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.
Octopus Treasure
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.26%
- Volatility
- Medium
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Adventure
VS
Cursed Treasure
NetEnt
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.09%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 5,000×
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Adventure
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
- 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: 96.26% against 96.09% — Octopus Treasure is 0.17 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×.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Cursed Treasure does not publish a rating.
- Worth noticing: the higher RTP and the higher win cap sit on opposite sides. Octopus Treasure returns more in theory over the long run, while Cursed Treasure reaches further at its ceiling. The two numbers answer different questions.
- Shared theme signals: Adventure.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
