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.

Nolimit City

Play’n GO

PG Soft

Reading the difference

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

Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. 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: 96.09% against 96.20% — The Shimmering Woods is 0.11 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 1.3×: 32,000× against 25,000×, with Gluttony higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Gluttony does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. The Shimmering Woods returns more in theory over the long run, while Gluttony reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
They come from different studios — Nolimit City and PG Soft — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 96.09% against 96.15% — Captain’s Bounty is 0.06 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Both cap out at roughly the same place: 32,000× and 30,000×.
Volatility cannot be compared: Gluttony does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Captain’s Bounty returns more in theory over the long run, while Gluttony reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

Add to the comparison (up to four)