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.
Cyclops Smash
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Cascading reels
- RTP
- 96.05%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- 10,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Timber Stacks
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Cascading reels
- RTP
- 96.05%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- 10,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Cyclops Smash vs Timber Stacks
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Cascading reels. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.05% against 96.05%.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 10,000× and 10,000×.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Very high.
Cyclops Smash vs Grug Make Fire
- Different format families: Cyclops Smash is Cascading reels, Grug Make Fire is Fixed paylines. Read each screen with its own rule set.
- They come from different studios — Pragmatic Play and Hacksaw Gaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.05% against 96.19% — Grug Make Fire is 0.14 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 10,000× and 10,000×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Grug Make Fire does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
