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.
Sizzling Spins
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.49%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Madame Ink
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.21%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Money on Reels
Microgaming
- Format family
- Ways to win
- RTP
- 96.21%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Sizzling Spins vs Madame Ink
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Ways to win. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP: 96.49% against 96.21% — Sizzling Spins is 0.28 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: Medium.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Sizzling Spins returns more in theory over the long run, while Madame Ink reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
Sizzling Spins vs Money on Reels
- 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: 96.49% against 96.21% — Sizzling Spins is 0.28 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
