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.
Ancient Treasure: Poseidon
Microgaming
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.10%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 18,000×
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Greek myth, Adventure
VS
Treasures of Kongar
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 15,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Adventure
Reading the difference
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 — Microgaming and Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.10% against 96.20% — Treasures of Kongar is 0.10 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 1.2×: 18,000× against 15,000×, with Ancient Treasure: Poseidon higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Treasures of Kongar returns more in theory over the long run, while Ancient Treasure: Poseidon reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
- Shared theme signals: Adventure.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
