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.

Pragmatic Play

Pragmatic Play

Play’n GO

Reading the difference

Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.

Both titles are built on the same format family: Cascading reels. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
Published RTP: 96.58% against 96.49% — Candy Rush is 0.09 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 3.0×: 15,000× against 5,000×, with Candy Rush higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Both carry the same volatility label: Low.
Shared theme signals: Sweets.

Different format families: Candy Rush is Cascading reels, Sweet Alchemy is Fixed paylines. Read each screen with its own rule set.
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: 96.58% against 96.52% — Candy Rush is 0.06 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
Win caps differ by about 5.0×: 15,000× against 3,000×, with Candy Rush higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
Volatility labels differ: Low against Medium. The label describes how widely outcomes scatter, not whether one game is better.
Shared theme signals: Sweets.

Add to the comparison (up to four)