Games arrive as third and fourth instalments of a franchise. The logic is the same as cinema’s, and so is the problem it creates.
Browse a contemporary online casino and the naming convention is unmistakable. Titles carry numbers. Sequels, spin-offs, “deluxe” and “megaways” variants, franchises running to a dozen entries.
A title released in July 2025 arrived explicitly as a third numbered instalment in a long-running fishing-themed series. This is now standard practice across the sector, and the reasoning is worth understanding because it has a direct consequence for anyone choosing what to play.
The discovery problem
Studios collectively release thousands of titles a year into lobbies that can surface only a fraction prominently. The overwhelming constraint is not production; it is being found.
A franchise name solves several problems simultaneously. It carries recognition, so players scanning a lobby have a reason to stop. It signals a known mechanic to players who liked the previous entry. It performs better in search, where the original title has established demand. And it gives operators a reason to feature the game, since a recognisable name converts better than an unknown one.
The economics closely resemble film franchises: a known property carries lower marketing risk than an original, and in a crowded market that difference decides what gets made.
What changes between instalments
Usually less than the numbering implies. Theme, artwork and symbol set carry over. What tends to change is the feature layer — new jackpot structures, revised volatility, higher maximum win multipliers.
The trajectory across a franchise is generally towards higher volatility and bigger headline ceilings, because that is the direction the wider market has moved. A third instalment will typically be a more extreme version of the first: rarer wins, larger maximum, more feature machinery bolted on.
The 2025 release fits the pattern precisely — high volatility rated around 8 out of 10, a 10,000× maximum win and four instant jackpot tiers, on a conventional 5×3 grid with 10 fixed paylines.
The problem this creates for players
Franchise naming implies continuity that does not exist mathematically.
A player who enjoyed an earlier entry and assumes the sequel plays similarly is frequently wrong. Return figures differ. Volatility differs, often substantially. Maximum wins can differ by orders of magnitude. The brand is continuous; the mathematics is not.
There is a further layer. Some studios ship the same title in multiple return configurations — the 2025 release exists at 95%, 93% and 92% depending on which build and operator deployed. So two players on the same sequel, at different casinos, are not necessarily playing the same game either.
Reviews that record the configuration range rather than a single headline figure are the only useful ones here. TopNonUKCasinoSites’ review of Big Catch 3 lists the alternative builds alongside the jackpot tiers and the volatility rating, which is the honest way to present a specification the publisher cannot control.
| Assumption | Reality |
| Sequel plays like the original | Volatility and RTP often differ |
| Same name means same maths | Variants may run different engines |
| Published RTP is the RTP | Operators may deploy alternative builds |
| Higher instalment number means better | Usually means higher volatility |
Telling the variants apart
Because a single franchise can span several mathematical engines, identifying which one you are looking at is a practical skill worth ten seconds.
The naming usually signals it. A suffix referencing a mechanic indicates the game runs that engine rather than the original structure. A word denoting a jackpot system indicates a linked progressive has been added. “Deluxe”, “megaways”, “power” and similar tags are not decorative — they generally correspond to a specific technical platform.
The information screen settles it definitively. Paylines versus ways-to-win tells you immediately which structural family a title belongs to, and the volatility rating will usually differ noticeably between instalments.
The habit worth forming is to check the layout line first. A game described as having fixed paylines and a game described in ways-to-win are different products regardless of sharing a name, a theme and an artist. Everything else in the specification follows from that distinction.
Where it leads
Franchise concentration tends to intensify. As discovery gets harder, the value of an established name rises, which pushes studios further towards sequels and further from original titles — the same dynamic that has reshaped mainstream cinema.
The likely end point is a market where a small number of franchises occupy most prominent placement, with original releases confined to the long tail.
For players the defence is straightforward and takes fifteen seconds. Ignore the name and the number. Open the game’s information screen and read the return figure, the volatility rating and the maximum win unit. That screen describes the game in front of you; the title on the tile describes a marketing decision.
It is a small discipline with an outsized return. Almost every misunderstanding described here — the sequel that plays nothing like its predecessor, the maximum win quoted per line, the return figure that differs by casino — is resolved by the same fifteen seconds spent on the same screen. The information is mandatory, free, and one tap away, and the reason it goes unread is simply that nothing in the interface encourages it.
Operators outside British licensing carry no GAMSTOP coverage and no British dispute route. Anyone registered with the scheme should keep that protection rather than seek ways around it. Free confidential support and advice: BeGambleAware and the National Gambling Helpline. Gambling is for over-18s only.
