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.
Glorious Rome
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 94.11%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 1,200×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Irish Gold
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 95.00%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 5,250×
- Reels
- 3
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Tales of Egypt
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 94.11%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 1,200×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Egypt
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Glorious Rome vs Irish Gold
- 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: 94.11% against 95.00% — Irish Gold is 0.89 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 4.4×: 1,200× against 5,250×, with Irish Gold higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Glorious Rome does not publish a rating.
Glorious Rome vs Tales of Egypt
- 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: 94.11% against 94.11%.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 1,200× and 1,200×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Glorious Rome does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
