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.
Let It Burn™
NetEnt
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.00%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 2,700×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Running Sushi
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.00%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 3,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Granny's Wild
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 2,800×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Let It Burn™ vs Running Sushi
- 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 — NetEnt and Pragmatic Play — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.00% against 96.00%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.1×: 2,700× against 3,000×, with Running Sushi higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Let It Burn™ does not publish a rating.
Let It Burn™ vs Granny's Wild
- 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 — NetEnt and Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.00% against 96.20% — Granny's Wild is 0.20 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 2,700× and 2,800×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Let It Burn™ does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
