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.
Asgardian Fire™
Microgaming
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.00%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Greek myth, Norse myth
VS
Supreme Zeus
Hacksaw Gaming
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.39%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 12,500×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Greek myth
VS
Guardians of Ice & Fire
PG Soft
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.70%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 50,000×
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Not published
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Asgardian Fire™ vs Supreme Zeus
- 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 Hacksaw Gaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.00% against 96.39% — Supreme Zeus is 0.39 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Supreme Zeus does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: Greek myth.
Asgardian Fire™ vs Guardians of Ice & Fire
- 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 PG Soft — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.00% against 96.70% — Guardians of Ice & Fire is 0.70 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Guardians of Ice & Fire does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
