Yeah, Very true.
And If you play as any of the characters, You still level up the other..From what I've heard.

I look at it as an extraordinary opportunity to oogle while I play videogames. Mmmm girls. :wub:

I take it you can wait for the release of The Expendables?

This. After all, did anyone find out if Ecco the Dolphin was male or female? What gender, if any, was Cool Spot?

Agreed because I can see a situation playing out alot where you invite one your friends to play with you but they are leveling up the same character and since they can only play as the one your not them not wanting to join because of it.

I like the 2 characters, I'd like to see a Male Elf and a Female Human. I wish there was a 4 player mode, skirmish, or survival mode or something. It'd be fun, not versus but just competitive coop. In the end i'd just like to see more player models/armors/skins. I don't need the story mode to be changed. I don't think there's anything wrong with finding a male or female character in a game attractive, if you like the female or male form then why wouldn't you? I'm not saying drool at the screen, I just mean you can look at art the same way and find the images contained therein attractive as well.

Well I will say, allot of my guy friends like to play girls in games just so they have something nice to look at in game..

but for me, I am dreading the point where my partner is going to ask that I switch out from playing the guy... just because I very much prefer to play his role and up close combat merc. I hate range/archer/ranger stuff... so there is more to it then just it being a girl, its a whole different play style, and so far in the trailers, his attacks look sooooo much more fun.

You should be able to play any combination of the two imo.

If you watch the trailer you can see Caddoc using missile weapons and E'lara with a sword and shield. We know their strengths lay elsewhere but at least they're not useless in the other's role.

This complaint makes more sense to me than the gender one. Hunted has a defined story and dialogue so if you wanted two male characters one would be named E'lara and speak with an impressive falsetto :hehe:

Sure Elara can use swords.... A mage in most games can hit people with the staff they are carrying. Just because you can use it, doesn't make it a good idea.

I get the feeling that E'lara will be competent at melee and Caddoc at missile weapons - but I doubt either will be a match for the others specialization. I'm curious to know how the leveling affects this - that's probably a good question for the fan interview

Wasn't it the other way around; that E'lara is the archer type and Caddoc the melee one? As far as i've read it's Caddoc which is competent in melee.


I'm afraid for you that you have to do it with E'lara and Caddoc and nothing else. Those are the main characters. I wonder what's the problem with having just a male and a female.
Sure, some would like to stare at 2 females instead of one. Double fun. And some would then have to like 2 males, which is double fun for them. So that means you will have to have a rotating system, like Sacred 2 Fallen Angel has. But i don't know if it can be performed with 2 characters. In Sacred 2 it's just choosing from 6 unique characters and with Ice&Blood this becomes 7. But in Sacred 2 you have no co-op and every character has just it's own skills. The aim in Hunted is probably set on the co-op mode and so you have fixed characters. And with choosing for a male and female they probably satisfy most people, as you can play with both.

I think you're might be wrong about that. Also the younger ones have already feelings and they also just love to stare at girls. Except maybe the real young ones, but then we're talking about the little ones (1 to about 6) But those ones are also playing other games.
The ones from about 12 years and older already play games like CoD and such and also The Elder Scrolls. Those are familiar with girls. Heck, they already brag about it at that age. Well, females like to play with males in most cases. What you describe about to kick some butt happens with shooters, where female players just like to do some headshots against males. Maybe some of them also like to have a female team, but you don't see that often.
I doubt if the sales are going to suffer. If that's the case, then it's not because of the choice of a male and female character, but more of doing a poor job. There are also games which just have 1 main character where you have to play with.
The gothic franchise, Risen, The Witcher, Bloodrayne, Venetica, Fable, just to name a few. Especially Gothic and The Witcher are examples of games which were an instant hit.

There is a difference between options and options. In my opinion the real options aren't about the amount of characters or choosing between them, but more about what they can.
Sure, if it's stated that the game is a party based game, then there must be enough companions to choose from. And if it is described that you can choose between some characters, then you have to get that option.
But if a game just have one character and you have to do with that, then the options are somewhere else. Now take The Witcher. You play with just one person and that's Geralt of Rivia. Geralt is the main character, the one where the game is named after, because he is a witcher; the witcher that is. The options in here lies within the dialogs and the things you can do. There is no good or evil, but there are choices to made. Which choice you made will influence the game. There are also some minigames in The Witcher and it's AO rated.
Is a game with just one person bad? No. Because here the options are somewhere else.

Surely this is a troll thread.... Many guys and girls played the Tomb Raider series. Ever played Baldur's Gate: Dark ALliance? There is no majority who will be upset and not buy the game. People will buy it to play as the type of characters regardless of their gender. No one is who is into this style of combat is going to turn away from the game b/c they might have to play as a girl. Welcome to the 21st century

More accurately, if Caddoc was the only playable character, many people would turn away from the game b/c they can't play as the girl. Welcome to the 21st century.

I love to play as both male and female characters, I actually like the idea of there being one of each because I always feel disappointed when I don't get the option.

haha i am reading about all the greif about folks not wanting to play a female and my bud and i are already fighting over WHO gets to play the female character. I think i am going to win because i always let him play Zoey or Rochelle in the Left for Dead series so i think i can safely say i will get the satisfaction of playing the magic caster who happens to have boobs rar.

But i do agree it would be nice or better if the player could design a custom character for the coop experience. Next year is going to be so great, TW2, DA2, I am guessing The Hunted is going to be close. Whew feast or famine fortunatly i have FONV to tide me over.

Asai

Agreed whole heartedly. I am a huge fan of couch co-op in action RPGs and I mean an ENORMOUS fan and supporter of it. . . and this game looks gorgeous. . . but frankly if I and any friends I might play with are Forced to play either as the female Elf archer or the hulking human male warrior, it is going to kill the interest rather signicantly. If there are Elves in the world, my leaning is to play as a male Elf magician with just enough sword skill to survive in a pinch, cause that's how I roll. I know people who will want a female human etc. The game looks amazing, but I really feel Bethesda is doing both themselves (salewise and creditwise) and their audience a disservice if you cannot decide the basic look, gender and specialization of your characters. . . and what I really fear and hate is that the co-op feature will take the bad rap if the games reception is less than stellar, even though the main reason for complaint would likely have nothing to do with co-op but with exactly what you stated. . . a lack of character options. I don't think the system needs to be one tenth as complex as Oblivions, where you choose not only race and gender, but thickness of brow, width of nose, prominence of jaw etc. . . but it should at least offer elf or human to both players, offer male or female to both players, offer mage or warrior or a combination of the pair to both players, otherwise people feel that in a role playing game they are going to be stuck playing a character role that they did not choose and do not really wish to play as. . . and that makes them less likely to get the game, and less likely to enjoy the experience if they do.

From my understanding each character has two areas they can advance, one is magic and the other is their combat ability (melee for Caddoc, archery for E'lara). So if you want to focus on advancing your magical abilities instead of combat that's fine.

As I mentioned in your other thread, and probably earlier in this one, character customization comes at the expense of story integration. InXile has chosen to focus on the story and the relationship between Caddoc and E'lara which requires that they have fixed details they can reference. While this means less character variety (no male elves or female humans, for example) it allows for more character depth since inXile is free to explore the two characters they have created and that the player gets to develop.

You say that. . . yet both Fable III and The more recent Elder Scrolls Games ( Morrowind/ Oblivion), which are probably the two most famed and profitable RPGs of the next generation, despite their differences, and both of which are rated T or M, they both offer the player (in the case of Fable III players) the choice of male or female, amongst other things. Let Elder Scrolls or even Fable take away the option of gender, or take away the option of playing as mage, warrior etc and see just how quickly the complaining will begin and how loud it will be. Let the next Elder Scrolls game come out and say "guess what, no more playing as Elves and Orcs and Ka-jitt, no more Nightblades born under the sign of The Apprentice, you play as a Nord warrior born under The Atronach or you leave the game on the shelf." I doubt the response will be at all pleasant.

That doesn't have anything to do with not being mature enough to play a female character etc. But people play these RPGs, by and large, to become the person they would want to be in a world steeped in wizardry and warcraft.

And I really have a lot of concern for this game, because it is one of the only big co-op ventures I can recall Bethesda doing. . . and I LOVE co-op. I live right here in Maryland where the studio is based, and God knows I have considered writing letters et al "please make an Elder Scrolls game I can play with a friend." I have played couch (local) co-op in lesser RPGs and adventure games with friends and relatives before, and the couch co-op experience in a detailed world is one of the most amazing gaming experiences you can have (its a pretty cool social bonding experience too). I have logged thousands of hours in Oblivion, and many thousands of those hours I have spent playing were simultaneosly spent thinking all the while "God, I wish I could play this with a friend." There were times when the road was either lonely or just so amazing to behold, adventure.plot/graphics et al, that I just keenly wanted to share it with a friend. More than any other game experience, I wanted, when a friend looked at my game and commented on how cool it was, to be able to say, "turn on that second controller, choose your race and occupation, and walk Tameriel with me for a while. The Colovian Highlands are lovely at this time of year and its just a shame to have to wander them all on my lonsome own. Also there are dangers on the road, and its always good to have a friend at hand." As I said I LOVE couch co-op. I know how engaging and enjoyable it can be, especially when the game world presents the players with something deep, and wondrous and thorough. Yet I also love a little customization options with my characters. And I worry, not only that this game may sacrifice the latter, but that its sales may be hurt by doing so, and that if that happens the blame for the shortfall will be placed unfairly upon the shoulders of the co-op play instead of on the lack of character choice where it belongs. I worry that if it doesn't break sale records, the developers may say "see there just isn't a market for couch co-op," which is untrue, and that they will fail to recognize that the real problem was people feeling forced to play character roles that didn't interest them.

I am not saying The Hunted needs to have as much extreme customization as Elder Scrolls, where there are about 9 playable races, and I spent nearly an hour refining my high-elf mages features until they were just so. But at least give the choice of the basics: human or elf for both players, male or female, wizard or warrior or a mix. Players are more invested in the character if the character is someone they would really like to be.

Its not my business to tell devs how to make their games, and I do not speak for all the world, but I will say this. . . . give my friends and I a game with the near perfect drop in/ drop out couch co-op of Fable III paired with the awesome customization options, expansive world and intricate stories of Oblivion. . . and I will put down $75 plus for your game and not look back, and probably not play anything else for a year.

I somewhat agree with you, yet at the same time I feel that you take it too far-
The game does not have to give those in depth customisation features, RPGs, in fact don't have to, its not a staple of the role playing genre, although it does help immersion into your role.

Secondly you mention Fable 3 (which I don't think many would say is the best RPG) and Oblivion (which is now 4/5 years old) and you compare it to now. If you look at the most successful modern RPGS, Mass Effect, Dragon Age Origins sequel (Fallout being an exception) They are all heading towards are more restricted character customisation, in trade for increased immersion.

Oblivion and all of the other "silent protagonist" games are great, but none of them can match the immersive depth of voiced characters.

However saying this, I can't help that the restriction on this game pulls the belt tight. In the current climate when choice is king, across all games of this genre, you feel somewhat restricted by two characters, with pre-set specialisation leanings already.

On the wider debate of genre, those who attempted to denounce the concerns raised with allegations of immaturity evidently miss the concerns that were raised in the first place.

Immersion into a storyline is great, its a priority for me when I play most games, taking on the role of the character is what draws me to games, so anything to further this immersion is golden in my eyes. However I find myself struggling to immerse into a game playing as a female; I can'ta achieve the same level of depth and involvement than as playing as a male character.

This is probably down to the basic fact that women and men do have differing feelings, thoughts and perceptive outlook of the world. When a female character reacts to the world around her I cannot relate to the same degree to how a male character acts. And while its completely the developers choice for the scope of classes/play-styles/races, I feel that gender should remain the basis of configuration due to the reasons stated above.

But you know after all that, I just realised there's two blanked out slots on the character page, and therefore all of this debate may be moot, if they are aiming for a fixed gender-character style, which isn't ideal, but does rest assure many fears of the above...

I guess we will have to see ^^

Haha! I love the Golden Axe comment by Alex... But truly, there are only who characters because they had to be rendered, and cutscenes provided and such, maybe.

My take on the "huge mistake" headline is that there should have been no co players at all. When I play Fallout or Oblivion, I just do whatever the hell i like, and my team mate might want to push on with the fight and such, where I intend to take a stroll across the country and smell the roses. Truly, do you guys think that even two of you do a LAN party of this game? It just doesn't make any sense to me.

Internet? Well, how the hell would that work over the Internet? The game's world isn't designed to let multiple players play on their own time.

Unless I am certain that I can control the characters with legendary Steve Jobs micromanagement skills, I'd be wary to buy this... Well, time and reviews will tell...

I can see the point but i also think sometimes the developers get to so hung up on thier story that they forget about including the player in the story. By allowing the player to make thier own character might be more difficult for the developers, but by doing so it allows the player to enjoy the experience as a more personal one. Having static characters in a static narrative is SO 1990s that anymore i consider it sloppy or lazy programming. The game looks cool and the coop concept is interesting but sad to say i am a person who likes to create my character, inject a bit of myself into the story and being stuck playing some one else's idea of a character is usually enough of a reason for me to look elsewhere for entertainment having been spoiled by several other game companies including Bethesda in this regard. I am not saying i will not be purchasing the game but i did have it on pre order just hoping that the static characters in the static narrative was more due to Bethesda being tight lipped concerning Hunted, but as i read more and more it seems that in order to play this game i will have to play some else's character, and well that will not do. The game might be fantastic, revolutionary, addictive but due to the static characters i think i will have to pass. It is a shame because i really like that Bethesda games seem to have SUCH a strong mod community with the developer blessing that maybe just maybe some modder out there will be able to mod some customization options for the player at which time i may reconsider my position.

I have no problem playing a female character, as long as I can move the camera around and check out my own ass.

I was hoping that you could make a custom character or choose between several characters. I guess I was wrong.

Really? Since when?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cooperative_video_games

How do you know I'll get what I want if they do as you ask? My guess is that it would change the interaction between the characters significantly. This thread seems heavily laden with opinion but not really any historical precedent to back it up. Considering the producers of this game were part of some of my favorite games of all-time (Bard's Tale, Wasteland) I'm more than happy to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I suppose it should be telling that people use Dragon Age (A watered down RPG-rule system) or Diablo (a level-grind item-oriented RPG) as their standards for an action-adventure game. As a die-hard RPG'er, I love my RPG's to be just that, and I love my action-adventures to be just that (ACK NO FEMALE HERO IN QUEST FOR GLORY OH NOES!!!)

There is some other things not mentioned here. Online games, many players love to find those that can't distinct between gender and who might be behind the controls. Playing a female character as a male gets lots of hand outs.
Another thing ya might think about I have heard often, do you want to look at a guys butte all game or a females?

Just some food for thought.
To me its what class I like, range or melee.