I guess the most important thing that TW3 did better is that its side content was done with the same technique as the main quest. In Cyberpunk, there is a clear difference between dialogue-heavy main quest (and major sidequests) and gigs who rely on gameplay and environmental storytelling.
I don't know why I misquoted it, but it's subjective, some playstyles, like sneaky one, can give you more quality than doing missions rambo-style less. I think it's even hard to compare two games, missions, gigs are done around few possible playstyle, when ofc in W3 you can be more melee, or more signs-focused or alchemy focused, but most of time it won't really change how missions, contract will work for you.Sorry, that's the only thing that caught my attention. Best sentence of the thread (or maybe it's the other way around)
Maybe I edited it in the meantim.
But no, nothing to do with the thread, it's related to the sentence that Judy says at her window and it's obviously a little bit off-topic.
So sorry for this unnecessary little aside
Crafting is so much better in W3. It really makes sense to use skilled craftsman. Combining sniper rifle out of junk in the middle of NC is ridiculous. If one's V is tech oriented, should at last use apartment workbench.
Kind of flipping the thread on its head but i think two things Cyberpunk does (much) better than the Witcher would be its prologue and gigs.
White Orchard and the wider Velen opening story of Witcher 3 I found so dour and uninteresting I abandoned the game not once but twice. Had i not known its reputation as one of the best games ever made I'd have refunded it because it simply was not interesting, showed no promise of becoming interesting and was not enjoyable. It was stereotypical peasants being miserable, an almost unfathomable control system, annoying monsters and trees. (It doesn't help that the very opening scene is porno Yennefer, which does not predispose a player to like the game if they are not in whatever that target market is supposed to be.)
I felt Cyberpunk did a much better job of dropping you into engaging material.
On gigs, I simply didn't like most witcher contracts.
I disliked the mechanic of having physically to go to a notice board and then pick them up, amassing the equivalent of a work to-do list. I disliked having to read the encyclopaedia to prepare. And I disliked the fights which, with some notable exceptions, were not narratively interesting. I'd sigh every time I went to do one and eventually stopped bothering. Basically, they felt like Cyberpunk's cyberpsycho jobs: formulaic.
Cyberpunk's gigs felt much freer in how they could be played and more varied.
White Orchard and the wider Velen opening story of Witcher 3 I found so dour and uninteresting I abandoned the game not once but twice. Had i not known its reputation as one of the best games ever made I'd have refunded it because it simply was not interesting, showed no promise of becoming interesting and was not enjoyable. It was stereotypical peasants being miserable, an almost unfathomable control system, annoying monsters and trees. (It doesn't help that the very opening scene is porno Yennefer, which does not predispose a player to like the game if they are not in whatever that target market is supposed to be.)
I felt Cyberpunk did a much better job of dropping you into engaging material.
On gigs, I simply didn't like most witcher contracts.
I disliked the mechanic of having physically to go to a notice board and then pick them up, amassing the equivalent of a work to-do list. I disliked having to read the encyclopaedia to prepare. And I disliked the fights which, with some notable exceptions, were not narratively interesting. I'd sigh every time I went to do one and eventually stopped bothering. Basically, they felt like Cyberpunk's cyberpsycho jobs: formulaic.
Cyberpunk's gigs felt much freer in how they could be played and more varied.
Last edited:
I'll make it short: The Witcher 3 was more Cyberpunk than Cyberpunk 2077.
almost everything? The only thing that's on the same level is voice acting and dialogue in the main quests, as well as some major NPC's writing (not all) and world design - kudos to the team responsible for creating the fictional brands, logos and ads.
There are some quests, like the Peralez one or the River quest chain that were as good as the quests in Witcher 3, but the GIGs were just horribly repetitive.
As for the rest...nope, Witcher was way better, sadly.
There are some quests, like the Peralez one or the River quest chain that were as good as the quests in Witcher 3, but the GIGs were just horribly repetitive.
As for the rest...nope, Witcher was way better, sadly.
Combat is much better than in Witcher 3 and you arent locked into using swords for the whole game you can even play the whole game using stealth which didnt exist in Witcher 3.....
I don't think you can compare combat. Once is mostly an FPS with some stealth, hacking and close quarter combat, the other is a sword-based action game with dodging and blocking meachnics. That's like comparing Dark Souls to Call of Duty. Which one has the better combat?
The only thing oyu can compare is sword fighting mechanics in both games and here CP2077 clearl looses for me, becuase first person sword fighting just feels clumsy.
I only really played Cyberpunk 2077, as I completed it 100%. That said, I just started Witcher 3 (Wild Hunt) so I'm not as versed in it. As an example, I haven't even taken the initial Griffin out yet.
I'm not seeing anyone mention this, so I will. I find more attachment or investment to my character in Cyberpunk 2077 than in Witcher 3. I think it has to do with the ability to create my own V in how she/he looks and the very unique interchanging outfits (individual pieces of clothing) vs the standard Geralt character. Another added plus is you also choose a backstory for your character in Cyberpunk 2077, which again is making the character more yours. It is for this very reason, I am not as compelled to jump back into Witcher 3 on a daily basis or at least in these early stages. Reading others opinions on how they view Witcher 3 makes me want to push through and hope I start to get invested though.
I'm not seeing anyone mention this, so I will. I find more attachment or investment to my character in Cyberpunk 2077 than in Witcher 3. I think it has to do with the ability to create my own V in how she/he looks and the very unique interchanging outfits (individual pieces of clothing) vs the standard Geralt character. Another added plus is you also choose a backstory for your character in Cyberpunk 2077, which again is making the character more yours. It is for this very reason, I am not as compelled to jump back into Witcher 3 on a daily basis or at least in these early stages. Reading others opinions on how they view Witcher 3 makes me want to push through and hope I start to get invested though.
Honestly, even if I prefer Cyberpunk (through his universe), TW3 will stay on my SSD and for me, it will stay a "must have".
Playing one is good, playing both is even better
1. Plot (Both, main quest and sidequests had more layers, were more immersive and complex. CP is way too generic in terms of side-quests.
2. Soundtrack - Witcher's music is way better, CP soundrack is good but its too short
3. Length of gameplay - The longer the better, argument that Witcher for most gamers was too long is just so wrong. Majority of consumers is less demanding, they should not be an indicator of quality.
4. Immersion, world in CP is complex but shallow.
4. Ending
Long story short Witcher 3 is a masterpice, while CP at this moment is just a good game.
Witcher delivered everything it promised (and more). CP promised a lot and delivered just a sample of possibilities.
2. Soundtrack - Witcher's music is way better, CP soundrack is good but its too short
3. Length of gameplay - The longer the better, argument that Witcher for most gamers was too long is just so wrong. Majority of consumers is less demanding, they should not be an indicator of quality.
4. Immersion, world in CP is complex but shallow.
4. Ending
Long story short Witcher 3 is a masterpice, while CP at this moment is just a good game.
Witcher delivered everything it promised (and more). CP promised a lot and delivered just a sample of possibilities.
Last edited:
If you are a Dev and with the stats (like in "Cyberpunk in number" thread) you see that lot/most of players didn't finish the game. You may wonder if it's not too long precisely
Well, statistically most of the players will never complete the title. At this moment average gameplay length is 45h, with 21% of achievements unlocked.If you are a Dev and with the stats (like in "Cyberpunk in number" thread) you see that lot/most of players didn't finish the game. You may wonder if it's not too long precisely
I haven't done all half of the sidequests ( I was shocked when I reached the no-return point after just a few missions) and my current score is 98h.
74% of the gamers stole the relic and only 50% reached the end game and 35% completed it.
Quest management was done better. I liked being able to pick and choose a little bit more and protect my log from being spammed with quests.
Otherwise I can't really say because they are just different games. And they also take place in completely different eras. I do not understand why people want to try and juxtapose apples and pineapples they they are obviously different things. There's nothing to say, they are different!
And you leave all that aside they are still even different era games. TW3 vs CP77 threads are pointless.
Otherwise I can't really say because they are just different games. And they also take place in completely different eras. I do not understand why people want to try and juxtapose apples and pineapples they they are obviously different things. There's nothing to say, they are different!
And you leave all that aside they are still even different era games. TW3 vs CP77 threads are pointless.
Thanks, I really never even thought about playing TW3 until Cyberpunk 2077. Reading opinions here and comments like yours let me know it will be worth it.Honestly, even if I prefer Cyberpunk (through his universe), TW3 will stay on my SSD and for me, it will stay a "must have".
Playing one is good, playing both is even better
Last edited:
I'd say give it another chance. It's different than CP2077 in regard to your investment into the character (just like you described), and obviously in other fields, but Geralt's story (and Ciri's) is full of great emotional moments, sometimes full of drama, sometimes humorous etc. There's everything that a good story should have in there, I'd say; and it's still interactive, because it is you who "jumps" into Geralt's shoes.
If you treat it just as a different game, without assuming any connections or comparisons to CP2077, it's an amazing ride. But you gotta decide yourself of course and nothing "by force".
As I say in a comment above, I really didn't like the opening part of Witcher 3 at all and gave up twice. But it gets much, MUCH better once you hit Novigrad and is a really good game. So it's worth persevering even if you're not digging it just yet. The main story does feel like it runs for about 700 years, though, so it's just as well the game is good! (I think the two DLCs have better thought out stories.)
On xbox :
The Witcher 3 > Passed the Trial (finish the game in any difficulty) > 14.82% of players
Cyberpunk > The World (finish main story) > 26.37% of players
Not so great, but already better (CP is way more recent and everybody know how it work on base XB1).
But I agree, longer is better (for me at least)
Anyway, it's easy... When I received my brand new XBSX, the first install was Cyberpunk and second The Witcher 3
Last edited: