Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 Warhorse Studio Founder Daniel Vávra is a Liar

Daniel Vávra’s Contradictions: Community Trust in Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 Has Crumbled

Over the years, Kingdom Come: Deliverance has earned - as I'm actively learning in real time here - an extremely dedicated fanbase for its commitment to historical realism. My initial take on this disregarded some of you very flippantly, tossing many aside for my own personal agenda. I wanted the sequel to be great, and I wanted to finally have a great game to be excited about to actually play... But after a lot of thought, and powerful feedback from the community, I've taken a much deeper dive at who this Studio founder, Daniel Vavra guy really is, and how he strikes me as a compulsive liar- Someone who I feel has been compromised and extremely disingenuous with the entire community... and many of you let me know that, in your own, special way lol:

Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 is a minefield for creators to talk about, and there are very strong opinions on all sides. I cover the games in the industry that move us, and make us critically think about what's happening on a grander scale in society at large... The woke politics have no place in gaming, and for one like KCD2 already facing heavy skepticism—not just for the game itself, but for the actions of its creator, Daniel Vávra... My frustrations are now there with many of you after doing the proper research on this one.

After a lot of reflection and listening to community feedback, it's clear that Vávra's inconsistencies and choices on the storyline make it difficult to trust him or the direction of the game at all.

Vávra’s History of CONSTANT Contradictions

Vávra has long positioned himself as a 'champion' of historical accuracy, famously stating that "there were no black people in medieval Bohemia. Period" back in 2015. In a series of now well-documented tweets, he dismissed any suggestion otherwise, even claiming that top historians laughed at the idea. His stance was clear: Kingdom Come: Deliverance was always supposed to be about realism, not modern revisionism.

Yet, here we are now fast forwarding to KCD2, and Vávra has now introduced Musa (below)—a character whose mere presence directly contradicts those previous statements. According to Vávra’s own explanation, Musa is a member of King Sigismund's court, an educated noble from Mali who found his way to Bohemia.

If this kind of historical figure is possible now, why was it deemed impossible before? Pair that with the rise of DEI and the woke agenda, it's not a stretch to think that Vavra has somehow been influenced by now parent company Embracer group.

The Embracer Group is a well known DEI-friendly corporation, and is really the only answer that makes any kind of real logical sense here. The problem isn’t just about historical accuracy—it’s about trust. Vávra isn't going to come out and say 'hey guys, yeah I signed a deal with embrace to ensure we checked those boxes in order to be funded' - In a situation like this, we really need to read between the lines. This is the same guy that previously ridiculed the idea of a black character in his setting, only to later justify one in his own sequel. Was his original stance genuine, or was he just saying what suited his argument at the time? Either way, it's a bad look... But it doesn't stop there... Let's travel back 8 years ago when they talked about how there's no way Henry was be gay, as that was the studio's choice...

One of the more baffling contradictions from Daniel Vávra comes from his stance on player choices in Kingdom Come: Deliverance. In the past, Vávra strongly pushed for historical accuracy (Warhorse Studios official YouTube account above), instantly rejecting anything whatsoever that didn’t align with 15th-century Bohemia.

Yet, when recently being questioned about whether the protagonist, Henry, could engage in same-sex relationships, he stated that players were free to roleplay however they wished, even though homosexuality was considered a severe sin at the time.

This directly contradicts his previously extremely rigid stance on historical accuracy— and perfectly explains why the community is so up in arms about this game being woke in the first place. The more I'm looking into this dude, the more it seems like everything I find raises some serious doubts about whether Vávra truly cares about authenticity or... more likely, selectively applies it whenever it serves whatever argument he'strying to make.

The Issue of Trust

His constant inconsistencies call into question not only Vávra’s credibility but far more importantly, the integrity of KCD2 as a product. Anyone like myself who originally defended him on the grounds of historical realism are now left wondering if we were intentionally misled... And rather than address these concerns honestly, Vávra has instead chosen to attack the very people he doesn’t agree with. Not a great look tbh...

Can KCD2 Overcome This?

The biggest hurdle for the game Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 ironically never was its mechanics or setting—it’s whether players can still trust the man behind creating it. Vávra’s flip-flopping and public outbursts make it hard to support the game in good faith. If he’s willing to bend his principles when it suits him, what else might he compromise on? Are there secret checkboxes for diversity metrics in order to be considered for additional game awards?

The divide I'm seeing now - thanks to so many of you explaining your frustrations with me within the community is pretty straight forward - we're being left with a choice: do we separate the art from the artist and support KCD2 despite Vávra’s contradictions, or do we walk away from a creator who has proven himself to be extremely unreliable when it comes to authenticity?

Whatever direction we take, I want to thank you all for the feedback from the previous video. I try my best to get it right, but sometimes, I need the community to make me aware of some angles that I hadn't been considering.

~Smash