3 ms·
From the article: > There was also strong incentive for us to promptly pay him, so he’d keep playing. I loved that line, because it's the converse of a casino
by ble 11y ago
From the article:
> There was also strong incentive for us to promptly pay him, so he’d keep playing.
I loved that line, because it's the converse of a casino player in a hole, thinking maybe they can make it back if they keep on playing.
- danneu 11y agoWell, the entire difference between the house and the player is that the house has the edge, so the house always wants the player to indefinitely recycle their winnings until they have none. It's more than an inverse in thinking, it's how the house makes money.
- thaumasiotes 11y agoNo, it's the same thing as the dumb guy in a hole. They already know this guy has an edge over them. The more he plays, the worse that gets. But, as you pointed out, they can't ban him, because they have no way of recognizing him when he walks back in.
- danneu 11y agoOh, as in Stunna was gambling that the player didn't have an exploit and that the developers were drawing the right conclusion. I'll allow it. :)