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

Hacksaw Gaming

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: Fixed paylines. 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: 96.52% against 96.27% — Forging Wilds is 0.25 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: Sand and Ashes does not publish a rating.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Forging Wilds returns more in theory over the long run, while Sand and Ashes reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

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 is effectively identical: 96.52% against 96.50%.
Both cap out at roughly the same place: 10,000× and 10,000×.
Both carry the same volatility label: Very high.
Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Forging Wilds returns more in theory over the long run, while Wild Falls reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.

Add to the comparison (up to four)