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.
Flowers
NetEnt
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.32%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Chambers of Ancients
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.31%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- 20,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Heavenly Elephant Fortune
Microgaming
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.27%
- Volatility
- Low
- Win cap
- 10,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- East Asia, Animals, Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Flowers vs Chambers of Ancients
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- They come from different studios — NetEnt and Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.32% against 96.31%.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Flowers does not publish a rating.
Flowers vs Heavenly Elephant Fortune
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- They come from different studios — NetEnt and Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.32% against 96.27%.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Flowers does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
