The Witcher 3 beats Skyrim in many ways in my opinion. The combat is just flat out better and actually presents a challenge, the main storyline is more enjoyable, the quests are more engaging (particularly the sidequests), the NPCs that you are actually able to interact with are more fleshed out and interesting and of course the Witcher has the benefit of being 3 years younger so it looks better on the whole.

On the other hand I just feel more attached to the world of Skyrim and the lore. Maybe it's just because I was exposed to the Elder Scrolls when I was young when these imaginary game worlds seemed much more enthralling. My attachment to the lore of TES just goes a hell of a long way towards immersing me in the world of Skyrim and immersion is so, so important in fantasy RPGs.

I also just felt like Skyrim felt larger and more epic in scale compared to the Witcher. I really don't like the way they split up the map in to different regions in the latter. As I've said these types of games rely on immersion to keep the gamer involved in the world, they're vehicles of escapism. Splitting up or dividing or separating the game world just ruins it for me which is why I've never felt the need to play games like Dragon Age.

On top of this, I felt like the geography of Skyrim was so much more appealing. Most of the the lands in the Witcher have felt kind of samey from what I've played so far. It's very green and very much based on Medieval Europe. Skyrim had vast tundra, towering mountains, icey wastelands, pretty forests and wide valleys. Each region in Skyrim felt so distinct from the next which was not only felt through the landscape but through the architecture as well.

I love both games and I think both Bohemia and CD Projekt Red could learn from each other in many ways. Bohemia could learn from The Witcher's fluid combat and questing mechanics while CD Projekt could learn from Bohemia world building skills.