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.
Sweet Powernudge
Pragmatic Play
- Format family
- Cluster pays
- RTP
- 95.01%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- Not published
- Theme signals
- Sweets
VS
Candy Rush Wilds 2
Microgaming
- Format family
- Cluster pays
- RTP
- 96.21%
- Volatility
- High
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Sweets
VS
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Sweet Powernudge vs Candy Rush Wilds 2
- 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: 95.01% against 96.21% — Candy Rush Wilds 2 is 1.20 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: Sweets.
Sweet Powernudge 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: 95.01% against 96.34% — Le Hooligan is 1.33 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 2.0×: 5,000× against 10,000×, with Le Hooligan higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Le Hooligan does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
