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.

Wolf Blaze Megaways™
Microgaming
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 95.98%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Animals
VS
Flying Pigs
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 25×
- Reels
- 25
- Theme signals
- Animals
VS

Hood vs Wolf
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 95.39%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 4,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Animals
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Wolf Blaze Megaways™ vs Flying Pigs
- 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 Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- RTP cannot be compared: Flying Pigs does not publish one.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
- Shared theme signals: Animals.
Wolf Blaze Megaways™ vs Hood vs Wolf
- 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: 95.98% against 95.39% — Wolf Blaze Megaways™ is 0.59 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Hood vs Wolf does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: Animals.
Add to the comparison (up to four)



