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.
Bear Crazy
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.52%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 3,900×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Animals
VS
Greedy Wolf
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.48%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 3,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Animals
VS
Lion Saga Odyssey
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.58%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Animals
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Bear Crazy vs Greedy Wolf
- 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: 96.52% against 96.48%.
- Win caps differ by about 1.3×: 3,900× against 3,000×, with Bear Crazy higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
- Shared theme signals: Animals.
Bear Crazy vs Lion Saga Odyssey
- 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 — Pragmatic Play and Play’n GO — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.52% against 96.58% — Lion Saga Odyssey is 0.06 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 1.3×: 3,900× against 5,000×, with Lion Saga Odyssey higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
- Shared theme signals: Animals.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
