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

Microgaming

Play’n GO

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 Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 95.86% against 96.06% — Monkey Bonanza is 0.20 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Volatility cannot be compared: Piggy Gold does not publish a rating.
Shared theme signals: Animals, Wealth.

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: 95.86% against 96.19% — Golden Caravan is 0.33 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Both cap out at roughly the same place: 5,000× and 5,000×.
Volatility cannot be compared: Piggy Gold does not publish a rating.
Shared theme signals: Wealth.

Add to the comparison (up to four)