Skyrim - Comparison with Witcher 3

If both need to be compared, odds are because they're both already very popular games that millions of people enjoy playing…

this reminds of the tons of comparison between the first mafia and gta 3 back in the time, completely useless

You have to admit, the title of this video will get people to watch it and discuss. I would like the best of both games, the Witcher with the amount of mods as Skyrim.

Elder Scrolls games are more or less sandbox games - you can follow the main story, but the storyline is just a reason for you to explore the world.

The Witcher games are based on books, so they are much more story oriented than the Elder Scrolls games.

Both are fun in their own way.

I mean….it all depends what you prefer. I think Witcher 3 is by far the better game, maybe even one of the best games ever but I also know people that think Skyrim is the best game ever created.

For me, Skyrim was OK. I enjoyed playing it, mainly because of the freedom it provides the player. Story was awkward as always.

Witcher 3 provides an incredible world, characters and story but not the freedom to what you like like Skyrim.

Was the Witcher 3 story really all that amazing though? I mean its presentation was fantastic and i agree some of the side quests were amazing but the main story was a pretty ordinary, gather some allies and kill the big bad guy at the end.

I think when people say "the story", a lot of them are talking about the writing in general.

And it was consistently good even in the DLC. Blood and Wine the last one was awesome and could have been a game in itself.

Originally Posted by Couchpotato
Another Apples to Oranges opinion video again.

Anyway loved both as each game fills a certain need.

I love it when someone says exactly what I was thinking as I click the link….first post even!

Originally Posted by JDR13
I think when people say "the story", a lot of them are talking about the writing in general.

I certainly am. "Gather some allies and kill the big bad guy at the end" describes (very loosely) the plot, and how often is the plot of an RPG particularly creative or outstanding? Pretty much never. The plot of Planescape Torment is "a man remembers who he is." The end. Plot is the least important part of these games for me, especially since most of what you do in these games isn't even related to it.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I think when people say "the story", a lot of them are talking about the writing in general.

I would agree with that then except for the romance parts but I donÂ’t think IÂ’ve played a game where romance doesnÂ’t seem awkward.

Beside all that was already said, one thing that makes me prefer The Witcher 3 to Skyrim is that in The Witcher, map is continuous. For example, when you enter a building, you can stay at the doorstep and see both the inside and the outside. This is impossible with Skyrim (and Fallout); when you enter or exit some buildings, it is like using a dimension portal.
This also avoids one problem that destroys game immersion in Skyrim: buildings that have an inside that does not match what you see from the outside. For example, from the outside, you see three windows and from the inside, you see four windows.

Originally Posted by JFarrell71
CDPR won that legal battle without having to give him a dime, I believe. The agreement came later and seems to point to further colloboration. Not hard to imagine that CDPR's success and the TV show have changed Sapowski's outlook a bit.

Sapkowski might be an asshole but he is an asshole that had a valid case according to Polish law .


CD Projekt did not win the legal battle. They settled. The exact details of the settlement are under NDA but Sapkowski originally demanded $15 million via a letter from his law firm published in October 2018.


Since CD Projekt reached an agreement with him that "satisfies and fully clarifies the needs and expectations of both parties, past and present", it stands to reason that a significant payment was made (the "satisfied" part) and that Sapkowski probably got a new deal involving royalties for the future use of The Witcher franchise instead of the original flat fee.
My guess would be that he did not get the full $15 million by far but only single digits but then possibly a fairly generous royalty deal to shut him up once and for all.


CD Projekt likely needed legal security and a settlement rather quickly in order to proceed with (pre-)production of the next Witcher game(s). They could not afford waiting for a long court battle that they would have likely lost due to the Polish law that enables an IP holder to demand extras when there is a gross discrepancy between the original agreement and the factual monetary benefits of the licensee.
This was apparently the case here since the original deal CD Projekt scored was almost literally a steal compared to the benefits they reaped.

Originally Posted by Moriendor
Sapkowski might be an asshole but he is an asshole that had a valid case according to Polish law .


CD Projekt did not win the legal battle. They settled. The exact details of the settlement are under NDA but Sapkowski originally demanded $15 million via a letter from his law firm published in October 2018.

Since CD Projekt reached an agreement with him that "satisfies and fully clarifies the needs and expectations of both parties, past and present", it stands to reason that a significant payment was made (the "satisfied" part) and that Sapkowski probably got a new deal involving royalties for the future use of The Witcher franchise instead of the original flat fee.
My guess would be that he did not get the full $15 million by far but only single digits but then possibly a fairly generous royalty deal to shut him up once and for all.

CD Projekt likely needed legal security and a settlement rather quickly in order to proceed with (pre-)production of the next Witcher game(s). They could not afford waiting for a long court battle that they would have likely lost due to the Polish law that enables an IP holder to demand extras when there is a gross discrepancy between the original agreement and the factual monetary benefits of the licensee.
This was apparently the case here since the original deal CD Projekt scored was almost literally a steal compared to the benefits they reaped.

Well the author was at fault can't blame CD Projekt.

He hated video games and underestimated how much money he could of asked for initially. Three games, a TV series, and countless book translations proved him wrong.

That polish law wouldn't fly in the US, we just call you an idiot. Look at Steve Jobs when Microsoft screwed him out of millions. Ask the man who invented MS-DOS as well.

Originally Posted by Couchpotato
Well the author was at fault can't blame CD Projekt.

He hated video games and underestimated how much money he could of asked for initially. Three games, a TV series, and countless book translations proved him wrong.

That polish law wouldn't fly in the US, we just call you an idiot. Look at Steve Jobs when Microsoft screwed him out of millions. Ask the man who invented MS-DOS as well.

Yep. As I said he might be an asshole and not a very smart one at that for signing away the rights for a flat fee originally but Polish law is Polish law, by which apparently he did make and have a case which got him (most of) what he wanted or at least enough to shut him up .


I don't get why he did not negotiate royalties in the first place either. It should be common sense ever since the success of Star Wars (1977).

It is almost a legendary tale by now that Alec Guinness was the only guy of the original crew smart enough to negotiate a royalty deal and thereby the only one who got filthy stinkin' rich originally while Hamill, Fisher and Ford walked away from ANH with (comparatively) pennies.
Sapkowski must have had either no or real shitty legal counseling when he made that original deal with no royalties.