Compare Kingdom Come: Deliverance II vs Graveyard Keeper 2

The dog companion Mutt was praised as useful and worthwhile, especially for tracking and early side-quest benefits.

Allied zombies can occasionally get stuck on geometry or stop contributing during combat. Because those helpers matter in battle, the failures can be especially frustrating.

AI and NPC behavior were praised for believable reactions, routines, crime responses, and increased sophistication over the first game.

AI problems are most visible around zombies getting stuck or refusing to move during combat. These glitches can undermine battles even when the rest of the game is running smoothly.

Fast travel opinions were mixed: one reviewer praised dynamic events, while another found it cumbersome and interruption-prone.

Fast travel exists, but its faith cost can be high enough that players still spend a lot of time retracing their steps. That undercuts its value as a quality-of-life tool.

Bugs were present but usually minor; reviewers ranged from calling glitches common to saying issues rarely disrupted play.

Bugs are a meaningful concern, especially around zombie movement and automation. One critic encountered recurring issues throughout the game, while another saw combat AI glitches often enough to notice.

The revised perk and upgrade system was praised for offering meaningful upside-focused choices rather than weak side-grades.

Upgrades can noticeably reduce energy costs and unlock more advanced tasks, giving later progression a practical payoff. At its worst, though, the system can feel circular when upgrades mainly help players earn yet more upgrade resources.

Reviewers repeatedly emphasized how unusual and specific the game feels compared with modern RPGs.

The game can feel fresh because of its unusual mix of cozy management, corpse handling, dark comedy, and dense systems. Critics who dislike its complexity instead see the design as derivative or distinctive for the wrong reasons.

Reviewers saw the sequel as much more polished than the first game, with rough edges reduced and systems better realized.

Presentation can feel highly polished in its visuals and voice work, but technical and informational rough edges remain. Repeated bugs, inaccurate descriptions, and small performance issues keep the experience from feeling uniformly finished.

Reviewers described the story as memorable and emotionally powerful, including scenes that brought strong lasting reactions.

The game can create real emotional engagement through its story and voice performances, but that response is far from universal. One critic instead came away feeling cold and demoralized.

Progression was widely praised for turning early friction into rewarding growth through skills, perks, equipment, and player learning.

Progression can feel rewarding when technologies and systems start opening up, especially once resources become easier to earn. Less enthusiastic critics see too many gates, prerequisites, and point systems standing between the player and meaningful progress.

Pacing opinions varied: some praised the sustained momentum, while others complained about indulgent cutscenes or late-game pacing issues.

Pacing becomes a weak point when long chains of chores, prerequisites, and grinding pile up. Even more positive critics note that the experience can drag or blur together over longer sessions.

Reviewers liked the depth and usefulness of perks, weapon techniques, and skill trees, especially when they enabled meaningful playstyle specialization.

The tech and skill trees offer substantial breadth, with many recipes, perks, and upgrades to unlock. That depth can also become hard to parse, and one critic felt the menu-heavy structure added complexity without enough payoff.

Onboarding divided reviewers: returning and new-player recaps helped, but some found the opening overloaded or blunt.

The opening can catch returning players up well, but the broader onboarding is inconsistent. Several critics felt they were thrown into too many systems with too little explanation during the first hours.

Writing was described as excellent, engaging, humorous, and consistently strong across main and side content.

The macabre humor and character writing land very well for many critics, especially when the game leans into cheeky absurdity. Two strongly negative takes found the jokes repetitive, unfunny, and unable to justify the grind.

Dialogue was mostly praised for impact, humor, and organic choices, though one reviewer found some repeated dialogue drawn out.

Fuller presentation and comic banter give many conversations personality and charm, especially with voiced delivery. Negative critics felt the dialogue could be off-key, repetitive in cadence, or gratingly cynical.

Combat drew broad attention for its realism, skill focus, and improvements, though several reviewers still found it harsh, clunky, or frustrating early on.

Large zombie battles and town-defense mechanics give the sequel a broader scale, but combat is not universally loved. Some praise it as a welcome expansion, while others find it gated, buggy, or outright dull.

The sequel was credited with giving supporting women and other groups somewhat more agency than before.

At its best, the supporting cast is well written, interesting, and full of secrets. At its worst, characters blur together through similar voices and a uniformly cynical tone.

Difficulty was often called demanding and unforgiving; reviewers generally treated this as part of the appeal, though not always an easy one.

The game can be complicated without feeling conventionally hard. One critic found that its abundance of tasks rarely turns into an impossible wall, keeping the challenge approachable.

The cast was praised for memorable personalities, humor, and a strong sense of history.

The expanded cast is broadly seen as funny, interesting, and more involved, though one critic found the characters irritatingly similar in voice. The roster’s appeal depends heavily on whether its cynical humor works for you.

Tutorial quality was mixed, with one reviewer calling it decent while others criticized dense text screens and poor explanations.

Tutorials and tooltips are one of the clearest recurring weaknesses. They often provide only the basics, leaving players to decipher important systems, currencies, and requirements on their own.

Narrative quality was a major strength, with reviewers praising the historical saga, main quest, character arcs, and cinematic ambition.

The story is a major highlight for several critics, with mystery, humor, and stronger motivation than expected from a management sim. Others found it confused, thinly motivated, or intentionally loose on logic.

Reviewers repeatedly framed the systems-heavy design as a major strength, praising how mechanics connect to role-playing, dialogue, world simulation, and player expression.

The sequel’s many interconnected management systems are a major draw for most critics, with automation and new activities broadening the formula. A few found the layered processes needlessly cumbersome and labor-like.

Several reviewers found the game highly entertaining, addictive, and rewarding once its demanding systems clicked.

Most critics had a very good or fantastic time, especially once the management systems clicked. The dissent is strong, though, with two critics describing the experience as exhausting work rather than fun.

Reviewers praised the breadth of activities, quests, and post-launch additions, with many describing a large and varied set of things to do.

There is always something to do, from graveyard management and crafting to exploration, side quests, automation, farming, and combat. That abundance is a strength for many players, though a few critics found the breadth unfocused or exhausting.

Atmosphere was praised alongside world-building, especially in cities, music, and historically grounded locations.

The macabre-but-cozy atmosphere is a major selling point, blending graveyards, zombies, dark jokes, and an oddly comfortable rhythm. A minority of critics found the same tone cold, cynical, or lacking charm.

The learning curve was repeatedly described as steep, slow, and friction-heavy, rewarding patience but likely turning some players away.

The game’s challenge comes less from difficulty than from the sheer number of systems, recipes, locations, and dependencies to understand. For some that complexity becomes rewarding; for others it is immediately overwhelming.

The game was not seen as a pure grind, but reviewers still emphasized the effort and repetition needed to gain traction.

Grinding is the game’s most polarizing trait. Automation and easier resource points can smooth repetition for some players, while others find the long chains of prerequisites and chores exhausting.

One reviewer found the loop rewarding but volatile, with strong highs offset by repeated frustration and setbacks.

For fans of dense management sims, crafting, gathering, upgrading, and automating can become deeply satisfying and hard to put down. The harshest critics found the same loop repetitive, grindy, and closer to work than play.

Exploration was praised for beautiful spaces, meaningful discoveries, and a strong adventuring feel, though harsh systems made some travel demanding.

Exploration is one of the most consistently praised parts of the game. Wandering off the obvious path regularly leads to useful discoveries, unlocks, and a strong sense of reward.

Reviewers admired the freedom to solve problems, exploit systems, and role-play, though the sandbox sometimes clashed with scripted story demands.

The game supports a relaxed, self-directed approach, letting players choose what to focus on without much pressure. That flexibility fits the cozy side of its otherwise macabre premise.

One reviewer reported a consistent frame rate and treated that as part of the game’s stronger technical state.

Frame rates stay stable most of the time, with only a handful of noticeable drops in more demanding lighting and foliage scenes. Those dips are minor rather than constant.

The adaptive HUD was praised for hiding unnecessary elements and improving immersion when information was not relevant.

The HUD keeps to the corners and avoids cluttering the play area. Its simple layout makes moment-to-moment information easy to live with.

One reviewer praised the scale of improvement as something other studios rarely achieve.

New automation, combat, town restoration, and quality-of-life changes make the sequel feel meaningfully expanded to most critics. One negative take argues that its ideas are stitched from familiar genre parts without enough fresh payoff.

Environmental detail was praised for dense, specific objects, puddles, tools, farms, residences, and believable spaces.

Wind-blown plants, moving shadows, and other small touches make environments feel carefully observed. The details add depth without abandoning the game’s simple top-down style.

The historical codex and contextual detail were praised for offering extensive background on people, events, and society.

The central mystery gives the story extra depth, especially for players familiar with the original. Connections to the first game make its unanswered questions more intriguing.

Crafting split reviewers: blacksmithing and alchemy could be charming and rewarding, but several found parts clunky, slow, or repetitive.

Crafting is deep, layered, and increasingly automatable, which can be highly satisfying once everything clicks. Its many prerequisite steps can also feel overwhelming or deliberately tedious to players who prefer a simpler loop.

Cutscene direction and mocap were praised for selling relationships and emotional scenes convincingly.

Animations are described as crisp, matching the clean pixel-art presentation. Movement and environmental motion help the visuals feel polished rather than static.

Henry and Hans received strong praise for their evolving relationship and character arcs, with Henry’s trauma and growth adding stakes.

Characters do more than hand out tasks; their situations and personalities change as their stories progress. That growth gives the supporting cast more texture over time.

Graphics were broadly praised for impressive landscapes, cutscenes, lighting, and major visual improvements over the first game.

Visual presentation earns strong praise across the positive reviews. Detailed pixel art, dynamic lighting, and crisp scenery make simply moving through the world enjoyable.

Immersion was one of the clearest strengths, with reviewers repeatedly describing the world, systems, and presentation as absorbing.

The stronger story presentation and fully voiced approach make the sequel more immersive for players who connect with its tone. The world feels more immediate than the original’s text-heavy presentation.

The visual style of menus, maps, and medieval presentation received praise for matching the game’s historical tone.

The detailed pixel-art style remains a standout, with critics praising how attractive and distinctive the world looks. Even when the sequel stays close to the first game visually, the presentation feels refined.

Mission variety was strongly praised, especially for quests that went beyond simple errands or bandit-clearing objectives.

Side content spans a wide mix of errands, story threads, tasks, and gags. The sheer bounty helps keep the game from running out of things to pursue.

Reviewers generally agreed the sequel stays true to the original while improving its systems, scope, and accessibility.

Most critics consider this a strong sequel that preserves the first game’s dark-cozy identity while expanding its systems. Returning players should recognize the core formula immediately, even if some familiarity remains.

Visual set pieces and in-engine scenes were praised for creating striking emotional moments.

Dynamic lighting and shifting shadows give the 2D presentation extra depth. These effects help the world feel more dimensional and lively.

The early economy was described as restrictive, especially when selling damaged or stolen goods with limited vendor money.

Resource flow is easier in some areas than in the first game, but energy, faith, and later upgrade costs can still become restrictive. Opinions range from manageable and genre-appropriate to excessively punitive.

Maps were praised for medieval flair and exquisite town art, supporting the game’s historical presentation.

Navigation can become frustrating when quest links are unclear or important resources are spread across disconnected work areas. Backtracking and uncertainty can make a large world feel less convenient than it should.

World-building was repeatedly praised as immersive, historically grounded, and central to the game’s appeal.

The world-building is sharply divisive. One critic praises the care put into the setting and story, while another feels unskippable scenes add almost nothing meaningful to the world.

UI feedback was positive when reviewers discussed improved, adaptable, or visually polished interface presentation.

The interface is visually simple, but clarity is inconsistent. Some currencies, tabs, and functions need more explanation than the UI currently provides.

Quest design was one of the strongest points, with reviewers praising memorable side stories, branching approaches, and strong writing, despite a few disappointing payoffs.

Quest tracking is improved in places, especially with clearer flowchart-style organization, but objectives can still be opaque. Several critics were frustrated by weak explanations, hidden requirements, and grind-heavy gating.

Sound design was praised for supporting immersion and helping players identify attacks or stealth-relevant cues.

Audio does its job without becoming intrusive, but it is not a standout element. The overall soundscape is functional rather than especially memorable.

One reviewer strongly disliked Hans as a long-term companion presence, creating strain on their desire to continue.

One critic strongly disliked the Keeper’s characterization, describing his behavior as sociopathic without enough motivation. For that reviewer, the protagonist made the story harder to connect with.

Voice acting was broadly praised, especially the main cast, though some reviewers noted repeated or uneven minor NPC voices.

Voice acting is one of the sequel’s clearest presentation upgrades. Critics praise the performances, regional accents, added charm, and the stronger emotional pull compared with the old mumbling style.

Menu usability was mixed to negative, with some praise for navigation but others calling the menu system dire or frustrating.

Menus range from genuinely helpful quest flowcharts to frustrating crafting and recipe navigation. The best screens organize complex tasks well, while others make players hunt for basic information.

The soundtrack was one of the most consistently praised elements, with several reviewers calling it orchestral, phenomenal, or legendary.

The soundtrack is solid and adapts to the current scenario rather than staying static. It supports the action effectively without being singled out as a major highlight.

Performance was generally praised across PC and console contexts, with reviewers noting strong optimization and technical improvements.

PC performance is generally solid, with the game running well through most situations. The few slowdowns reported were limited and did not define the experience.

The save system was one of the most divisive topics, praised by one reviewer but criticized by many as stingy or punishing.

Saving only when the character sleeps feels restrictive and dated for a modern cozy game. The limitation can make players more cautious than the rest of the relaxed design suggests.

One reviewer warned that excessive profanity and potentially offensive material make the game unsuitable for some audiences.

Controls were described as noticeably smoother than the first game, especially in camera feel, aiming, and sword fighting responsiveness.

Ranged play was viewed as improved by some reviewers, especially archery, but another found ranged combat weightless and weak.

Large zombie-versus-zombie clashes and town-defense battles add welcome scale beyond routine management. The mode is considered a worthwhile expansion even if combat is not the game’s deepest system.

Camera behavior was a noted issue for one reviewer, especially through finicky first-person viewpoint problems.

Checkpointing was criticized for causing lost progress when autosaves appeared only at limited quest points.

Perk decisions for zombie helpers matter because their limited slots make the right selections important. Those choices give progression decisions more weight than simple linear upgrades.

Crash stability was praised by multiple reviewers who reported no crashes, no soft locks, or no hard crashes.

Facial animation feedback was mixed: one reviewer noted lifeless dialogue faces, while another praised key character animations.

Family friendliness was limited by repeated profanity, sexual content, and depictions of women that one reviewer found objectifying.

Handheld suitability was supported by one reviewer who described the game as scalable enough for handheld play.

DualSense haptics and adaptive triggers were praised for reflecting stamina, sword clashes, and sharpening interactions.

A horror-leaning quest was criticized for being too short for its dread to fully develop.

Load times were criticized by one reviewer as long enough to worsen stealth retries and experimentation.

Loot was criticized for early encumbrance pressure and the difficulty of carrying everything a player might want.

One reviewer felt early traversal was unnecessarily taxing, especially before stronger equipment and better mobility options eased the burden.

Stealth was useful and sometimes satisfying, yet reviewers also called it finicky, weak, or frustrating in specific forced sections.

Weapon balance was mixed: one reviewer liked weapon choice, while another found some ranged options hard to use effectively.

Reviewers consistently praised the reactive crime, reputation, NPC, and quest systems that made the world feel alive and responsive.

The post-launch expansions were credited with adding a large amount of extra content to the package.

Post-launch support was described positively through free updates, fixes, and eagerly awaited features.

The PS5 Pro version was praised as a graphical treat, with platform-specific technical strengths noted.

Replay value looked strong thanks to hardcore mode, major content additions, and reviewers wanting to return for more playthroughs.

Value was praised because the game is both strong and very long, with some reviewers reporting enormous playtime.

One reviewer praised the way locations were recontextualized into memorable set-pieces that rewarded planning and awareness.

Main mission design was mixed: reviewers praised varied scenarios, but one criticized a required sequence for lacking an alternate path.

The open world drew strong praise for its scale, density, historically grounded cities, and lived-in regions across multiple maps.

Town restoration broadens the sequel’s scope, but implementation quality is mixed. One critic likes it as part of the expanded management formula, while another hates how separate build areas fail to share resources.