I think you're missing the whole 3D-transition concept. You're essentially saying that Super Mario 64 isn't the same as Super Mario Bros, and thus it must suck?
Yes, of course Golden Axe was great as a co-op game. I won it many many times, both solo and with a pal. That's not what I was getting at. It was a straight-forward hack and slash, with rideable beasts -- yes, the original was co-op, but that's not what I'm after.
The characters, and harsh world of Golden Axe were very cool, and mostly this game seems to cover that pretty well. Its cool that you liked the co-op... but that wasn't all that Golden Axe was. There were LOTS of co-op arcade games by that time, and Golden Axe was not revolutionary in this regard, like Double Dragon was. Golden Axe was really the first game that really captured that "Conan the Cimmerian" feel, in a video game, in my opinion. That's what I'm looking forward to.
I liked Viking, and I even enjoyed the recent Conan hack and slash some, despite the cruddy boss fights (the music in that game was awesome). If this game captures the "barbarian" atmosphere, like games like "Rune" captured the Viking atmosphere, I will be pretty happy. Games like Rune, God of War, Enclave, etc., which really capture that "savage" feel in an action are really enjoyable, IMO.
Golden Axe had that going for it, and I hope the new one has the same. Co-op was not the defining feature of the original, from my point-of-view.
