I read somewhere that Xenoblade Chronicles X world was a little bit smaller than Skyrim. Guess I was wrong!

The original Xenoblade Chronicles was a bit smaller than Skyrim and Takahashi said Xenoblade X is five times larger at least. It is my belief that he was including ocean in that estimate. However I have estimated a few different ways that each continent is like 16-22 km^2 and Skyrim was about 30km^2. with five continents that is 80-120 km^2

I had a lot of FUN with the first Xenoblade so I feel that I won't be bored by this game since it seems to be similar.

It's just HIS opinion and the review seems fair (with the exception of the part where he says boredom because it sounds kind of sensationalist)

Kotaku...gosh I used to spend a lot more time there. I feel like every once in a while they'd have a good article, but they were so few and far between. Most of the time I felt like I was reading a fan blog. Which isn't bad necessarily...if the site was treated that way.

Anyway, I'm gonna wait for other sources before coming to any assumptions on the game. Maybe it is boring, or maybe this person didn't like it. Tachikoma's review seemed mostly positive, and she seems a lot more knowledgable in game design than most.

Regardless, if this game is even half as good as its predecessor, it'll be my favorite 8th gen console game so far. Likely even my GOTY...though maybe I'm getting ahead of myself. Heh...

The only way this doesn't sound really bad is if Kotaku is straight up lying about the game.

Well he was already lieing about the missions, and Tachikoma said his knowledge of the Japanese language seems to be google translate. So... 

Play it cmfor yourselves fellas. Who made Kotaku a major reviewer any way? Some people can't play games that aren't gritty all the time, I guess.

This is from Kotaku, they have been on a crusade against Xenoblade Chronicles for years now. They shouldn't be listened to, they're idiots.

Having about 30 hours into The Witcher 3, and a good grasp of the gameplay of Xenoblade Chronicles X how about I describe why these games are interesting in different ways for me.  

Open World - Xenoblade Chronicles X seems to be taking this much more literally than the Witcher 3. With things like licensing and building Dolls, and no loading screens except for the Doll garage, it is much more open-world oriented than the Witcher 3's big hubs. This is neither a plus or minus, but it goes with the type of game Xenoblade Chronicles X is trying to be versus the type of game the Witcher 3 is trying to be. Explorations vs. World-Building. 

Story - The Witcher's 3 story is much more about world-building and lore. "Xeno-" stories are much more about extistential philosophical symbolism and human psychology. One is literal the other is symbolic. The original Xenoblade Chronicles for example was an allegory for the Gnostic religion myth, Xenogears incoporated a plethora of Judaic, Gnostic, and science-fiction themes. Witcher 3 on the other hand is much more about the story we are experiencing than any symbolism, and if there are allusions they are 1:1 based on Slavic mythology. To compare them is like comparing Beowulf to Ender's Game. Entirely different genres trying to do entirely different things. On the otherhand the Witcher 3's story seems much less linear with multiple events affecting the ending. Which can be a plus or a minus. 

Side Quests - I have no doubt that The Witcher 3's side-quests will be overall more engaging and relevant than Xenoblade Chronicles X's, but that is one out of the many things these both games will have. 

Supporting characters - Xenoblade Chronicles X actually has permanent party members, so some of the supporting characters are very relevant to the story, like the Witcher 3. I personally spoiled myself by reading a major spoiler about one supporting character in particular.

Have interactions with NPCs - This was one of the best traits of the first Xenoblade Chronicles. The affinity chart gave a lot of depth to NPC interactions and made the NPC's  feel connected to eachother and you. It seems to have been improved in Xenoblade X. In The Witcher 3 much of the NPC interactions are generic and repetitive in comparison, in my opinion. Some of the NPC's even look exactly the same from village to village. I really don't care too much about this though. 

Have interactions with world and explorations - I have no doubt this will be much better in Xenoblade Chronicles X. You have multiple devices that give you opportunities to capture great views of the diverse looking world. Furthermore, the world is seamless, while I became frustrated multiple times in The Witcher 3 when I reached invisible walls which teleported me back to prior locations. Again, the Witcher 3 focuses on a dense world with a lot of lore and world-building while vast exploration of the environment is one thing Xenoblade Chronicles X focuses on (if you watched any of the Nintendo Directs for this game it would be evident. 

Have different battle systems (that should be varied and engaging regardless) - The Witcher 3's has an action battle system, Xenoblade's is real-time but not action-oriented. The Witcher 3 is mostly a single person fighting with a focus on preparation and survival, while Xenoblade X's is a party which while needs preparation for its battles will have them so frequently and often that preperation is not in the same caliber as The Witcher 3's. 

 Have different settings and music (that should set the tone appropriately regardless) - Again Slavic folk music vs. pop and generic movie orchestrated music. 

To conclude, I will play Xenoblade Chronicles X mainly for a different reason that I am playing the Witcher 3. I will play Xenoblade Chronicles X to explore its vast diverse alien world, and to experience its symbolic story. I play The Witcher 3 to become immersed in a denser world that is based on Slavic mythology. While both also try to do what the other is doing (world-building vs. exploration, neither is focused on it like the other.) 

Why don't you throw games like Bloodborne into the mix? It is about as similar to both of them as they are to each-other. And yes, I agree, The Witcher 3 and Fallout aren't very comparable.