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.
Peking Luck
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.50%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- 180,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Stompin’ Gold
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- 50,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Wealth
VS
Queens of Ra
Microgaming
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Egypt
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Peking Luck vs Stompin’ 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: 96.50% against 96.20% — Peking Luck is 0.30 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 3.6×: 180,000× against 50,000×, with Peking Luck higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Very high.
Peking Luck vs Queens of Ra
- 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: 96.50% against 96.20% — Peking Luck is 0.30 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Very high.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
