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.
Mahjong 88
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.62%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 0
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS
10000 Fortunes
Microgaming
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- Not published
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- East Asia
VS
Mega Fortune™
NetEnt
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.60%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 1,700×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- East Asia
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Mahjong 88 vs 10000 Fortunes
- 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 Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- RTP cannot be compared: 10000 Fortunes does not publish one.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Medium.
- Shared theme signals: East Asia.
Mahjong 88 vs Mega Fortune™
- 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 NetEnt — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.62% against 96.60%.
- Win caps differ by about 2.9×: 5,000× against 1,700×, with Mahjong 88 higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Mega Fortune™ does not publish a rating.
- Shared theme signals: East Asia.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
