Sjajno je ?to obra?ate tako detaljnu pa?nju na poreklo igre. Ovih dana je stvar, verujem, slo?enija.
U su?tini, ova dva se ne?e podudarati:
Proizvod koji je kazino zvani?no kupio od Plaison-a je prva veza - zvani?ni ?lanak
Druga je verovatno igra koja se mo?e igrati besplatno i otkrivena je na zvani?nom sajtu - izlo?beni komad
Pored toga, prva veza je povezana sa va?om specifi?nom sesijom igre - ID, druga je prili?no uobi?ajen format.
Iskreno, dokazivanje da je igra samo kopija zvani?no licenciranog proizvoda je prili?no komplikovano, pa ?ak ni mi ne mo?emo da uo?imo duplikate bez uputstava provajdera igre. Veze vi?e nisu validan oblik identifikacije. Koliko mogu da procenim, kopije se obi?no identifikuju po razlikama koje se pokazuju tokom igre.
Da li vam to ima smisla?
It's great you're paying such detailed attention to the game's origin. These days, the matter is more complex, I believe.
Basically, these two won't match:
The product that the casino officially purchased from Playson is the first link - the official article
The second is probably a game that can be played for free and was revealed on the official website - an exhibition piece
Additionally, the first link is associated with your specific game session - ID, the second is a rather common format.
Frankly, proving the game is just a copy of an officially licensed product is quite complicated, and even we are not able to spot duplications without the game provider's guidance. Links are no longer a valid form of identification. As far as I can tell, copies are usually identified by the differences shown during gameplay.
Does it make sense to you?
Automatski prevedeno: