Building comparison
head to head
DevourvsMicrosoft Minesweeper
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is variance, and it is a single point.
Devour
Variance · Systems & Chaos
A co-op horror game where up to four players burn ritual items to stop a possessed cultist while she hunts them.
Microsoft Minesweeper
Microsoft Minesweeper
Optimization · Systems & Chaos
Logical deduction over hidden mine placement, with unavoidable guess moments.
Devour leans Variance (Systems & Chaos); Microsoft Minesweeper leans Optimization (Systems & Chaos).
DevourMicrosoft Minesweeper
Axis by axis
Execution2 vs 2
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Devour
Running and item carrying require minimal dexterity
Microsoft Minesweeper
Click speed only matters for leaderboard times
Reads0 vs 0
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Devour
The possessed boss escalates on rules, never models players
Microsoft Minesweeper
No opponent, just a static hidden board
Variance7 vs 6
Devour leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Devour
Randomised item spawns and boss aggression drive each run
Microsoft Minesweeper
Mine placement is hidden information forcing occasional pure guesses
Optimization6 vs 7
Microsoft Minesweeper leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Devour
Spawn pools, UV stuns, and routes converge with experience
Microsoft Minesweeper
Constraint deduction from number clues is fully solvable logic
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.