Support NeoGAF

[GuinGuin]

1. Superior melee combat
Far more moves, weapon options and it's just smoother and faster.

2. Superior ranged combat
The crossbow in The Witcher 3 is damn useless whereas the bows in Odyssey are quick, devasting and accurate.

3. More charming protagonist
Kassandra has the charm and grace to match the greatest stars of cinema. Geralt is as miserable and gruff as a fail son at Thanksgiving.

4. Larger map
The map in Odyssey is almost twice the size of The Witcher 3.

5. Better boats
You have a refugee dinghy in TW3. In Odyssey you have a proud ship of war fit for the high seas which can be customized and upgraded extensively.

6. Better story
TW3 you are basically just the backdrop to the story of Ciri and her MacGuffin magic and there is a little political nonsense with characters that barely have any introduction. In Odyssey you roam the greatest era of the greatest civilization while solving the mysteries of your past and influencing the future.

7. Better DLC
The Witcher 3 DLC you chase around a genie and a vampire. In Odyssey you get all new gameplay exploring the mystical land of Atlantis.

8. Better mounts
In odyssey you can customize your mount and your horse is named after the God Phobos, son of Ares. In The Witcher your horse is named after a roach.

9. Better exploration
There is more to see and do in Odyssey. You can climb every mountain and swim to the bottom of the ocean.

10. Better sex
In TW3 you can romance Triss the rat exterminator or Yennifer who takes every opportunity to emasculate poor Geralt while simultaneously being clingy and a shrew. In Odyssey Kassandra bangs whoever she wants with wild abandon.

11. Better Scaling
In TW3 enemies and quests were a set level so therefore were often too easy and gave awful rewards. In Odyssey enemies and rewards scale.

12. Better Upgrades
Weapons and armor can be fully upgraded with many more options and transmog in Odyssey.

13. Better crafting
Instead of making useless "dedoctions" like Witcher 3 crafting in Odyssey focuses on useful things like weapons and ship upgrades.The supplies are more universal and there are more options for obtaining them.

14. Better graphics and performance
Not really debatable. Everything is just that much more beautiful in Odyssey.

15. Better tracking
Instead of following miles of trails and scent marks like in TW3 in Odyssey you follow clues and geography.

16. More epic battles
If you want you can conquer and defeat every army in the Aegean in Odyssey. In TW3 you fight at most a few guys at a time.

17. More dangerous enemies
Start trouble in Odyssey and an endless wave of mercenaries will be sent to track you down and put an end to you. In TW3 your actions have no consequences outside of story beats and a few worthless guards being sent after you.

18. Better stealth
In Odyssey you can become the ultimate assassin slipping silently into a camp and deftly murdering every soul like a whisper on the wind. In TW3 you stomp around clumsily and must fight your way through every situation.

19. Better antagonists
Instead of knocking off the Nazgul from Lord of the Rings like TW3 in Odyssey you pursue a dangerous cult that has infiltrated every level of society.

20. Better setting
The amazing world of ancient Greece is brought to life brilliantly in Odyssey. TW3 has some generic castles, fields and swamps.

 

[Relativ9]

Those might be 20 things it does better specially, but that does not make it a better game.

 

[GymWolf]

And even with that in mind, odissey is still the far worse game.
You can literally buy an xp boost with real money to speed up part of the game because they knew that level gating and 99% of side contents are shit tier, talk about being proud of your own game, lmao.

Also lol at kassandra being more charming than geralt...or anything related to story\writing, even the fry pan sidequest of W3 is more interesting than odissey main plot.

 

[LazyParrot]

I love how pretty much all of those have nothing to do with the game being an RPG and could just as easily apply to an action game.

 

[niilokin]

that gif has good facial animations... valhalla had very wooden faces, I did have the impression they weren't as good in valhalla

 

[Flabagast]

LMAO what kind of joke is this?

 

[Lanrutcon]

I like both games, but uh...you spend most of your time fighting in both.

So which game would I rather replay? ...the one without the shitty combat. Sorry, Geralt.

 

[kanjobazooie]

I really want to play the three AC RPGs, but their settings bore me to death.
Go back to Masyaf ffs.

 

[Kenpachii]

1. Superior melee combat
Far more moves, weapon options and it's just smoother and faster.

2. Superior ranged combat
The crossbow in The Witcher 3 is damn useless whereas the bows in Odyssey are quick, devasting and accurate.

3. More charming protagonist
Kassandra has the charm and grace to match the greatest stars of cinema. Geralt is as miserable and gruff as a fail son at Thanksgiving.

4. Larger map
The map in Odyssey is almost twice the size of The Witcher 3.

5. Better boats
You have a refugee dinghy in TW3. In Odyssey you have a proud ship of war fit for the high seas which can be customized and upgraded extensively.

6. Better story
TW3 you are basically just the backdrop to the story of Ciri and her MacGuffin magic and there is a little political nonsense with characters that barely have any introduction. In Odyssey you roam the greatest era of the greatest civilization while solving the mysteries of your past and influencing the future.

7. Better DLC
The Witcher 3 DLC you chase around a genie and a vampire. In Odyssey you get all new gameplay exploring the mystical land of Atlantis.

8. Better mounts
In odyssey you can customize your mount and your horse is named after the God Phobos, son of Ares. In The Witcher your horse is named after a roach.

9. Better exploration
There is more to see and do in Odyssey. You can climb every mountain and swim to the bottom of the ocean.

10. Better sex
In TW3 you can romance Triss the rat exterminator or Yennifer who takes every opportunity to emasculate poor Geralt while simultaneously being clingy and a shrew. In Odyssey Kassandra bangs whoever she wants with wild abandon.

11. Better Scaling
In TW3 enemies and quests were a set level so therefore were often too easy and gave awful rewards. In Odyssey enemies and rewards scale.

12. Better Upgrades
Weapons and armor can be fully upgraded with many more options and transmog in Odyssey.

13. Better crafting
Instead of making useless "dedoctions" like Witcher 3 crafting in Odyssey focuses on useful things like weapons and ship upgrades.The supplies are more universal and there are more options for obtaining them.

14. Better graphics and performance
Not really debatable. Everything is just that much more beautiful in Odyssey.

15. Better tracking
Instead of following miles of trails and scent marks like in TW3 in Odyssey you follow clues and geography.

16. More epic battles
If you want you can conquer and defeat every army in the Aegean in Odyssey. In TW3 you fight at most a few guys at a time.

17. More dangerous enemies
Start trouble in Odyssey and an endless wave of mercenaries will be sent to track you down and put an end to you. In TW3 your actions have no consequences outside of story beats and a few worthless guards being sent after you.

18. Better stealth
In Odyssey you can become the ultimate assassin slipping silently into a camp and deftly murdering every soul like a whisper on the wind. In TW3 you stomp around clumsily and must fight your way through every situation.

19. Better antagonists
Instead of knocking off the Nazgul from Lord of the Rings like TW3 in Odyssey you pursue a dangerous cult that has infiltrated every level of society.

20. Better setting
The amazing world of ancient Greece is brought to life brilliantly in Odyssey. TW3 has some castles, fields and swamps.

Problem witcher 3 had was the absolute dog shit combat.

 

[GymWolf]

I like both games, but uh...you spend most of your time fighting in both.

So which game would I rather replay? ...the one without the shitty combat. Sorry, Geralt.

They both have shitty combat, one slightly less than the other, but still mediocre at best.

 

[Deleted member 471617]

The Witcher III was my game of the generation for PS4/XBO. AC Odyssey is in my top ten though. Combat and gameplay is overall better but soundtrack, voice acting, story, characters, writing, narrative and side content is better in The Witcher III. AC Odyssey looks better but not by much and since it was released 3 1/2 years later, it should have looked better.

 

[JMarcell]

lol good joke, pal.

 

[Lanrutcon]

They both have shitty combat, one slightly less than the other, but still mediocre at best.

I like Odyssey's combat. It's not Dark Souls, but you know.

 

[dwish]

Whaaat? No, W3 is way, WAY better. The story and side quests have made it really difficult for me to play open world games since.

 

[oagboghi2]

I'm playing Valhalla right now, and no, it's not even close.

It's a step back from Witcher 3 in close to everything. The combat is boring(more weapons doesn't equal good), The open world is boring, and despite being much larger than Witcher 3 feels lifeless. I don't care about going off the beaten path at all, most of the characters are boring, which is pretty huge because Witcher 3 are damn good.

The only thing I've give the game is the horse tracking to an objective is helpful.

Edit: Oh it's Odyssey. I'm dumb

I don't remember that game being much better. I didn't even bother to finish it.

 

[GymWolf]

I like Odyssey's combat. It's not Dark Souls, but you know.

It's literally clunky souls light with shitty animations and no weight at all, origins was fairly better imo (still mediocre overall)

 

[Armorian]

LOL

 

[HellforLeather]

 

[jshackles]

I actually agree with OP. I've started into The Witcher 3 several times, and it's just never clicked with me. But I loved AC Odyssey.

Also, Kassandra best girl.

 

[mejin]

 

[TheInfamousKira]

20 Reasons Ocarina of Time is a better game than Assassin's Creed Odyssey:

1. Game is so bad, it has ass in it twice. Even Ubisoft knew what they were working with.

2. Better experience distribution? How about NO LEVELS WHATSOEVER. Link is canonically always top level.

3. A pirate ship? Link doesn't even fuck with the ocean. He let's whoever wants some come to HIM.

4. Better abilities. Press Z. Press A. Press F to pay respects.

5. Better ranged combat. Fairy bow + light arrows. Everything dies in one hit AND gives you fifty dollars.

6. Better mounts. Epona can't even take damage. Invincible horse > everything.

7. Better plot twists. The game is called The Legend of Zelda and you play as Link. They were bait and switching before Naughty Dog made it cool.

8. Better world. Hyrule's map is like 12,500x smaller than Greece. It doesn't waste your time.

9. Better combat. Press Z. Press A. IT JUST WORKS.

10. Better romance options. You can choose to be friend zoned or asexual. V. Realistic.

11. Better bosses. Medusa? Try Ganondorf.

12. Better music. Koji Kondo is a big Japanese fraud, according to a thread here like four months ago. If all of his songs are based on already popular songs, it beats the 18,000 version of Ezio's Family.

13. Better sidequests. Trading eyedrops is a lot more realistic than killing wolves and shit for coin.

14. Takes less hard drive space. Nintendo are straight wizards when you compare the file size between these two games.

15. Better voice direction. No phony sounding accents in OoT.

16. Better DLC. Majora's Mask owns Fate of Atlantis as an expansion, fight me.

17. Better respect to franchise legacy. OoT feels like a Zelda game. Odyssey doesn't even have assassins in it.

18. Better birds. Kaepora Gaebora's "would you like to hear what I said again?" Trolling is league's beyond anything you can teach Ikaros to do.

19. Better tutorials. Zelda doesn't even trust you to know how to open doors without a notification. That's intuitive design.

20. Better menus. I'm trapped in a glass case of equipment settings!!!! Totally beats having an entire screen dedicated to a cosmetic shop.

 

[ClosBSAS]

lol even with 20 "advantages" odyssey still sucks ass compared to w3. in every other regard.

also, the dlc is nowhere near as good as w3 dlc. come on op.

 

[Thirty7ven]

20 reasons why horse manure goes better with pasta than pesto

 

[Jigsaah]

I really liked the combat in TW3 *shrugs* Its a deeper form of combat that relies on properly using resources and preparing for battle ahead of time. I like that aspect of it. In Odyssey, you just assassinate or combo enemies or shoot them from range. It's much more simplified. I don't like simplistic combat. I need some nuance, some consequences to making bad choices. TW3 does a good job of making you feel vulnerable while still allowing a crafty mind to come up with a way to overcome seemingly difficult odds. I

I enjoyed both games. I thought the sidequests in TW3 were better than Odyssey. The storytelling of TW3 is better. I still don't understand the purpose of getting out of the Animus just to read some got damn emails and listen to audio files in Odyssey. The characters outside the animus are largely forgettable. I don't believe the world being bigger makes it better. Hell, I thought TW3's world was too big honestly. I'll give the Naval combat to Odyssey...always like that part of Assassin's Creed games.

Geralt could bang prostitiutes...it wasn't just Yennifer and Triss. He also had a couple of other chance encounters throughout the game.

TW3 crafting system was useful for boosting stats of your character, creating potions, oils and bombs to help combat specific types of monsters. I think it was convoluted for sure, but I prefer that over...crafting a sword or better armor. I don't blame TW3 for only having a Silver Sword and a regular sword for main combat. It's part of who Geralt is. Do people complain that you never could craft any other weapon in Sekiro? I just thinks its part of Geralt's lore and that's not an issue.

I would reply about more of this...but I don't want the post to be too long. Overall, I guess I think both games have their strong points. It never really crossed my mind to compare them. Since you brought it up though. I guess I would contribute.

 

[Aion002]

It is pretty, the battle system is fun, the setting is cool and the characters are fine.... Everything else?

The quests are horrible, the grind is immense, the repetitiveness is off the charts, too many microtransactions, the world map is not interesting to explore and extremely bloated.

Ubisoft really needs to learn that most of the times less is more.

In my opinion TW3 is a gazillion times better. Heck, Origins is way better than Odyssey.

 

[Aesius]

I enjoyed Odyssey but it became a slog after about 40-50 hours. Witcher 3, on the other hand, remained compelling well into the 120+ hour mark.

 

[Nico_D]

Bigger map = better game?

I would also argue that at least few others are pretty subjective whether they make a game better or worse.

 

[GymWolf]

20 reasons why horse manure goes better with pasta than pesto

time to try some good genovese pesto dude.

 

[Nezzeroth]

A map being bigger does not mean it's better. Quality over quantity.

 

[Athreous]

Also, TW3 is a bit old, isn't it? AC has the obligation to try to be a better game

 

[Haggard]

here`s 20 reasons for x, the 999 reasons for y don`t fit my personal opinion, so I don´t mention them here, because my opion is all that matters.

 

[GuinGuin]

A map being bigger does not mean it's better. Quality over quantity.

Odyssey had both. So much more attention to detail. The buildings are amazing and there is something to do everywhere. Skellige and the attempt at seafaring was a monumental fail.

 

[GymWolf]

It is pretty, the battle system is fun, the setting is cool and the characters are fine.... Everything else?

The quests are horrible, the grind is immense, the repetitiveness is off the charts, too many microtransactions, the world map is not interesting to explore and extremely bloated.

Ubisoft really needs to learn that most of the times less is more.

In my opinion TW3 is a gazillion times better. Heck, Origins is way better than Odyssey.

Yep, origins remains the better game from the new 3 iterations even with his shitty story.

 

[GuinGuin]

here`s 20 reasons for x, the 999 reasons for y don`t fit my personal opinion, so I don´t mention them here, because my opion is all that matters.

Pretty sure I covered every aspect of both games and Odyssey came out on top in each category. You got a topic I missed?

 

[Interfectum]

1. Superior melee combat
Far more moves, weapon options and it's just smoother and faster.

2. Superior ranged combat
The crossbow in The Witcher 3 is damn useless whereas the bows in Odyssey are quick, devasting and accurate.

3. More charming protagonist
Kassandra has the charm and grace to match the greatest stars of cinema. Geralt is as miserable and gruff as a fail son at Thanksgiving.

4. Larger map
The map in Odyssey is almost twice the size of The Witcher 3.

5. Better boats
You have a refugee dinghy in TW3. In Odyssey you have a proud ship of war fit for the high seas which can be customized and upgraded extensively.

6. Better story
TW3 you are basically just the backdrop to the story of Ciri and her MacGuffin magic and there is a little political nonsense with characters that barely have any introduction. In Odyssey you roam the greatest era of the greatest civilization while solving the mysteries of your past and influencing the future.

7. Better DLC
The Witcher 3 DLC you chase around a genie and a vampire. In Odyssey you get all new gameplay exploring the mystical land of Atlantis.

8. Better mounts
In odyssey you can customize your mount and your horse is named after the God Phobos, son of Ares. In The Witcher your horse is named after a roach.

9. Better exploration
There is more to see and do in Odyssey. You can climb every mountain and swim to the bottom of the ocean.

10. Better sex
In TW3 you can romance Triss the rat exterminator or Yennifer who takes every opportunity to emasculate poor Geralt while simultaneously being clingy and a shrew. In Odyssey Kassandra bangs whoever she wants with wild abandon.

11. Better Scaling
In TW3 enemies and quests were a set level so therefore were often too easy and gave awful rewards. In Odyssey enemies and rewards scale.

12. Better Upgrades
Weapons and armor can be fully upgraded with many more options and transmog in Odyssey.

13. Better crafting
Instead of making useless "dedoctions" like Witcher 3 crafting in Odyssey focuses on useful things like weapons and ship upgrades.The supplies are more universal and there are more options for obtaining them.

14. Better graphics and performance
Not really debatable. Everything is just that much more beautiful in Odyssey.

15. Better tracking
Instead of following miles of trails and scent marks like in TW3 in Odyssey you follow clues and geography.

16. More epic battles
If you want you can conquer and defeat every army in the Aegean in Odyssey. In TW3 you fight at most a few guys at a time.

17. More dangerous enemies
Start trouble in Odyssey and an endless wave of mercenaries will be sent to track you down and put an end to you. In TW3 your actions have no consequences outside of story beats and a few worthless guards being sent after you.

18. Better stealth
In Odyssey you can become the ultimate assassin slipping silently into a camp and deftly murdering every soul like a whisper on the wind. In TW3 you stomp around clumsily and must fight your way through every situation.

19. Better antagonists
Instead of knocking off the Nazgul from Lord of the Rings like TW3 in Odyssey you pursue a dangerous cult that has infiltrated every level of society.

20. Better setting
The amazing world of ancient Greece is brought to life brilliantly in Odyssey. TW3 has some castles, fields and swamps.

 

[GuinGuin]

Yep, origins remains the better game from the new 3 iterations even with his shitty story.

Origins was an empty dull wasteland with nothing to do and as you said a bad story and characters. Sad I wasted even a minute with that game. Odyssey is addictive and fun with lots to do everywhere.

 

[AJUMP23]

If you like it more that is cool, I loved Odyssey and had a great time with it. I don't know that it is better.

 

[ACESHIGH]

That design by comitee trash by Ubisoft is not even a good open world game. The Witcher 3 raised the bar for AAA RPGS.

 

[TheGodfather07]

 

[Fbh]

Played and liked both games but I think both have pretty lackluster moment to moment gameplay.
The Witcher felt more polished than the previous 2 but still had some of the Euro Jank
Gameplay in Odyssey was kinda boring and repetitive, and the aggressive level scaling only made it worse.

Ultimately I vastly prefer the Witcher though, because I found the world, characters, stories and quest A LOT more memorable. There's still a ton of quests and encounters I remember from it, meanwhile the only one I remember from Odyssey was the tournament of a thousand hand (or something like that) which was kinda neat.

I also think the worst part about Odyssey is that it's AC. If only they could have made a cool greek RPG without all the needless evil cult, modern day and space aliens sci fi shit.

 

[captainnapalm]

Gosh you're right OP, spending 80 hours crossing off checklists in an endless string of copy/paste forts and camps, all in aid of a grindy looter shooter with dull combat and the worst animations in the series, really is better than Witcher 3. What was I thinking? And Odyssey's characters, quests and writing are clearly superior to Witcher 3. I think the guys at CDPR need to go visit Ubisoft Quebec and ask them how it's done.

Also what is it with gamers and "Female protagonist X is just the coolest most charismatic character ever!" And then you play them and there is literally nothing special or interesting about them. I've lost count now how many times I've seen this phenomenon.

 

[Hendrick's]

OP sounds like it was written by someone who never played TW3.

 

[Mozzarella]

I think its a bait topic, as soon as i reached better DLC i just knew there is no way its serious. However if you like the game more good for you, i dont think its nearly as good as Witcher 3, but even if it was better its trying too hard to be Witcher 3 anyway so i dont know if it ended up being better is going to be enough for it anyway.

I also dont share the idea that Witcher 3 combat is dogshit or whatever "insult" word people try to use, its a decent combat system for open world rpg games, most of them have mediocre combat anyway, except for few and those few sacrifice so much for good combat it feels like a bad trade. Witcher 3 combat has many flaws but its still decent imo, i wouldn't delcare it as good though. The expansions improved it too.

Feels bad to write a post for bait topic though.

 

[TrueLegend]

Better Graphics and Performance

 

[BennyBlanco]

Thanks Watchmojo. I enjoyed both a lot but TW3 is simply better to me.

 

[Con_Z_ǝdʇ]

Highly subjective and superficial list you put together there.

You could have put in much more effort by going in a bit deeper with your comparisons of the individual points.
It is very obvious that you leave out things to put The Witcher 3 into a bad light.
It is completely fine when you like one game more than another but this is a twisted comparison here.

 

[//DEVIL//]

1- the op made a mistake and bought the wrong game. Trying to convince him self by posting here . Mission fail

2- the op is a retardera member and just hate the devs behind the Witcher 3 since these SJW retards think they can bring a company down along with the head of the tool idiot of this forum Jason reard.

Wonder which one is it

 

[Guilty_AI]

True answer: they're both bad WRPGs

Seriously, when talking about RPGs i think stuff like Baldurs Gate, Fallout, Divinity, etc. New ACs, Witchers, HZDs, etc; are just adventure games with some rpg elements.

 

[HotPocket69]

BUILDING BACK BETTER

 

[nkarafo]

haha, better scaling.

As if scaling is good and not the worst mechanic in any RPG.

If a game has level scaling its not worth my time. No matter how good it is in other areas.