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.
Myth of Dead
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 3,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Greek myth, Horror
VS
Frankenstein
Microgaming
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.19%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Horror
VS
Zombie Outbreak
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.75%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Horror
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Myth of Dead vs Frankenstein
- 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 Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.20% against 96.19%.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Shared theme signals: Horror.
Myth of Dead vs Zombie Outbreak
- Different format families: Myth of Dead is Fixed paylines, Zombie Outbreak is Standard video slot. Read each screen with its own rule set.
- 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: 96.20% against 96.75% — Zombie Outbreak is 0.55 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 1.7×: 3,000× against 5,000×, with Zombie Outbreak higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Zombie Outbreak does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: Horror.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
