Traditional vs Provably Fair Game Testing

Easy Guide to Traditional vs. Provably Fair Casino Game Testing

For decades, the phrase “certified by GLI” or “approved by eCOGRA” has been treated as a seal of legitimacy in the online casino world. These labels are common and reassuring, but they raise an important question: 

What is actually being certified by third-party test labs, and how does it compare to provably fair games?

What Does “Audited” Actually Mean?

Most players assume these badges mean the games are fair. That the games have been fully audited at every level, including RNG (random number generator), RTP (return to player), and game logic. 

In reality, that’s not how traditional auditing works. These certifications are primarily designed to satisfy licensing requirements, not to provide end-user verifiability. Despite this, players are still asked to trust that everything is above board, without any ability to check for themselves.

In contrast, crypto-native platforms offering provably fair games developed to standards like those set by ProvablyFair.org take a fundamentally different approach. Their model isn’t based on promises or reputation; it’s built around technical verifiability and putting tools directly in the hands of players.

This article offers a clear comparison between traditional testing labs and the provably fair model, with a practical look at where each makes sense, and where they fall short, in today’s rapidly evolving gambling ecosystem.

Traditional Testing Labs: Built for Regulation, Not Transparency

Third-party testing labs have long served as the compliance backbone of the online gambling industry. Their role is to validate that games function within specified regulatory parameters before those games are allowed onto licensed platforms.

Each gambling regulatory authority has a list of approved test labs. For example, the UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) list of approved test houses includes:

• BMM Testlabs
• eCOGRA
• Gaming Associates Europe
• Gaming Laboratories International
•  iTech Global
• Nick Farley & Associates
• Quinel
• RiskCherry
• SIQ Gaming Laboratories
• Trisigma

How It Works:

1. The developer submits their game (or RNG engine) for review
   
2. The lab performs internal testing, often simulating millions of spins or rolls to validate the RNG and return-to-player (RTP) metrics
   
3. A certificate is issued
   
4. The process ends there and the game goes live

Limitations:

• One-time approval: There’s no ongoing verification once the game is deployed
  
• Private methodologies: The testing process and results are not transparent to the public
  
• Limited scope: Certificates often cover only RNGs, not complete game logic
  
• Zero player access: End-users cannot independently verify individual game outcomes

These frameworks serve a well defined purpose, especially in highly regulated markets (like the UK, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, New Jersey, Ontario, etc.), but they were developed before public verifiability became technically possible, or expected. 

It’s also worth noting that the certification process can be expensive for providers. For example, games often need to be released and certified in market-specific versions to comply with strict local regulations (e.g., bet sizes, spin speeds, bonus features). Conversely, some regulators, like those in Curaçao, Anjouan, Kahnawake, and Tobique do not require extensive game testing. Hence, casinos operating under these licenses may offer versions of games that have not been adequately tested.

Case Study: eCOGRA

London-based testing and certification service eGOGRA was established in 2003 by several iGaming industry stakeholders as a self-regulatory body. Its overall goal was to ensure fair gaming practices, player protection, and the professional conduct of online gambling operators, suppliers, and service providers. 

By 2025, eCOGRA was offering an extensive range of certification and compliance services including Product Certification, Game Engine Certification, RNG Testing, RTP Testing, Website Testing, Integration Testing, Platform Certification, Vault Compliance Evaluation (SAFE), Geolocation Testing, Live Dealer Testing, and Sports Betting Systems Testing. Additionally, the company offers ISO services, Cyber Security, and an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) service. 

Today, the agency is approved to offer compliance assessments for the following jurisdictions:

• Europe: Alderney, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Georgia, Gibraltar, Great Britain (UKGC), Greece, Isle of Man, Italy, Jersey, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Republic of Srpska, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland
  
• North America: Arizona, Bahamas, Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Kahnawake, Michigan, New Jersey, Ontario, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia
  
• South America: Buenos Aires Province, Buenos Aires City, Brazil, Colombia, Cordoba, Mendoza, Panama, Perua, Paraná
  
• Asia: First Cagayan, PAGCOR

eCOGRA clients include some of the biggest online gambling brands like 32Red, Bet365, Betway, Entain, Games Global, Habanero, Inspired, Kindred, Microgaming, Realistic, Red Rake Gaming, Relax Gaming, Sport Radar, and Thunderkick.

The Provably Fair Model: Built for Verification, Not Just Compliance

The provably fair model emerged alongside blockchain-based gambling platforms, where traditional trust assumptions were no longer acceptable. Instead of relying on third-party certifications, these systems enable players to verify the integrity of each game round themselves, using hashes, seeds, and open algorithms.

Key Features:

• Commit–reveal architecture: The casino commits to a server seed (usually hashed) before play begins
  
• Player-controlled client seed: Users can input their own seed, increasing transparency and unpredictability
  
• Round-by-round reproducibility: Players can verify that their result was mathematically fair
  
• Open-source verifier tools: Anyone can inspect the game logic and validate results independently

This model is especially suited to simple, in-house games like dice, crash, or plinko and used by many crypto gambling platforms, including the biggest casinos like Stake, BC.Game, and Rollbit. These games typically don’t rely on complex visual engines or proprietary slot mechanics, making them easier to audit fully.

However, provably fair standards like those from ProvablyFair.org go a step further, offering:

• Full game logic audits (not just RNG testing)
  
• Reproducibility of every outcome
  
• Simulated RTP testing
  
• Public-facing, plain-language audit reports

Traditional Testing vs. Provably Fair: A Side-by-Side View

The IP and Complexity Trade-Off

However, despite the advantages of provably fair technology, it’s important to acknowledge why many developers, particularly slot providers, remain cautious about full transparency.

Common Concerns:

• Intellectual property (IP) protection: Revealing full source code or logic risks cloning
  
• Complexity: Modern slot games involve proprietary engines, animations, and layered mechanics
  
• Historical assumptions: Much of the existing game code was never intended to be publicly audited

Regarding the first point, IP protection, it’s easy to understand why providers are concerned. After all, according to those in the industry like Juego Studios, a single online casino game typically costs between $20K and $500K to develop – and potentially much more for AAA titles, especially if they involve licensing costs (e.g., official movie or band slots). 

Take for example the famous Megaways slots, which feature proprietary mechanics from BTG (Big Time Gaming), or some of the hugely complicated NoLimit City, Pragmatic Play, and Hacksaw Gaming slots. These providers have invested staggering sums over many years to develop novel game mechanics and continuously improve production standards. 

That said, the landscape is shifting. With the rise of AI-assisted reverse engineering, code obfuscation tools, and an increasing demand for openness, some of the old assumptions about secrecy are being challenged. 

Even so, when it comes to complexity, as things stand in 2025, provably fair auditing makes the most immediate sense for simpler original, in-house titles – particularly those operated by crypto casinos looking to build trust directly with players. As mentioned previously, these typically include games like crash, mines, tower, hilo, plinko, limbo, coin flip, and roulette.

However, providers like Turbo Games, Spribe, InOut, and BGaming are pushing the envelope of provably fair technology. For example, creating provably fair slots – though, at least at the time of writing, they were still considerably simpler than most non-provably fair slots.

To address the need to protect IP used in more complex games, hybrid solutions are emerging. ProvablyFair.org, for example, works with developers to design confidential workflows that allow third-party audit of both RNG and game logic without exposing trade secrets. These models enable verification without compromising IP, especially when paired with secure environments or limited code disclosures.

A Better Definition of Fairness

The gambling industry is overdue for a better definition of fairness. One that goes beyond regulatory checkboxes and embraces verifiability as a core principle.

While traditional testing labs have their place, particularly in jurisdictions that require them, they were never built for player-facing accountability. Provably fair systems offer something different: the ability to see fairness in action.

As crypto-native platforms continue to grow, and as player expectations shift toward transparency and control, we’re likely to see a convergence: traditional labs adopting more open methodologies, and provably fair frameworks expanding to handle more complex games.

In the end, fairness shouldn’t be something you’re told to believe in. It should be something you can prove – every time you play.