Push Gaming has some serious explaining to do after two separate casino streamers land identical win sequences in Jammin Jars
The article was updated on the 11th of October
It shouldn’t be possible. In fact, the odds of something like this happening are astronomical. Jammin Jars by Push Gaming has been the hottest and most talked about online slot since the day of its release. Because of a shocking event, we now have even more reason to talk about it. A video was uploaded and shared on Youtube today by an alert viewer after having observed two identical big wins won by two different streamers. When we say identical, we mean identical.
If you have seen the mechanics at play in Jammin Jars you probably understand that there is an almost infinite number of combinations that can land during any spin on the 8×8 reel set, let alone during the run of a whole bonus. These two streamers, as it turns out, had the same win sequences played out, down to the last spin, even ending up having the exact same 1660.15 xbet wins.
It’s hard to imagine that it’s the result of sloppy coding that we’re witnessing – for several reasons. Slots are tested and evaluated with millions of spins before becoming certified, and besides, what is the chance of a ‘bug’ happening to two different streamers in temporal proximity. If it were the case, it would undoubtedly indicate serious issues with not only Push Gaming, but the testing agency as well.
Without any direct comment from Push Gaming it’s hard to find an explanation, but if allowed to speculate about this remarkable episode, built-in automatic demo sequences could have been used although unlikey as it would be extremely hard to pull off in a live stream. Some game providers implement such functions in their demo games in order to facilitate testing and to demonstrate various features without having to wait hundreds of spins for them to trigger. Being reviewers ourselves, however, we have never seen such option in any of Push Gaming’s slots.
It is also possible that the game is designed in such way that the win sequences and payouts are predetermined while the RNG is there to ensure these win sequences are triggered randomly. It would essentially be the same as having the exact same line win in a 10 payline slot.
Whatever the reason may be behind this, we’re probably all equally interested to hear Push Gaming’s version, although this surely puts the studio in a very uncomfortable spot as game developers, for competative and safety reasons, tend to avoid talking about how their games are built. It’s also important to point out that, however bad this may look, no foul play is necessarily involved.
We promise to update this article when more information becomes available to us. Meanwhile, have a look at the video and judge for yourselves.
Update: Push Gaming’s response
Push Gaming finally made an official comment to the unlikely event on Casinomeister:
“To understand what has happened in the above video you will need to understand how the game is designed. So here’s some background information on Jammin’ Jars.
The game does work by randomly picking a win/loss from an extensive pool of results, as picked up and explained by some of the members here. The wins are represented through cascading symbols, the random giant fruits feature and multiplying wilds, rather than traditional spinning reels. This makes the win sequences very long and therefore makes the game extremely complex mathematically.
The nature and complexity of creating a well-balanced model for this game, whilst making it enjoyable for players using a typical video slot method are extremely difficult (we would argue impossible). We do not use this method in our reel based video slots.
As the results are selected from a pool of results, what happened on the two streams was highly unlikely as there is a huge amount of possible results for each winning category across the base and bonus rounds, in this case, 1,600x in the base game. The game is certified by a third party (eCOGRA) and runs on a 96.83% RTP.
As the video shows two of exactly the same result, which is incredibly unlikely to happen (1 in over 1.3 million), we understand the suspicions, but as was suggested by some members in this thread we have not and cannot give anyone a result to play through.”
So in an attempt to make some sense of Push Gaming’s response, what they are saying is that the game comes with an extensive, but still limited pool of results.
In other words, there may for example be an x amount of win sequences programmed for 1000x wins, and another x amount of win sequences for 1600x wins which are then triggered randomly by the players. It may very well be so (we’re just guessing here) that Push Gaming became a bit lazy and didn’t program enough pools to make the game appear random enough, which these two wins above is a perfect example of.
Furthermore, a game that initially appeared to mathematically be able to randomly produce an almost infinite number of win combinations (just by looking at the reel set) turns out to be quite limited in reality after all is said and done, something that is likely be a turn off for some people.
Update October 7
Four days after this article was published yet another similar event was discovered by Youtuber Degsy Degworth, the same guy that initially uncovered this whole story. It now turns out two more streamers just recently had the same identical win sequences in Jammin Jars even uploaded on the very same day. Those of us who felt Push Gaming’s explanation, as quoted above, was inadequate the first time around might now perceive it as a straight out lie.
If the event of two streamers landing identical win patterns truly is 1 in over 1.3 million, as explained by Push Gaming themselves, what is the chance of this happening again only a week or two later. To clarify things – we do not question the legitimacy of the slot, Push Gaming, or the streamers, but as situations like this might solidify players beliefs that slots are ‘rigged’, an explanation from Push Gaming would probably be in the best interest of everyone.
Update October 11
Additional information regarding the game was provided to us by one of our readers who writes:
“After examining eCOGRA certification documents, I noticed that the theoretical return to player for Jammin Jars, as provided by Push Gaming (96.83%), was conciderably higher than the one recalculated by eCOGRA (95.17%). The point here is not to point finger or call out Push Gaming because I simply lack the insight and knowledge to correctly assess the information, but such big difference appears strange to me and makes we wonder why Push Gaming is still advertising the higher rtp in the paytable. It would be interesting to hear what Push Gaming has to say about it.”
Bigwinboard.com has taken part of the documents but has decided not to make further comments. It should be noted, however, that the result of the tests carried out by eCOGRA usually does differ from the providers, sometimes in the positive and other times in the negative.