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.

Execution · Competitive PvP
A hip-hop themed brawler where customized fighters batter each other through New York clubs.

Execution · Competitive PvP
A rugby simulation testing input timing and tactical play against opponents.
Def Jam: Fight for NY leans Execution (Competitive PvP); Rugby World Cup 2015 leans Execution (Competitive PvP).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Def Jam: Fight for NY
Combo timing, grapple inputs, environment slams demand solid hands.
Rugby World Cup 2015
Timing passes, tackles, and kicks needs consistent inputs
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Def Jam: Fight for NY
Versus humans, baiting grabs and counters matters; AI is mappable.
Rugby World Cup 2015
Human opponents can be read in multiplayer matches
Rugby World Cup 2015 leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Def Jam: Fight for NY
Minor stage and AI behaviour randomness.
Rugby World Cup 2015
Ball bounces and AI add some unpredictability
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Def Jam: Fight for NY
Fighting-style blends, move purchases, venue weapons reward system knowledge.
Rugby World Cup 2015
Set plays, team selection, and tactics form a systems layer
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.