Skyrim or The Witcher 2?

[IamSofaKingRaw]

Been playing the Witcher 2 and it's really addictive. All the quests are different from each other and the fact that there is an actual story is really nice. Although you don't have the whole world in from of you to explore, the areas you get to work around are pretty big with a varied amount of monsters. The combat is also head and shoulders above Skyrim's

Skyrim on the other hand has much better customization and larger areas. The play styles in Skyrim are also more diverse than the Witchers but it is not as enjoyable to execute. It also has an abundance of dragons...

 

[Zhukov]

I enjoyed them both for different reasons and eventually came to despise them both for different reasons.

[sub](If that sounds vague it's because I'm not actually sure what the OP wants us to talk about.)[/sub]

 

[soren7550]

I've only played Skyrim, so I can't say anything about Witcher 2.
[small]Other than Silver and Steel is an awesome song.[/small]

 

[shrimpcel]

Do you mean which is best? Because those two are about as incomparable as you can get.

I prefer Witcher 2, but that's mostly because I like a focused linear story over a billion stories in a sandbox.

Both of them are RPG's in a fantasy setting. In both games, you play as someone who is close to being the last of his kind (Witcher or Dragonborn). Both have dialogue options. I could go on, of course. I fail to see how they are so mind-blowingly "incomparable". Maybe if these are the two only games you have ever played in your entire life, but otherwise...

In fact, if I try to apply your logic, all we can ever compare is games that are part of the same franchise, and even then, some franchises evolve to have a bigger difference between earlier and later games than there is between The Witcher 2 and Skyrim.

OT: I prefer Skyrim. It has a great atmosphere and an impressive amount of freedom.

 

[sanquin]

They're not comparable really.

In terms of what you can do, customization and feeling of scale Skyrim wins for me. But in graphics/aesthetics, story and combat Witcher 2 wins for me. The general 'feel' of both games are about equal, but for different reasons.

 

[shrimpcel]

Do you mean which is best? Because those two are about as incomparable as you can get.

I prefer Witcher 2, but that's mostly because I like a focused linear story over a billion stories in a sandbox.

Both of them are RPG's in a fantasy setting. In both games, you play as someone who is close to being the last of his kind (Witcher or Dragonborn). Both have dialogue options. I could go on, of course. I fail to see how they are so mind-blowingly "incomparable". Maybe if these are the two only games you have ever played in your entire life, but otherwise...

In fact, if I try to apply your logic, all we can ever compare is games that are part of the same franchise, and even then, some franchises evolve to have a bigger difference between earlier and later games than there is between The Witcher 2 and Skyrim.

OT: I prefer Skyrim. It has a great atmosphere and an impressive amount of freedom.

You have got to be kidding....

One of them uses swords and so does the other and therefore they can be compared....

Witcher 2 is a liniar story with few, segnificant choices with a predetermined char. You cannot redefine him outside what has been defined as his char. Skyrim's char is a blank slate in a sandbox. You decide more or less everything about him. Race, sex, Persona, skillset. These are in no way comparable. The world isn't tied to a specific story, but instead a giant sandbox. They have randomly generated quests in there for crying out loud.

God....

Well, didn't you just compare the two?

 

[Shadowstar38]

The combat in Skyrim is clunky as hell and the story leaves a lot to be desired.

I'll say Witcher 2.

 

[shrimpcel]

Well, didn't you just compare the two?

Umm, the hell?

You know, the OP was asking for quality, he didn't compare these two in quality. It all comes down to what you want in a game.

Oh alright then. To be fair, the OP was not very clear on what he was asking!

 

[alphamalet]

I have played both, and didn't like either of them. Both were essentially action games with RPG mechanics, and both had terribly clunky combat. I guess I will say The Witcher 2 because I liked the more focussed experience, and the combat was the better one out of the two.

The thing that bothered me about the Witcher 2 the most was the inconsistent sword animations in comabt. I can see they included a ton of different animations of Geralt swinging his sword to keep the game interesting, but that added a ton of problems. In a combat system where you can't interrupt a sword swing once you've started it, you need to know EXACTLY how long the attack will take so you can time your dodge accordingly. The inconsistent sword animations made that impossible to do 100% of the time. It's bad game design. Compared to a combat system like Dark Souls, The Witcher just isn't up to snuff.

Not to mention the fact that I'm not sold on this being a mature and adult story. It seems like a lot of profane material was thrown in for the hell of it. I realize that in that time people were more than a little uncouth, but I've never heard someone say, "What the ass fuck is going on here?" That's just childish. Additionally, you can't make it more than thirty minutes without some profane sexual innuendo. It's fine at first but gets old quick.

I would go into detail about what I don't like about Skyrim, but I don't have all day.

 

[Woodsey]

Do you mean which is best? Because those two are about as incomparable as you can get.

I prefer Witcher 2, but that's mostly because I like a focused linear story over a billion stories in a sandbox.

Both of them are RPG's in a fantasy setting. In both games, you play as someone who is close to being the last of his kind (Witcher or Dragonborn). Both have dialogue options. I could go on, of course.

You could, but the straws would probably snap so hard they'd blind you.

 

[Judgement101]

I personally think Witcher 2 is better in nearly every way since the combat is more entertaining and not just a "Mash attack to win". Also, the Alchemy system is more fun and less random in my opinion and in general the weapon variation feels better since it caters to how you want to play.

 

[Savagezion]

Do you mean which is best? Because those two are about as incomparable as you can get.

I prefer Witcher 2, but that's mostly because I like a focused linear story over a billion stories in a sandbox.

Both of them are RPG's in a fantasy setting. In both games, you play as someone who is close to being the last of his kind (Witcher or Dragonborn). Both have dialogue options. I could go on, of course. I fail to see how they are so mind-blowingly "incomparable". Maybe if these are the two only games you have ever played in your entire life, but otherwise...

In fact, if I try to apply your logic, all we can ever compare is games that are part of the same franchise, and even then, some franchises evolve to have a bigger difference between earlier and later games than there is between The Witcher 2 and Skyrim.

OT: I prefer Skyrim. It has a great atmosphere and an impressive amount of freedom.

You have got to be kidding....

One of them uses swords and so does the other and therefore they can be compared....

Witcher 2 is a liniar story with few, segnificant choices with a predetermined char. You cannot redefine him outside what has been defined as his char. Skyrim's char is a blank slate in a sandbox. You decide more or less everything about him. Race, sex, Persona, skillset. These are in no way comparable. The world isn't tied to a specific story, but instead a giant sandbox. They have randomly generated quests in there for crying out loud.

God....

You just did the same thing you complained at him for. You sited 1 difference to support the notion they are incomparable. Linear and sandbox games are comparable especially if they have as much in common as these two do. About the only difference in them is linear vs open. Even Skyrim has a linear story inside of it.

I would suggest Skyrim. It's story isn't as bad as some people make it out to be. It is a pretty decent story. Good but not great. Additionally, it offers player versatility much better and has that "whoops, I wasted a lot of time on fun diversions" thing going on. Plus, if you like mods it has a much larger community.

 

[90sgamer]

I found Skyrim more enjoyable between the two, but really like both games.

My opinion of Skyrim is based on a modded Skyrim. I never played it vanilla. The mods I used primarily improved what was already in the game and didn't add anything else or otherwise change the game experience. That said, Skyrim had a believable world that was interesting to explore, and held a wide variety of combat styles that were fun to try out. The visuals, modded, are stunning. Sadly, no SLI support.

The Witcher 2 had a better narrative but was less fun to play. Combat relied too heavily on dodging and the quality of the visuals was not consistent by a long shot. The chacter models, however, were stunning. I did not appreciate the overemphasis on sex compared to the first game. Lastly, the pacing of the game was all kinds of fucked up, much like the first game. CD Projekt Red need to hire another advisor to help them with that.

The conclusion is surprising to me because I always prefer linear narrative RPGs to Western style RPGs. I typically dislike sand box games as well. I wouldn't have anticipated liking Skyrim so much. It is probably the result if Skyrim exceeding my expectations and Witcher 2 falling short of expectations.

 

[tokae]

Avast.

Perhaps it was a false positive, I just figured I would make you aware of it, since there is a possibility the threat was real.

To be fair, Avast! will give you alot of false positives but also always protect you. As for the link that was posted to hark.com, it was indeed a false positive.

And to stay on topic:
I prefer TW2 myself, mainly because I feel more bad-ass as Geralt than any of my Skyrim-chars.
Skyrim is great for just running around and exploring things and hunting bandits but there is no pay-off for anything. I still enjoy it, very much so even, but it all feels kinda pointless.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

Witcher 2 is definitely a better choice because of the fleshed out characters and story and I have always liked that compared to a sandbox.

And this coming from having spent 300hours in Skyrim.

 

[Savagezion]

I am sorry how did I do the same thing as him?

I point out why they are incompatible as comparison. If I had used Diablo and Skyrim would that have made a difference for my argument? No. They dont try the same thing and he more or less goes "They are both RPG's in a fantasy setting. Therefore comparable". That doesn't make any sense. it is like going "Grand Tourismo and mario kart are comparable because they are both races".

Skyrim gives people a sandbox to play in and Witcher gives you a locked interactive story. Tell me does Skyrim end when you kill when your main story is over? No. Witchers does. That is because it isn't the same thing. Of you are going to broaden your comparisons you might as well go "You can compare them because they are both games".

It is perfectly acceptable to compare GT and Mario Cart. Is it not ok to compare star wars and star trek? All they have in common is space travel and aliens. Yet, people compare them all the time. These things are definitely in the realm of comparison is all I am pointing out. If you think that is inconceivable, whatever. Is it Torchlight vs Diablo? No, but it is still closer than the threads of "which is better, L4D2 or Mario Kart? That is some wtf stuff. Witcher or Skyrim, isn't any different than comparing TES and Dragon Age which happens all the time too.

 

[scw55]

Skyrim because I hate the Witcher.

WTS a thread full of bias.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

I haven't played Skyrim yet (I know right?) but it looks to be the love child of Oblivion and Fallout 3 so I'll have to assume some things.

For me personally it has to be The Witcher 2.

I really prefer the pre defined character that is Geralt as oppose to a blank slate character I never get to see (Yes I know you can change to 3rd person). In fact all the characters in The Witcher 2 I find interesting, fleshed out, dynamic, but with the Skyrim characters I've seen in videos they all seem like stupid androids kind of just following their routine. I find it hard to get truly immersed in Bethesda games although it is fun to just walk around, go spelunking, murder some bandits and steal their loot, I find it hard to give a shit about the characters and the story.

Everything you need in an RPG was there for me in The Witcher 2.

 

[Gergar12_v1legacy]

Get both if you can, but the Witcher 2 seems better to me.

 

[Simonoly]

They're both so very different. It would probably be better to ask "Witcher 2 or Dragon Age 2?" or some other RPG series that isn't truly open world and has a pre-defined player character. Unless you wanted to know which one to buy?

Personally, I enjoyed The Witcher 2 for the story, the gorgeous visuals and interesting characters. But I found the combat quite dull and the game is actually quite short lived so I never felt like I had enough time to really explore the alchemy etc. I actually think the Witcher series could benefit from being a bit more like Dragon Age: Origins and allow you to explore a bit more of the world. It's set in a truly fascinating world and I'd love a little bit more freedom to explore it.

I probably rate Skyrim over the Witcher 2 purely because I prefer the variability that Bethesda games offer.