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 · Pure Optimization
The deepest optimization puzzle in the Infinity Engine lineage, rewarding encyclopedic knowledge of 2nd Edition AD&D systems.

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Stacking multi-class abilities and CT tricks to dominate tactically scripted encounters.
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); Fell Seal: Arbiter's Mark leans Optimization (Pure Optimization).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn
Pause-and-plan removes twitch entirely; micro-placement has marginal value
Fell Seal: Arbiter's Mark
Turn-based; no timing windows whatsoever
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn
Enemies run scripted behaviour patterns, never modelling your tactics
Fell Seal: Arbiter's Mark
Enemy AI is scripted; fixed job archetypes behave predictably
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn
Loot randomization and enemy ability use create hidden-information layers
Fell Seal: Arbiter's Mark
Random encounters and loot add mild variance; counter procs are minor
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn
Mage spell sequences, dual-class builds and Spellhold routing define mastery
Fell Seal: Arbiter's Mark
Multi-class ability transfers and CT manipulation make this near-FFT optimization depth
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.