The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt vs Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 — two epic RPGs of the generation, but which one is actually better?

Comparing different games, even within the same genre, is generally a thankless task. Different mechanics, stories, and characters appeal to different people. Therefore, it's hard to talk about objectivity. However, not comparing them at all would also be wrong. Especially when one great game, whose heights no one could surpass for a long time, finally gives way to a worthy newcomer. Without further ado — The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt vs Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2. Who is the true king of the RPG genre?

Let's agree right away, the author of this article is a big fan of the Witcher universe in general and the games about it in particular. A long time ago, The Witcher made me fall in love with the character, after which I read all the books and absorbed all the content I could get my hands on. Suffice it to say, the medallion of the School of the Wolf made of pure silver still hangs around my neck from time to time. The second and especially the third parts were, of course, only better in every way. I truly believe that CD Projekt RED managed to find solutions to several important problems that many studios stumbled upon before them, and even after.

Firstly, the developers managed to organically continue the plot of the original source. Not to rework it with their original and very conceptual vision, as is fashionable today, but to continue it. That is, the creators immediately limited themselves to the rules of Andrzej Sapkowski's world and were able to tell a big new story within its framework, spanning three games.

Secondly, they managed to build the gameplay in such a way that in Geralt — an already fully formed character — there was still a lot of the player. The decisions that could be made often felt diametrically opposed. However, they always matched the spirit of the witcher as a hero.

And thirdly, of course, is the lore and the world, which were organically expanded. The game universe still captivates and attracts, even though the last part was released 10 years ago.

Perhaps The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is not the exemplary RPG of all time, but it successfully combined its components, becoming one of the best games as such. Players around the world would agree.

Now, regarding Kingdom Come: Deliverance. I honestly admit, I never finished the first part, suffocated by many conventions, a strange combat system, and a completely non-working lockpicking mechanic on the console. I watched the story on YouTube, I was interested, but I didn't want to return to the game after many dozens of hours.

And how delighted I am with the second part... Now Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 has become the game for me where I can spend five hours without progressing in the main plot, still doing something and genuinely relaxing mentally. It's a great project that everyone who truly loves role-playing games should try. So I will be comparing two favorite games. At the same time, we will consciously ignore Baldur's Gate 3 — another undeniable masterpiece. A party-based RPG with a top-down camera is too different from the other two games, so we won't torture ourselves trying to find parallels and compare warm with bitter here.

Let's start with the basics. Despite the 10-year difference, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt still looks good. In the updated version, the graphics have been improved, so the visuals are pleasant, sharp, and not particularly demanding by modern standards. But the devil is in the details. Firstly, Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 has more environmental elements. The forest alone is worth mentioning. Secondly, the game showcases more diverse features characteristic of real life. For example, bolts and arrows stick in targets and trees and create splashes in the water. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt lacks this. Arrows simply disappeared, nothing more.

The surrounding world behaves differently too. In Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, animals need to be tracked during hunting. In The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, they just scattered in different directions, and you were only allowed to shoot deer. The entire open world in CD Projekt RED's masterpiece revolves around the witcher. Characters do not live outside the player's view. In contrast, in Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, each NPC has their own daily routine and follows it if possible. Moreover, the player can interfere with the usual life of a settlement, which will make the NPCs react to certain actions. For example, Geralt could take everything from huts without any penalty. Henry, on the other hand, would be whipped or even executed for such behavior.

Interestingly, there are also common points in technical terms. For instance, neither Geralt nor Henry can make even a minimal swim on horses. However, the witcher can dive into the water, whereas Henry cannot. Also, water reacts similarly to footsteps. In both games, grass and flowers are flat models, and the faces of unimportant NPCs are regularly repeated.

Overall, the visual aspect of Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 is not a step forward, but rather a step deeper. The newcomer lacks the various trendy features with lighting and graphic realism that make even the most powerful video cards and processors boil; everything is simple but tasteful and detailed. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt felt similar at the time and still does to this day.

Having discussed the technical aspects and visuals, it's worth talking about role-playing. It's wonderful and diverse in both projects, but... it's still better in Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2. All experienced players know that the lines in the dialogue window usually have a clear gradation — at the top are the best and correct answers, at the bottom — aggressive and "wrong" ones. Many RPGs have used a similar mechanic until Mass Effect once popularized the dialogue wheel. Subsequent BioWare games were released with "mood response" icons, so even the most shortsighted players would clearly understand which choice was "bad." There's something similar in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, but without the icons, of course. Nothing stops you from choosing differently, but most of the game can be completed by clicking on the top options in dialogues. Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 is a rare case where the system was broken. You really have to think about what to say in each specific situation, regardless of the line's position in the window.

Moreover, in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, it wasn't very often required to achieve specific actions from characters through charisma or communication skills. Most often, the result depended on Geralt's specific actions — whether he gathered all the clues, talked to all the necessary people, and what he personally considered right. In Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, it's not like that. Your communication skills are constantly evolving, depending on how Henry looks, what he's wearing, and how recently he's bathed. Dialogues are a big and important part of the game, where you can fully be who you want to be. Not bad or good, but realistic. This is a level of depth and development that many projects are still far from reaching.

An important factor is the characters. Here, CD Projekt RED had an advantage since most of the important characters were created by Sapkowski. However, it's worth noting the competent work with them, which, by the way, the Netflix series lacks. Having the original source at hand, the studio integrated recognizable characters so that every dialogue was memorable. Just think of Geralt's poems about Lambert — the well-known walrus jerk.

In Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, there are also plenty of characters, but none of them are particularly familiar to you. Yes, there are heroes from the first part, but the circumstances reveal them in a completely new way. Because of this, you form your relationships here and now. And no one knows if an insignificant quarrel will play out in ten hours or not. Regarding characters, I would probably balance both hits. It's fun and interesting to follow the companions.

Finally, let's address the elephant in the room — the combat system. And this is where it gets particularly tricky. The Witcher fights beautifully and lethally. It's one grand dance where blood flows constantly, even if it doesn't linger on the protagonist's body. In Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, battling even against two enemies is a tiresomely long and dangerous affair, where you can also die from blood loss. Of course, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt has difficulty levels, which, by the way, Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 lacks, but let's be honest — CD Projekt RED's fights are simpler and more visually appealing.

The combat system in Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 already deterred many potential fans in the first part. In the sequel, the situation has somewhat stabilized; some aspects have been simplified, others trimmed, and some added. Is it interesting to fight? Well, if you spend a few hours actually learning combos, then yes. However, even in this case, most combos simply won't be allowed. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt doesn't require that from you. Geralt is already an excellent swordsman, so he should be. In combat, both heroes have quick access slots, but Henry won't be able to munch on loaves during a boss fight; at most, he can switch weapons.

The battles also differ greatly in their dynamics. In Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, any rush is very bad. You risk losing stamina, making mistakes, getting hit in the head in return, which leads to bleeding and further reduces stamina. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is different. Being aggressive in combat is the main winning tactic. Which is better — probably each decides for themselves.

The last thing I'd like to discuss is overall crafting and management. And here, Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 outshines The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. In the latter, the main challenge lay in the recipes, the most valuable of which were obtained through special means in side dungeons. While the dungeon clearing was excellent, it all boiled down to gathering resources and ordering equipment. The differences were only in the numbers.

In Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, this system was upgraded to an entirely different level. You need to buy equipment of three different types — for combat, conversations, and stealth. Each group of characteristics has its own additional stats. What will be more important to you — silence or invisibility?

Blood, which inevitably remains after each battle, directly affects how intimidating you become. Each of the three types of armor has a whole bunch of layers and its own durability. Swords need to be regularly sharpened or forged by your own hands. Brewing potions literally requires measuring time with an hourglass, and thefts require preparation and careful planning. Furthermore, stolen items cannot be sold in the same village where you committed the crime. There's nothing even close to this in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. Of course, CD Projekt RED's game lacks survival elements and is about something entirely different, but the level of immersion and detail in Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 cannot be overlooked.

***

Comparing The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt and Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 — two such massive games — is an extremely challenging task. They differ too much in their essence. However, if you analyze it, it becomes clear that Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, in many ways, develops the ideas of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. I've written this above and am ready to repeat it. The 2025 release is not a step forward for RPGs, but a step inward, and that's what makes it valuable.