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.

PG Soft

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 — PG Soft and Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 94.96% against 96.24% — Rise of Olympus 1000 is 1.28 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 30.0×: 2,000× against 60,000×, with Rise of Olympus 1000 higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Medusa II does not publish a rating.
Shared theme signals: Greek myth.

Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
Published RTP: 94.96% against 95.29% — Medusa is 0.33 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 5.0×: 2,000× against 400×, with Medusa II higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Medusa II does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Medusa returns more in theory over the long run, while Medusa II reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
Shared theme signals: Greek myth.

Add to the comparison (up to four)