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.
Mining Pots of Gold™
Microgaming
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.00%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Crabby's Gold
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.25%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 70,000×
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Burning Desire
Microgaming
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.19%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Mining Pots of Gold™ vs Crabby's Gold
- 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: 96.00% against 96.25% — Crabby's Gold is 0.25 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Shared theme signals: Wealth.
Mining Pots of Gold™ vs Burning Desire
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Ways to win. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP: 96.00% against 96.19% — Burning Desire is 0.19 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Shared theme signals: Wealth.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
