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

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Gentler GBA Fire Emblem with branching promotions and an optional grinding tower softening the tactics test.

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Lane-defense economy optimization against semi-randomised zombie waves.
Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); Plants vs. Zombies 2: It's About Time leans Optimization (Pure Optimization).
Plants vs. Zombies 2: It's About Time leans a little harder on execution, though the gap is small.
Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones
Grid menu tactics; nothing physical.
Plants vs. Zombies 2: It's About Time
Tapping plants quickly only matters in surge moments
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones
Enemies use fixed targeting logic.
Plants vs. Zombies 2: It's About Time
Zombie waves are announced patterns, not minds
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones
Hit, crit, and growth RNG remain meaningful.
Plants vs. Zombies 2: It's About Time
Wave compositions and plant-food drops add per-level randomness
Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Fire Emblem: The Sacred Stones
Branching promotions and grindable maps reward build planning.
Plants vs. Zombies 2: It's About Time
Lawn economy and plant placement are the solvable core
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.