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

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
Deck-folder optimisation executed through real-time grid dodging.

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
An open-chapter survival horror game where upgrade planning and systematic area sweeping drive success.
Mega Man Battle Network 3 Blue leans Optimization (Practiced Mastery); The Evil Within 2 leans Optimization (Practiced Mastery).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Mega Man Battle Network 3 Blue
Grid dodging and chip timing in real time demand reflexes
The Evil Within 2
Open-zone combat demands solid aim and positioning
Same score on reads - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Mega Man Battle Network 3 Blue
Viruses and bosses follow learnable patterns; link battles are rare
The Evil Within 2
Enemies are scripted; no adaptive opponent
Mega Man Battle Network 3 Blue leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Mega Man Battle Network 3 Blue
Random chip draws shape each battle's options
The Evil Within 2
Collectibles are hidden; minor supply variance in open zones
Mega Man Battle Network 3 Blue leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Mega Man Battle Network 3 Blue
Folder construction and style builds dominate outcomes
The Evil Within 2
Upgrade system, open-area routing and crafting are fully optimisable
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.