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

Play’n GO

Hacksaw Gaming

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 Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 96.10% against 96.21% — Doom of Egypt is 0.11 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 1.2×: 600× against 500×, with Lights™ higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Lights™ does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Doom of Egypt returns more in theory over the long run, while Lights™ 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 Hacksaw Gaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 96.10% against 96.20% — Magic Piggy OG is 0.10 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 4.2×: 600× against 2,500×, with Magic Piggy OG higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Lights™ does not publish a rating.

Add to the comparison (up to four)