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.
Safari of Wealth
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 10,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Animals, Wealth
VS
Arctic Wolf Triple Riches
Microgaming
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.18%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Animals, Wealth
Reading the difference
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.
- 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: 96.20% against 96.18%.
- Volatility labels differ: Medium against High. The label describes how widely outcomes scatter, not whether one game is better.
- Shared theme signals: Animals, Wealth.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
