Fallout vs. Witcher

[jhelzei]

My goal with this post is not to start a flame war, but rather to compare notes with others about what they like and dislike about recent Bethesda games in contrast with the Witcher (specifically the third game.) These are my opinions, but I think they generally hold up to scrutiny.

 

The Witcher 3 has many factors in its favor. It features betters graphics than (unmodded) Skyrim or Fallout 4. The scenery is top-notch, as is the level design. It also has superior writing, more compelling quests and better drawn characters than the Bethesda games. There are also significant consequences to your actions. These story elements compare favorably to the best classic RPGs, including Baldur's Gate 2 and Planescape: Torment.

 

Yet despite all these points in the Witcher's favor, I find myself abandoning the Witcher after about 80 hours of gameplay. There are a few reasons for this. First, I didn't find the Ciri quest line that compelling. This may be because I didn't play the first two games, nor have I read any of the books. I just didn't feel connected to Ciri, nor did I feel any urgency to rescue her. The third person perspective also turned me off. I prefer Fallout's over-the-shoulder 3rd person and 1st person perspectives and find them more immersive. This may be a deliberate decision by CDPR due to the heavy emphasis on melee in the Witcher games, but it didn't pull me in like the Bethesda games.

 

But I think the main reason I prefer Bethesda games is that I get to tell my own story, with very few limitations. In the Witcher I have a set class, a set past and a pre-determined background. I am Geralt, monster slayer. I don't get to be the son of a merchant, or the scion of a noble family, or a scheming mage, or a pacifist thief. Now with Fallout 4, Bethesda seemed to set a few parameters of the player's background. You're either a combat veteran, or a lawyer, though this does not restrict you in terms of your 'class'; you have no pre-set perks or skills. Your past does come up very rarely, as in the Old Ironsides quest, but your background is mostly a blank slate.

 

So am I crazy to be playing Fallout 4 before finishing the Witcher 3? Does anyone else feel the same way I do?

[McclaudEagle]

If I'm honest, I found it very hard to transition from playing Witcher 3 to Fallout 4, mostly because Fallout 4 just feels like a much lesser game. For me, the only thing Fallout 4 has over Witcher 3 is the "free" combat and more fluid character movement. While I haven't completed Fallout 4, the story in Witcher 3 is more compelling, and holds my attention for longer. Graphically, Fallout 4 can't even keep up, which in some ways is an isn't a surprise; on the one hand, you'd think a studio that has specialised in 3D open worlds far longer than CD Projekt Red would be able to create one with amazing graphics, on the other, I'm not surprised because it's Bethesda. From a technical standpoint, Fallout 4 has far more bugs, and lots of performance issues that don't exist, or at least not as frequently, as in Witcher 3. This is either down to their continued use of an ancient, lumbering game engine, or down to their team.

 

One thing I will say about Fallout 4 is that at least the map is a bit less generic than previous games. Skyrim's landscape, while impressive at first glance, was pretty dull and vast with nothing significantly impressive to fill it. I think the founder of Warhorse Studios described it as a "potato landscape".

 

Overall, I feel that Witcher 3 is a superior game, but many of the reasons for that are subjective, and are of my own opinion.

[Gazz43]

I'v played Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vages on Console. To me the Fallout games are just like Oblivion and Skyrim but you have guns instead. As for the Witcher Games i could never get into them if i remember you don't have free roam of the world map like Oblivion, Skyrim and the Fallout games

[Thaneize]

Altough both are RPGs the Witcher 3 is a Completely different type of game, it is as you would try to compare Mass Effect and Dark Souls.

The Witcher 3 is a completely planned and scratch designed world with a strong Story and different types of storytelling, the story has risen throgh the earlier releases of the game series and you (#NOSPOILER) don't play Geralt the whole game. Places and Chracters play a role over the boundaries of game releases (like Yennefer or Triss) and there is even a series of Books which you need to read to fully understand the Story and the World.

 

In contrary to that, Fallout 4 has nothing to do in particular with Fallout 3 or New Vegas, its a different game set in the same Universe some years later in a different place, just as the TES series, some names are told, some places are reffered to but you never get news from the Courier or the Vault 101 Dweller in FO4.

Therefore I personally can play them both with no regrets xD altough I would not cross play them, only play one at a time.

[Wouter445]

do it sounds very weird that i find witcher 2 better then witcher 3?.

not that witcher 3 is anything bad, i love it. but found 2 more of a connection.

 

also i not really like playing as Male this is a major point i have with witcher games, i console a playable ceri but it's not the same as official.

 

as for fallout 3 or 4, it just not connect their is nothing bad about the games just the places where they are (also i not a super fan of to open world) sandbox type of game.

while it's not a bad thing it is in fallout to many places with to many enemy's and to many stuff.

 

my ideal game will be something like Tombraider made with wither type of sword play in a jungle type of environment.

Edited December 28, 2015 by Wouter445

[JustATac0]

I have never played witcher and fallout 3 is one of my favorite games so i have to say fallout by default :P

[billyro]

For me, the only things Fallout 4 has over the Witcher 3 is character creation and better mod support. The Witcher 3 is better in almost every other aspect.

 

Unfortunately for The Witcher 3, I love making my own characters and creating custom content. So I've actually played Fallout 4 more, even though I think The Witcher 3 is the better game.

Edited December 30, 2015 by billyro

[Sonja]

In all honesty, I'm not really sure you can even compare the two because they are so completely different. Bethesda tends to make sandbox games; what this means in practice is that the emphasis lies less on the story and NPC depth and more on wandering the world as any type of character you want to be.

The Witcher games are the polar opposite of Bethesda's approach. The story and the characters who inhabit the world take front and centre stage... That said, one reason, amongst many, where I feel Witcher 3 really shines is that they very successfully blended a strong narrative with a stunningly beautiful open world.

Overall, I prefer story-driven games. I loved (and still play) BG2 and Planescape:Torment, and I consider the Witcher series to be the natural successor of those titles. But, of course, this is a highly subjective thing. I'll also say, having recently installed Skyrim, that mods such as Inigo and Interesting NPCs make a HUGE difference. This has always been the case with Bethesda games; I can't play them unmodded. Nonetheless, I do think they are moving in a good direction with Fallout 4; I feel that the story is well told and the followers are MUCH better developed than previous Bethesda games. Again though, these are definitely personal preferences. :)

[DeadManDingus]

When I saw the topic I thought you meant a battle against the two. Like the Sol Survivor and that witcher dude...

[Thaneize]

the one with the fatman and power armor and vertbird airsupport wins, igni doesnt even do a scratch in a T-60f