Building comparison
head to head
Eat Lead: The Return of Matt HazardvsSuper Mario World
Super Mario World asks more than Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard, and the gap is execution.
Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard
Execution · Pure Mechanics
A by-the-numbers cover shooter testing only modest aim.
Super Mario World
Execution · Pure Mechanics
Precise jump execution across fixed levels with secrets to memorise.
Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard leans Execution (Pure Mechanics); Super Mario World leans Execution (Pure Mechanics).
Eat Lead: The Return of Matt HazardSuper Mario World
Axis by axis
Execution5 vs 7
Super Mario World leans clearly harder on execution.
Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard
Cover-shooter aim with generous margins
Super Mario World
Perfect inputs trivialise every jump, spin and cape flight
Reads0 vs 0
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard
Parody enemies follow obviously scripted waves
Super Mario World
Scripted Koopas adapt to nothing
Variance1 vs 1
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard
Set pieces never change
Super Mario World
Levels are fixed; nothing hidden survives one playthrough
Optimization2 vs 4
Super Mario World leans clearly harder on optimization.
Eat Lead: The Return of Matt Hazard
Little to solve beyond weapon pickups
Super Mario World
Secret exits and route knowledge add a modest solvable 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.