Wild Hunt vs. Skyrim (The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt)

I was in Skyrim, I didn’t like it, I’ll live here for now

dd300 The
Witcher 3 what is and what is not and how will we trample back to Skyrim?

did you understand what you wrote? what are we going to do back to Skyrim? How is this to be understood?

another stsuka excellent student eg

Deseptikons.STARSCREAM
Yes, he has all the text like this)))

AVEDALOR
sadness is all the salt in the current education. Education reform is her mother, and this user is her fruits

Firstly, I didn’t understand the title of the topic ...
Secondly, you compare the game 4 years ago and the game that came out a month ago, this is stupid ...
Thirdly, you spoil a lot ...
Fourthly, you find fault with the Russian voice acting, although as I understand it, you don’t know that in the original there is no less swearing ..
Fifth, I don’t know what’s wrong with your controls, because everything is fine with me and 8 of my friends, sometimes there are friezes, but are they really in “skurim” not blyo?
Sixth, Credit-loan, just flaws in Russian voice acting ...
Seventh, I don’t see anything similar to "skurim" except for the genre ...
Eighth, maybe you are right about the scene with icons from Saints Row, but I saw these "icons" in many games, films and books, which makes me think that Volition just chose this "icon" for itself, and other games, films and books do not troll the game from them in any way...
And in conclusion, I will not play "skurim" again in the next half a year, because I play The Witcher and intend to play it at least three times...

For all my dislike for Skyrim and its open world, I understand why it is needed there and why people like it. Not in The Witcher 3. I see absolutely no reason why the same content could not be stuffed into small locations and corridors of the previous parts. Beauty? I would not say. I love Slavic mythology, but these fields-forests do not deliver any aesthetic pleasure at all. Although even the local northern islands cannot boast of strong scenery, let's be honest. Again, Skyrim is at least trying to create the illusion of a living world, while in The Witcher all the quest characters that are not in cities and villages stand along the roads and are waiting for the player to give him the quest. Made very rough and visible to the naked eye. So, in my opinion, the open world in the third Witcher has nothing interesting to offer,
On the other hand, the story. In Skyrim, he is purely for being. The concept of chosenness is elevated to such an absolute that you are already amazed. The standard "go save the world" is not intriguing at all. In The Witcher, the story is more personal and exciting, Geralt does not climb into heroes and acts, for the most part, because of selfish motives. What is good, we still have time to become the saviors of all in most future RPGs. As for the dialogue component, the Witcher wins here in all respects, the reasons, I think, do not need to be explained. And then there is the issue of moral choice. There are practically no such moments in Skyrim, and those that exist do not affect anything. The Witcher is full of them, but they do not greatly influence the world around, after the second part I would like more.
As for combat, then everyone will decide for himself what is more important to him. In Skyrim, it is quite diverse, although crooked, in The Witcher it is licked, but it does not shine with variety. Which is better is hard to say.
The question of authenticity is not entirely clear. The world of the Witcher never claimed to be historic, because there is a huge number of cultures and nationalities mixed there that either did not exist in the same time period, or, if they did, did not touch in any way. Just accept the world as it is and don't transfer it to real history.
In general, the author, [insert the right one] for the sake of it, open the textbook on the Russian language.

one character appears in a black and yellow frock coat studded with badges you won’t believe from what ... From Saints Row

Heraldic lily (florentine iris) is a symbol of the royal family, appeared and was distributed in Eastern and Western Europe in the Middle Ages (came along with the adoption of Christianity) .

Everything has already been said, but one thing remains...
...one character performs in a black and yellow frock coat with badges dotted with you won't believe what... From Saints Row...

Do you even know that the Saints Row badge is a fucking LILY ! What the fuck is a joke? If someone used a lily as an icon of the game and the gang in this very game, is it possible that no one, anywhere and ever can use it? It's just a normal plant.

Another manifesto of the desperate)))

Self-Murderer
I absolutely see no reason why the same content could not be stuffed into small locations and corridors of the previous parts.
With corridors .... You know where to go along the same corridors. Here, corridors are definitely needed, so as not to be confused and bring everything to the cesspool, and not to spread it, wherever it hits)))))))))
This is generally just the third game, young, but already loudly declared itself how about wealthy competitors, teams, people a step away from the "major league" ... And I hope in a couple of years, they will again force the rolls of the same BV or Arbors to tighten up ...
The most greedy BV even issued a FREE DLC after such provocations from the Poles. And you sit and arrange a rut on those who became one of the first to push through a sparing pricing policy for the DLK.
A healthy competitor is growing up...
Do you know what those who are themselves game developers by profession say?))) They are upset by the fact that in such a short time Projects have produced a quality product in a lot of aspects...
Than The more open world games like this with an emphasis on tactics, the better...

You know what?

dotted with badges you won't believe from what... From Saints Row yes, yes
Yeah, and the whole Temeria is a parody of a gang of saints :D

I love Skyrim dearly, and I think that the games are similar in many ways, but in The Witcher the quests are more intricate and interesting, and in Skyrim the open world is more diverse (I don’t mean monsters). I don’t have a habit of replaying games, perhaps because while you are playing one such big game, something new will come out.

So far I've gone about halfway through, but what I really miss in The Witcher 3 is interesting places to explore like in TES, here basically everything is limited to just some small object, a tent, a house, a cart, a stone, at best, some a small cave, and in order to get into some branched dungeon or ruins with a bunch of different passages and labyrinths, with traps, some kind of riddles and puzzles, this is very lacking in the game. And besides, they taught Geralt to jump and swim, you can to make a bunch of interesting chips, because there is even an elixir in order to breathe longer under water (and you could still make an elixir so that Geralt would jump further and make some hard-to-reach places, for example, towers that would be very difficult to climb, but also an appropriate award), but almost nothing interesting was done.

Well, there is still not enough chest, there is many times more loot than in the second part, and you can also craft much more than in the second, only there was a chest (well, a lot of people have already spoken about this). mannequins, and with weapon racks to hang all this stuff, I’m not even talking.

_Str75_
I'm sorry, but why should I like or dislike a certain game because of the youth and prospects of the studio? I pay attention to my feelings from the game, and who created it how and with what means is already the tenth thing. And what kind of claims are these? Not only did I not, as you put it, "drive" CD Projekt RED, I didn't even say a word about them. Although, even if he had mentioned it, it would not be the most flattering, because it was with the third Witcher that the developers did not show their best side. If you really ask them for all the promises that they made to the players, then the current released game can only be perceived as a small demo version of this project. Again, you sound like I'm calling the game bad. Not at all, I liked it, I enjoyed the passage. I just think it's not perfect and a little oversaturated with superfluous.

too thick)

I will go to Skyrim only if the animation of the witcher is transferred there, all the characters and magic, in general, then, after all, those and those NORDLINGS!))))

Self-Murderer
I had the same experience with DA:I, so both of these games are about the same level for me.
ooooooh (choked on tea) ............. And there is simply nothing to say about this, except [censorship] ...
Only to diagnose a brain collapse ... You even poorly understand such an aspect as the script , as I see it ... Scenarios and texts are IMPOSSIBLE to be put on the same level. In DAI, only he makes any sober-minded person vomit, .. Remove all romanceability and get a game for children 10-12 years old, and not for an adult audience ... The Poles have scripts for current small plot quests and sensible flashbacks, not to mention global and much more... The flexibility of the build is excellent...

I understand when people argue Sky vs The Witcher3... There is something to argue about, each game is good in its own way and I really love both of these series of games... But putting AIM on the same level with The Witcher is just the limit of NOT understanding the essence of the discussion even...

_Str75_
You even poorly understand such an aspect as the script, as I see it ... Scripts and texts CANNOT be put on the same level.
I didn't. I talked about the general impressions of both games. Excuse me that I liked one good game that everyone pissed off even before the release and it became fashionable and, in principle, I liked the second good game, which everyone elevated to the status of a cult, everything was the same before the release and it also became fashionable. I just recognize the pros and cons of both of them and do not elevate them to the status of masterpieces, which does not prevent me from enjoying them. I just understood why I was going to DA:I and, in principle, I got what I wanted. And I went into it purely because of romances and dialogues with companions, seasoned with another epic story about the fight between a beaver and a goat. With The Witcher, the situation is the same, I was waiting for it only for an interesting, deep plot for the sake of it and did not remain disappointed. In this regard, for me, the games balance each other out. And the publicized open world did not impress me either there or there.

saa0891
Yeah, and also build your own palace and declare yourself Huscarl and to hell with this low-paid witchcraft) ... Well, seriously, Skye had an absolutely ill-conceived economy, at least chew money with your ass, merchants are needed only to throw off unnecessary loot and get unnecessary ones for it the same money, but having no weight. Furnishing your numerous houses with all sorts of junk is still a pleasure, especially if you take into account a bunch of bugs in the hemorrhoidal implementation of this process (in particular, it pissed me off that objects periodically arbitrarily moved from places carefully defined for them, and at these moments I only wanted to have such a magic hammer and nails, with which one could nail all this utensils to dick). I don’t understand why you can be nostalgic here, it’s like remembering with a warm feeling and longing about an excised appendicitis.
Witcher's balance, although it makes you sweat, it suggests the player's motivation to perform certain actions: sell, buy, craft, etc. For example, in The Witcher, even just to repair a weapon, you must reckon with certain financial costs, either buy a repair kit (they are not lying around on every corner) or pay a blacksmith for work. Money is never enough. Good swords do not lie on the road either, so you repair your own one until there is an opportunity to change it to something better. To create a good sword, you need to find or buy a drawing, then assemble-buy materials, then order work, in the end, all this can cost an average of 1000 really hard-earned money or a decent amount of time (if you want to save money). In Sky, you just pump in a bunch of accumulated cash after a foray into a couple of caves in blacksmithing, and now you are already a master blacksmith, and now to become the owner of some epic weapon you do not need to explore the world, make deals with the gods, but in one second you forge yourself a steel blade, which in terms of its characteristics will be many times better than a blade, some kind of Azura (the latter, if only hung on the wall). As a result, the question invariably haunts Skyrim, what is the motivation of the Dragonborn, as if he is saving the world from doing nothing, and not due to some insurmountable circumstances. which, according to its characteristics, will be many times better than a blade, some kind of Azura (the latter, if only hung on the wall). As a result, the question invariably haunts Skyrim, what is the motivation of the Dragonborn, as if he is saving the world from doing nothing, and not due to some insurmountable circumstances. which, according to its characteristics, will be many times better than a blade, some kind of Azura (the latter, if only hung on the wall). As a result, the question invariably haunts Skyrim, what is the motivation of the Dragonborn, as if he is saving the world from doing nothing, and not due to some insurmountable circumstances.

San226
Excellent comment )
Indeed, when playing The Witcher, you see, first of all, a person who has fallen into the cycle of political intrigues. In Skyrim, this feeling did not arise at all. The game, of course, is interesting, but at the same time, the feeling of being burdensome, paradoxically, did not leave. When I watched "Senior Doodles" I didn’t clap my hands (yes, I did clap, why be modest). Everything is very subtle there.

San226

But seriously, in Skye there was an absolutely ill-conceived economy, money at least chew your ass, merchants are needed only to throw off unnecessary loot and get unnecessary money for it, but having no weight.

In B3, there’s nothing to spend money on at all, at least in Skyrime there was a chic interesting craft, alchemy, enchantment, I’m not talking about houses that needed to be bought and equipped, building your own house, learning from teachers, etc.
The Witcher can easily move even with a ton of overload, fight without problems, in Skyrime you won’t even budge when overloaded.

Furnishing your numerous houses with all sorts of junk is still a pleasure, especially if you take into account a bunch of bugs in the hemorrhoidal implementation of this process (in particular, it pissed me off that objects periodically arbitrarily moved from places carefully defined for them, and at these moments I only wanted to have such a magic hammer and nails, with which one could nail all this utensils to dick).

These are just your personal problems that you don’t like it, especially since no one is forcing you to do it, these are just another interesting gameplay feature of the game that the players have been asking for and done in mods, the developer listened and did it, now such an opportunity will also appear in fallout 4 only with even more different features, such as building protective turrets, your own villages, the ability to launch caravans between them, which I am very happy about, it only makes the gameplay more diverse and interesting.

I don’t understand why you can be nostalgic here, it’s like remembering with a warm feeling and longing about an excised appendicitis.

You write some kind of nonsense, in The Witcher 3 they simply didn’t even make a chest, and how much whining about this is still, it’s good that the developers also listened to the opinion of the players and in the 7th patch they will finally add a chest, and Skyrime has much more features, And this is very pleasing, for this people love this series so much.

And yes, receiving all these positions as a reward for merit, from which the real benefit is dick, only to amuse your pride ...

I’m afraid that you don’t understand what an RPG is and win back, all these bonuses are designed to reward the player and convey positive emotions and impressions that you don’t just do some kind of quests in the game, join guilds, choose any solution, etc., I already I'm not talking about the fact that NPCs pay attention to what your specialization is, or when you have some kind of illness, there are even such trifles - you threw away a weapon in the city. you left the house without clothes NPCs will also pay attention to this and there are just a bunch of such pleasant little things in the game.

Witcher's balance, although it makes you sweat, it suggests the player's motivation to perform certain actions: sell, buy, craft, etc. For example, in The Witcher, even just to repair a weapon, you must reckon with certain financial costs, either buy a repair kit (they are not lying around on every corner) or pay a blacksmith for work.

Don’t write bullshit, the Witcher 3 doesn’t present any particular difficulty, except at the very beginning, and after the twentieth level, everyone goes to bed like it’s not good to do, I’m not talking about the fact that the lack of auto-leveling makes the monsters very weak when you are level 20 and monsters 15 or less, it’s generally very easy to play, they fall from one sneeze (in Skyrime, level 20 is just the beginning of your GG’s development, when you don’t shy away from every bear, mage, vampire or outcast), with a balance in The Witcher 3, it’s also specifically developed screwed up, as well as, by the way, with quests and experience for them, in skyrim the same auto-leveling and when your level rises, monsters grow and pose at least some kind of danger.

And I already wrote about money, in The Witcher 3 this is not a problem at all, in Skyrim there are much more ways and opportunities to spend it.

To create a good sword, you need to find or buy a drawing, then assemble-buy materials, then order work, in the end, all this can cost an average of 1000 really hard-earned money or a decent amount of time (if you want to save money). In Skye, you just pump in a bunch of accumulated cash after a foray into a couple of caves in blacksmithing, and now you are already a master blacksmith, and now to become the owner of some epic weapon you don’t have to explore the world, make deals with the gods

I don’t know why you have problems with money in The Witcher 3, maybe you don’t know how to play (I personally already have more than 50 thousand, and I just started completing quests on Scaling), money may not be enough only at the very beginning of the game, however, this is the case in almost all RPGs, then there are no problems, especially if you correctly sell the product.

and in one second you forge yourself a steel blade, which in terms of its characteristics will be many times better than a blade, some kind of Azura (the last one, if you only hang it on the wall)

Why, Azura's blade - you played the game, there is Azura's Star - this is one of the most useful artifacts in the game.
In Skyrim, weapons with magical abilities require constant charging, using the same soul stones or Azura's star (at least read what it is on the wiki so as not to write nonsense), again, even here there is a choice, there is a black star and an ordinary one, they can capture different sizes of souls, this is very important.
The stone of souls is needed not only for charging weapons, but also for enchanting weapons and armor, again there is also a nuance here, the larger the stone and the soul in it, the greater the effect and the number of charges, of course, pumping directly affects all this, and alchemy and enchantment skills.

By the way, for example, in the second witcher on dark mode, in order to collect all three sets, a treacherous, a blasphemer, a brother-fighter, you really had to sweat in order to save money for them, in B3, as in B3, as you already wrote, there are no problems with money at all, since loot falls just unmeasured, I’m already silent about what’s going on in Skeylig, chests were poked like in some kind of AC.

In The Witcher 3, apart from blueprints and spare parts, you don’t need anything else, but in Skyrime you still have to upgrade your skills, choose the appropriate perks, with one branch for weapons, and completely different ones for creating armor, and there is more than one branch (a bunch of different armor starting from steel and ending with dragon) and all this needs to be pumped, plus enchantment and alchemy follow from here, and all this must be downloaded again, and not one branch, this is a whole interesting roleplaying, which is simply not in The Witcher 3.
I’m not talking about a bunch of classes and styles (mage, archer, assassin, necromancer, warrior, and what’s more, styles, one-handed, two-handed, with a shield, duals, etc. and for all this there are perks and branches in pumping) and you can even play a werewolf or a vampire, the witcher doesn’t even come close to that, although I understand perfectly well that it’s not very correct to compare these games and the possibilities in them.

As a result, the question invariably haunts Skyrim, what is the motivation of the Dragonborn, as if he is saving the world from doing nothing, and not due to some insurmountable circumstances.

You should play the game to understand the motivation, in addition to saving from dragons, there is also a civil war in which you take part.