Comparing TW3 and CP2077 played times

[cartlidge]

Witcher just under 50.. had the game for years.. I don't remember loading it in may,.. maybe they meant may last year
Cyberpunk getting on for 1k hours and just started up yet another playthrough.

 

[BigWezz69]

CP77 was most certainly too short and too empty imo.

 

[Rawls]

I think thats something like 2 or 3 years post release?

GOTY came out in August 2016, 1 year and 3 months after vanilla release.

I put about 110 hours into my first TW3 campaign, and about 90 hours into my first CP2077 campaign. Both are excellent games. TW3 is still my favorite game ever, but it's a bit premature to fully compare them them yet. Hearts of Stone is probably tied for the best quest line in the entire game (along with the main quest-lines Family Matters / Wandering in the Dark / Ladies of the Woods and the Isle of the Mists through Battle of Kaer Morhen).

 

[Guest 3847602]

Both are excellent games. TW3 is still my favorite game ever, but it's a bit premature to fully compare them them yet. Hearts of Stone is probably tied for the best quest line in the entire game

Hearts of Stone is probably the main reason I prefer TW3 over Cyberpunk. There's no guarantee that they'll be able to deliver something like that ever again, but yeah, many people seem to compare the quantity and quality of content in CP2077 to TW3 GOTY instead of vanilla.

 

[northwold]

They're very different games and explore very different philosophies (actually I'm not sure Witcher 3 has a philosophy, simply a story).

I like Cyberpunk significantly more than Witcher 3 and have played it for significantly longer, but its themes appeal to me (I felt Witcher 3's main story just flailed around by the end and was narratively incoherent, as if the narrative was being built to add adventures rather than the adventures being built to serve the narrative -- the DLCs were much better focused in that regard).

But if people don't dig the themes, Cyberpunk feels less tuned to providing a freestanding gameplay experience than Witcher does. Part of what I love in CP is that almost everything in the game ties back to the underlying philosophical precepts. It's extremely unusual to see a commitment to that kind of storytelling in a non-linear game. But that does also make it a bit more Marmite.

 

[yaminabo]

I have spent 60 hours in my first playthrough, i kinda did not know how things worked out and did some extra things here and there also spent some time cruising.

while in my 2nd playthrough im taking more time to do the whole content provided, im trying to max out reputation with johnny, having a balanced character that can do all the quests that require you to have certain amount of points to open a door or hack something in order to complete said quests.

im level 41, mantis based, i still have not met panam palmer and i dont plan on doing so till i get to 50 and have my character with proper gear and training, i estimate that will take around 20 more hours till i get to meet panam palmer and i really want to max out johnny relationship.

the game its fun, i played as streetkid with guns and stuff and now im a corpo with mantis, i dont know what i'll do after, but i want to play the nomad part too.

to me it has a ton of replayability, similar to mass effect series

 

[mbrto]

i cant complain
witcher 3: 319.8h
cp2077: 869.5h

 

[AikoHayashi]

The Witcher 3: 90 h, CP: 956 h on PC and 60h on ps4. TW3 is a great game, but I prefer CP.

 

[simon_brooke]

Comparing the average played time for all styles, especially looking at the players who considered themselves 'rushing' or 'leisurely' on their playthroughs, it starts to become apparent that in sheer content engagement The Witcher 3 is sporting around twice the engagement-time for players as Cyberpunk 2077.

I don't want to hear that extra length is padding, we aren't comparing CoD titles or MMORPGers.
Extra time between these games is a comparison of content and desire to remain in the world, not a genre or structural difference in the type of content.

Granting that 'Leisure 100% Completionist' runs likely represent The Witcher 3 in its full 'Expansions w/ GOTY' glory, a rough estimate seems to indicate that the final/definitive version of the TW3 has somewhere around triple the content currently present in Cyberpunk 2077.

*all numbers used from are from Howlongtobeat[.]com

I'm currently at 300 hours played and just over 50% complete, which means I've a lot of hours still to play. This doesn't invalidate what you're saying – I've put at least twice that many hours into Witcher III – but for the £60 I paid, that's 20 pence per hour of play time, which is hell of a good value for money from where I'm sitting.

 

[Rabygon]

.

 

[AikoHayashi]

This doesn't sound very good when taken out of context

Why not? By the way, I played TW3 after Cyberpunk.

 

[wright1978]

My single Cyberpunk playthrough was close to 100 hours, which was pretty much clearing the map. The bulk of the game was pretty if a little lacking choice. However, the appalling lack of character agency choices at the end means i have zero desire to try and replay currently(unless expansions fix that).

In comparison i've played the TW3 three times so far, each well over 150 hours. It's a joy to replay(and i likely will again) because of the way choice/consequence are handled and character agency on display.

 

[Draconifors]

It isn't cool to purposely twist something someone else said for the sake of twisting it -- especially when the result is something nasty. So please do not do it. It's off-topic, too.
One post deleted.

 

[AlienSpaceBats]

I know my Witcher 3 playtime is miniscule compared to CP2077; but I played both on PS4 and don't have numbers. I finished six playthroughs of CP2077 (90-100 hours each) and got the platinum trophy, but only finished Witcher 3 twice since it came out (and I only finished Hearts of Stone/Blood and Wine once).

Obviously this is personal preference but CP as a whole just resonated with me more.