Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 - Review and Comparison of Graphic Settings

Like the first part, the game was developed on the CryEngine engine, but on its latest version. The game presents the player with a fairly decent and fairly standard range of graphic settings for today, which we will study in this graphic review. 

For most graphic settings, there are 5 parameters: Experimental (according to the developers, it is intended for "hardware of the future"), Ultra, High, Medium and Low. Those settings that were not included in the review did not have a visible effect on the image quality or the difference is visible only in dynamics, which is quite difficult to trace.

First in line is Upscale. DLSS (standard and transformer) and FSR 3.1 are presented, Intel XeSS support was not brought this time. Let's compare both technologies in native resolution. If we compare DLSS and FSR, the difference is very clearly visible - FSR noticeably blurs the picture. Now let's compare DLSS Standard and Transformer. According to Nvidia, Transformer should make the picture better due to the use of advanced AI technologies and indeed, the image with Standard DLSS looks slightly blurrier. Completely disabling upscalers leads to the fact that characteristic stairs immediately appear on the edges of objects, plus Transformer makes the picture sharper compared to the original. As a result, DLSS is optimal, but it is only available to owners of Nvidia cards.

Next comes Smoothing, which is represented by 3 modes: SMAA2tx, SMAA1tx and SMAA1x. The conclusions in this case are disappointing: none of the modes can compete even with FSR, so there is basically no point in them, and it will be easier to use FSR in native than any of the presented anti-aliasing modes, which blur the image even more.

The next point is Detailing objects and is responsible for drawing plants and buildings at a distance. Like all subsequent settings, it has 5 modes. The difference is visible only when switching from Experimental to Ultra and High, which is manifested in a decrease in the detail of the castle on the hill and the tree next to it. With further reduction, there are no differences, as in general for the detail of vegetation in the distance.

Go to Lighting. The difference is visible only with the transition from Experimental to Ultra, which manifests itself in a decrease in brightness and intensity of lighting. With subsequent reduction, the difference is not visible to the eye.

Global Illumination. The difference is noticeable only when switching from Experimental to Low, which manifests itself in a slight decrease in the brightness of the lighting and the amount of soft shadows and penumbra on objects.

Go to Quality of shaders. The transition from Experimental to Ultra to High is barely noticeable. The naked eye can only see the switch from High to Medium, which is manifested in a slight decrease in the relief of the wall on the left and the tiles on the roof of the house on the right. The transition from Medium to Low is already much more visible in the stones in the wall and the tiles, which lose their relief much more.

Consider Shadow quality - the difference between the modes is visible in all cases, which is manifested in a decrease in the number of shadows cast by vegetation and objects. The most significant impact on image quality was made by switching from Medium to Low, removing most of the shadows from small objects and vegetation and making the shadows blurry.

Next in line Texture quality. The difference is visible between all settings, which manifests itself in a gradual and insignificant decrease in detail and relief of all textures, but the most noticeable transition is from High to Medium and then to Low, which makes the picture rather unsightly.

Vegetation quality. With each subsequent decrease in quality, the differences are manifested in a decrease in the amount of vegetation in the distance and in a decrease in the amount of shadows in the vegetation itself. The transition from Experimental to Ultra and High is not very noticeable, but from High to Medium and then to Low it is already more noticeable.

Character texture quality. It was difficult to notice the difference between all the settings with the naked eye, and the characters are constantly moving, and the photo mode does not save the situation, since you need to find the same angle every time. But even in this case, there are no noticeable differences.

Graphic jump from the first part to the second and overall assessment.

Kingdom Come: Deliverance II demonstrates a confident step forward in terms of visual performance compared to the first part. Although the game is still developed on CryEngine, its latest version is used, which has significantly improved many aspects of graphics - both technically and aesthetically.
Comparison with the first part:

Detailing and geometry of objects:

• In the second part, the detail of objects at medium and long distances has been noticeably improved. Buildings, landscapes, vegetation and other elements of the scene look more natural and detailed, especially at high settings.
• In the first part, distant objects often suffered from weak rendering and abrupt appearance, which has now been solved by more flexible and high-quality LOD (level of detail) settings.

Lighting and shadows:

• Significant progress has been made in the lighting treatment. The second part offers more natural light scattering, soft shadows and better global illumination, making scenes look more realistic and deeper.
• In the first part, the lighting was sometimes harsh and did not always correctly convey the atmosphere of the time of day or weather conditions.

Textures:

• Deliverance II features significantly sharper and more detailed textures, especially on high and ultra settings. Wall surfaces, ground, clothing, and small environmental elements all look richer.
• The first part suffered from blurry textures on medium and even high settings, especially on characters and vegetation.

Upscaling and AI technologies:

• The second part received support for DLSS (including the Transformer mode) and FSR 3.1, which gives a powerful increase in performance without a noticeable loss of quality. This is an important addition, which was not in the first part at all.
• The use of neural networks (in DLSS Transformer) allows for improved image clarity and stability, especially with dynamic lighting and camera movement.

Anti-aliasing and post-processing:

• Anti-aliasing in the second part, despite the presence of several modes, is still inferior in quality to modern standards. However, compared to the first part, it has become less intrusive and slightly more adaptive.
• Improved post-processing effects: glare, depth of field, volumetric fog and atmospheric effects now look more realistic and are less system intensive. Unfortunately, in the second part (as well as in the first) the difference between all post-processing settings modes is not visible, so it was not included in the review.

Performance:

Despite the higher graphics bar, the game offers more flexible settings, allowing you to customize the visuals for a wide range of hardware. This is a clear improvement over the first part, where optimization caused a lot of complaints.

General conclusion:

Kingdom Come: Deliverance II is a significant visual upgrade over the first part. The game has not only become more technologically advanced, but also more visually expressive. Improved lighting, higher-quality textures, detailed geometry, advanced upscaling technologies and a reasonable settings system make the game visually pleasing even on mid-budget systems.

However, it is worth noting that certain settings, such as anti-aliasing and detailing of some objects, still have potential for improvement. Also, as in the first part, some of the graphic parameters have a minimal impact on the final image, which may be confusing for less experienced users.

To sum it up: for fans of the first part, the visual changes will be clearly noticeable and, most likely, pleasant. The game has retained its artistic style, but has done so with much greater technical quality, which makes the second part not only a logical continuation, but also a real evolutionary step in graphics and optimization.