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.
Golden Retriever
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.52%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Stadium of Riches
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.58%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Prosperity Blessing
Microgaming
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.07%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Golden Retriever vs Stadium of Riches
- 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: 96.52% against 96.58% — Stadium of Riches is 0.06 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 5,000× and 5,000×.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
- Shared theme signals: Wealth.
Golden Retriever vs Prosperity Blessing
- 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 Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.52% against 96.07% — Golden Retriever is 0.45 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both carry the same volatility label: High.
- Shared theme signals: Wealth.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
