Forums - Gaming Discussion - Witcher 3 vs Skyrim

I prefer...

Witcher 3 44 66.67%
 
Skyrim 22 33.33%
 
Total:66
Metallox said:
victor83fernandes said:

Ask yourself this, if witcher 3 was really that good, how come those fans didn't buy an xbox to play witcher 2? Most people on ps4 that I know here in Europe that loved witcher 3 have not even bothered to get a 360 or xbox one to play the second one. So much for all that love for witcher.

This is pure nonsense, and I think you're aware why. In part because the people you know don't represent the majority, in part because Witcher 3 is the standout of the series, and, most importantly, the quality of a game simply can't be defined by the traction it generates on people to play other entries of their respective franchise. You're here to judge the individual strenghts of the game, whatever it does for CDPR and their adaptation of The Witcher is another story. 

Standout yes, but everyone seems to say its great because of the story, which started on the first one. So if people really love the story, why not go back and start from the beginning?

Graphics of Witcher 2 are amazing on the X, I play it, it looks incredible in 4K.

People keep talking about strengths of the game, and this and that, but they never seem to be specific, was it graphics? Graphics of Skyrim are very impressive in 4K on ps4 pro and xbox X, and in my opinion has a better atmosphere, Witcher looks too clean and pretty for such a violent world.

Witcher has some good music, but it starts to get tiring after you heard it 1000 times.

I get the feeling most people praising Witcher they just do so because that's the accepted thing to do, everyone seems to want to fit in society, no one seems able to have their own opinions.

I ask these people, write it here all the things Witcher does better, if it is the story then say what part of the story, don't just keep saying its great because its amazing and fantastic. Specify everything.

If you like the story and cutscenes then admit you prefer to watch cutscenes than playing the games, and that's fine, that's why they come up with interactive movie games these days.



Around the Network

Actually hated TW3 when I first tried it, but I gave it another chance and loved it afterwards. The side content is just an absolute treasure trove.

Could never get into Skyrim. Maybe I'll give it another chance soon enough.



Made a bet with LipeJJ and HylianYoshi that the XB1 will reach 30 million before Wii U reaches 15 million. Loser has to get avatar picked by winner for 6 months (or if I lose, either 6 months avatar control for both Lipe and Hylian, or my patrick avatar comes back forever).

curl-6 said:
victor83fernandes said:

Why do people keep saying this? I found Oblivion and Skyrim to have better story, the story in Witcher is basically looking for ciri, where is ciri, she's been here, she's heading there, go there and look for ciri, get there she has already gone somewhere else, go there and repeat and repeat until the end.

Why is this story so amazing for a lot of people?

When people talk about Witcher 3 having a great story, they're talking less about the central thread of finding Ciri, and more about how much effort has gone into the individual strands; the way even optional sidequests have more depth than main story quests in most RPGs. Instead of just being "go to this location and exorcise the ghost" you'll find out the whole backstory of the person who became that ghost's life, for example. You'll find out about their relationships with the still living characters you talk to and interact with, who themselves may be directly affected by your taking on that sidequest, and its all treated with a level of gravitas and attention to detail far beyond most other games of this type.

Besides the baron quest, and that kid who couldn't speak,  I didn't see any amazing story in there. Which other stories in there were really amazing?

When I compare story of games I usually just compare the main quest of the game.

Look at god of war, it was capable of telling a fantastic story, and still I remember being playing the game for 95% of the time.

And I'm still not convinced on the side quests, because from what I remember I was more talking and not exploring or fighting, I was just listening, in Skyrim, sure the story of the quests is not great, but they put you in caves and several locations to fight and explore.

Don't get me wrong I love stories, that's why I read books, but I play games for fun, exploration, freedom, not sitting hearing people talk to each other while I press the A button for each line, pressing the A button to skip lines is not a challenge.

By the 'finding out the backstory', Skyrim does it better, it gives you the option to read the books and such on the quests, instead of being forced to watch a 20min cutscene. So you can still learn the story if you want, but you can just explore and move on.

I agree that details are high, I was in awe when I was riding the horse and seeing the trees move with the wind, very pretty and nice, doesn't make a game fun or challenging. Ryse was impressive visually on xbox, very pretty indeed, I still thought it was a terrible game because it was far too linear and too many QTE, like I said I prefer freedom and do my own thing, I don't mind people talking, just don't take the controls away from me for far too long.

And I found it insulting to my intelligence when the developers remembered they were making a GAME, and let you walk a room for 5 seconds before the next 20min cutscene, if they want a 1 hour custcene just do it, don't pretend to give me controls, that's disingenuous. Its like hey we got a 1 hour cutscene but this is a game so every 15min lets let the player cross a room to speak to another character so we can call this a game.

I'm not saying everyone has to like the same things as me, just accept that I have my reasons for preferring elder scrolls or fallout or xeno games over Witcher, and like I said, I also accept people who love Witcher for the story, just think its a shame they haven't discovered books, they might want to change hobbies.

PS - I never said I hated Witcher, I played the 3rd and then purchased the second one and played both in 4K HDR, still good games, all Im saying is its very overrated, but by no means bad.

Last edited by victor83fernandes - on 11 March 2020

victor83fernandes said:
curl-6 said:

When people talk about Witcher 3 having a great story, they're talking less about the central thread of finding Ciri, and more about how much effort has gone into the individual strands; the way even optional sidequests have more depth than main story quests in most RPGs. Instead of just being "go to this location and exorcise the ghost" you'll find out the whole backstory of the person who became that ghost's life, for example. You'll find out about their relationships with the still living characters you talk to and interact with, who themselves may be directly affected by your taking on that sidequest, and its all treated with a level of gravitas and attention to detail far beyond most other games of this type.

Besides the baron quest, and that kid who couldn't speak,  I didn't see any amazing story in there. Which other stories in there were really amazing?

When I compare story of games I usually just compare the main quest of the game.

Look at god of war, it was capable of telling a fantastic story, and still I remember being playing the game for 95% of the time.

And I'm still not convinced on the side quests, because from what I remember I was more talking and not exploring or fighting, I was just listening, in Skyrim, sure the story of the quests is not great, but they put you in caves and several locations to fight and explore.

Don't get me wrong I love stories, that's why I read books, but I play games for fun, exploration, freedom, not sitting hearing people talk to each other while I press the A button for each line, pressing the A button to skip lines is not a challenge.

By the 'finding out the backstory', Skyrim does it better, it gives you the option to read the books and such on the quests, instead of being forced to watch a 20min cutscene. So you can still learn the story if you want, but you can just explore and move on.

I agree that details are high, I was in awe when I was riding the horse and seeing the trees move with the wind, very pretty and nice, doesn't make a game fun or challenging. Ryse was impressive visually on xbox, very pretty indeed, I still thought it was a terrible game because it was far too linear and too many QTE, like I said I prefer freedom and do my own thing, I don't mind people talking, just don't take the controls away from me for far too long.

I'm not saying everyone has to like the same things as me, just accept that I have my reasons for preferring elder scrolls or fallout or xeno games over Witcher, and like I said, I also accept people who love Witcher for the story, just think its a shame they haven't discovered books, they might want to change hobbies.

PS - I never said I hated Witcher, I played the 3rd and then purchased the second one and played both in 4K HDR, still good games, all Im saying is its very overrated, but by no means bad.

You're arguing points I never made.

You said you didn't understand why people praised Witcher 3's narrative content, I simply explained that it's because even optional sidequests typically delve into the private lives, background, and motivations of multiple characters and how they interact with each other instead of just being "go kill 6 red scorpions" or "go collect 5 blue flowers."

Oh, and I'm very familiar with books thanks very much, having been an avid reader of novel-length fiction since primary school.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series X will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

curl-6 said:
victor83fernandes said:

Besides the baron quest, and that kid who couldn't speak,  I didn't see any amazing story in there. Which other stories in there were really amazing?

When I compare story of games I usually just compare the main quest of the game.

Look at god of war, it was capable of telling a fantastic story, and still I remember being playing the game for 95% of the time.

And I'm still not convinced on the side quests, because from what I remember I was more talking and not exploring or fighting, I was just listening, in Skyrim, sure the story of the quests is not great, but they put you in caves and several locations to fight and explore.

Don't get me wrong I love stories, that's why I read books, but I play games for fun, exploration, freedom, not sitting hearing people talk to each other while I press the A button for each line, pressing the A button to skip lines is not a challenge.

By the 'finding out the backstory', Skyrim does it better, it gives you the option to read the books and such on the quests, instead of being forced to watch a 20min cutscene. So you can still learn the story if you want, but you can just explore and move on.

I agree that details are high, I was in awe when I was riding the horse and seeing the trees move with the wind, very pretty and nice, doesn't make a game fun or challenging. Ryse was impressive visually on xbox, very pretty indeed, I still thought it was a terrible game because it was far too linear and too many QTE, like I said I prefer freedom and do my own thing, I don't mind people talking, just don't take the controls away from me for far too long.

I'm not saying everyone has to like the same things as me, just accept that I have my reasons for preferring elder scrolls or fallout or xeno games over Witcher, and like I said, I also accept people who love Witcher for the story, just think its a shame they haven't discovered books, they might want to change hobbies.

PS - I never said I hated Witcher, I played the 3rd and then purchased the second one and played both in 4K HDR, still good games, all Im saying is its very overrated, but by no means bad.

You're arguing points I never made.

You said you didn't understand why people praised Witcher 3's narrative content, I simply explained that it's because even optional sidequests typically delve into the private lives, background, and motivations of multiple characters and how they interact with each other instead of just being "go kill 6 red scorpions" or "go collect 5 blue flowers."

Oh, and I'm very familiar with books thanks very much, having been an avid reader of novel-length fiction since primary school.

Well by that logic, then the same can be said for Skyrim and many other RPGs, I've played plenty where you get several stories with quests. I don't know where this idea came from that quests in Skyrim are just fetch, in fact I remember doing more fetch and follow the red path in Witcher than in Skyrim. 

Sure the narrative is better done in Witcher, doesn't make the game more fun. You should never sacrifice gameplay for story in a GAME.

That's like someone trying to play monopoly but they prefer to listen to the story.

I repeat, Witcher had like 3 great story quests, and a lot of boring ones filled with fetch stuff and go from point A to point B and return.

I never said the game or story was bad, I just said its way overrated. 

Funny you mention the go fetch scorpions and flowers, because Witcher is littered with those quest, you're supposed to be this amazing fighter and somehow you get quests like find my pan, or go get my goat. Lets not pretend those things don't exist in the witcher.

Well lets just say that if all games were like Witcher, I would quit gaming for good. There would be no point where I could just get better stories in Books and movies.



Around the Network
victor83fernandes said:
Metallox said:

This is pure nonsense, and I think you're aware why. In part because the people you know don't represent the majority, in part because Witcher 3 is the standout of the series, and, most importantly, the quality of a game simply can't be defined by the traction it generates on people to play other entries of their respective franchise. You're here to judge the individual strenghts of the game, whatever it does for CDPR and their adaptation of The Witcher is another story. 

Standout yes, but everyone seems to say its great because of the story, which started on the first one. So if people really love the story, why not go back and start from the beginning?

Graphics of Witcher 2 are amazing on the X, I play it, it looks incredible in 4K.

People keep talking about strengths of the game, and this and that, but they never seem to be specific, was it graphics? Graphics of Skyrim are very impressive in 4K on ps4 pro and xbox X, and in my opinion has a better atmosphere, Witcher looks too clean and pretty for such a violent world.

Witcher has some good music, but it starts to get tiring after you heard it 1000 times.

I get the feeling most people praising Witcher they just do so because that's the accepted thing to do, everyone seems to want to fit in society, no one seems able to have their own opinions.

I ask these people, write it here all the things Witcher does better, if it is the story then say what part of the story, don't just keep saying its great because its amazing and fantastic. Specify everything.

If you like the story and cutscenes then admit you prefer to watch cutscenes than playing the games, and that's fine, that's why they come up with interactive movie games these days.

We're still dealing with the same issue here. A game's quality isn't determined in the slightest by how many people it tracks to make them play other games. That's irrelevant. 

But if you really want to push it, recent data from CDPR shows that their adaptation of The Witcher has sold over 40 million units, more  than half of which belong to the third entry. Before of the release of 3, that amount was rounding 10 million between the original Witcher and 2, so, I mean, an important increased interest in the series has emerged since 2015.

Now, this notion that The Witcher series' atmosphere is too pretty for such a violent world, I disagree entirely with it. That's one of its main appeals, in fact, it creates such a contrast that allows you to take breaks from grim scenarios and embellished locations. In general, it keeps things fresh. 

If you want to know why people like The Witcher 3 so much you can look everywhere for opinions. Focal points include the incredible immersion, which is established by many things, beginning with Geralt himself. When I hear him examining and making deductions from the environment I cannot but think it's very engrossing, frankly. You learn from the world, people and beasts alike, and you get amused by the roll of the witcher, most importantly.

Same rule applies to everything else, which is so nicely crafted that, at least for me, it's very captivating even hearing the irreverent and crazy talk that a lot of villagers have with Geralt. It's interesting, and a lof of times it's almost believable due to how these people live in a world ruled by chaos and beasts from other dimensions.

In general, part of the game's appeal lies on its attention to detail, it's absorbing. So no, the praise isn't just for show.  



victor83fernandes said:
curl-6 said:

You're arguing points I never made.

You said you didn't understand why people praised Witcher 3's narrative content, I simply explained that it's because even optional sidequests typically delve into the private lives, background, and motivations of multiple characters and how they interact with each other instead of just being "go kill 6 red scorpions" or "go collect 5 blue flowers."

Oh, and I'm very familiar with books thanks very much, having been an avid reader of novel-length fiction since primary school.

Well by that logic, then the same can be said for Skyrim and many other RPGs, I've played plenty where you get several stories with quests. I don't know where this idea came from that quests in Skyrim are just fetch, in fact I remember doing more fetch and follow the red path in Witcher than in Skyrim. 

Sure the narrative is better done in Witcher, doesn't make the game more fun. You should never sacrifice gameplay for story in a GAME.

That's like someone trying to play monopoly but they prefer to listen to the story.

I repeat, Witcher had like 3 great story quests, and a lot of boring ones filled with fetch stuff and go from point A to point B and return.

I never said the game or story was bad, I just said its way overrated. 

Funny you mention the go fetch scorpions and flowers, because Witcher is littered with those quest, you're supposed to be this amazing fighter and somehow you get quests like find my pan, or go get my goat. Lets not pretend those things don't exist in the witcher.

Well lets just say that if all games were like Witcher, I would quit gaming for good. There would be no point where I could just get better stories in Books and movies.

I didn't say Witcher 3 didn't have fetch quests, it simply puts more narrative effort into them than is typical among similar games, hence they feel less like filler and have more of a sense of purpose.

I understand your point of view, I was simply answering your question, when you asked why anyone considered Witcher 3's narrative component to be good.

Last edited by curl-6 - on 11 March 2020

Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series X will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

For me, Witcher. I kinda got bored with Skyrim.



JWeinCom said:
So... If I really didn't like Skyrim because I found the combat to be very meh, and I didn't find the disparate narratives very engaging, would I enjoy Witcher, or would I have the same issues?

Combat and narrative are the main parts that are wildly different about Skyrim and the Witcher. Doesn't mean you will enjoy the Witcher, but if these areas were lackluster for you in Skyrim, Witcher might be working for you.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019

Predictions: Switch / Switch vs. XB1 in the US / Three Houses first quarter

Psssssh

Kingdom Come Deliverance :)