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.
Super Strike
Habanero
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 94.00%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 2,215×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Space Fortune
Habanero
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 94.00%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 2,145×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- East Asia, Sci-fi & neon
VS
Animal Madness
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 2,250×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Super Strike vs Space Fortune
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 94.00% against 94.00%.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 2,215× and 2,145×.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Space Fortune returns more in theory over the long run, while Super Strike reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
Super Strike vs Animal Madness
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. 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: 94.00% against 96.20% — Animal Madness is 2.20 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 2,215× and 2,250×.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
