Building comparison
head to head
Final Fantasy Tactics AdvancevsPokémon Ruby Version
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is execution, and it is a single point.
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance
Optimization · Pure Optimization
Handheld tactics RPG adding a shifting law system to grid battles.
Pokémon Ruby Version
Optimization · Pure Optimization
Team-building optimisation against fixed trainers with mapped RNG.
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); Pokémon Ruby Version leans Optimization (Pure Optimization).
Final Fantasy Tactics AdvancePokémon Ruby Version
Axis by axis
Execution1 vs 0
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance leans a little harder on execution, though the gap is small.
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance
Turn-based grid commands only
Pokémon Ruby Version
Turn selection requires no dexterity
Reads0 vs 1
Pokémon Ruby Version leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance
Scripted opponents, judge rules are fixed
Pokémon Ruby Version
Scripted trainers never adapt to your strategy
Variance3 vs 3
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance
Random laws and hit rolls
Pokémon Ruby Version
Encounter, catch and crit rolls are quickly mapped
Optimization8 vs 8
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Final Fantasy Tactics Advance
Race-job ability combos reward deep planning
Pokémon Ruby Version
Abilities and natures deepen an already solvable type system
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.