The short answer is that neither mechanic is “better” in every context, and the popular debate usually skips the numbers that actually matter. A cleaner comparison starts with volatility profile, feature frequency, and how much of the return is delivered through bonus events rather than base-game play. That is the lens used here: published RTP, hit mechanics, provider design patterns, and how each system behaves under real session pressure.
All Ways Pay is a pay-structure, not a bonus engine. Colossal Reels is a feature framework built for expanding symbols and stacked visual impact. Those differences are often blurred in marketing copy, which is why players end up comparing two mechanics that solve different problems.
All Ways Pay replaces fixed paylines with left-to-right symbol matching across adjacent reels. The classic version is associated with Aristocrat-style design logic, later adapted widely across online slots. The appeal is simple: more ways to connect, fewer dead line restrictions, and a cleaner base-game cadence. The trade-off is equally clear: the mechanic can feel flat if the title does not layer in multipliers, expanding symbols, or frequent feature triggers.
Colossal Reels is a visual and structural feature rather than a payout map. Reel stacks expand into oversized symbols or multi-cell blocks, turning a standard grid into a temporary monster board. NetEnt helped popularize this style in modern online play, and the company’s design language is easy to spot in titles that use oversized symbols to create sudden payout bursts. The mechanic sells spectacle first, then payout potential.
RTP is the first assumption worth challenging. A mechanic does not guarantee return quality; the specific game does. All Ways Pay titles often cluster around mid-to-high 96% ranges, but the spread is wide because the mechanic is used across many studios and themes. Colossal Reels games also vary sharply, though many are built to support high-volatility sessions where large wins arrive less often.
Key point: a 96.5% RTP with frequent small hits can feel better to a casual player than a 96.5% RTP with long dry spells and one oversized bonus spike. The math is identical on paper; the session experience is not.
| Mechanic | Typical RTP range | Volatility profile | Session feel |
|---|---|---|---|
| All Ways Pay | 95.5%–97.0% | Low to medium | Steadier, more frequent connections |
| Colossal Reels | 95.0%–96.8% | Medium to high | Lumpier, bonus-led swings |
Those ranges are not universal, but they are consistent enough to expose a common mistake: players treat “more ways to win” as automatically superior. In practice, the payout curve matters more than the count of theoretical combinations.
Hold-and-respin first appeared in land-based and early video slot experimentation long before online players gave it a name. The mechanic credits often point to manufacturers that refined the format into repeat-locked bonus rounds, then online studios borrowed the logic and combined it with expanding reel structures. All Ways Pay usually does not rely on that system at all. It lives or dies on symbol adjacency and whatever modifiers the studio adds on top.
Colossal Reels tends to pair better with hold-and-respin than All Ways Pay does, because the visual expansion supports lock-and-fill tension. That said, not every Colossal Reels title uses hold-and-respin. Some use cluster-like oversized hits, while others lean on free spins with expanding symbols. The mechanic family is flexible, which is also why comparisons can become sloppy.
“Players often confuse the size of a win with the quality of the mechanic. A huge screen event can mask a weak base game, and a modest grid can hide a much cleaner payout structure.”
Good comparisons need named games, not vague genre labels. In All Ways Pay, Viking Wilds from Microgaming is a useful reference point because it uses the mechanic to support frequent connections and a straightforward free spins model. Another strong example is Thunderstruck II, also from Microgaming, which combines a multi-way structure with layered bonus rounds and a well-known 96.65% RTP.
For Colossal Reels, Gonzo’s Quest Megaways is not a pure Colossal Reels title, so it should not be used as a clean example. Better references are NetEnt-style oversized-symbol games such as Dead or Alive II in terms of high-volatility bonus design, though that title is free spins driven rather than Colossal Reels in the strict sense. The cleaner historical comparison is Gonzo’s Quest itself, whose avalanche system influenced many later oversized-feature designs even if it is not Colossal Reels by label. The point stands: Colossal Reels titles usually chase dramatic spikes, not steady algebra.
If you want a practical testing ground, the 22bet portal often lists both mechanic families across multiple providers, which makes side-by-side playtesting easier than relying on promotional claims alone.
That split sounds obvious, yet marketing often reverses it. “More ways” gets sold as if it were a volatility reducer, and “colossal” gets sold as if it were automatically more profitable. Neither claim survives close inspection.
For bankroll management, All Ways Pay usually offers the cleaner ride. For entertainment density, Colossal Reels usually delivers the louder session. If the goal is to stretch playtime and keep hit frequency visible, All Ways Pay has the edge. If the goal is to chase memorable spikes and accept rougher variance, Colossal Reels is the sharper fit.
So which is better? The evidence points to a conditional answer: All Ways Pay is better as a mechanics-first system, while Colossal Reels is better as a spectacle-first system. One is structurally efficient; the other is theatrically aggressive. Players who want consistency should lean toward the first. Players who want volatility with visual drama should choose the second.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.