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.
Candy Rush Wilds 2
Microgaming
- Format family
- Cluster pays
- RTP
- 96.21%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Sweets
VS
Sugar Mania 8000
Microgaming
- Format family
- Cluster pays
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Sweets
VS
Chocolate Deluxe
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.75%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Sweets
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Candy Rush Wilds 2 vs Sugar Mania 8000
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Cluster pays. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- RTP cannot be compared: Sugar Mania 8000 does not publish one.
- Volatility labels differ: High against Very high. The label describes how widely outcomes scatter, not whether one game is better.
- Shared theme signals: Sweets.
Candy Rush Wilds 2 vs Chocolate Deluxe
- Different format families: Candy Rush Wilds 2 is Cluster pays, Chocolate Deluxe is Standard video slot. Read each screen with its own rule set.
- They come from different studios — Microgaming and PG Soft — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.21% against 96.75% — Chocolate Deluxe is 0.54 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 5,000× and 5,000×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Chocolate Deluxe does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: Sweets.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
