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.
Ra's Reckoning
Play’n GO
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- 50,000×
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Not published
VS
Queens of Ra
Microgaming
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.20%
- Volatility
- Very high
- Win cap
- Not published
- Reels
- 5
- Theme signals
- Egypt
VS
Aftermath
NetEnt
- Format family
- Fixed paylines
- RTP
- 96.05%
- Volatility
- Not published
- Win cap
- 25,000×
- Reels
- 6
- Theme signals
- Not published
Reading the difference
Reading the difference
Some dimensions are excluded because one studio does not publish that figure.
Ra's Reckoning 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 — Play’n GO and Microgaming — which is what makes the comparison useful: the same problem, two house styles.
- Published RTP is effectively identical: 96.20% against 96.20%.
- Both carry the same volatility label: Very high.
Ra's Reckoning vs Aftermath
- 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: 96.20% against 96.05% — Ra's Reckoning is 0.15 points higher. RTP is a long-run theoretical figure, not a session forecast.
- Win caps differ by about 2.0×: 50,000× against 25,000×, with Ra's Reckoning higher. A cap is a rulebook ceiling, not an expectation.
- Volatility cannot be compared: Aftermath does not publish a rating.
Add to the comparison (up to four)
