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

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Engineering unit pairings and reclass paths to dominate maps whose enemy scripts are fully mappable.

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Solving procedurally generated corporate heists through precise resource and power management under escalating alarms.
Fire Emblem: Awakening leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); Invisible, Inc. leans Optimization (Pure Optimization).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: Awakening
No twitch elements; pair-up placement is the only spatial decision under time
Invisible, Inc.
Turn-based movement; no twitch demands whatsoever
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: Awakening
Enemies follow simple aggro patterns on fixed maps
Invisible, Inc.
Corporate guards patrol on scripted timers; no adaptive opponent
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: Awakening
Hit and crit rates plus random level-up stats create run variance
Invisible, Inc.
Procedural floor layouts and alarm escalation add significant run variance
Invisible, Inc. leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Fire Emblem: Awakening
Marriage pairings and Second Seal reclass chains are the optimization spine
Invisible, Inc.
Power allocation, agent pairing, and escape routing are the core puzzle
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.