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.
RTP cannot be compared: Rainforest Magic Bingo does not publish one.
Win caps differ by about 1.6×: 2,600× against 4,250×, with Rainforest Magic Bingo higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Win Win Won does not publish a rating.

Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
Published RTP: 94.14% against 94.96% — Medusa II is 0.82 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 1.3×: 2,600× against 2,000×, with Win Win Won higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Win Win Won does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Medusa II returns more in theory over the long run, while Win Win Won reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

Add to the comparison (up to four)