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

Play’n GO

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.
Published RTP: 96.88% against 96.24% — Pearl Lagoon is 0.64 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 3.4×: 336,660× against 100,000×, with Pearl Lagoon higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.

Different format families: Pearl Lagoon is Fixed paylines, Mahjong Ways 2 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: 96.88% against 96.95% — Mahjong Ways 2 is 0.07 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 3.4×: 336,660× against 100,000×, with Pearl Lagoon higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Mahjong Ways 2 does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Mahjong Ways 2 returns more in theory over the long run, while Pearl Lagoon reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

Add to the comparison (up to four)