Really sick and tired of Bioware-style companions

[octavius]

It makes sense when companions have a background story and their own motivations, and it livens up the game when they make interjections. But it's hard to find the right balance. Fallout 1 and 2's companions were too scetchy, same with BG1. BG2 had a good balance, and the romances were not intrusive.

But if I have to choose between characters that are just stats and characters that are mouthpieces for the devs' political or sexual agendas, then I choose the stats.

Reminds me of how much I disliked Imoen in BG2. "I'm afraid, I'm cold, I feel this, I feel that, I wanna pee..." Whine, whine, whine. I'd never bother rescuing her if the story didn't force me to do so. :D

Same here. And when I do rescue her, she has a habit of being chunked by an undisarmable trap.

 

[Zanzoken]

Wait... Why can't we have the best of both worlds? Wizardry 8 made the foundation of having full character creations that could actually have some level of personality. Its sad nobody has built on this idea.

Yes I think the groundwork is there, just very few have taken advantage of it. Battle Brothers is a good example of a new game that is doing well at it -- your dudes only have brief histories, traits, and a few noncombat events to define them explicitly, but I guarantee after a dozen fights with bandits, orcs, and undead each one feels like he has a genuine personality.

Also I think things that happen in gameplay are nine times out of ten more meaningful than anything a writer can dream up. Stuff like "Harald had broken ribs and was all alone against three Orcs but managed to behead them all and live to fight another day" is just whatever if told to you in a backstory or cutscene -- but when you actually see that shit happen in gameplay and feel the desperation and triumph of it, then it becomes much more real.

 

[Mark Richard]

Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 did NPCs and their dismissal right. Random or story-related NPCs that offer to join you at different parts of the game, and you can just tell em to fuck off, so you never see them again. OR tell em not right now, so they'll just stay there or tell you where to find them if you change your mind. None of this "hello we just met oh you don't want me lemme go to your base you didn't tell me about". NO, I don't want to ever see your face again. At least PoE let you kill em for good so I guess that's a way to get rid of them.

Plus in BG1 the player has a bounty on their head and each companion has their own agenda, some of which conflict. For one of the few times in an RPG I was motivated to be choosy with my company and fill the party with people I could trust.

 

[Reinhardt]

Problem is - you know everything about your future companions and their characters even before game starts. They are one of the selling points. Stretch goals in kickstarter.

 

[Trash]

I remember it being novel for an npc companion to have actual things to say in an rpg. It actually added to the experience. I'm all for companions in these games if they add to it. Where it went wrong is that nowadays you get soap opera antics and an apparant need for the player to be able to fuck each and every one of those characters. Bah.

 

[JarlFrank]

If PST was made today, Fall From Grace being a chaste succubus would end up with the player getting a very involved seduction quest to make her break her vow of chastity just for the player.

 

[Mozg]

I can nitpick given characters but mostly I'd like to see games that try a whole new paradigm where "companions" (even the term is prejudicial) aren't your simulated sitcom friends, you never have long personal conversations, they come and go based on their character's goals and nature, etc.

 

[Sykar]

Icewind Dale companions are the best.
No fuss at all.

Icewind Dale NPC Project...<shudder>

I thought you were joking at first.
But then I quickly search on the web.

WHAT?!
ROMANCE?!
I don't usually swear but...

Please, by all means, continue.

 

[Dorateen]

Fear not, Grimoire is coming.

 

[DemonKing]

...but if you don't have Bioware-style companions is it even possible to have proper romance options (ie gay, transgender, alien/orc/undead etc)?

 

[pippin]

If PST was made today, Fall From Grace being a chaste succubus would end up with the player getting a very involved seduction quest to make her break her vow of chastity just for the player.

And you would have to use Tab to highlight her pussy. Modern gaymers wouldn't find it otherwise.

 

[JarlFrank]

...but if you don't have Bioware-style companions is it even possible to have proper romance options (ie gay, transgender, alien/orc/undead etc)?

Yes just shag people who aren't in your party, problem solved.

 

[Delbaeth]

If PST was made today, Fall From Grace being a chaste succubus would end up with the player getting a very involved seduction quest to make her break her vow of chastity just for the player.

And you would have to use Tab to highlight her pussy. Modern gaymers wouldn't find it otherwise.

"A lady must keep her secrets."

 

[DraQ]

It's not that difficult to write a good and believable companion. First, let them be useful in unique ways, let their personal stories grow steadily during the entire game and have them actually act as human beings upon introduction. People are generally guarded about their baggage and shit. Seriously, it's not complicated at all. Have some burly zwei-hander motherfucker happen upon your character on the open road, let them shake forearms in a tenuous alliance and then have the aforementioned burly kraut slowly open up about some personal shit - if you really have to have that sort of thing. Characters should be unknown quantities upon first meeting them only to become more fleshed out and defined the longer you travel with them. BioWare can't into this, though, just like a lot of other RPG developers. If you incorporate whiny needy tween nonsense in your companions then you've already lost. Nobody wants to hear that shit.

For characters to work properly they'd have to:

• Limit your access to their inventory and character sheet at least until after (and if!) you have earned their trust
• Overrule your commands if for some reason they conflict with their ethos

I'm not sure I've ever seen any RPCs that would fit the bill. The closest would be those in Wizardry 8 (private items, that couldn't be moved out of their personal inventory, unwillingness to visit certain areas, leaving the party and fighting you if you attacked their friends) and in Skyrim (private armor/outfit that couldn't be traded, simple morality system deciding whether the character would be willing to perpetrate criminal acts and what kinds when asked to do so).

BG's approach was half-assed as it allowed you to direct a paladin to slaughter an orphanage, or invite a friendly duo of an eccentric wizard and a halfling with unusual sense of humour, traveling in the same direction as you to the party and immediately stripping them of all their worldly possessions, then leaving them to the wolves because you read in their character sheets that they were evil.

 

[Reinhardt]

ToEE!

 

[sser]

Wait... Why can't we have the best of both worlds? Wizardry 8 made the foundation of having full character creations that could actually have some level of personality. Its sad nobody has built on this idea.

Yes I think the groundwork is there, just very few have taken advantage of it. Battle Brothers is a good example of a new game that is doing well at it -- your dudes only have brief histories, traits, and a few noncombat events to define them explicitly, but I guarantee after a dozen fights with bandits, orcs, and undead each one feels like he has a genuine personality.

Also I think things that happen in gameplay are nine times out of ten more meaningful than anything a writer can dream up. Stuff like "Harald had broken ribs and was all alone against three Orcs but managed to behead them all and live to fight another day" is just whatever if told to you in a backstory or cutscene -- but when you actually see that shit happen in gameplay and feel the desperation and triumph of it, then it becomes much more real.

There's some minor direction in BB to keep backgrounds more or less in line with their motives/personality, but yes, I left it mostly hands off. I really wanted to setup some ways to connect brothers to one another as friends/nemeses, e.g., if a bro is nearly dead but another bro swoops in and kills the enemy that's in his ZoC, in the post-fight the guy might be like hey man, thanks for having my back, or if an archer hits his own guy that guy might be like hey dude I found this arrow in my back and I turn my back to no foe so it must be yours you fucking arse; that sort of thing, but with a continuation of procedural storylines. Unfortunately, time and resources are limited. There's a ton of room to work with. I really did have a vision of a JA2 style medieval merc-simulator, but as far as writing and design both go, only so much can be done in 1 or 2 hour stints sitting in a Starbucks and programming-wise rap obviously had more important things to work on like finetuning the actual game.

 

[pippin]

ToEE!

they steal your shit tho

 

[Zanzoken]

Yes I think the groundwork is there, just very few have taken advantage of it. Battle Brothers is a good example of a new game that is doing well at it -- your dudes only have brief histories, traits, and a few noncombat events to define them explicitly, but I guarantee after a dozen fights with bandits, orcs, and undead each one feels like he has a genuine personality.

Also I think things that happen in gameplay are nine times out of ten more meaningful than anything a writer can dream up. Stuff like "Harald had broken ribs and was all alone against three Orcs but managed to behead them all and live to fight another day" is just whatever if told to you in a backstory or cutscene -- but when you actually see that shit happen in gameplay and feel the desperation and triumph of it, then it becomes much more real.

There's some minor direction in BB to keep backgrounds more or less in line with their motives/personality, but yes, I left it mostly hands off. I really wanted to setup some ways to connect brothers to one another as friends/nemeses, e.g., if a bro is nearly dead but another bro swoops in and kills the enemy that's in his ZoC, in the post-fight the guy might be like hey man, thanks for having my back, or if an archer hits his own guy that guy might be like hey dude I found this arrow in my back and I turn my back to no foe so it must be yours you fucking arse; that sort of thing, but with a continuation of procedural storylines. Unfortunately, time and resources are limited. There's a ton of room to work with. I really did have a vision of a JA2 style medieval merc-simulator, but as far as writing and design both go, only so much can be done in 1 or 2 hour stints sitting in a Starbucks and programming-wise rap obviously had more important things to work on like finetuning the actual game.

Agreed, these little pieces of reactivity over time could add up to a pretty satisfying cast of characters. And again I think it's really important to tie these developments to in-game effects. So in your example where one bro saves another one, maybe the bro who got saved gets a Morale bonus whenever the bro who bailed him out is within X tiles. Or maybe the bro who got shot in the back with an arrow becomes extra wary of archers and gets a bonus to Ranged Defense. Or maybe if he has the Bloodlust trait (forgetting the actual name) he loses his shit and tries to kill the archer bro who shot him. Sky is pretty much the limit with this type of stuff, I guess like you said it just comes down to scripting and what is feasible in a project's scope.