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.
Chinese New Year
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.65%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 67×
- Reels
- 67
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Ninja Fruits
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.65%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 67×
- Reels
- 67
- Theme signals
- East Asia, Fruit & classic
VS
Galactic Cash
Habanero
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 92.00%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 100×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Wealth
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Chinese New Year vs Ninja Fruits
- 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: 96.65% against 96.65%.
- Both cap out at roughly the same place: 67× and 67×.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
Chinese New Year vs Galactic Cash
- 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 — Play’n GO and Habanero — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP: 96.65% against 92.00% — Chinese New Year is 4.65 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 1.5×: 67× against 100×, with Galactic Cash higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Chinese New Year returns more in theory over the long run, while Galactic Cash reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
