Compare Diablo IV vs Kingdom Come: Deliverance II

One review warned that the gore is intense enough to shock players who dislike graphic violence.

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

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

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

One expansion review praised Blizzard’s cutscenes as massive, detailed, and stunning.

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

Art direction was a standout strength, with reviewers praising Diablo IV’s darker horror look and expansion region aesthetics.

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

Atmosphere was strongly praised for darkness, brutality, and ominous beauty in both base game and expansion.

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

One expansion reviewer criticized premium battle pass add-ons as unnecessary cosmetic value.

Boss design was highly mixed, ranging from phenomenal and mechanically distinct to disappointing, inconsistent, or frustrating.

Bug evidence was limited and negative-leaning, with IGN-style reviews noting irritating issues.

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

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

One review praised the base game’s characters as more fleshed out and memorable.

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

The roster was praised overall for fun, distinct classes, especially Warlock and Paladin, though some reviews preferred one class over another.

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

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

Class balance evidence was mixed to negative in expansion reviews, especially around the Paladin feeling underwhelming or passive despite power.

Co-op evidence was positive, with reviewers praising group formation, level scaling, and the extra fun of playing with others.

Combat was one of the strongest points, with repeated praise for precision, satisfaction, and tactical chaos; only one review framed it as more uneven.

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

Community features were praised through trading, clans, and group activity support.

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

Content variety was mostly positive thanks to sidequests, endgame activities, and expansion additions, though one review warned some activities can feel copied.

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

The handling was praised as precise and responsive, with reviewers highlighting intuitive combat feel and quick reactions.

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

Reviewers described the core loop as deeply compelling overall, though one found repeated spaces blurred together after long sessions.

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

Crafting and Horadric Cube evidence was strongly positive, with reviewers valuing refinement, gear forging, and buildcraft expansion.

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

One review reported a persistent crash after a specific main-quest boss.

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

One review praised cross-platform play as fun and appealing.

One review praised carrying progress between consoles as appealing.

One review praised the move away from cheesy performances and dialogue compared with the prior entry.

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

Difficulty evidence was mixed: bosses and tier options were praised, but some expansion encounters and later challenge tuning felt frustrating or uncertain.

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

DLC value was mixed: several reviewers found Lord of Hatred worth playing or robust, while others called it a hard sell or context-dependent.

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

One review found respec costs workable but still a slight disincentive to experimentation.

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

Emotional impact was generally strong in expansion and lore-focused reviews, though one reviewer said the base game did not raise their pulse.

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

Endgame was heavily discussed and mostly praised, especially day-one systems and War Plans, though a few reviewers found later loops lacking.

Enemy variety was mixed: one expansion review praised a cohesive new bestiary, while base-game reviews noticed repeated enemies or simple mechanics.

Environmental detail was a major strength, with reviewers praising intricate environments, Skovos changes, and beautiful region design.

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

Exploration was consistently praised as rewarding, joyful, and enhanced by large regions, side activities, and new expansion spaces.

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

One expansion review found some lip-syncing and cutscene quality behind the curve.

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

One review praised Diablo IV as quintessentially Diablo.

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

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

One expansion review praised War Plans for saving players from searching the large map.

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

One review praised the slick 60 frames-per-second performance.

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

Fun factor was broadly positive across base game and expansion reviews, even among reviewers who criticized story or systems.

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

One review praised the ability-tree flexibility, saying players can rebuild their character and adapt play fluidly.

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

Graphics were consistently praised as stellar, beautiful, sharp, and technically impressive across base game and expansion coverage.

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

One review framed the modern grind as low-commitment and welcoming rather than punishing.

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

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.

Horror tension was mixed-to-positive, with praise for evil tone but one caveat that some horror imagery became bland through repetition.

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

One reviewer criticized the inability to change the HP bar color while using Warlock resources.

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

One review found the shared online world could detract from the lonely Diablo atmosphere.

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

Innovation was criticized as limited, even by reviewers who liked the overall design.

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

Learning curve evidence was mixed: complexity can be bracing, but the Warlock and skill systems were also called approachable.

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

Level design was mixed: some praised less backtracking and rewarding dungeons, while another found dungeon structure predictable.

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

Live-service evidence was cautiously positive, with reviewers praising foundations and planned updates while noting unknown seasonal elements.

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

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

Loot was praised for cadence, usefulness, and improved design, with reviewers emphasizing experimentation and build-defining drops.

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

One review strongly praised Diablo IV as rewarding for lore enthusiasts.

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

Map and navigation design was praised for an easy world map, pathfinding, overlays, and War Plans teleporting.

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

Menu and inventory usability was mixed, with praise for loot filters but criticism of the small inventory and missing gem bag.

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

One review said the shop was annoying but did not ruin the game design.

Mission design drew criticism in expansion coverage for repetitive objective flow and travel-to-talk sequences.

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

One expansion review criticized missions for repeating ambush-style objectives.

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

Monetization was mixed: cosmetics were not intrusive or pay-to-win, but reviewers repeatedly criticized high prices and paid layers in a full-priced game.

Movement received strong marks for responsive dodging and class mobility, including praise for the expansion Warlock’s wraith-like movement.

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

Multiplayer design was praised for cross-platform flexibility, online integration, and group play freshness.

Narrative drew broad but mixed praise: many reviews liked Lilith, Mephisto, or expansion arcs, while several criticized weak, predictable, or ham-fisted storytelling.

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

Reviews found the story and current ARPG structure approachable for newcomers, especially when major lore points were explained.

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

Online stability was mostly good in review periods, though reviewers still noted rare hitches and disconnections.

The open world was broadly praised for scale, interlinked regions, and multiplayer-friendly structure.

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

Originality was a weakness, with reviews describing Diablo IV as rule-following or more deterministic than surprising.

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

Pacing was a recurring weakness, with reviewers criticizing filler errands, shocking plot pacing, and overly cinematic stretches.

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

Performance was generally praised as smooth and well optimized, though one expansion review noted mild issues and progression bugs.

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

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

Polish was mostly praised, with several reviewers calling the launch or technical package ready, well made, or a tour de force.

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

Progression was mostly praised for freshness, item growth, and useful systems, though a few reviewers found leveling or rewards slow early on.

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

One review criticized the player character as lacking personality or development.

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

Quest evidence was split between strong praise for rewarding side content and complaints that some side quests were mundane or one-dimensional.

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

Replay value was a major strength, with reviewers repeatedly saying the game kept them returning through classes, builds, and endgame systems.

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

One review specifically praised player agency in choosing how to spend time across Sanctuary.

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

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

One reviewer said seasonal content is integral and often good, while noting the reviewed expansion period did not include it.

Server reliability was mixed: some reviews saw stability, while others reported lag, disconnections, or rubber-banding.

One review praised the supporting cast and narrative characters as more memorable and fleshed out.

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

Skill trees and buildcraft were heavily covered and mostly praised for flexibility and depth, with some caveats that changes could be overstated or twig-like.

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

Social features were praised through increased trading and clan prominence.

Sound design was unanimously strong in scored evidence, from demon audio to interface and environmental details.

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

The soundtrack was consistently praised as memorable, majestic, atmospheric, and excellent.

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

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

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

Upgrade-related evidence was positive overall, especially around Talismans and loadout tailoring, though one reviewer had not yet found thrilling pieces.

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

UI evidence was positive where scored, especially tooltips and UX design.

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

Value evidence was positive, with reviewers saying the base game offered strong hours-per-dollar value.

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

Visual effects received strong praise for spell and magical effects that looked flashy while staying functional.

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

Voice acting was consistently praised, especially Lorath and the expansion performances, with only minor presentation caveats elsewhere.

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

One comparison review felt Diablo IV weapons functioned too much as stat sticks.

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

World-building was praised for history, mythos, and an exciting Sanctuary setting.

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

One review praised world bosses and limited-time events for making the shared world feel active.

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

One review criticized the story presentation as clunky and out of place.

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