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.
Primal Rampage
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 2,500×
- Reels
- 3
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
African Wilds
Microgaming
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 95.94%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 3
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Totem Wonders
PG Soft
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.73%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 2,500×
- Reels
- 3
- Theme signals
- Not published
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Primal Rampage vs African Wilds
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. 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: 96.20% against 95.94% — Primal Rampage is 0.26 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
Primal Rampage vs Totem Wonders
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Standard video slot. 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: 96.20% against 96.73% — Totem Wonders is 0.53 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 2,500× and 2,500×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Totem Wonders does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
