About Fallout 4's companion system

therealyesman

therealyesman

commie
They did that right. I know it's strange that 'someone hated that' because you took a drug, but it's nice to know whenever your companion approves of something, there wasn't much of that in Fallout New Vegas, besides Boone telling you to not mess with the NCR.

You know what the funny thing is?

Even though the companion system is miles ahead of Fallout New Vegas, the companions in New Vegas are much better and detailed. I mean, BETHESDA, YOU COULD'VE DONE ONE THING RIGHT, but they didn't. Let's talk Companions.

The first one you meet is Dogmeat. He is the best of them all. I don't have anything negative to say about him, besides being a dick in sneak mode, but a decent distraction.

The second one is Codsworth. (after you rescue the helpless villagers that is Gravy Boy), he is a decent companion, but WHY in all gods name does he dislike/like stuff? HE IS A ROBOT, not a person, so don't make him like stuff... he likes it no matter what, he is a god damn robot.

The third one is Gravy Boy... oh boy that fucking gnome is Fallout 4 in a nutshell: 1. Help a settlement 2. build a few defenses 3. repeat for grinding purposes only

Fourth we have Piper. Oh is she the greatest cliche of all. She is taken straight from a teenage book about a boy who plays video games that finds a woman... great. She is a companion that I just don't wanna be with.

Fifth we have Paladin Danse. Fuck off Soldier Boy and your open to all Brotherhood of Steel, that should be in a bunker feeling all powerful because of power armor.

Sixth we have Deacon. I did not use him, because the Railroad is one big radiant quest.

Seventh is Cait: ''I am a former raider, I hate it when you help people, but plz don't kill friendly people''

Eight we have Valentine. Now he is the only character with somewhat of a nice story and one of the bearable. I like Valentine. (I forgot about him which is why he is eight.)

Then we have Strong. I am fascinated by Super Mutants, I hate what they did with them, but I love Super Muties. He is just one big irritating arsehole that dislikes everything. He likes it when you do something good, and likes it when you do something good. Make up your mind, Strong!

Then we have.... ehm... X6. Who. Fucking. Cares.

And... Hancock. So i'm the mayor of the second biggest town (there is only two towns in this game), and when I get dismissed from my adventure, i'm willing to be in one of SS' settlements, rather than return and rule. Also my backstory is shit.

...and finally MacCready. Ehm... besides being in Fallout 3... i don't get it. Also his son has a weird disease, so I'm just going to run around and do radiant quests for.... (Sarcastic) Helpless villagers.


... I can do the same thing for Fallout New Vegas characters, but they are interesting and has a purpose. Also they can all be murdered.
 
therealyesman said:
I'm not saying that the companion's likes and dislikes are good, I'm saying that it has potiental. One of the things that really should stay in Fallout: New Vegas: Kentucky
Click to expand...
I don't think so nor do I think Bethesda designed something new here. Arcanum nailed companion design best. Why and why fallout 4 companions are horseshit? They will join you no matter who your character are (a generic white parent really) and who they are. Why would Cait join the saint one and Piper with murderer? Answer without question.
@JO'Geran c'mere.
 
0wing said:
I don't think so nor do I think Bethesda designed something new here. Arcanum nailed companion design best.
@JO'Geran c'mere.
Click to expand...
No need to squeak and go defensive everytime something remotely positive is said about Bethesda. I hated Fallout 4, AND the companions, but the system was decent. I do not know Arcanum, so I don't know if they had the same system.
 
therealyesman said:
No need to squeak and go defensive everytime something remotely positive is said about Bethesda. I hated Fallout 4, AND the companions, but the system was decent. I do not know Arcanum, so I don't know if they had the same system.
Click to expand...
Again, your OP makes no sense regarding Fallout 4 companions' personalities, since they don't interact and correlate with the player before becoming the actual companions. A decent system, again, excludes the jack of all trades horseshit, which farcryout 4 fails to do so.
Companions don't have much to say to you nor do their comments on things do change something. Completed the game sided with the Instupiditude? Piper still will be okay with you even if her dialog says otherwise.
 
0wing said:
Again, your OP makes no sense regarding Fallout 4 companions' personalities, since they don't interact and correlate with the player before becoming the actual companions. A decent system, again, excludes the jack of all trades horseshit, which farcryout 4 fails to do so.
Click to expand...
Read the fucking post again. I DID NOT LIKE THE COMPANION'S PERSONALITIES WHAT SO FUCKING EVER.
 
therealyesman said:
Read the fucking post again. I DID NOT LIKE THE COMPANION'S PERSONALITIES WHAT SO FUCKING EVER.
Click to expand...
It's not like/dislike question, it's just doesn't have a point regarding companion, fucking, system.

Besides, it's not bethesda's system. It's still Fallout New Vegas but reinvented to be grind-friendly.

F4 is dogshit and every single positive comment is a simple bait.
 
My biggest issue with the Companions is how shit the actual system was.

For one, I can only have one at any given time. This means I can't have Dogmeat and another, I just have Dogmeat, which is rather backwards from the previous games.

The like/dislike system however could have been good, if it was implemented into their character. Why would Piper like it if I pick a lock?
But it makes sense for Arcade to be more trusting when I go inside a shop full of gamma weapons.

I prefer the New Vegas System.
 
Well yeah, it was alright. But again, from an AAA company and the IP "alright" is not what we should be happy for, that's how we ended with Fallout 4
Everyone liked being nice but Strong and Cait Mk1, reverse for dislikes.
It should have been a VERY contextual thing, to really make you work for it and have a more natural feel.
The only companion i liked was Curie, and that's becouse her voice in the spanish location is cute.
As Millim said, having your bandwagon of companions is something that made Fo1/Fo2 and cRPGs in general very personal. Understandably they were cut down to two in Fo3/NV, but cutting it down to one, bah.
 
The system is actually pretty good I just witch the emitional sence and what not didn't come down to 4 different dialogue choise that all pretty much let to the same thing. If this sort of thing was built into NV or FO3 and fixed (More accurate things get their likes uo and down) It would be kinda cool. I wish it was't as genric as affinty though like wtf is that. All the characters just want to have sex after a certain point i don't get it. For me it was something too complex introduced too simply
 
therealyesman said:
They did that right. I know it's strange that 'someone hated that' because you took a drug, but it's nice to know whenever your companion approves of something, there wasn't much of that in Fallout New Vegas, besides Boone telling you to not mess with the NCR.
Click to expand...

I disagree. They didn't do it right, doing it right would mean the companions themselves would tell you what they thought of your actions instead of an info box telling you.

Besides why would they care about picking locks or being a dick to someone? Have them react to actual meaningful actions like in New Vegas, like if you start siding towards the Legion Cass will speak up about it.

therealyesman said:
And... Hancock. So i'm the mayor of the second biggest town (there is only two towns in this game), and when I get dismissed from my adventure, i'm willing to be in one of SS' settlements, rather than return and rule. Also my backstory is shit.
Click to expand...

Even if you fuck him over and kill his bodyguard for Bobbi, agree to hunt down Bobbi and kill her,but then let her go and tell him straight up you let her go and you're not going to repay the debt, he still forgives you and joins you.

Also radiation drug.

therealyesman said:
...and finally MacCready. Ehm... besides being in Fallout 3... i don't get it. Also his son has a weird disease, so I'm just going to run around and do radiant quests for.... (Sarcastic) Helpless villagers.
Click to expand...

MacCready gives the cure for his seriously sick son to a caravan to deliver rather than doing it himself and actually seeing if his son is ok. That and leaving him to begin with. Did he and Princess become lifelong pals and he left his son with her or something? If I had a child and they were seriously ill I wouldn't leave them hundreds of miles away.

He is the only companion to mention the Sole Survivor's spouse during his romance (I think). Not that the prick/bitch cares though.
 
0wing said:
@JO'Geran c'mere.
Click to expand...
You rang?
therealyesman said:
do not know Arcanum, so I don't know if they had the same system.
Click to expand...
I think what 0wing was referencing specifically was the type of character you need to be to get companions to join with you

Unlike modern games, where companions will pretty much join with the player at a fixed point(For example, Cait will happily start travelling with you as soon as you reach combat zone), Arcanum companions often had very specific conditions on how to get them on side.

For example, an evil character would struggle to recruit the aid of a good character, or a character who likes magic wouldn't be able to recruit a character who likes technology, or a straight-up low charisma character would generally just struggle getting companions.

Also, there were various points in the game where certain companions would comment there opinions, much like with FO4, but instead of them just saying it in passing comment, you could often discuss it with them, and explain to them why they are wrong.
 
I remember how I tried to press my character into form just to get Sebastian.

Always thought his picture was awesome.
sebastian_5.png
 
Actually NV's companion system was far better tbh. Rather than simple good/bad actions such as do drugs/give back a deathclaw egg NV's companions would react to things you do that are for or against their core beliefs. Prime example is doing the Helios quest with arcade in your party. Plus I don't like being told when my companion likes/dislikes an action by an on screen prompt. I'd prefer they tell me themselves. Which NV did. See arcade confronting you when you Peter ceasars camp or blow up Helios. Or veronica confronting you when you blow up the BOS. Or Boone confronting you if you made him kill an innocent man/woman. Imagine all of these great emotional moments were replaced with a simple so-and-so hated that and then they attacked you? The moment and character are ruined.
 
You picked 30 Locks, now you can pick the Lock to her Pants.

The new systemt is garbage, like most things in Fallout 4, you don't really get much control or influence in how they develop and most of their quests are less involved than Raul's. Hell Nick Valentine's quest is literally just indulging a deluded robot into carry out revenge for a man that died 200 years prior on an old man who barely has anything, and this is treated not only as a good thing but as the ONLY thing you can do in the quest.
 
F4 system is shit it's probably the most half assed binary systems I have ever seen it's literally a handholding system. Here's a comparison.

NV companion: "your(courier) actions remind me of actions I have seen/done in the past. I am struggling to find out how I feel about said actions,and would like to have a intellectual/personal discussion with you".

F4 companion:" oh my god babe the way you work that lockpick, while screaming SHAWN!!! gets me sooo wet. How about you help my "settlement" by shoving your "laser musket" where it belongs daddy".
 
R.Graves said:
Actually NV's companion system was far better tbh. Rather than simple good/bad actions such as do drugs/give back a deathclaw egg NV's companions would react to things you do that are for or against their core beliefs. Prime example is doing the Helios quest with arcade in your party. Plus I don't like being told when my companion likes/dislikes an action by an on screen prompt. I'd prefer they tell me themselves. Which NV did. See arcade confronting you when you Peter ceasars camp or blow up Helios. Or veronica confronting you when you blow up the BOS. Or Boone confronting you if you made him kill an innocent man/woman. Imagine all of these great emotional moments were replaced with a simple so-and-so hated that and then they attacked you? The moment and character are ruined.
Click to expand...
Yep. Because NV is an RPG, not a shallow relationship simulator :)
 
F4's system was just plain bad. Like many pointed out, the system itself was problematic, simplistic and far too easy to exploit. Even when the player in New Vegas are made to grind for approval, the actions that generate approval tend to be significant actions that reflect the character traits of each companion (i.e Boone appreciating attempts to rescue hostages from the Legion, freeing slaves etc.).

4's tended to be more simplistic and downright nonsensical (somehow Cait falls in love with you every time you take drugs/Piper becomes drawn to a character who picks locks) plus it was terribly easy to exploit (once you figure out how to reset the timing for approval gain to constantly loop approval gain).

JO'Geran said:
the type of character you need to be to get companions to join with you

Unlike modern games, where companions will pretty much join with the player at a fixed point(For example, Cait will happily start travelling with you as soon as you reach combat zone), Arcanum companions often had very specific conditions on how to get them on side.
Click to expand...
I miss the days when the personality of a companion can get in the way of recruitment, it made for a more interesting experience when you have to pick characters based on your reputation and alignment. One thing I also miss from older RPGs (like Baldur's Gate & Arcanum) is how companions can oppose to the presence of certain companions to the point where they may even attempt to kill each other (for instance, Minsc and Edwin).
 
CerberusGate said:
I miss the days when the personality of a companion can get in the way of recruitment, it made for a more interesting experience when you have to pick characters based on your reputation and alignment.
Click to expand...

It's so no players miss out regardless of what side they've picked, just like all the romances are bisexual so they don't miss out whether male or female. Or laziness. I'm inclined to think both actually, though more of the former in this case.

Wouldn't it be more interesting if Piper was suspicious of you when you first meet and doesn't instantly believe you're from a Vault and Pre-War? Or if you could work for the Gunners MacCready would be suspicious of you and not follow you without earning some trust (and even after that you could still lose it, permanently).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top