head to head
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is variance, and it is a single point.

Optimization · Systems & Chaos
A narrative-driven horror walk through a Victorian slaughterhouse engine, lighter on systems than its predecessor.

Optimization · Systems & Chaos
Turn-based dungeon crawling testing resource management against randomised floors.
Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs leans Optimization (Systems & Chaos); Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity leans Optimization (Systems & Chaos).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs
Walking and lever-pulling demand essentially nothing physical
Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity
Turn-based grid moves involve no dexterity
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs
Manpigs are scripted set-dressing, rarely a true threat
Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity
Dungeon Pokémon follow simple rules, never adapt
Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs
First-run unknowns are the whole experience; spoilers defuse it
Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity
Random floor layouts and item spawns vary each delve
Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs
Light puzzles and routes are trivially solvable on repeat
Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity
Team builds and item management converge to known strategies
A matching score does not mean a matching test. Two games can both sit at 10 on execution and demand completely different things of you - which is why the reasoning above matters more than the number beside it.
full breakdown
Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs →
full breakdown
Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity →