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.
Disorder
Nolimit City
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.11%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 23,500×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
24k Dragon
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 24,000×
- Reels
- 0
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS
xWays Hoarder 2
Nolimit City
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.14%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 25,920×
- 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.
Disorder vs 24k Dragon
- 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 — Nolimit City and Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.11% against 96.20% — 24k Dragon is 0.09 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 23,500× and 24,000×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Disorder does not publish a rating.
Disorder vs xWays Hoarder 2
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Ways to win. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.11% against 96.14%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.1×: 23,500× against 25,920×, with xWays Hoarder 2 higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Disorder does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
