With the increase of gambling at gaming venues has come increased competition between gaming venues to obtain a larger share of the total gambling spend. Gaming venue operators have therefore continuously looked for new variations and types of games in order to attract both new and return customers to their venues.
In response to this need, suppliers of gaming devices and systems have attempted to provide the sought after variety, while still developing games that comply with the relevant regulations in the jurisdiction of the gaming venue operator. Suppliers of gaming devices therefore are faced with restrictions on the types of games and gaming apparatus that are allowable, both in terms of the prevailing regulations and in terms of providing a return on investment to the gaming venue operators.
In addition, it is important that a player be able to understand the operation of a game quickly so that the player can start to quickly play the game and therefore extract maximum entertainment from the game.
One method that has been used with gaming machines is to offer a progressive prize. The progressive prize is contributed to through gaming activity on the gaming machine, for example by taking a percentage of all wagers placed on the gaming machine. The progressive prize is awarded on the occurrence of a progressive prize winning event. Various methods of contribution to a progressive prize and determination of when the progressive prize has been awarded have been developed.
A problem with progressive prizes is finding an appropriate method of determining how to award the progressive prize. Taking the example of a gaming machine that implements a spinning reel game, if the progressive prize winning event is the spinning up of a particular combination of symbols on a pay line that has been purchased through the placing of a wager in the form of a number of credits, then this combination can be expected to occur with the same frequency no matter how many credits are wagered on that outcome.
For other winning combinations of a pay line, the award may be multiplied by the amount of credits that were wagered on that pay line. However, multiplication of a progressive prize in this manner is not viable. The result is that the contribution to the expected return to player of the progressive prize is higher for players that only wager a single credit per pay line than for players that wager multiple credits per pay line. An ongoing problem faced in the field is how to develop new ways of offering progressive prizes that adequately address variations in the expected return to player.