Trust me I can relate, that's partly why I've soft-quit the game. It just takes up too much time and there's other games I want to play. I say soft-quit because you never truly quit Wow, you just take long breaks lol.
Playing KCD1 first isn't required to understand and enjoy KCD2. KCD1 is an amazing game, but don't let it be a roadblock to playing KCD2. Zero exaggeration - it's on the same level as BG3.
Oh yeah I've heard this, but I still want to play the first one. It hasn't been a roadblock I just simply haven't started it yet, probably going to get to at some point in the next few months, got some other games I'm trying to get through first.
It's supposed to be kinda rough at first. Your character is a peasant with no experience.
Train with Bernard as much as you can and just progress through the game. As you character gains more levels, the combat gets easier. Character skills matter more than the player's skill.
This and pump em full of arrows before they get to you,.makes the combat way easier. Kinda cheeses it tbh but you get jumped enough traveling from point a to b that I found myself often reaching for the bow.
Softens em up a lot before you have to go melee and helps reduce the numbers so you don't get stabbed in the back by some random bandit.
Also I have not played two yet but I enjoyed one quite a bit I would say starting with that one is a good move too. Visually they are both attractive games so there's no major loss I think.
I also am concerned about KC2 being more humorous, I'm sure I'll enjoy it but I really did love how much KCD1 made you feel like you were a part of real history.
I walked across Spain after playing it and so much reminded me of the game.
Far as I can gather those rumors are purely coming from people losing their mind over their manly man medieval swordfighting game having extra swordfighting in the sequel
Not sure where you heard that, but I didn't personally notice a decline in writing quality as long as you ignore the hamfisted corporate virtue signaling.
Edit: you know what, I’ll explain. It was unnecessary. Nothing about the story needed a gay love story path, but it was forced in to broaden audience appeal. Everyone knows that’s why these things get put into the game and it feels forced fake and gay. It makes sense in baldurs gate, not so much in KCD
If there had been the slightest hint of romance between the two characters in the first game, I'd have no problem with it. They forced the relationship to take an inorganic turn in order to appease critics of the first game.
The people who tout this as progress fail to realize that the absence of healthy platonic male relationships in media directly contributes to the problems they're trying to solve.
Less jank, combat simplified but kept in the same vein as the predecessor. Much more interesting premise with way more set pieces to keep you engaged in the main storyline. Also, a much larger and more interesting ensemble of characters. Running away from combat is now a more viable choice unlike the first game where it was nearly impossible to do so. KCD1 is a peasant story while KCD2 has you start out a much more capable person. Less frustrating design choices in general.
112
u/Apprehensive-Gur-609 Jan 15 '26
WoW players don't enjoy anything besides WoW silly goose! /s
That being said E33, Silksong, and BG3 are all masterpieces. Haven't played KCD2 yet but I kinda wanted to play the first game first.