Building comparison
head to head
Loop HerovsWe Were Here Together
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is reads, and it is a single point.
Loop Hero
Optimization · Pure Optimization
An auto-battling deckbuilder about building a loop to defeat the Lich.
We Were Here Together
Optimization · Pure Optimization
A two-player co-op escape adventure built on describing what only you can see over voice chat.
Loop Hero leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); We Were Here Together leans Optimization (Pure Optimization).
Loop HeroWe Were Here Together
Axis by axis
Execution1 vs 1
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Loop Hero
Autobattler, almost no inputs.
We Were Here Together
Walking and interacting; minimal physical demand.
Reads0 vs 1
We Were Here Together leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Loop Hero
Enemies follow scripts.
We Were Here Together
Partner is an ally; puzzles never adapt.
Variance5 vs 5
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Loop Hero
Card draws and loot drops randomize.
We Were Here Together
Asymmetric hidden information is the core mechanic.
Optimization9 vs 8
Loop Hero leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Loop Hero
Deck and tile placement reward deep optimization.
We Were Here Together
Fixed symbol-and-mechanism puzzles, fully solvable once both sides known.
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.