The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt vs The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

They're my top two games of this generation, but I'm gonna have to go with Breath of the Wild.

Breath of the Wild

Actually bought a used WiiU specifically to play it, and it surpassed my expectations by a mile.

A Link to the Past is still my favorite Zelda and one of my Top 3 games all-time, but BoTW is certainly up there. Easily my personal GOTY.

Eh I guess I like BOTW more but they're very different concepts for open world action-fantasy and very close in pure quality, so saying one is better as some kind of objective statement would be stupid.

The Witcher 3.

It's been a really long time since a game sucked me in like that. I own multiple copies for every platform. No idea why, and I just really, really like it.

BotW is good shit, though.

I vote zelda because i dont think it can be worse than witcher 3.

Witcher 3 wins it for me. I love Breath of the Wild but as far as Fantasy games goes, Witcher 3 was as deep as they come.

Breath of the Wild for me however The Witcher 3 is certainly an excellent game as well.

Breath of the Wild by far.

The Witcher 3 has terrible combat and terrible movement controls that made the game unplayable to me. It is the biggest disappointment of this generation to me and I think that too many people look past and make excuses for it's terrible combat and movement controls to give it excellent reviews when having good combat and especially movement controls are critical components that should not be looked past and excused just because other aspects of the game may be great.

To quote my little bro when I asked him this question before, "Hahahaha!"

The Witcher III is hands down better in every conceivable way to me, and is a top 3 game of the gen. BotW, when compared to other Zeldas, I'd probably only put it over Wind Waker, and I hate that game.

The Witcher 3. Each side quest is arguably more immersive than the average game's main quest.

Hard to pick, despite both being open world games they are so different, both setting new standars on their area, while I througly enjoyed Witcher I still think Zeldas fresh take on open world wins it for me.

Definitely Witcher 3... mainly because it has a fantastic story and memorable characters. Also it's side quests are probably the best of any game I've played. And the worlds are incredibly detailed and filled with interesting things at every turn.

I've only played alittle bit of BOTW, but for me it seems to rely too much on exploration and 'creating your own fun' for me. And the world felt a little empty at times too.

I love Witcher 3, Horizon 0 and BOTW, but i have to go with BOTW. The reasons why I voted for BOTW is simple , I do a lot of traveling to Japan and Europe and being able to play these games with huge world and bad ass gameplay on a portable gets my win. If Horizion 0 was able to be played portable, then that game would get my vote , but since it's not BOTW gets my vote easily .

@undefined: Love both but it's an easy pick for me. Zelda. Just because of the joy it gave me.

@Renegade_Fury: Well except the combat.

I clicked the Witcher 3 without thinking but I'm not being fair as I haven't played BotW. I think I'd still go with The Witcher 3 as I'm more invested in that game and world than Zelda.

@Juub1990: I'd disagree on that too. Witcher III's requires more thinking and is overall more engaging than BotW's copy and paste N64 combat but with added bullet time.

@Renegade_Fury: BOTW combat has nothing to do with OOT...

Dude, this is the most hyperbolically wrong comment I have seen about BotW in a while, and that is saying something.

@Juub1990: It's exactly the fucking same.

I've posted this vid before of my little bro playing:

As I wrote, same shit, but with bullet time.

Witcher 3, game of the generation. Zelda is probably my goty this year though.

Wut

I want to ask, very genuinely and without any snark, how many hours do you have in BotW?

How so? I'm not calling Witcher III's combat amazing, but I did actually have to use my head versus never having to in BotW. Plus, once I was done fighting in Witcher III, I could stop by the blacksmith, versus.. yeah, I'm not going to go another rant, lol.

Your brother has mad skill and can cheese the combat, that doesn't make it like OoT lol. There are literally a hundred videos on YouTube about Witcher bosses being cheesed on Death March in a similar way, that doesn't make Witcher combat like OoT either.

Come on, I get that you think BotW is overrated, but you're veering into disingenuous territory here lol

90 hours +, all 13 memories, and I think 62 shrines. I think I played BotW long enough to judge it, lol.

But the same is true of BotW as well- your brother played exceptionally well in that Lynel fight (seriously, mad props to him, I am in awe lol), but BotW requires you to stop and think for most encounters as well, since there is the possibility of you being swarmed constantly. Remember, most encounters are not 1v1.

@Renegade_Fury: So your brother is cheesing the combat? I can do that in literally every game including Dark Souls and even more in The Witcher III. Kind of a poor argument.

Well then you should know that it is nothing like OoT. Not even a little.

lol, too many people are replying to me at once, but when I say "N64 combat" I don't know why everyone is getting so offended. It's Z-targeting, slashing with A, using B for the shield, and doing backflips. How is that any different? Just because the enemies hurt more doesn't mean the combat itself has evolved. Witcher III's combat reminds me a little of JK2's dueling but with a pinch of Arkham style's combat, (and I'm sorry?) that I find that to be more interesting. I've always played Zelda for the puzzles; the fighting never was all that special to me.

I don't trust or like the opinions of people with Nintendo sigs and avatars in this thread.

I legitimately don't think it is much like the N64 combat. I played Ocarina right before I played BotW, and the difference is clear in... uh, I think a minute of the first encounter. Enemies do hit harder, but the AI is far better scripted as well, weapons have different feels and heft, parrying and dodging are actual strategies now compared to before, Flurry Rush and Sneakstrikes are rewarded and emphasized, archery is a legitimate part of the actual combat flow and loop, and this is before we even get into the environmental considerations of combat, which the game very heavily emphasizes, especially in the early portions.

Because as opposed to OoT combat, which was pretty rudimentary at the end of the day, BotW's combat has a lot of moving parts. Weapons and shield durability and armour ratings by themselves add so many layers to combat. Then you have the behaviour patters of all the enemies, which each them having different ways of behaving or attacking you. Then there's different weapon types, with each being significantly different than others, and for the first time in the series, you have options in combat- you can do ranged, you can do up close, you can do stealth, you can use the environment or your runes.

If you want to narrow it down to the absolute core, the mechanics of which buttons you press to kill enemies, sure it's the same as OoT. But by that token, so are 90% action games out there. You're simplifying it a bit too much.

Interestingly enough, I am the only one who fits the bill, so... trust the opinion of everyone else posting in the thread, I guess?

Can't really judge, but it's Zelda.

Yeah, you can cheese Lynels. Shit, I wouldn't even call that video cheesing, that's a pretty basic standard approach. Parry, dodge, get your hits in, durr. You can do all kinds of ridiculous shit fighting them, there's just so many ways to open them up for damage.

Also that's like the lowest level Lynel, who cares lol.

Still, BotW's combat isn't exactly a good go-to argument if we're talking BotW vs. TW3 of all games lmao.

-

On topic, it's not even a question for me, BotW all day.

I think a more logical comparison for this thread would have been Breath of the Wild vs The Phantom Pain.

Zelda botw is goty but The witcher 3 with the story and story progression, characters, the world design, the music, the expansions/DLCs( hearts of stone Blood and Wine) which are as long as a new game... is basically the best rpg of the decade.

lol hidden body + the ring that masks sounds = ultimate cheese for DS3.

I played OoT, TP, and MM only a couple of months apart from playing BotW, and I disagree. Mechanically, literally nothing felt different to me other than the odd placement of the jump button. I found the differences in weaponry to be superficial, and any implementation of strategy to be overall unnecessary since the AI can be readily defeated without much effort either way. You can approach any fight the same way, versus in a game like Nioh, which is what I played directly after BotW, where both skill and tactics are necessary. BotW's strength is the freedom it allows you to tackle objectives, but to put its combat on a pedestal too is just over-glorification, imo.

To be clear, I am not saying that BotW's combat is award winning, or any such thing, I am just saying it is better than The Witcher 3's in my experience (which for me ended in each encounter becoming a protracted battle of attrition), and certainly not as simplistic as you are saying it is. But I think that in the end, it's coming down to our individual experiences with the games involved, and there is not much that can do there lol.

I will tell you when I get a switch later this year....can't wait lol

Same here, because I'm also saying the same thing about the Witcher III, because I don't think it's all that great either, but it seems I have triggered a bunch of people (I have a dozen unread messages atm, lol). I think both games have brain dead combat, but you have to put a little more effort into the Witcher III's fighting than Zelda's is all.

Yup. They're far more comparable. The common ground between TW3 and BotW is all superficial.

This thread will be more fun though, because it's a fight between two SW favorites.

MGSV would just be outright murdered by BotW on votes. And as a whole, I'd agree with those results as BotW comes together as a much better package, even if I do think MGSV has tighter mechanics, more systemic depth, and higher highs. It also has much lower lows, and while BotW does have some baggage of its own, it's nowhere near the mountain of shit you have to ignore in MGSV.

Simply put, BotW is the tighter game as a whole. Still I'd take both BotW and MGSV over what TW3 is serving.

We actually did have some nice in-depth discussions comparing the two games, but never in a specific thread for it.

Lol, people get defensive about their favorite game- I did too :)

But yeah, I think in the end it comes down to how we each approached the games in question. I personally found the combat in BotW to be a bit more involved than the combat in TW3.

zelda combat vs witcher combat, which midget you betting on?

Yeah, I think BotW has more cogs moving at the same time, but what's there in TPP is just far more nuanced and far more interactive. I sort of look at that game as the precursor to BotW, like a test-run of what was possible with this kind of gameplay. BotW took that formula and made it more consistent.

And I get what you mean about taking BotW/TPP over TW3. I mean, I personally love TW3, it's one of my all time favourites, but with the kind of game it was and the kind of experience it was offering, I kind of got tired of it in its final act. With The Phantom Pain and Breath of the Wild though, it's hard to get tired of those games. You can literally keep playing them endlessly, especially BotW.

Not even close, zelda

Can't say which one is better because I didn't finish any of them yet... But gotta say, this comparison isn't right; it's like comparing Spiderman to Assassin's Creed.

I understand how well done the Witcher 3 was... I played it and enjoyed it but Zelda takes a massive dump all over it as a video game.

Lol, combat isn't that bad in either