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

Microgaming

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: 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: 96.26% against 96.09% — Octopus Treasure is 0.17 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Volatility labels differ: Medium against High. The label describes how widely outcomes scatter, not whether one game is better.
Shared theme signals: Adventure.

Different format families: Octopus Treasure is Fixed paylines, Tsar Treasures 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: 96.26% against 96.75% — Tsar Treasures is 0.49 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 2.0×: 5,000× against 2,500×, with Octopus Treasure higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Tsar Treasures does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Tsar Treasures returns more in theory over the long run, while Octopus Treasure reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
Shared theme signals: Adventure.

Add to the comparison (up to four)