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.

Infectious 5 xWays®
Nolimit City
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.02%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 55,555×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS

Buffalo King
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.06%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 93,750×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Animals
VS

African Quest
Microgaming
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.02%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Adventure
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Infectious 5 xWays® vs Buffalo King
- 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 Pragmatic Play — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.02% against 96.06%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.7×: 55,555× against 93,750×, with Buffalo King higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Infectious 5 xWays® does not publish a rating.
Infectious 5 xWays® vs African Quest
- 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 Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.02% against 96.02%.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Infectious 5 xWays® does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)



