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

Pragmatic Play

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: 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: 96.23% against 96.08% — Hugo Carts is 0.15 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 1.2×: 25,000× against 30,000×, with Cowboy Coins higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Both carry the same volatility label: High.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Hugo Carts returns more in theory over the long run, while Cowboy Coins reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

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 PG Soft — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 96.23% against 96.70% — Guardians of Ice & Fire is 0.47 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 2.0×: 25,000× against 50,000×, with Guardians of Ice & Fire higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Guardians of Ice & Fire does not publish a rating.

Add to the comparison (up to four)