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.
Granny's Wild
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 2,800×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
5 Lions
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.50%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 3,520×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Animals
VS
*NSYNC Pop
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Granny's Wild vs 5 Lions
- 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 Pragmatic Play — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.20% against 96.50% — 5 Lions is 0.30 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 1.3×: 2,800× against 3,520×, with 5 Lions higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
Granny's Wild vs *NSYNC Pop
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Ways to win. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.20% against 96.20%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.8×: 2,800× against 5,000×, with *NSYNC Pop higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
