Thrill casino vs BC.Game

Our record for Thrill contains one substantial document: the studio listing published on its own site, read on 26 August 2026. It contains no licensing authority, no licence number, no register link, no coin list, no verification clause and no feature tags. That is a description of our reading, not a claim that Thrill is unlicensed.

The distinction matters enough to repeat. If a reviewer writes that a brand has no licence when what they mean is that they did not find one, they have converted an absence of evidence into evidence of absence, and a reader makes a decision on it. Our data structure records the difference, and this page prints it.

Our record for BC.Game runs the other way. The licence, the company, the statute, the register status, the numbered terms sections and the provably fair scheme are all read from primary sources. Its coin list and its studio list are not, so the row that Thrill fills best is the row BC.Game leaves empty.

Reading down the table, the two blocks of missing information sit almost perfectly opposite each other.

Forty-seven studios is a real number, counted from the listing rather than rounded up from a marketing line. The list spans the large aggregating names a reader will recognise and a long tail of small studios that only appear on crypto-facing sites.

The recognisable end includes Evolution Gaming, Pragmatic Play, Play'n GO, NetEnt, NoLimit City, Hacksaw Gaming, Big Time Gaming, PG Soft, Novomatic, Relax Gaming, Red Tiger Gaming, Quickspin, Thunderkick, Endorphina, BGaming, GameArt, Slotmill, OneTouch, Fantasma and Spribe. The presence of Evolution Gaming is the closest thing we have to evidence of a live-dealer offering at Thrill, though we hold no live-dealer tag for the brand.

The other end of the list is the part that tells you what kind of site it is: AvatarUX, Backseat Gaming, Bullshark Games, Peter & Sons, Popiplay, TrueLab, Kitsune Studios, Foxhound Games, Pineapple Play, Hold Your Hat, Jinx Gaming, Delulu, Octoplay and Zerplaay among them.

Set the list against the other 23 published catalogues in our library and it turns out to be a fairly ordinary crypto lobby with a small private corner. The recurring core is all there: Hacksaw Gaming appears in 23 of the 24 catalogues we hold, Evolution in 22, and Endorphina and Pragmatic Play in 21 each, and Thrill names all four. Eleven of its 47 studios appear in three catalogues or fewer, and exactly three - Fat Panda, Hold Your Hat and WCK - are named by Thrill and by no other brand in the library. If that tail is what you are after, the catalogue is the reason to look; if it is not, most of the 47 can be found at a brand that also publishes a licence number.

• 47 studios named on Thrill's own listing, read 26 August 2026
• Includes Evolution Gaming, a live-dealer supplier, alongside the major slot studios
• Includes both major slot studios and a long tail of crypto-native ones
• No equivalent list has been read for BC.Game, so the count cannot be compared

BC.Game's licence is documented to a level of detail that is unusual: authority, number ALSI-202410011-FI1, the Computer Gaming Licensing Act 007 of 2005 as the governing statute, Anjouan Licensing Services Inc. as administrator, and a validation endpoint that returned VALID on 27 August 2026. The record also attaches conditions to that permission, including territories the licence does not extend to; our licence check page sets out that part of it in full.

It is worth knowing how far above average that is. Of the 40 alternatives in our library, 38 name an authority and publish a number, but only 32 of those numbers resolve in a regulator's own register; six publish a number whose only supporting link points back at the operator's own site, and two name no authority at all. A record that carries the statute and the administrator as well as the number is rarer still.

For Thrill there is no authority to name and no number to check, so there is nothing on our record that can be compared with any of it. We are not saying Thrill has no licence, and a reader should not take a blank cell as an answer. What we can say is that a reader who wants to verify a licence before registering can do that today for BC.Game and cannot do it from our data for Thrill.

This is the section where both records thin out. BC.Game's user agreement carries a section 6 headed Know Your Customer and identity verification, a section 9 on anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing, and sections 10, 11, 12 and 15 on deposits, withdrawals, bonuses and account restriction. We hold the headings, not the figures inside them.

That means no verification threshold from us for BC.Game, and no withdrawal cap. Any number you have seen attached to those subjects came from somewhere other than the clause list we have read. Our verification threshold comparison covers what identity checks are actually published across the brands in our library.

For Thrill we hold nothing at all on verification, coins or caps. Both brands are unread on coins, which is worth noting because both are commonly described as crypto casinos and neither has a coin list on our record. BC.Game at least carries a crypto-only tag; Thrill carries no tags.

Two documented halves of two different questions do not average into a winner. The table splits the decision by what the reader is actually trying to find out.

Thrill wins the catalogue question and BC.Game wins the accountability question, and those two answers are not interchangeable. If your decision is being made on which lobby holds the studios you play, the Thrill listing is the only read evidence on this page and it is a long list with recognisable names in it. If your decision starts with who issued the licence and whether the number resolves, BC.Game is the only side of this comparison that can be checked at all.

The temptation with a pair like this is to split the difference and declare a narrow winner. We think that would be dishonest here, because the missing halves are not small. A studio list with no licence entry and a licence entry with no studio list are two different kinds of incomplete, and a reader who cares about the missing half should treat this page as a starting point rather than a conclusion.

There is also a third option this page cannot show you, and it is the one most readers should take. Ten of the 40 alternatives in our library publish both a coin list and a studio catalogue, and five publish a numeric verification threshold on top of that. A brand that fills the columns both of these leave empty is a better answer than either half of this comparison, and our top ten alternatives page sets those out with the clause numbers attached.