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.
Trinity Impact
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 1,600×
- Reels
- 3
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Magic Piggy OG
Hacksaw Gaming
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 2,500×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Fantasy, Animals
VS
Horse's Treasures
Microgaming
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 3
- Theme signals
- Adventure, Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Trinity Impact vs Magic Piggy OG
- 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 Hacksaw Gaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.20% against 96.20%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.6×: 1,600× against 2,500×, with Magic Piggy OG higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Magic Piggy OG does not publish a rating.
Trinity Impact vs Horse's Treasures
- 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.
- RTP cannot be compared: Horse's Treasures does not publish one.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
