• Video Lottery Terminal
• Difference Between Slots And Vlts 2
• Difference Between Slots And Vlts Free
• Difference Between Slots And Vlts Games

Slot machines often referred to as “Vegas-style” or traditional slots are the machines you’re probably used to playing. Each traditional slot machine in a casino plays independently from other machines. The only way in which they are linked is usually in terms of the jackpot, but this is only for progressive networks. Slot machines may share a progressive jackpot that is awarded randomly to one player and one player only at a time. Each slot machine connected to the progressive network contributes a small part of each bet played to the jackpot. Some slot machines have “local” progressive jackpots which are not shared with other machines. The Differences Between Slot Machines, 'Bingo' Machines and VLTs. If online like your gameplay more instant, you can reveal riches on our online scratchcards, where three matching symbols can put money in your pocket. We also offer a range of online casino games that slots you that real club experience, wherever bingo are.

Quite different:

Video Lottery Terminal

What Is the Difference between Video Lottery Terminals and Slot Machines?Can someone explain to me the disdain for VLTs, outside of the context of Video Poker?
From the VP angle, I totally get it. The game may look like Video Poker, but it's not dealt from a real deck, it's impossible to figure out the return percentage, there's no real strategy (the fairy comes and fixes your hand if you throw away a winner), etc. etc.
But compared to a regular slot machine, nothing about the VLT mechanism vs. an independent RNG machine inherently hurts or harms the players, as far as I can tell. A VLT game could be structured such that the RTP (return to player) of an average bet is 99% just as easily as an RNG machine could be programmed with an RTP of 80%. I understand that with the VLT approach, depending on specific implementation, the percentage might vary and not be constant from one hand to the next, depending on the pool of remaining 'tickets.' But that doesn't seem to be a negative on its face..in fact it might even be a positive, since VLTs might actually be 'due' in the ploppy-understood sense, unlike a traditional slot.
Is it just that VLTs tend to be programmed with lower returns in general?Perhaps variance plays a role in why states prefer Class II VLT's. An RNG CLass III slot might have a 'bad day' as far as the state is concerned and award too much in returns. As I understand it, the state is guaranteed their pound of flesh with Class II VLT operations. That is, the state isn't gambling on their returns!
Edit: Added closing comment.

Can someone explain to me the disdain for VLTs, outside of the context of Video Poker?
From the VP angle, I totally get it. The game may look like Video Poker, but it's not dealt from a real deck, it's impossible to figure out the return percentage, there's no real strategy (the fairy comes and fixes your hand if you throw away a winner), etc. etc.
But compared to a regular slot machine, nothing about the VLT mechanism vs. an independent RNG machine inherently hurts or harms the players, as far as I can tell. A VLT game could be structured such that the RTP (return to player) of an average bet is 99% just as easily as an RNG machine could be programmed with an RTP of 80%. I understand that with the VLT approach, depending on specific implementation, the percentage might vary and not be constant from one hand to the next, depending on the pool of remaining 'tickets.' But that doesn't seem to be a negative on its face..in fact it might even be a positive, since VLTs might actually be 'due' in the ploppy-understood sense, unlike a traditional slot.
Is it just that VLTs tend to be programmed with lower returns in general?

It's a Genie!

But compared to a regular slot machine, nothing about the VLT mechanism vs. an independent RNG machine inherently hurts or harms the players, as far as I can tell.

It might.
I don't know how they work, so maybe I'm all wrong. But in some lotteries there is a set number of prizes of varying amounts (think scratch cards, for example). If VLT slots operate that way, it means there is just one jackpot, say, per period of time, ten second prizes, and so on. Whereas on a regular, random slot machine in Vegas, the odds of hitting a jackpot are the same for every pull.

Perhaps variance plays a role in why states prefer Class II VLT's. An RNG CLass III slot might have a 'bad day' as far as the state is concerned and award too much in returns. As I understand it, the state is guaranteed their pound of flesh with Class II VLT operations. That is, the state isn't gambling on their returns!
Edit: Added closing comment.

FYI, electronic pull-tab VLTs are not Class II. They are Class III, but that's only relevant when a tribal gaming operation runs them anyway because IGRA only applies to tribal gaming. In New York, the VLTs are regulated by the state, and the state can make whatever rules it wants.
Edit: I just read that article about the purported difference between slots and VLTs. It is very wrong.

A video lottery terminal (VLT), also sometimes known as a video gaming terminal, video slots, or the video lottery, is a type of electronic gambling machine. They are typically operated by a region's lottery, and situated at licensed establishments such as bars and restaurants.

VLTs typically feature a selection of multiple games, primarily video slot machines and Keno. Their exact operation depends on local law: many VLTs are stand-alone devices containing a random number generator. Each terminal is connected to a centralized computer system that allows the lottery jurisdiction to monitor gameplay and collect its share of revenue. The outcome of each wager on a VLT is random. VLT operators are not able to program the total amount wagered, or payouts, through the central computer system. A minimum percentage payout usually is written into that jurisdiction's law. That percentage is realized not by manipulation of the game, but by adjusting the expected overall payout.

In some jurisdictions, VLTs do not contain a random number generator, and display results from a fixed pool controlled by the central system (in similar fashion to scratch-off lottery tickets).

• 2United States

Difference Between Slots And Vlts 2

Canada[edit]

VLT programs are operated in eight Canadian provinces, with the only major exceptions being British Columbia and Ontario. These machines are typically governed by the region's lottery and gaming boards, and are situated inside licensed establishments such as bars.^[1] In several provinces, VLTs were deployed primarily to help counter illegal underground video gambling operations, while several (particularly those whose economies are reliant on natural resources) cited economic development as a factor in their use.^[1]

VLTs were first popularized in Atlantic Canada, with New Brunswick becoming the first province to introduce them in 1990, and the other Atlantic provinces following suit in 1991. In New Brunswick, sites were initially limited to a maximum of five machines each, and they were later removed from locations that did not hold liquor licenses. Since 2002, the Atlantic Lottery Corporation has been fully responsible for all VLT operations in the province, rather than having their costs covered by private owner-operators. The ALC had already operated the VLT programs in Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia since their launch, while Prince Edward Island transferred its VLTs to the ALC in 2003.^[1] Quebec introduced VLTs in 1994.^[1]

VLTs also began to appear in Western Canada in 1991, with Alberta trialling them during the Calgary Stampede and Klondike Days events before beginning a province-wide program the following year. Manitoba initially deployed them at rural locations only, but expanded them to Winnipeg in 1993, and the Assiniboia Downs race track.^[1] Saskatchewan introduced VLTs in 1993, primarily to encourage business at establishments in smaller communities (which faced competition from out-of-province casinos, prior to the opening of several commercial and First Nations casinos in the province).^[1] Saskatchewan's VLT program also includes games offering regional and province-wide progressive jackpots.^[2]

To address problem gambling concerns, VLTs in Canada are typically equipped with features and restrictions as safeguards in comparison to a casino-style slot machine, including the display of a player's credits as a cash value rather than units of a denomination, on-screen display of the current time, maximum session lengths with mandatory cash-out after time expires, limits on hours of operation, no Stop button (to regulate the pace of play), wager limits, limits on the amount of cash that can be deposited during a single session, and problem gambling resources.^[1] Some VLTs may also offer integrated account systems for tracking usage and setting limits on cash spent.^[3] In 2012, Nova Scotia began to mandate that users enroll in an account card system known as My-Play in order to use VLTs. The government discontinued the scheme in 2014, citing its decision to allow players to register anonymously without personal information ('light' enrollment) as having defeated the purpose of the system—as many players only used the cards temporarily before disposing them. The government claimed it would save $200,000 a year by removing the system.^[4][5]

Each province has imposed caps on the number of VLTs that may operate in their province, and Nova Scotia has enforced a moratorium on new VLT sites and attrition on existing sites outside of First Nations reservations (taking VLTs out of service permanently if a site closes or removes them). In the 2000s, Alberta reallocated some of its VLTs to increase the number allowed at specific sites, in effect reducing the total number of sites in operation. Some provinces also have regulations that allow individual municipalities to hold referendums to opt out of VLT operation in their communities.^[1][3][6]

United States[edit]

Lotteries in the U.S. were considering VLTs as early as 1981, when a planned experiment with 20 machines by the New York State Lottery was scrapped, after the Attorney General determined they would be illegal.^[7] A similar plan by the New Jersey Lottery died in 1983 after ties between state officials and VLT manufacturers raised conflict of interest concerns.^[8]

The first VLTs in the country were installed in late 1983 by Bellevue, Nebraska as part of its municipal lottery. Eleven other local lotteries in Nebraska followed suit, until the state banned the devices, effective 1985.^[9]

South Dakota became on October 16, 1989, the first state to adopt VLTs. In a unique arrangement with private industry, the machines are owned by private companies but monitored by the South Dakota Lottery via a centralized computer system that assures the integrity of the games. South Dakota imposes a substantial tax on the net income (gross income minus player winnings) of the games. Beginning in 1992, four attempts were made to repeal South Dakota's video lottery; all were widely rejected by public votes. Most recently, in May 2006, petitions were filed containing over 21,000 signatures in order to place the issue on the November ballot; voters again agreed to keep video lottery, by a 66%-34% margin.

Other US jurisdictions which have had legal video lottery include Oregon, South Carolina (formerly), Rhode Island, Delaware, New York, Ohio, West Virginia, Louisiana, Maryland, Montana and Illinois. Of these, Delaware, Rhode Island, and West Virginia formerly participated in a shared VLT game, Cashola.

Difference Between Slots And Vlts Free

The U.S. Virgin Islands also has a legalized video lottery, managed by Southland Gaming of the Virgin Islands.^[10] The local governments in St. Thomas and St. John use the funds generated by the video lottery to fund various government programs on the islands; primarily focusing on educational efforts.

Racinos[edit]

In 1990, West Virginia introduced the concept of racinos when it allowed MTR Gaming Group to add VLTs to Mountaineer Race Track & Gaming Resort in Chester.

Racinos differ from traditional VLTs in that all video lottery games are played on a gaming machine.

Other states that have legalized VLTs in racinos are Delaware, Rhode Island, Louisiana, New York, Ohio, and West Virginia.

Non-lottery[edit]

In Montana, VLT-type poker, keno and bingo machines are legal to operate in the private sector. Since the 1970s, Montana was the first state, other than Nevada and New Jersey, to legalize machine gaming. Online scratch off lottery tickets.

Difference Between Slots And Vlts Games

Keno and Bingo machines were first introduced in Montana in 1975. Although subject to legal challenge, these machines were deemed legal in 1976 after the Montana Supreme Court ruled in favor of Treasure State Games, a private company that brought the first games of this type to the state. (See Justia.com - Treasure State Games v. State of Montana)

Unlike in other states, the gaming devices are not under the jurisdiction of the state lottery. In 2011 the state legislature added another class of games, so-called 'line games', to the list of approved games.

All establishments licensed for the on-premises consumption of alcohol within the state of Montana are allowed to operate such machines provided they have the correct permits. In addition, there are some Montana establishments (such as some truck stops) that do not possess 'on-sale' licenses but hold 'grandfather' licenses allowing them to operate gaming machines.

The maximum prize awarded on these machines is $800, with a maximum bet of $2 per hand. The legal age to gamble in Montana is 18, although people under the age of 21 cannot gamble in bars.

As in Louisiana, the games in Montana are not technically part of its lottery.

Class III video lottery[edit]

Currently, only Oregon and South Dakota employ Class III gaming technology (incorporating a random number generator) into their VLT games. Oregon's VLT program was modeled upon those deployed in Canada.^[1] The devices operated in Montana are also Class III machines, but as they are not connected to the Montana Lottery are technically not 'video lottery terminals'. This means that unlike any of the Class II states (which have a fixed number of winners, analogous to scratch cards), Oregon and South Dakota lottery players compete against a house edge rather than other lottery players.^{[citation needed]} This is the same type of gaming offered in Nevada, Connecticut and Atlantic City, New Jersey as well as in the majority of tribal casinos. Currently, the state of Oregon offers its players a 91-95% payout on each of its games. South Dakota and Montana law specifies that payouts must be greater than 80%, although in reality actual payouts in these two jurisdictions are around 88-92%.^{[citation needed]}

Most US jurisdictions do not allow VLTs and those that do have attracted the same criticism the Canadian provinces have. However, some non-players have expressed tolerance for the machines.

Other terminology[edit]

In certain jurisdictions, VLTs are known as video gaming devices (VGD) or video slot machines along with 'Video Gaming Terminal (VGT)'. Most VLTs are multi-game devices, allowing the players to select, from an on-screen menu, the game(s) they wish to play. They are also known as poker machines and fruit machines in some areas.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

1. ^ ^abcdefghi'VLT Gaming in Canada'(.doc). Canadian Gaming Association. March 2006. Retrieved November 29, 2019.
2. ^'Moose Jaw woman wins $1.2 million from VLT'. Regina Leader-Post. 2018-10-01. Retrieved 2019-11-30.
3. ^ ^abDoucette, Keith (2011-03-25). 'New VLT moratorium to continue in Nova Scotia'. iPolitics. Retrieved 2019-11-30.
4. ^'Province says My-Play system unsuccessful in helping gambling addicts'. Cape Breton Post. Retrieved 2019-12-02.
5. ^'John Xidos calls province's My-Play figures 'far-fetched''. CBC News. August 26, 2014. Retrieved December 1, 2019.
6. ^'Provincial VLT revenues slow after four years of growth'. CBC News. March 21, 2018. Retrieved November 29, 2019.
7. ^'Video lottery plan scrapped'. New York Times. via LexisNexis. September 11, 1981. p. B6. Retrieved 2012-06-02.(subscription required)
8. ^Asher, James (March 6, 1983). 'Bets are off: Many say politics killed New Jersey's high hopes for video lottery'. Philadelphia Inquirer. via NewsBank. Retrieved 2012-06-02.(subscription required)
9. ^Sutton Jr., William W. (March 17, 1985). 'A bet on video games pays off for one town'. Philadelphia Inquirer. via NewsBank. Retrieved 2012-06-02.(subscription required)
10. ^Video lottery information page

External links[edit]

• VLTs: Nova Scotia's Billion Dollar Gamble An investigative website on VLTs in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia prepared by University of King's College students.