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.
Mental II
Nolimit City
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.06%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 99,999×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Folsom Prison
Nolimit City
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.07%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 75,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
3x Catch
Booongo
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Animals, Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Mental II vs Folsom Prison
- 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: 96.06% against 96.07%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.3×: 99,999× against 75,000×, with Mental II higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Mental II does not publish a rating.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Folsom Prison returns more in theory over the long run, while Mental II reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
Mental II vs 3x Catch
- 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 Booongo — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- RTP cannot be compared: 3x Catch does not publish one.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Mental II does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
