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: Ways to win. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.25% against 96.25%.
Win caps differ by about 14.0×: 70,000× against 5,000×, with Piggy Heist higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Piggy Blitz returns more in theory over the long run, while Piggy Heist reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
Shared theme signals: Animals.

Both titles are built on the same format family: Ways to win. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
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: 96.25% against 96.70% — Guardians of Ice & Fire is 0.45 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 1.4×: 70,000× against 50,000×, with Piggy Heist higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Guardians of Ice & Fire does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Guardians of Ice & Fire returns more in theory over the long run, while Piggy Heist reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

Add to the comparison (up to four)