience where (not gambling related maybe but till serves as a good example) an app started messing up on my phone, it was an exchange actually, I was trying to sell some coins but the app hanged/seized/froze, I waited for more than 5 minute for the app to unfroze and when it finally did, the opportunity to sell the coin at the price it was good was no longer there, I got really angry and deleted the exchange app promising myself never to have anything to do with that exchange again.

Weeks later, I still changed my mind and downloaded back the same app I deleted and today, that exchange have become one of my favourite..
So you really have to think this through and ensure it's a feature you really want casinos to introduce.

[Doan9269]

By now we should know that there are some things that the casino may not have to implement for us except we do for ourselves, you cannot assume that every one gambling does not know what they want, and at the same time they can't be the one to decide for us on the right thing to do or not when it's comes to gambling and the decision to make in it, c a gambler is expected to device a self exclusion measure for himself or try to avoid playing a particular provider once you see that there is no enough transparency needed from the provider they are using.

[Victorybit1]

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.

Lol 😆 I can feel your pain but that would limit alot for the casino, I think it will be much easier if you were to just avoid or ignore the game of the provider but am a little bit curious to why the whole provider, I mean there are a couple of games that are highlighted by pragmatic play that seems to be interesting although we both can't have the same opinion on the issue or games I suppose.

[knuckey]

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.

It's possible that if they provide a feature like that it will be detrimental to the gambling site itself. because the games provided by the Paragmatic server can usually be controlled by them and it is possible that the main source of the bookie or gambling site is this kind of game. although some gambling sites provide sports betting, but they also still provide games from paragmatic servers, if they block these kinds of games, their income could fall

[STT]

Some games are so irritating and seemingly unendingly unlucky, being able to simply delete it from sight is the only pleasure left from that game at all.  I surely support such a measure, if only for something like six months.  I imagine there's some agreement on marketing a bundle offering that disallows this currently but it'd no doubt be a popular option and bringing control back to the player, a good idea.

[o48o]

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.

The fact that you have very long unlucky streak (when it comes to bonus rounds), is unlikely but not unheard of. But that's just statistics, in a same way it's unlikely not to win almost ever, it's almost impossible to win the max jackpot. So would you sue them for that as well, because it's even more unlikely then not winning bonus rounds with 3k spins.

Statistics go both ways, and they contain unlikely events. When those unlikely events (like very long losing streak) are against you, you feel like it's unjust. But you wouldn't bat an eye if it was happening for your advantage. So there's nothing to sue here.

I haven't seen an option to ban a provider, but you can filter them out by provider from slots list. Sadly it doesn't affect your changes, because it's not about providers.

[Crypto Library]

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.

I personally will say this about those who will use self exclusion or self banning type features and later try to gamble again on another platform, even if those specific games are banned from the games provider, it will not stop.

Because in their case it will be seen that they will find different providers of different casinos for gambling. And it is even easier to open a new gmail and open a new account with it and they can get more help only by using vpn. So the self exclusion issue has to come out completely from the person himself.

[Orpichukwu]

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.

That will be a nice feature, but they might not do it. What could be easier to achieve is if casinos could bring an option where you can filter and set the providers whose games you only want to be playing. Just as we could easily search for games by provider, these settings can be saved each time you log in to your account; you don't have to reset them again unless you choose to change the settings.

[Cantsay]

I think you take this issue too seriously. If I don't like certain providers I simply obviate their games and look for the ones I like. In my TV I have many channels I don't usually watch, but I have not seriously considered deleting them so far, even having the option to easily do it.

I guess that this has more to do with how different we are. Those people who score high for OCT would greatly appreciate a feature like that.

I feel the Op just is just angry at the provider and doesn't want to see them at all, because every time he sees them, the anger comes back. That's just the only possible explanation I have for this thread, because if he actually wishes not to use the provider, all he has to do is ignore their games, just like you have said and use the one he feels is better. There's no need to start banning a provider just because you had a nasty experience with them.

[Royal Cap]

Honestly, I don't think casino companies themselves will bring this kind of provider ban feature. Because it is their own loss. Especially popular providers like Pragmatic usually generate a lot of traffic and profit. So they want players to access as many providers as possible.

However, almost all casino sites have this provider filter option. If you search from there and exclude Pragmatic Play, you can easily find games from other providers. And the userscript suggestion that someone above gave can also be useful. Ultimately, your own control is the most important here. If you want, you can easily avoid games from a specific provider, so the entire responsibility does not go to the casino.

[taufik123]

I feel the Op just is just angry at the provider and doesn't want to see them at all, because every time he sees them, the anger comes back. That's just the only possible explanation I have for this thread, because if he actually wishes not to use the provider, all he has to do is ignore their games, just like you have said and use the one he feels is better. There's no need to start banning a provider just because you had a nasty experience with them.

Even if there is a bad experience, it may be an algorithm that is already running.
Without doubting any provider, each service provider has their own algorithm and if someone is disappointed, then it is necessary to see how they lost and if there was ever a win.

Each casino lists what services they use in the game and several services exist in the realm of one online casino,
this is just an option of which service to use because there will be several categories of games according to the provider's platform.

[livingfree]

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.

I don't think that they're going to do this.

They're a provider and they paid for them and so if a user requests for that, there probably won't be other offers to you if most of the games come from the same provider you don't like.

But this is a good feature for those gamblers who feel that there's sort of energy that comes from the providers that they've lost money.

It might be a good attempt to suggest it to them though.

[STT]

It doesn't have to be something too dramatic, it could be purely cosmetic viewability for the user.  The ability to make the game window or option for that particular game completely translucent and never seen again, in theory its there and in practise its out of sight out of mind for the user and they feel much better.
  Technically its still being offered but doubtful the user will select unless they reset their own options for user interface.

[BigTarget]

3000 of spins was a lot though. So it was ridiculous indeed. Even by just 60 spins, I panicked already if the bonus won't come out yet. But if I play on some shitty casinos, the spins can go for more but I bet it is not 3000 spins. Are you sure mate that the problem was still on the provider's side?

Because maybe this is on the side of the casino's anymore. But on a casino that I play, good thing they don't have a search function there. Although maybe they put it for a reason because there are people like you there for example. And as we know it, Pragmatic Play has plenty of games now. So it is a pain on the ass scanning that specific game, unless if you hearted them or added to your favourites already.

[Zadicar]

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.

I don't think that they're going to do this.

They're a provider and they paid for them and so if a user requests for that, there probably won't be other offers to you if most of the games come from the same provider you don't like.

But this is a good feature for those gamblers who feel that there's sort of energy that comes from the providers that they've lost money.

It might be a good attempt to suggest it to them though.

For sure they wont because this is where they do make money too. They might be having that self exclusion but it totally talks about on stopping on playing literally but blocking or not to see a specific provider then there's no such feature and they wont really be doing it. So the best approach? Just manually avoid them and if you do hate pragmatic then skip all the types of slots they do have and focus into other provider. Actually you would really be able to think up on this way. Imagine having that 3000 rolls and having no bonus? that would surely pissed you off and thinking about being non fair and thats something a normal reaction for us gamblers who do love slots. This is why i do keep on transferring on other slots whenever my first 30-50 rolls didnt give out something good win or my bankroll is that fastly declining then i do tend to make some switch up.