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.

Play’n GO

Play’n GO

Microgaming

Reading the difference

Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.

Both titles are built on the same format family: Ways to win. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
Published RTP: 96.72% against 96.20% — Enchanted Crystals is 0.52 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 2.3×: 68,308× against 30,000×, with Enchanted Crystals higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility labels differ: Medium against High. The label describes how widely outcomes scatter, not whether one game is better.
Shared theme signals: Fantasy.

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 — Play’n GO and Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 96.72% against 96.09% — Enchanted Crystals is 0.63 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.

Add to the comparison (up to four)