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.
Lock and Pop
NetEnt
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.09%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 4,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Superstars™
NetEnt
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.08%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 4,500×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Sci-fi & neon
VS
Battle The Beast
Habanero
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 4,047×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Lock and Pop vs Superstars™
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.09% against 96.08%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.1×: 4,000× against 4,500×, with Superstars™ higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Lock and Pop does not publish a rating.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Lock and Pop returns more in theory over the long run, while Superstars™ reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
Lock and Pop vs Battle The Beast
- 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 Habanero — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- RTP cannot be compared: Battle The Beast does not publish one.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 4,000× and 4,047×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Lock and Pop does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
