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 is effectively identical: 96.20% against 96.20%.
Win caps differ by about 1.3×: 50,000× against 40,000×, with Ra's Reckoning higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Both carry the same volatility label: Very high.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Shark Feast returns more in theory over the long run, while Ra's Reckoning reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

Different format families: Ra's Reckoning is Fixed paylines, Spirited Wonders 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: 96.20% against 96.70% — Spirited Wonders is 0.50 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Both cap out at roughly the same place: 50,000× and 50,000×.
Volatility cannot be compared: Spirited Wonders does not publish a rating.

Add to the comparison (up to four)