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.

Dungeons and Diamonds™
Microgaming
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.03%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- East Asia, Fruit & classic
VS

Double Fortune
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.22%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 100,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS

Immortal Fruits
Nolimit City
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.06%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 2,787×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Fruit & classic
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Dungeons and Diamonds™ vs Double Fortune
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. 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: 96.03% against 96.22% — Double Fortune is 0.19 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Double Fortune does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: East Asia.
Dungeons and Diamonds™ vs Immortal Fruits
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- They come from different studios — Microgaming and Nolimit City — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.03% against 96.06%.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Immortal Fruits does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: Fruit & classic.
Add to the comparison (up to four)



