Only one character available for local co-op?

[biddyearlyman]

Is it just me boing an idiot, or does the local co-op option only let you play one totally nondescript character and that's it? Kinda weak if that's the case.

[Mr.Nintendo]

Yes, only one character is available for coop

[biddyearlyman]

That's pretty weak, anyone know why?

[Darqfalls]

Because that character has co-op specific abilities. The active lets you revive the first player, the passive makes you much stronger while the first player is dead.

[biddyearlyman]

Again, not a huge perk when compared to choice. I dunno about the rest of the world, but I remember a day when co-op games didn't have these kinds of aspects. It makes the second player more of a sidekick than a partner. This isn't the only one either, I mistakenly bought that piece of ♥♥♥♥ 'The Baconing' for local co-op and the same thing, absolutely no interaction available for the second player. Kinda disappointing. Even castle crashers had "some" semblance of choice, and it's a repetitive POS. That hunk of ♥♥♥♥ that was the Gauntlet reboot even had the option of playing more than one character for a local co-op. Bad form making the second player in local a convenient buff rather than an independent character. Am I really the only one who feels this way?

[Del_Duio]

Just tried co-op with my daughter the other day. I played the cultist. I was having a really hard time getting him to fire his gun all the time. Is there some sort of cooldown on his dart gun (or whatever it is)? It only seemed to work all of the time when he was standing completely still.

The ghost / rez mechanic was kind of cool though.

[[FAUCᴇT] Psychopath]

Originally posted by biddyearlyman:

That's pretty weak, anyone know why?

Cultist is designed to be a sidekick, not a standalone character.

It's why his two items exist to act as padding for the first player: instant revive for your partner and a passive stat bonus that offsets the passive health bonus that enemies receive in co-op.

It's more of an argument about the flexibility that unanimous character choice permits than anything else. An example being Pilot + Marine, allowing for the Pilot character to reap a lot more ammo benefit from Marine's active item than the Marine could on his own. While it may seem insignificant, it surely had posed a problem during internal testing which would explain why the second player is relegated to a character specifically designed to be a sidekick.

[biddyearlyman]

Originally posted by FAUCeT Psychopath:

Originally posted by biddyearlyman:

That's pretty weak, anyone know why?

Cultist is designed to be a sidekick, not a standalone character.

It's why his two items exist to act as padding for the first player: instant revive for your partner and a passive stat bonus that offsets the passive health bonus that enemies receive in co-op.

It's more of an argument about the flexibility that unanimous character choice permits than anything else. An example being Pilot + Marine, allowing for the Pilot character to reap a lot more ammo benefit from Marine's active item than the Marine could on his own. While it may seem insignificant, it surely had posed a problem during internal testing which would explain why the second player is relegated to a character specifically designed to be a sidekick.

That I can understand, but I guess I just yearn for the good old days when local co-op was local co-op (notwithstanding such games as toejam & earl, sonic e.g.). I get that the game is meant more or less to be one-player, but it seems to lose its flavor when that choice is taken away. there are very few true local co-op games being produced these days and it just makes me feel old I guess. That and I'll have to share first player with my wife since she wanted to be the convict ;) Surprised someone actually piped in with solid info though, tip of the hat to devs/testers combming the boards.