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.
Lucky Diamonds
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 95.87%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 33×
- Reels
- 33
- Theme signals
- East Asia, Fruit & classic
VS
Nile Fortune
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.03%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 2,500×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS
Ace of Spades
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 95.87%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 33×
- Reels
- 33
- Theme signals
- Not published
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Lucky Diamonds vs Nile Fortune
- 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 Pragmatic Play — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 95.87% against 96.03% — Nile Fortune is 0.16 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 75.8×: 33× against 2,500×, with Nile Fortune higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Shared theme signals: East Asia.
Lucky Diamonds vs Ace of Spades
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Fixed paylines. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 95.87% against 95.87%.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 33× and 33×.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
