Push Gaming Big Bite – pravi RTP ili manipulisani algoritam?

During many sessions playing Big Bite, I’ve experienced the same recurring issue shown in my video. The slot has a cascade feature where different symbols drop in, but I’ve noticed that when a scatter is about to land in the corner of the reel, the game often replaces it , effectively removing the chance to trigger free spins or get additional scatters.

This has happened to me thousands of times across countless rounds. I contacted the casino ( MyCasino.ch ), and they claimed to have contacted the provider. I’m not sure if that actually happened. I decided to contact Push Gaming myself. They neither admitted nor denied anything, simply sending me a short reply saying I should deal with the casino directly.

So far, the casino has not given me any proper answer. They only refunded me CHF 2 for the specific round I showed in my video. But this issue doesn’t happen in just one round , it’s been happening in thousands. If a casino refunds money, it means they saw something wrong, yet they still haven’t provided any explanation or solution.👇🏻

https://drive.google.com/file/d/11dF8H-7BeWBQ9Lm2k15HzeWLR7wLFwIO/view?usp=drivesdk

It’s not just that. The game seems to have some kind of "correction" mechanism. Sometimes it literally freezes or stutters when it "knows" something good is coming, as if trying to prevent a winning round from triggering. And in bonus mode, whenever there’s something valuable on the table, the final whale animation almost never lands. If the whale symbol does appear and the algorithm "realizes" it, it quickly corrects it before it can award anything significant.

Nice to see you back again!

Though I’m afraid we might once again find ourselves on opposite sides of the fence when it comes to how these games work. Hope you won't say again that I'm a game provider in disguise. 🙂

In slot games, the result of a spin is determined entirely by the RNG at the exact moment you hit "spin." Everything you see afterwards, e.g., cascading symbols, disappearing icons, and "almost" scatters is just an animation revealing an outcome that was already decided milliseconds earlier. The game isn’t replacing or removing symbols mid spin, it’s simply displaying what the RNG has already generated in a visually engaging way.

What may look like a scatter "changing" or being "moved away" is actually a near miss, and that’s a common and intentional feature of slot design. Near misses are meant to create the feeling that a big win was almost within reach, which keeps the player engaged. It’s not the game making last-second decisions to take your win away; the outcome was defined the moment you hit spin.

As for the refund, that’s not an automatic confession that something was "wrong"; it’s often just a goodwill gesture to keep a customer reasonably happy or make him leave, rather than evidence of a malfunction...

Well, perhaps learning more about how slots work would be useful and I mean it like a polite suggestion, because I still appreciate your engagement. See you.

Hi Radka,

I’m fully aware of how slot machines work, and I understand that when you press the "Spin" button, the RNG has already decided the outcome. That is precisely why it’s suspicious when the game appears to be "correcting" itself in real time. In my sessions, I have seen cases where the machine freezes or makes strange spins, as if it’s adjusting the result on the spot, which contradicts the idea that everything is determined milliseconds before.

In the cascade feature, what I show in the video is clear: the scatter was there. When you press spin again, you can even see that same symbol passing through the reel in the exact position where it was before. This is not a "near miss" or just an animation; it’s a visible change that indicates the RNG is not acting in a fixed manner, but that there is manipulation in the visual execution of the result.

I understand the general technical explanation, but what I’m showing is not a "near win feeling" designed to keep the player engaged; it’s visual evidence that the result being shown to the player is being altered right in front of their eyes, which is something entirely different and far more serious.🫶🏼

Hello, I can see you have been looking at this once more very closely and I value the detail you have noticed. The key point is that the visual part of a slot spin is not what determines or changes the result. It is simply there to reveal it in a way that fits the RNG outcome that was already decided when you hit "spin."

If it ever looks like a symbol is "moved," "replaced," or "corrected" in real time, what is actually happening is that the animation is being aligned with the predetermined result. Developers design the graphics so that the final display matches the outcome but it can sometimes give the impression of a live change when in fact nothing is being recalculated.

Even in cascading features, the path symbols take on screen can overlap with previous spins or look familiar but it is still just a visual sequence built around the fixed result. The outcome is not altered mid spin and there is no mechanism for the game to "correct" the RNG result once it has been generated.

I understand it might look suspicious in your video but from a technical standpoint, it is a case of presentation and not manipulation. This has always been the case, especially in high-end graphic games,…

Thanks to your comments, I get to dive much deeper into how things actually work in modern slots and I genuinely enjoy that. Still, it is important for me to stay objective, so I hope you can understand that too.

Thank you for your explanation, Radka. I understand what you mention about animations and the visual presentation of slot games. But in this case, we are not only talking about a visual perception or a confused player.

The casino itself wrote to me twice proposing to "find a fair solution for both parties" and asking me about my expectations. That has nothing to do with simple animations or a visual misunderstanding. If a licensed casino acknowledges in writing the need to find a solution, it means the issue was taken seriously and there was an implicit recognition that something was not right.

I am attaching here the screenshots of those two emails (in German). If you don’t understand German, just copy them into any translator and you will see exactly what they say.

I believe this completely changes the framework of the discussion: it is not just about how the symbols are displayed, but about an issue that even the casino itself tried to handle outside of the regulatory path.

Thank you for sharing those screenshots; I kind of understand why you interpret them as the casino implicitly acknowledging an issue.

On the surface, the wording can really sound like that.

From experience, though, I can tell you that this kind of language is very common in customer support. Even when the provider doesn’t identify any actual malfunction, the team may still try to de-escalate the situation and find a "fair" outcome by offering extra communication or sometimes even a goodwill gesture.

It’s a similar approach we also take here on the forum: if a player is, for example, struggling to use certain features correctly, we’ll often respond in a softer, customer-care style rather than bluntly saying "you did it wrong." The point is to keep the conversation constructive, even if the technical responsibility doesn’t lie with us.

That’s why I believe those emails don’t change the technical framework of this case. The random outcome of the game is fixed the moment you press "spin," and there is no mechanism for altering or "correcting" it afterward.

The casino’s replies were more about communication style than about confirming a fault in the game. I understand they just can't say, "We are sorry, but you got it all wrong." Especially if it's obvious that you will be sharing their responses further.

I do appreciate you bringing these details up, because they highlight how easily customer-friendly wording can be misunderstood. It gives us a chance to explain both sides more clearly.

Thank you, Radka, for your explanation. I understand that sometimes "customer support language" is used to calm a situation, but in my case this wording was repeated twice, explicitly asking me what my expectations were and proposing "a fair solution for both parties." That goes beyond a simple "gesture of goodwill" and shows that the case was considered serious at an internal level.

It is also important to point out that this wording was not used from the beginning. For more than a month, the responses were only technicalities such as "the provider has not seen anything." Only after I communicated that I was going to share my accumulated evidence with the regulator and that I had already started making the situation public, the casino suddenly adopted the position of looking for "a fair solution for both parties." That makes a clear difference: it was not a spontaneous gesture of customer care, but a reaction to pressure.

If it was only about calming down a player, then why did they later send me a completely contradictory email stating that for "legal reasons" they could not offer either a refund or credit? That contradiction itself is already evidence that something irregular happened.

I see. I get why the wording might feel like the casino was admitting something went wrong. Phrases like "finding a fair solution for both parties" and asking about your expectations can eventually give that impression.

From what I’ve seen, this is very standard customer support language, especially when a case gets more attention or there’s mention of regulators. The emails clearly show that they were just trying to close the situation calmly and avoid conflict, not admitting any technical problem.

The change in tone from purely technical answers to a friendlier style fits with how support teams usually respond once a situation becomes more visible or sensitive. The later email saying they can’t give a refund or credit actually shows the game worked as it should.

So, I understand why you see it differently, but to me, it seems more like reading hope into the emails than seeing a real malfunction. The way they responded fits normal support behavior, not an admission of error.

Thank you for your explanation, Radka.

I understand what you are saying about customer support language. However, I think there is an important difference:

Normally, a casino would reply with something like:

"After reviewing your complaint, we have not found any irregularities. We have checked all data with the provider, and everything works according to the rules and required standards. The games undergo strict controls and are regulated. We are sorry you had a bad experience on our platform and we wish you a nice day."

That is the kind of standard support response one would expect.

In my case, what happened was different: for one month I only received technical explanations and these standard-type replies. But after I informed them that I would share the evidence with the regulator and that I had already started making it public, the casino suddenly changed tone and started talking about finding "a fair solution for both parties" and asking about my expectations.

That sudden and unusual change of posture is what I find significant.

Thank you for clarifying your point. I see why you interpret the sudden change of tone as significant; it does look different from the earlier technical replies.

From my own experience in customer support, though, I would say this shift is not unusual. The longer a discussion goes on, the more likely it is that the team will move away from repeating technicalities and instead try to close the case in a more constructive or conciliatory way. That is especially true when a player communicates professionally and insists on continuing the dialogue, which is exactly what you are doing here.

Let’s consider our ongoing communication as another example. Normally, many similar threads on the forum don’t even reach this stage, because they tend to turn into unproductive arguments quite early. In those situations, I simply stop repeating myself and close the matter. This conversation has gone further precisely because you are presenting your view in a logical, calm and respectful manner.

That’s why the casino’s language changed: not because they found a fault in the game, but because they were trying to adapt to your communication style and end the discussion without escalating. I can honestly say that if I were in their shoes, I would probably have written something very similar.

For me, this confirms that the technical framework hasn’t changed. The outcome of the spin is still determined the moment you press the button, and nothing in their replies indicates otherwise. What changed was only the support style, in response to how you presented your case.

I pretty much adopted the same manner here on the forum not because I'm hiding anything, but because I respect the way you explain your perspective on things.