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.
Egyptian Fortunes
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.50%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 700×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Egypt, East Asia
VS
Wild Pixies
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.48%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 700×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS
3 Coins: Egypt
Booongo
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Egypt, Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Egyptian Fortunes vs Wild Pixies
- 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: 96.50% against 96.48%.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 700× and 700×.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Egyptian Fortunes returns more in theory over the long run, while Wild Pixies reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
- Shared theme signals: East Asia.
Egyptian Fortunes vs 3 Coins: Egypt
- 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 Booongo — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- RTP cannot be compared: 3 Coins: Egypt does not publish one.
- Volatility cannot be compared: 3 Coins: Egypt does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: Egypt.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
