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

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
Turn-based RPG whose reactive parry timing layers execution onto build optimization.

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
Learning fixed boss patterns and managing survival systems through a linear jungle infiltration.
Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 leans Optimization (Practiced Mastery); Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater leans Optimization (Practiced Mastery).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Clair Obscur: Expedition 33
Parry and dodge timing inside turn-based combat
Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater
CQC execution, camouflage switching speed, and boss timing are demanding
Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Clair Obscur: Expedition 33
Bosses follow learnable scripted patterns
Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater
The Cobra unit fights with scripted abilities; no real-time player profiling
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Clair Obscur: Expedition 33
Some unknown attack strings on first encounter
Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater
Camouflage index and food supply introduce hidden-state management
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Clair Obscur: Expedition 33
Pictos, builds, and turn economy are solvable
Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater
Camo pattern matching and boss moveset mastery are fully learnable
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.