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.
Fire Portals
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Cluster pays
- RTP
- 96.06%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 10,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS
Kung Pao Panda
Microgaming
- Format family
- Cluster pays
- RTP
- 96.15%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 15,000×
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Fire Portals vs Kung Pao Panda
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Cluster pays. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- They come from different studios — Pragmatic Play and Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.06% against 96.15% — Kung Pao Panda is 0.09 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 1.5×: 10,000× against 15,000×, with Kung Pao Panda higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
- Shared theme signals: East Asia.
Fire Portals vs Le Hooligan
- Both titles are built on the same format family: Cluster pays. Differences between them therefore come from tuning, not from structure.
- 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: 96.06% against 96.34% — Le Hooligan is 0.28 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: Le Hooligan does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
