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.
Graffiti Rush
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.75%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 4
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Kraken Gold Rush
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.75%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Primal Rampage
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 2,500×
- Reels
- 3
- Theme signals
- Not published
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Graffiti Rush vs Kraken Gold Rush
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.75% against 96.75%.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 5,000× and 5,000×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Graffiti Rush does not publish a rating.
Graffiti Rush vs Primal Rampage
- 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 — PG Soft and Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.75% against 96.20% — Graffiti Rush is 0.55 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 2.0×: 5,000× against 2,500×, with Graffiti Rush higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Graffiti Rush does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
