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

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
Series finale blending stealth with active battlefields and heavy cinematics.

Optimization · Practiced Mastery
An open-world co-op shooter about scouting cartel bases and picking the cleanest approach.
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots leans Optimization (Practiced Mastery); Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands 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.
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
flexible gunplay alongside sneaking
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Headshots, drone marking, and sync shots reward steady aim
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
battlefield factions act on scripts
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Enemy AI is scripted patrol logic, not adaptive
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands leans a little harder on variance, though the gap is small.
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
mid-battle chaos mostly cosmetic
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Patrol spawns and reinforcements add mild unpredictability
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
camo, gear, and route knowledge per act
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Outpost approach planning and skill unlocks carry progression
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.
full breakdown
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots →
full breakdown
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands →