Structure comparison

Two games, side by side

The structural difference between two games, assembled from published specifications only. Nothing here forecasts a result or recommends either game.

Habanero

NetEnt

Play’n GO

Reading the difference

Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.

Both titles are built on the same format family: Ways to win. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
They come from different studios — Habanero and NetEnt — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 86.00% against 96.33% — Cashomatic is 10.33 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 1.4×: 1,562× against 2,200×, with Cashomatic higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Cashomatic does not publish a rating.
Shared theme signals: Wealth.

Both titles are built on the same format family: Ways to win. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
They come from different studios — Habanero and Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 86.00% against 96.50% — Perfect Gems is 10.50 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 3.2×: 1,562× against 5,000×, with Perfect Gems higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
Shared theme signals: Wealth.

Add to the comparison (up to four)