Kingdom Come: Deliverance II Thread

[GrainWetski]

A Warhorse dev rn - there's a hidden ending that nobody discovered so far. At least nobody reported it on the webz yet.

what are your bets on, people? some secret pacifist ending or some secret "kill everyone" ending?

Probably some joke easter egg ending, that isn't really an ending, just a funny unique game over screen somewhere in the middle of the game.

The Hans and Henry gay scene is just a small easter egg kissing ending according to Worth A Buy, so that must surely be it.

 

[shimadamada]

The agenda is to preach sheepish tolerance at the population, including of violent invaders. Whatever. Henry has the option to kill the Cumans, including to initiate the combat from dialogue. The fact that they are even added in the way they are, speaks to how bad the writing is in this particular instance.

There is no preaching of "sheepish tolerance". You can kill these Cumans and even if you befriend this particular group you can slaughter another group of Cumans the "friendly" ones warn you about. You are also showing that you haven't really understood the plot. Cumans aren't "invaders". They are mercenaries brought by Sigismund to support an already existing rebellion of Czech nobles against his brother Wenceslaus. They are invaders in same sense that Hessian mercenaries hired by the British were invaders in the American Revolution.

Also, Cumans originally settled in Hungary in 13th century fleeing from Mongolian conquest. I suppose 13th century Hungary was also woke considering it "sheepishly" allowed such numbers of refugees to settle there.

 

[herpenis]

Then there are issues of gaym being easier than kcd1 and your progress being faster. At some point I stopped having fun.

Some of you were writing about stealth being skyrim tier and I agree. A number of times I was wanted in trosky village even though I am invisible. Which is easy to prove as I stopped to care and can sneak through main street in medium armor without anyone bothering me.
Stealth archer can keep firing arrows and enemies will be running around trying to find you. Granted im good with stealth now but I dont recall having such problems in kcd1. In fact I dont remember maxing my skills.

I've had the opposite experience. The progression in 2 is much slower compared to 1 where after a few Bernard sessions you could go and win the tournament. Here it takes way longer to reach OP status, and even when you do, the game throws enemies who are no pushovers at you - not blindly attacking, feinting, master strike baiting. And in the story missions it throws assorted curveballs to make things trickier regardless of your skills. Like the dungeon escape mission in Trosky after you get tortured and get -6 to all stats.

Though I think moving into Kuttenberg would be way more fun if the torture debuff was permanent. You break and talk? Here, some crayons and ez mode. You stay silent and get tortured - C&C bitch - deal with a weaker Henry and have more fun the rest of the game.

huh, i guess i played too much of the first game, because i found kcd2 to be a breeze
master strikes are just too OP

 

[Grampy_Bone]

i think 99% of npc got super low stats. Then you get surprised when you encounter that 1%

I still remember this happening with a bandit camp in KCD1. I attacked a camp that had to have 20 guys. I ran a decent distance and turned to face them; one by one they caught up to me and I stabbed them in the face. 19 one-shot kills.

The last guy left is an archer so I think, this will be easy, run up to him. He draws his sword and we have an EPIC DUEL OF THE AGES. Nothing works on him, no masterstrokes, no parries, no combos. Just a grueling back and forth battle to the finish, scoring maybe one hit out of 20 swings, until bit by bit I eventually wear him down. I wish there were more battles like that in the first game.

In this game it definitely feels like there's one badass in most bandit groups that takes a lot more killing than the rest, but it's usually the obvious heavy in armor, not some random bowman.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Yes, agreed, they would most likely be bandits. I still don't think it's completely out of the question people like them would just stroll in a village pub and ordered a beer and sausages but it's definitely very unlikely, yeah.

The first thing I picture a group of deserters would do to get food in an unfamiliar area is they would drop by some isolated farm at night time and steal a pig or a sheep. I don't see them entering villages openly for the same reason Henry wouldn't go into a village that he recently has been stealing from.

Discipline was actually no joke in late Medieval armies, or at least not as much as people imagine. One of the most comprehensive sources of information on late medieval army organisation is Charles the Bold's edicts ("ordonnances") written between the late 1460s-1473, which prescribe the equipment and organisation of his army. Since they summarize the experience gathered from the Italian campaigns of the mid-to-late 14th century, things didn't differ much in Italy. The main unit was the company, which numbered around 900 men. The smallest unit was the "lance" (9 men), six lances make one "chambre" (54 men), four "chambres" make a "squadron" (54*4 = 216 combatants), and four "squadrons" of 225 men each make a company (total 900). Every unit's commander would keep track of how many men he has and would know them.

The ordonnance deals with how discipline must be maintained and the company commander (the "conducteur", obviously from Italian "condottiero") and his subordinated squadron commanders ("chefs d'escadre") are charged with assuring the proper behavior of their men towards the population. They were obliged to appoint a special commissary to record complaints from civilians and reimburse any damage, deducting the money from the guilty soldier's pay. During march, going out of formation to pillage or forage on your own accord was forbidden. You could lose your wages, have your equipment confiscated, or if in enemy territory, sentenced to death. Desertion was a very serious offence, and if someone was reported to have deserted, marshals would be dispatched to await him at his place of residence to arrest him, which tells you that soldiers would report their place of residence when enlisting in the lance. See "Men-at-Arms #144 Armies of Medieval Burgundy". There is a nice big pack of MaA magazines on piratebay.

I'm not saying it would have been that strict in Sigismund's army, but if you were a deserter you would definitely try to stay out of sight and not just welcome strangers walking into your camp. They might turn your location in to some foraging party of your former army, and they would deal with you to make an example. You were on the run first and foremost if you were a deserter, that seems most likely to be the case. They would hide in the woods and try to make their way back out of the theater of operations and into Hungary with minimal risk.

It is generally accepted that prior to Thirty Years' War, the level of destruction you speak of was very rare

The Italian wars (of the 14th and then late 15th centuries) weren't all that destructive, but the Hundred Years' War was pretty bad on civilians. In Italy, they would free prisoners after battle and would only keep ransom-able nobles as prisoners. But towards the end of the 15th century, when German and Swiss mercenaries became more frequent, things got rough. Germans and Swiss were notorious for killing prisoners, whether in order to loot their belongings or just to save on provisions. Booty was considered as an alternative form of payment for the mercenaries, so the sacking of villages and mass killing of prisoners was a way to get a bonus or skip this month's payment. Payment was usually kept in arrears of at least 2-3 months, to dissuade potential deserters, who would get their payment and wander off. This practice also encouraged soldiers to turn to looting, because they were expected to pay for their provisions out of their own pocket.

I think one difference in the medieval mindset we tend to underestimate is the tolerance for witnessing and incurring violence that people had. For a medieval man or woman, witnessing the death of peers, relatives and siblings was far more common. The average Western person today would be disturbed by the sight of blood or from witnessing someone hitting an animal. Most of us here likely don't know how to efficiently cut the head of a chicken People back then were much more used to such sights, but mass slaughter of prisoners or the razing of settlements would still make a strong impression, especially on a young person.

There is no preaching of "sheepish tolerance". You can kill these Cumans and even if you befriend this particular group you can slaughter another group of Cumans the "friendly" ones warn you about. You are also showing that you haven't really understood the plot. Cumans aren't "invaders". They are mercenaries brought by Sigismund to support an already existing rebellion of Czech nobles against his brother Wenceslaus. They are invaders in same sense that Hessian mercenaries hired by the British were invaders in the American Revolution.

I already mentioned you're allowed to kill them. My problem is with the way the game is presenting them, and the way that NPCs don't miss mentioning they are nice folks whenever Henry asks someone "Do you know about any Cumans in the area". The game is obviously pushing a viewpoint on the player and it's quite an implausible one, in my humble opinion.

I understand the plot quite well, and the Cumans are invaders, by virtue of them being soldiers in an invading army, or you would disagree?

Also, Cumans originally settled in Hungary in 13th century fleeing from Mongolian conquest. I suppose 13th century Hungary was also woke considering it "sheepishly" allowed such numbers of refugees to settle there.

I don't have any sources at hand to confirm or deny that 13th c. Hungary was woke. But I'll look into it in whatever books I have at home.

 

[lukaszek]

did the monastery hemingway quest. Why do I cover hans poaching activities only for him to be almost hanged for it?

Whole orderal felt like scooby doo. with me sneaking around, at one point i stopped caring about being seen as i could just run behind the cover and sneak again. I wondered... what if i just let guard stop me? Turns out there is easy check 'do you know who am i?' that I always passed lol

 

[PlayerEmers]

finished the game

ending left me wanting more, like... i was expecting more main quests after the final big battle thing...
but it was fun overall

 

[ADL]

Does the ending feel definitive or does it lead into KCD3? Haven't gotten to play it yet since I sold my graphics card.

 

[PlayerEmers]

Does the ending feel definitive or does it lead into KCD3? Haven't gotten to play it yet since I sold my graphics card.

Henry's story is pretty much done (main baddies are dealt with in a way or another except one guy) but the big conflict of kings is still somewhat unresolved, with sigismund alive and wenceslas still imprisoned.

My guess is if they made a sequel, it would probably be someone`s else story (so not "KCD 3" but "KCD: Something else")

 

[notpl]

As for woke agenda in regards to race, I've seen none so far. There are 'friendly' Cumans, but they don't seem out of place and you can find out they

Their justification is laughably naive, the only motivation to have them implemented as a friendly bunch is the agenda, and it's breaking the 4th wall for me.

Nah, disagreed. There are always deserters in every campaign everywhere, people who don't give a fuck about no fighting and shit and only wanna go home to fuck their women and drink beer. I.e. these guys in a nutshell. Plus, as someone already said, you have the option to send them to hell.

How can I get him drunk?

He's the final boss of the unarmed fighting chain on the Trosky map. If you beat him (save before) you can drink with him and learn people chased him off for being geh.

I don't mind this btw, geh isn't unrealistic, I just wish you had the option to play as a proper Christian and report him to the priest, just like in the first game in the monastery. And the Black Bartosh fag too.

He was already driven out of town. Report him to whom? You think the church cared about random sodomites living in the middle of the woods? Rules and strictures are tools for the powerful to use against one another, nobody cares what an unimportant person does. Also, the dude never claims to prefer men, nor does he try anything with Henry. He says he wasn't interested in girls - he can't just ask a doctor, it could be impotence, hypogonadism, hypothyroid, kleinfelter's disease, any number of things that would ruin the dude's life and make it impossible for him to conform (or perform, as it were)

The educated professional dude propositioning you in the middle of a crowded banquet is way more egregious and feels like it came straight out of a current-day bioware RPG.

 

[AwesomeButton]

One reason I like historical games is that they prompt me to read actual history. KCD2 got me back to scanning this old thing I found about 10 years ago when I was going through archive.org looking for info on Early Modern history. I was working on a mod for EU4 which had been released about a year ago at the time.

I've downloaded all the parts of "Periods of European History" but I can't seem to find some of them on archive.org now. Always download books whenever you can.

https://archive.org/details/periodseuropean01hassgoog/page/n18/mode/2up

 

[SlamDunk]

My guess is if they made a sequel, it would probably be someone`s else story (so not "KCD 3" but "KCD: Something else")

It will be about Martin and his quest to fuck the Jew woman... and, at some point of the story, save the poor innocent Jews, of course.

 

[cvv]

You think the church cared about random sodomites

Don't know about sodomites specifically but the church absolutely did care about heretics, however lowborn and unimportant. They rooted them out something fierce because any behavior that goes directly against the Bible and is left untended undermines the authority and power of the church.

But you're probably right they might not care about a lonely dude living in the woods. Then at least give me the option to say "They were right to chase you away, sodomy is a sin" or some such.

 

[Grauken]

It's only been a week. The question now is whether KCD2 is "merely" a success or can it become closer to a Witcher 3-sized hit with word of mouth.

That's a pipe dream, historical stuff can't beat fantasy when it comes to RPGs

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

This has nothing to do with real history. It is generally accepted that prior to Thirty Years' War, the level of destruction you speak of was very rare.

That level of destruction* is what the previous game chose as the foundational event of the story and its protagonist. Now the second game - a direct sequel - expects us to believe said protagonist could possibly get over that foundational event in a matter of months, just so that the writers could play the "not all Cumans" card.

The issue isn't that they're trying to humanize the Cumans, but that they chose what was possibly the most narratively lame, lazy way to do it.

*which was rare at the scale of Limoges or Cesena, not at the scale of a minor fortified manor or large village, of which hundreds were sacked across Europe during 14th century conflicts.

 

[lukaszek]

oh and one more thing about hemingway quest. I had plenty of lockpicks. I did sneak back to hans cell, but couldnt open it lol.
Next to hans cell there is entrance to dungeons that lead to my now favourite door. The very same that I found while exploring the cave. So yeah... why in hell I couldnt break hans free and escape together? It's so convenient like if they were planning to do it at some point cmon.

Did you guys notice that certain crucial characters dont seem to be part of game world? For example Otto cant be pickpocketted and he doesnt seem to care that you are trespassing.

 

[Thorakitai]

For those who got far or finished the game, what exactly is the story of KCD2 and it's overall arcs and notable events?

Is it an enjoyable historical fiction and are the other historical info of the game still accurate at least if you can look past the controversal elements?

 

[cvv]

oh and one more thing about hemingway quest. I had plenty of lockpicks. I did sneak back to hans cell, but couldnt open it lol.
Next to hans cell there is entrance to dungeons that lead to my now favourite door. The very same that I found while exploring the cave. So yeah... why in hell I couldnt break hans free and escape together? It's so convenient like if they were planning to do it at some point cmon.

Did you guys notice that certain crucial characters dont seem to be part of game world? For example Otto cant be pickpocketted and he doesnt seem to care that you are trespassing.

True, all valid criticism.

And most of those limits are unnecessary. Why can't I pickpocket Otto or Zizka or Katherine? Why do some characters not care about my crimes? For example during some quests - like the Trosky one - you can absolutely rob the castle blind and you'll never wanted and your rep never plummets.

I'd even let players kill anyone, including major chars like Otto. You could get a death screen with something like "You've killed Otto von Bergow and lost Radzig's trust" or some such. Or you could even keep playing, you just won't progress the main story anymore. You can become a bandit, living off your prey, or work in the mill or the forge or whatever. Would it be a bad idea? As long as you have hard automatic saves I don't think people would mind.

 

[Infinitron]

I'd even let players kill anyone, including major chars like Otto. You could get a death screen with something like "You've killed Otto von Bergow and lost Radzig's trust" or some such. Or you could even keep playing, you just won't progress the main story anymore. You can become a bandit, living off your prey, or work in the mill or the forge or whatever. Would it be a bad idea? As long as you have hard automatic saves I don't think people would mind.

 

[cvv]

I've seen a few people - usually ADHD gameplayfags who can't into reading texts or watching long cutscenes - bitch about you having to play through half of the main story to access the Kuttenberg map.

A clever way to accommodate people like this would be to allow players to kill Hans in the prologue, snuff out the main quest and open up both maps. You could do shenanigans but you'll be essentially an outlaw with limited side quests selection and access to certain areas during the day or without a disguise.

 

[lukaszek]

And most of those limits are unnecessary. Why can't I pickpocket Otto or Zizka or Katherine?

I assume that devs didnt want to deal with your character getting caught in the act. Although in kcd1 if you were stupid you would be put in prison and die, dunno why they didnt go with that

 

[herpenis]

And most of those limits are unnecessary. Why can't I pickpocket Otto or Zizka or Katherine?

I assume that devs didnt want to deal with your character getting caught in the act. Although in kcd1 if you were stupid you would be put in prison and die, dunno why they didnt go with that

part of appealing to a wider audience means protecting players from their own stupidity - it's considered good practice because it means fewer fuckups on the player's part
it can be a little immersion breaking, but the trade-off of leaving more people happy with the game is worth it imo

 

[Larianshill]

Barely played the game for the past few days. Meeting Musa and having my worst fears confirmed really took the wind of my sails. But I'm pretty close to the ending now.

 

[Groover]

I've clocked 57 hours so far, and while there are some welcomed improvements, like the comparative fluidity of the combat, some other elements seem like downgrades. Is it just me, or does the writing feel a little less sharp than in 1? I can't quite put my finger on it, but I find myself skipping through conversations more than I'd like, which is something I rarely do on first playthroughs. The music is also less inspired and memorable, feeling at times like a tired rendition of the first game's score.

 

[shimadamada]

The issue isn't that they're trying to humanize the Cumans, but that they chose what was possibly the most narratively lame, lazy way to do it.

That's not what people here are saying though. They are bemoaning wokeness, progressives and similar phantoms. Nobody cares that it's potentially a weak narrative moment, people gloss over similarly weak moments in other games but here it's put under special scrutiny because lowlife illiterati perceive it as woke.