The Witcher 1 was just shy of awful and the Witcher 2 looks very pretty but just as limiting and unimaginative. Pass.
I also seriously doubt the Witcher 2 will have 50 hours of gameplay, or that you'll be able to do everything in Skyrim in 50 hours or less. If the Witcher 1 is any indication, it'll be little more than a linear Action game like the first one. Also, combat looks terrible, like DA2 terrible.
Well aware that it's based on a series of novels, not an excuse for making it highly wooden, linear and boring.
I would agree they are very different, and not really good compared to each other, the Witcher is only barely an RPG.
You have such poor taste and such a skewed definition of what makes an RPG that I just don't quite know how to reply, except with this: :facepalm:
The witcher wishes it could be as good as Elder Scrolls. Trouble with Witcher is that its a MMORPG. A single player MMORPG. All the best traits of a MMORPG clumped into one single player gelatinous mass that svcks out your brains and forces you to stop calling people Gerald in favour of Geralt. Lol.
Skyrim wins.
Yeah as in all the fetch quests you do in MMORPG's, you have in Witcher. Bring X amount of items to Generic person A, but you can only get said item once you defeated X amount of creatures to get item. And it goes on and on. Not for me. I lost track of what I was supposed to be doing after the first part of the game. I prefer having quests that have stories in themselves. Something that keeps you riveted, not just something that levels you up for the sake of progression. That's why Skyrim's a winner for me.
All of those quests were totally optional if you hated them so much, and all of them could be completed by just killing stuff you encountered on story quests. And at the implication that TES games have better storylines than The Witcher... :sadvaultboy:
I am looking forward to both games, but if Oblivion and The Witcher 1 are anything to go by I am certain that I will enjoy The Witcher 2 much more.