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.

NetEnt

Pragmatic Play

Play’n GO

Reading the difference

Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.

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 Pragmatic Play — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 96.33% against 96.27% — Jumanji is 0.06 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 1.2×: 500× against 600×, with Three Star Fortune higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Jumanji does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Jumanji returns more in theory over the long run, while Three Star Fortune reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

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: 96.33% against 96.21% — Jumanji is 0.12 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Both cap out at roughly the same place: 500× and 500×.
Volatility cannot be compared: Jumanji does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Jumanji returns more in theory over the long run, while Doom of Egypt reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

Add to the comparison (up to four)