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.
Hugo
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.40%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 10,000×
- Reels
- 0
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Jade Magician
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.52%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 15,000×
- Reels
- 0
- Theme signals
- East Asia, Fantasy
VS
Fruits Fever 5 lines
Booongo
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Fruit & classic
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Hugo vs Jade Magician
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP: 96.40% against 96.52% — Jade Magician is 0.12 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 1.5×: 10,000× against 15,000×, with Jade Magician higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
Hugo vs Fruits Fever 5 lines
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- They come from different studios — Play’n GO and Booongo — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- RTP cannot be compared: Fruits Fever 5 lines does not publish one.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Fruits Fever 5 lines does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
