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.
Queen of Cairo: Royal Maxways
Microgaming
- Format family
- Maxways
- RTP
- 96.59%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- 10,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Egypt, Animals
VS
Shark Feast
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- 40,000×
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Animals
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
- Different format families: Queen of Cairo: Royal Maxways is Maxways, Shark Feast is Fixed paylines. Read each screen with its own rule set.
- 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: 96.59% against 96.20% — Queen of Cairo: Royal Maxways is 0.39 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 4.0×: 10,000× against 40,000×, with Shark Feast higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Very high.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Queen of Cairo: Royal Maxways returns more in theory over the long run, while Shark Feast reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
- Shared theme signals: Animals.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
