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.
Riches of RA
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.01%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 8,032×
- Reels
- 32
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Sienna Steele
Microgaming
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.01%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Golden Genie And The Walking Wilds
Nolimit City
- Format family
- Standard video slot
- RTP
- 96.03%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 9,583×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Riches of RA vs Sienna Steele
- 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 Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.01% against 96.01%.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Shared theme signals: Wealth.
Riches of RA vs Golden Genie And The Walking Wilds
- Different format families: Riches of RA is Fixed paylines, Golden Genie And The Walking Wilds is Standard video slot. Read each screen with its own rule set.
- They come from different studios — Play’n GO and Nolimit City — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.01% against 96.03%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.2×: 8,032× against 9,583×, with Golden Genie And The Walking Wilds higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Golden Genie And The Walking Wilds does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: Wealth.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
