Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
from what i've seen they look the same, obviously KCD2 looks a bit better but overall i don't think they changed much. tbf, there's not a reason to. cryengine has always looked good. it's just a matter of getting it to *work.*
Here's a comparison.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXZrysYwoMA
KCD2 has indeed made significant improvements in lighting and graft technology compared to the first game, but its“ color style” seems to have taken a different direction. The first game was clearly aiming for full realism, while the second one gives off the vibe of a mainstream AAA game. I'm not saying this is bad, but for a game with a realism-focused approach, I personally still prefer KCD1. After all, this isn’t a DnD world but a historical period that actually existed.
That said, it seems like very few people share our perspective. Hopefully, in the future, an ENB mod can bring back a look closer to the first game.
I wouldn’t say this kind of color grading is good or bad—everyone has different needs. But KCD1 is that baseline, you know what I mean.
Of course, this might also have something to do with the engine KCD1 used. I know the first game was built on CryEngine, which excels at creating a realistic visual style (sometimes even better than ray tracing). It naturally enhances realism in ways that many other engines struggle to replicate. I’m not sure what engine KCD2 is using, though.
Got excellent fps on my old rig on low settings. While KCD2 often got mediocre to low fps on same low settings.
So probably engine got more complicated in 7 years lol :)
Both games have a pretty wide range of lighting conditions. KCD2 has more variations and uses volumetric clouds and fog to set them apart even further. It has a wide range of rainy, cloudy, and overcast profiles so it is not always the nice postcard sunset as seen in trailers.
It is hard to get a direct comparison of the two games with equivalent scenarios. Yet, once you spend enough time and witness enough weather profiles, you will get the idea.
The art direction was probably the same. Stay as close to reality as you can.
I would agree that KCD1 has slightly more uniform textures in some areas and the lighting feels softer. I also feel that KCD2 got bolder and tries to capture the distinct character of all the light and weather conditions, whether it is a golden hour or bleak overcast noon. The greens in nature may look off at times, but so they did in the first game. Grass especially. Nature in reality looks completely different depending on the sun's position, sky color, or in shadow. It's hard to get right. but oh it's so vibrant.
Your settings for the game have a bit to do with it. I personally found that High looks better than Ultra in some respects. But each level you raise to adds a layer to the previous. If you have a decent system the game may have defaulted to ultra. Try lowering it a bit and see how that looks to you. ;)