All right, so my girl and I were looking on the site and saw the trailer and info for The Hunted. Initially, I almost had a seizure due to excitement. I am a lover of action RPGs and a lover of co-op , and HATE that they so seldom coincide . I have long ( much to the annoyance of some, unfortunately) pushed for The Elder Scrolls, a gold standard amongst RPGs, to offer at least limited local co-op of the sort that Fable II offered in a half-[censored] variety, and that Fable III virtually perfected ( i.e. drop in/ drop out, fully customizable and interactive but still limited and non dominating second player option). I could go on, but will suffice to say that I love the worlds of magic/melee ancienty civ. RPGs, and I LOVE co-op. Some of the most enjoyable experiences I have ever had gaming were exploring and adventuring alongside a friend in realtime couch/local co-op. When the Fable series ( I had liked Fable I but decryed its lack of co-op) switched over to having a couch co-op mode I nearly expired of . The implementation was shoddy in II but as of III it is frankly the ideal of a drop in/drop out couch co-op. . . and despite the hype the game is far larger than the original, and graphically much better as well.

Now, about this game, The Hunted. . . I love that it is co-op. . . but I am wondering if co-op and good graphics are the only things it has going for it? What I mean is this. . . does it have good storyline and NPC interaction. . . and just as importantly, does it have customizable characters? I am worried because the only characters I saw advertised were the Elf girl and the human warrior. Are these the only playable options? If so, I must say that is dissapointing on its face.I was hoping that when Bethesda (based right here in mine own home state ) finally got around to making a next gen RPG that offered couch co-op, it would have some of the same awesome character customization options that are featured in Oblivion. Maybe no argonians, and maybe only one race of Elves instead of three, but real options, as in, you choose Elf, Human, maybe Dwarf or Orc, you choose Male or Female, you choose warlock or warrior or something inbetween. It seems like they are handicapping the game before its onset if they do not allow this. And that bothers me for two reasons. . . A) it makes me less interested in this game, and less likely that it will be the awesome co-op game I am hoping for, but B ) it also occurs to my mind that this might be Bethesda's first big foray into couch-co-op in Next Gen, and thus may be their tester for whether or not co-op is profitable. . . and it may fall short because it lacks things like character options. . . I worry that if it fails on those grounds, Bethesda may make the incorrect assumption that its shortcoming was based in a lack of interest in cooperative play, or that they may hold its figures, if it underperforms, as evidence of why they do not bother with investing in co-op. . . . but the lack of enthusiasm, if it happens, would likely have a lot more to due with things like a lack of player ability to create a character of their choosing than with the co-op feature.

In short, people might, like me, love the ability to play with a friend, but might give a lukewarm reception to the game as a direct result of the fact that it offers very limited options as to whom they can play as and how. I hope this isn't the case. . . but I worry.

Hunted is being developed by inXile Entertainment, not Bethesda Game Studios.

Bethesda has two halves: one is the development arm, Bethesda Game Studios, which made The Elder Scrolls and more recently Fallout 3; the other is the publishing arm, Bethesda Softworks, which has published BGS's game but is also involved in a variety of others, like Hunted, Brink, and Fallout New Vegas.

You don't make your own characters in Hunted, the story involves E'lara and Caddoc and you play as one or the other. There is character developement but this isn't an open system like The Elder Scrolls where you choose your own class and every ability is open to every character, Caddoc and E'lara have specific ability trees.

While there may not be the same level of character customization having defined characters allows them to better integrate them in to the story. There is quite a lot of banter between the two characters as well and that couldn't be done if both PCs were fully customizable. In the Elder Scrolls your character doesn't have a defined name, set of abilities, or personality so the game can't reference these things - Hunted can.

Thank you for clarifying. I understand the logic, though I don't know that it makes me feel better. At first glance I thought that an awesome couch co-op RPG in the vein of Oblivion, if not quite as thorough had arrived. It seems rather to be an adventure game without the RPG customization. I guess I just feel alot of folks, myself included, will feel a little limited if She-Ra and The Hulk are the only playable options. Or Artemis and Hercules as the case may be. Even if the only choice were Elf and Human, and the Elf hailed from one place and the human for another, male or female, mage or warrior should still be options. But I don't make the games, so what can I say?

You still develop your character, you just don't begin with a blank slate.

It's common for an RPG to pin down some character details so they can be incorporated in to the story - this can be as little as a codename, or the character's gender or race may be pre-determined even if the class and ability options are wide open. Deus Ex and Mass Effect are good examples of games that take a largely hands-off approach to defining the character but still have some predetermined characterization. Some RPGs define classes for each character and it's particularly common among more action-oriented RPGs (Diablo, Borderlands) as well as the more interactive-story route taken by JRPGs.

Hunted isn't being developed as an RPG which has the option of playing with a friend. Cooperative play is a core element - perhaps even the core element - and the character design reflects that. For example, many of E'lara's spells are specifically designed to compliment Caddoc's fighting style, and vice versa. I also believe, although I'm less certain of this, that there are special attacks or combos that are similarly designed to allow one character to assist the other. With the characters being so highly integrated defined classes and characteristics are pretty much required. (It's also worth pointing out that in single-player both characters are still traveling together, the cooperative play is central to the game even if an AI is controlling your other half.)

This isn't an "FPS with RPG elements" like No One Lives Forever 2, but it also isn't an open world RPG like Morrowind. I know a lot of people would like to play one of BGS's open world RPGs with a friend but Hunted isn't trying to be that game. The RPG genre covers a lot of ground . . . and I do understand that someone who sees "Bethesda Softworks" and expects a BGS title is going to find that Hunted doesn't fit their initial expectations. I'd suggest looking back at some of the demo videos and judging Hunted by its own merits, even if it isn't the cooperative play you initially envisions I think you'll come away with a positive impression of the game.

I completely get what you are saying, Hungry Donner, and I appreciate all the time you put into making the reply. It definitely looks like, for what it is, that The Hunted will be a good game. . . yet in the character department, I just don't know that it has the requisite options to appeal to me. The co-op makes it alluring in and of itself, and coupled with the beauty of the game world it is all the more tempting, but I don't know if it is enough for me personally. My last co-op experience was Fable III, which had both gender choice and a good amount of customization for both players. I want to break even or move forward from the this experince not fall back.

And I do understand that many of the more limited RPGs come with pre-determined characters. I loved Baldurs Gate and Dark Alliance, for all their shortcomings. But A) I gave them more leeway with their shortcomings because of the generation of engine and console they were running on and B ) They still had more character options than this game seems to. Two options just is not a lot, no matter how you cut it. It is very limiting. Baldur's Gate Dark Allaince offered 5 options back in the Mideval period of the last gen consoles. At the least it would be better of this game offered a male and female varient for both players, or maybe several different optional skins for each. I know there are other RPGs that offer less in terms of character choices. I suppose there can be no denying, fresh off the heels of Fable III and with the air full of news about Skyrim (thus with The Elder Scrolls heavy in mind) I see a co-op RPG even tied to Bethesda and I excitedly expect the moon, not a studio in the Arizona desert. I am sure it will be a good game, really, but in some ways it already dissapoints. . . and it certainly isn't because of the co-op.

That's certainly understandable, while Bethesda Softworks has been a publisher for quite some time it is only recently that they've expanded to the point where they are publishing multiple high profile games at the same time. We're in a transition period where "Bethesda" is better established as a developer instead of a publisher and it's routine for people to see "Bethesda" associated with a title and assume BGS is developing it.

And even after this is clarified you've already had that moment where you hear that Bethesda is involved with a co-op RPG.

Some stories can't be told as open-endedly as customization would require. Are you going to not read [insert favorite novel here] because it isn't a choose-your-own adventure book? Will you not see [insert broadway show or movie here] because you can't choose the gender and appearance of the main characters?

I agreee with the OP i myself am disappointed in the complete lack of character customization. Some folks might consider a limited talent tree as customization enough and to each hgis own, but after the games i have played over the last several years, to be STUCK playing some one else's idea of a character is no fun. I HAD the game on pre-order from Amazon but as of yesterday 5 feb 11 i canceled the pre order because of the lack of customization options. To go from FO3, FONV, Dragon Age origins, Divinity 2, even with the limited customization options they offered still offered it. Bioware's Dragon Age 2 which i also have on pre- order along with Fable 3 (PC) have customization options that for the life of me i still can not figure out why it is such a big deal anymore for the developers to bring the player into the game by the player creating themselves or someone they can become attached to. These two characters in Hunted may be great, awesome, well written but they are YOUR characters not mine and that is a deal breaker. I realize it is Bethesda's character, story and game, so before the flame wars start i conceede this point no problem, i just will respond with, ok keep it.

Yes it matters enough to me to create my own character that even as engaging as the game sounds i will have to pass for the only reason is that i would be stuck playing YOUR character, in YOUR story, with nothing left for me to do but push them around in the world. It sounds to me that with out the replay-ability that character customization provides there is going to be little reason to play the game a second time. If i could say make a mage one time, a warrior the next, see the difference the classes would make in how one would do the encounters because of builds, that is a reason to play again, even in this repsect there is only 2 replays before the player is chewing the same tired old dirt again. Like GTA4 once you run it there is absolutely no reason to bother with it again, as Hunted seems to operate on the same premise neither GTA4 or Hunted are Pre order titles, they are not even titles to be bought with in the first month of release, the best bet is to wait until they hit the bargin bin at your closest retailer then pick them up for 15 to 20 bucks when the price reflects the play value a bit closer to reality.

I would like to add to the poster above that no one would refuse to read a book or watch a movie because they could not customize the character. There is a fundamental difference though in that the reader/watcher does not expect an interactive experience where as a game is an interactive experience. So while i would not expect to be able to change the character to suit me it is not unreasonable to expect that an entirely different meduim such as games to be held to a higher standard. Plus most books and movies do not cost 60 dollars either so when it comes to what one can/should expect it is acceptable to expect more.

I will add one final note here just to prove my point. Even as poor of a port as Saints Row 2 was Volition was able to take Nico Bellic out of the game and allow the player to insert them sleves into the game in Nico's place. It was because of this and well the many more things the player could do in SR2 that made it a superior game even as poorly ported as it was, it was still a better game than GTA4 was because the developer said "here is my world tell me a story".

This is clearly not an action rpg but an action adventure game. It's fine to not like that about the game, but I wouldn't say misconceptions about the type of game make them 'steps backwards' in any way, shape, or form.