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

Pragmatic Play

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 Pragmatic Play — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
Published RTP: 92.01% against 96.52% — Golden Retriever is 4.51 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Both cap out at roughly the same place: 5,000× and 5,000×.
Both carry the same volatility label: High.
Shared theme signals: Wealth.

Different format families: Rally 4 Riches is Fixed paylines, Cash Mania 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: 92.01% against 96.75% — Cash Mania is 4.74 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 2.5×: 5,000× against 2,000×, with Rally 4 Riches higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility cannot be compared: Cash Mania does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Cash Mania returns more in theory over the long run, while Rally 4 Riches reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
Shared theme signals: Wealth.

Add to the comparison (up to four)