Transparency

Our editorial method

A repeatable, source-led process for turning game specifications into useful comparisons.

What we verify

Our catalogue separates published mathematical data from observable demo behaviour. RTP, volatility, reel layout and maximum win are displayed only when the source record supplies them. When a value is uncertain, we mark it as not published rather than estimating it.

How catalogue pages are assembled

Structured game records are normalised automatically so tens of thousands of releases can use the same accuracy rules. Source reviews are preserved. Where source copy is missing or too short to explain the page, an automated editorial layer adds the recorded provider, release information, available mechanics, a demo inspection checklist and clear data limitations. Automation is used for coverage and consistency, not to invent game mathematics or claim first-hand play that did not happen.

What the demo adds

Every indexed game page links the written record to a working free demo. Readers can inspect the interface, paytable and feature rules directly. Demo outcomes are never presented as evidence for RTP or likely returns.

Ratings are never invented

Structured aggregate ratings are emitted only when reviews come from a documented, verifiable user-rating system. Editorial scores are kept separate. This keeps structured data representative of visible content.

Configuration matters

Some operators use different RTP configurations. Every review asks readers to confirm the value in the in-game help screen before real-money play.