FortuneTiger.io checks factual claims against the source responsible for that claim. A PG Soft document can confirm a game rule; it cannot explain why a casino delayed a withdrawal. An operator’s terms can describe its own account rules; they do not prove that every user received the same result.
Source priority
Primary and directly responsible sources come first. Depending on the question, these include:
- official PG Soft game information and technical documents;
- recognised testing-laboratory reports;
- official casino-operator terms and help pages for operator-specific claims;
- gambling regulators and government bodies;
- banks, payment providers and wallet documentation for payment states;
- official app stores, device-security documentation and verified software publishers.
News reports, forums, complaint sites, Reddit, YouTube and social media can reveal recurring problems or claims worth checking. They are not treated as proof on their own.
How game claims are checked
Mechanics, RTP, volatility, paylines, respins and multiplier conditions should be traced to PG Soft material or a relevant technical report. If a document applies to a specific tested version, that version matters.
FortuneTiger.io does not turn a simulated audit result into a promise about an individual session, and it does not infer a future result from previous spins.
How operator claims are checked
Account rules, KYC requirements, promotions, deposit methods, withdrawal limits and processing statements belong to the casino operator. These claims should be attributed to the operator and dated when they can change.
An offer shown on an operator page is an operator-published claim until FortuneTiger.io has directly observed the relevant behaviour under documented test conditions.
First-hand tests are labelled separately
A first-hand observation records what happened in a specific test. The record should include the operator, exact domain, date, relevant region or access conditions, account state and the part of the flow being tested.
When visible, the record may also include provider label, game version, RTP, paytable, bet range, transaction status and payment references.
One account or one session is not generalised to every user, country, operator or later date. See the First-hand Testing Methodology for the full procedure.
How payment claims are checked
Payment problems are split by system state. A casino can show a withdrawal as pending, approved or completed, while a bank, wallet, processor or blockchain shows a different state later in the chain.
Where possible, FortuneTiger.io looks for transaction references, timestamps, status messages and documentation from the system currently controlling the transfer.
How fake-platform claims are handled
A copied logo, familiar game screen or use of the PG Soft name is not enough to prove that a platform is genuine. Checks may include the exact domain, company identity, claimed licence, app publisher, payment recipient and whether the game itself identifies PG Soft.
If the available evidence is incomplete, the wording should reflect that. The site distinguishes between a confirmed fact, a likely explanation, a possible cause, a user allegation and an unverified claim.
Conflicting or outdated information
When reliable sources conflict, the disagreement is described rather than silently choosing the more convenient version. Dates, version numbers and regional scope are included when they materially affect the answer.
Operator pages and regulations can change quickly. A statement that was accurate on one date may need to be updated later without implying that the earlier version was fabricated.
What FortuneTiger.io does not invent
The site does not invent RTP figures, licences, ownership details, payment times, withdrawal limits, legal status, app ownership, support contacts, game mechanics or reasons for an account restriction.
It also does not convert marketing language such as “fast payout” or “best casino” into an editorial conclusion without evidence.
Corrections
If reliable evidence shows that a published factual statement is wrong or materially outdated, it should be corrected. See the Corrections Policy for how correction requests are handled.