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.
Photo Safari
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.14%
- Volatility
- Low
- Win cap
- 5×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Animals
VS
Golden Dancing Lion
Booongo
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Animals, Wealth
VS
Hot Safari
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.17%
- Volatility
- Low
- Win cap
- 4,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Animals
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Photo Safari vs Golden Dancing Lion
- 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 Booongo — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- RTP cannot be compared: Golden Dancing Lion does not publish one.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Golden Dancing Lion does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: Animals.
Photo Safari vs Hot Safari
- 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 is effectively identical: 96.14% against 96.17%.
- Win caps differ by about 800.0×: 5× against 4,000×, with Hot Safari higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Low.
- Shared theme signals: Animals.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
