Here are our responses to some of the outrageous, false claims made by users in reviews for Backgammon NJ on the US App Store. Since Apple doesn't give developers a way to respond to reviews, we're responding to them here.
You can also read about how to prove that Backgammon NJ doesn't cheat here.
| Posted by: | SwordShadow |
| False Statement: | (Note: This person updates his review multiple times per week and sometimes even multiple times per day. Look for his false review near the top on the US App Store.) |
| Our Response: |
Update: We were finally able to get this person to send us dice statistics using a special method in the game. The dice stats he sent us included detailed information which allowed us to track exactly how he was manipulating the dice to skew the stats. In short, he was looking at upcoming dice rolls, and whenever a sequence of repeated doubles was about to come up, such as 3 doubles in a row, he would restart the game on an opening roll which would result in the computer getting the 3 doubles in a row. He didn't do this on every sequence, but he did it enough to skew the dice stats to look like the computer was getting more doubles and doubles in a row. This just goes to show that certain people are intentionally lying about our game in reviews on the app store. We have no idea why someone would do this other than if they were a competitor, troll, just out of general maliciousness, or some other incomprehensible reason. The best thing you, as a potential buyer, can do is to read our detailed explanation (http://www.njsoftware.com/note.html) about how you can use the technical features included in the app to prove to yourself that the game is honest and then think long and hard about whether you understand and agree with the proofs before you buy the app. The proofs are the only way that you'll be able to convince yourself without a doubt that the game is honest. If you don't understand and agree with the proofs, then don't buy the app. You'll be much happier if you choose a different game with an easier AI. This person has changed his story so many times, it's comical. He's updated his review 30+ times so far as of 8/12/10. At first, he claimed that the computer was getting 3.6 times as many doubles as he was. He emailed us and insisted that he kept track of the count over 100 games. When we asked him to send us the seed and roll numbers of some games he was playing so that we could double check his counts, he never did. In fact, there was never any proof of his claims, only his continually updated review on the app store that stated it as "fact." After we put in dice stats, he changed his story to "the computer rolls 17.5% doubles to my 14.4% (484 to 398)". So where was this supposed 3.6x disparity? According to his earlier story, the computer should have had over 1000 doubles. For many months, he kept updating his review claiming the 3.6x doubles disparity. You have to wonder why he originally claimed the 3.6x doubles: did he miscount, or did he just lie? This person claims that he is an expert with 37 years of backgammon experience. He sent us the following position as "proof" that the computer cheats, because it "had no reason to make the move it did". In this money game with no Jacoby, the computer (blue) played this 6-4 by taking a piece off and then hitting the piece on 2.  Upon analysis of this position, we determined that the computer's move was indeed the correct move and that the move this person claimed was better (taking two pieces off) was in fact a blunder. The computer's analysis was as follows: 6/2* 6/off, Win = 93.6% Gammon = 77.0% Backgammon = 1.3%, Equity = 1.66 6/off 4/off, Win = 92.3% Gammon = 66.5% Backgammon = 1.5%, Equity = 1.53 (-0.13) We also performed a rollout in GNU Backgammon with this result: 6/2* 6/off, Win = 95.1% Gammon = 77.2% Backgammon = 0.9%, Equity = 1.72 6/off 4/off, Win = 91.6% Gammon = 67.9% Backgammon = 1.4%, Equity = 1.56 (-0.16) With all this evidence, this person still claimed that no human professional would ever play the hitting move. So we posted this position to bgonline.org, where professional backgammon players go to discuss backgammon. So far, every expert on bgonline has agreed with the computer's play. One expert gave the following explanation:
http://www.bgonline.org/forums/webbbs_config.pl?noframes;read=63804 |
| Posted by: | (Various - see below) |
| False Statement: | (Note: Some comments about particular reviewers who post false statements on the US App Store.) |
| Our Response: | As of 8/12/10: Stone Kisses - This person was initially someone who updated their review continually claiming our app cheated for various reasons. Up through the middle of March 2010, he had updated his review 8 times. Recently, he changed his mind when he realized our app didn't cheat, and he updated his review a 9th time to change it from 1 to 5 stars. We want to thank him for being honest enough to admit he was wrong and also for leaving the text of his previous reviews so that others can see the progression. SwordShadow - This person has updated his review 30+ times. See the false statement at the top of this page to read about him in detail. Sigea - This person has updated his review 13+ times. In one of his initial reviews, he claimed that the fact that the app didn't roll doubles during the opening roll was proof that it was cheating. When we explained that smart programs discarded doubles during the opening roll so as not to make the user waste time re-rolling, his statement saying that was proof of cheating conveniently vanished, without any admission of his own error. Drez12345 - This person claims that he's not able to look at his dice statistics because he hasn't rolled 1500 rolls. He must have been in too big of a rush to write his false review because he failed to notice that the dice statistics are displayed after the sample size message is dismissed. Ciapp, Flyboytim, Jkiy2356, musicwiz4u, YuraFrayman - You'll always find false reviews from these people near the top of the list. |
| Posted by: | kyuss77 |
| False Statement: | "Game no longer loads since 3/14 update." |
| Our Response: | Try the following:
|
| Posted by: | Jvfhjvdx |
| False Statement: | "I am considered expert level and have been playing backgammon since my father was stationed overseas during the Korean conflict and this app's "lucky rolls" make me want to throw this across the room." |
| Our Response: | How long you've been playing backgammon has no bearing on how well you play. Some of the top backgammon players in the world right now are very young. If you're an expert player, then you won't mind proving the false statements you've made about our app with concrete evidence. Take the proof that we've provided (RNG Seed, printouts of dice rolls, detailed method that shows the AI isn't looking at upcoming rolls, etc) and prove that it's not true. Post your evidence for all to see at the BGonline.org forums, frequented by many of the top players in the world, start a discussion there, and find out what the true experts think. We'll expect your post there any day now. NOTE: We first issued this challenge on the US App Store on 2/11/10. To date, no one has posted to the forum. It's easy to falsely slander us with no accountability, but when asked to prove your claims in a forum of experts, you can't do it. |
| Posted by: | SwordShadow |
| False Statement: | "Dice stats prove cheating... The random dice favor the computer..." |
| Our Response: | First, dice statistics can be modified by using Manual Rolls and by changing the Next Roll Number and RNG Seed. Dice statistics are pretty charts, but they don't prove anything. The only way to prove your false claims is to take the detailed proof that we've provided that shows the game isn't cheating and prove that it's not true. See our previous response above for details on what you need to do. Second, if you think that random means you're going to roll exactly the same number of doubles or other rolls as your opponent, then you have a lot to learn about statistics. The larger the sample size, the more closely the statistics will approach expected values, but they'll never match exactly. For a closer approximation, you would likely need to look at a sample size on the order of 100,000 rolls or more. Go to wikipedia and read about sample size and statistics. Third, if there really was a problem with the dice rolls, then wouldn't you want it fixed? If so, why have you refused, on multiple occasions, to provide us with the RNG Seeds and Roll Numbers that we need to analyze and reproduce what you're seeing? If you refuse to provide relevant information, there's nothing that we can do. |
| Posted by: | Jvfhjvdx |
| False Statement: | "The glowing reviews are paid plants." |
| Our Response: | The good reviews are written by real users who we have no association with, some of whom are world-class players who have identified themselves by name in their review. If you really think that a world-class player who has competed at the World Backgammon Championship would jeopardize their reputation by identifying themselves by name and lying about a $5 backgammon app for money, then we have a bridge we'd like to sell you... |
| Posted by: | SwordShadow |
| False Statement: | "I don't care how many paid "giants" say otherwise." |
| Our Response: | A Giant of Backgammon is one of the top 32 players in the world. If you can't believe a Giant, then who can you believe? And once again, if you think a Giant would lie about a backgammon app for money, then...see our response above. Better yet, go to the BGonline.org forums and ask them yourself. |
| Posted by: | Dj Blue 42 |
| False Statement: | "...ai looks ahead at upcoming rolls and plays accordingly." |
| Our Response: | To prove to yourself that the AI does not look at upcoming dice rolls, follow these steps. |
| Posted by: | Stone Kisses |
| False Statement: | "I've also noticed that if you have the "Auto Bear Off" on that sometimes it will move a man instead of taking one off." |
| Our Response: | In many situations, it's correct to move a checker instead of taking one off. Backgammon NJ uses a pre-computed bearoff database, so it plays nearly perfectly in bearoff situations. You should note that there are 2 settings for Auto Bearoff: Greedy and Best Move. Greedy will always attempt to bearoff as many checkers as possible, even when doing so isn't the best move. However, since you have it set on Best Move, it will always make the best move, which sometimes means not bearing off a checker. If you think that the computer made the wrong move during bearoff, then take a screenshot of the board and send it to us. We'll analyze it and tell you why the move it made was the best move. |
NJ Apps