Look, my comments point wasn't that really... so stop complaining about it.

This would probably be just another headache of *scruffy is unconscious because he's retarded. So, definite no from me.

I'm not voting (for now at least) since they would be nice to have but I don't want Bethesda to focus on pets more then the other parts of the game. An other option might have been nice.

Adoring Fan IS my pet.

also, i just decided to keep the everscamp staff, so now (incuding adoring fan) i have 5 pets!

yes most definately, you can get pets in the tribunal expansion for morrowind, but the die way to easy, it would be cool to have pets like the one in fable 2.

I WANT MY PACK RAT BACK

He went SQUEEK!!

There not wasted resources!! If people are going to use them in a game then they are not wasted because they serve a purpose. If less than say half the people who play TES didnt use them THEN it would be a waste of resources.

I didnt mean that, but somebody said there wouldnt be much point in it unless it was as strong as dogmeat, so i was just saying you could make it as strong as dogmeat. However i still think it should only be available to 1 class so as you said, it doesnt turn into the sidekick type thing which just doesnt suit TES.

"Just because other game did it doesnt mean tes SHOULD do it too." Thats not what he means he means that because other games did it means that TES COULD do it. Especially since it worked in F3 which was made by beth, and is similar to TES in some way.

I will try to keep my answer on a civilized level:
OMGZORS YEEEEEEEEES!
Um... I mean... that would be nice. Especially if I was able to have a wolf as pet. No no, not those stupid wannabe-wolves from Oblivion, but one that would actually deserve the honorable title of "wolf". Otherwise I guess just a dog would be nice...
*sob*... poor old Dogmeat...

Although it is the point ya consider that just because Game A did, so should Game B, which that itself is a big no-no.


Then it would be wasted for those who did not use the pets ingame. The number of would even use such feature is very vague, but I rather not see it goes down to adding things just to attract other players or its "cool".


And making it as strong as that mutt is as to making it like a unofficial sidekick and much emphasis of resource just to do that. Same goes with just making for one class people keep saying. There is no true classes and just making one class have special treatment for just for adding pets is already unbalance to the other classes and a waste of resource.

But its more that such comment is very weak when it hold on in to the discussion when adding things into the game. Very flawed.

Yet again not because game A SHOULD but that game A COULD. Hes not saying that they should just because another game did, but because another game did it similar to TES by the same ppl and it worked well shows that if it was implemented it would most likely work.

Well im afraid games arent made to suit the needs of 100% of the public, but the majority of ppl. I never used the mercantile skill in any of my characters, and they could easilly have done without it by just making prices based on disposition. For me, it was a waste of resources but im sure most ppl used it...

Dogmeat wasnt really that strong, i mean he was stronger than your average dog but he did die occasionally. And making him stronger is not making him an unofficial sidekick. It is not a waste of resources!! I do think they should make it into special classes though instead of just choosing your own skills, so that you can add personalised things to each class, but if they didnt do this i that they should probably just make the pets thing really hard to get, so it doesnt become an "everyones got a dog" type of thing.

Well the point still stands that if another game could it is possible for TES.

But then again, it same goes as they COULD add into the game because the other game did it. Fable is not that similar to the TES, nor how the gameplays goes. Comparing game just to adding things into the game is very flawed.


Except ya comparing something that is a huge into the game (skill) to something that is easily not exist at all (pets). Oh, and mercantile skill, in Morrowind and Daggerfall, was an interesting skill to use to buy things cheap and sell things at a higher price. The resource for pet could be use to enhance the mercantile skill, because major or no, everyone uses that skill.


Then again, ya putting much emphasis just to add pets and a class just for that does not need to exist in the TES series in the first place. If pets are going to be added, http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Tribunal:Special_Creatures#Pets.

But then again, TES isn't like any other game. I do not like seeing the addition of worthless gimmick because other game did it.

Fables not that similar to TES, i agree with that but f3 is. Plus there both made by beth which shows that beth are capable of doing it well.

Well the point is they didnt need it, they could have done without out it but they added BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD USE IT. If you never put resources into adding in extra features to games your are just going to end up getting the same generic RPGs like OB.

Like I said it does not need to exist but if it did exist, it would improve the game therefore it wouldnt be wasting resources. Im sorry, but those pets are far too boring, they would barely make a difference.

TES and F3 are very similar. Have you played it?

Fallout is Fallout and TES is TES. Both involving different gameplay and different setting. And Fallout isn't really with Beth in the past.


And adding thing thinking people would use it is hopeless as to expect they would use it. The second comment on how it would be like Oblivion, very false. The resource could be use to resurrect past feature that did not exist from that abomination they called Oblivion (more skills, item slots, weapons, missing spells, actually lore following, actual setting of the next TES, actual traveling system) while at the same time, enhancing current feature (current skills, quest, guilds, cities, AI, guards for gosh sake, etc).


They do not require anything else but just companion script as packrats and what not. Pet are not really fighting creature to begin with, nor that big of a deal in TES.

I do not need to play to know that they are similar, or the fact I keep hearing the term "Oblivion with Guns" when the game was release. Its more that ya comparing a post apocalyptic shooting RPG with a Sword and Magic RPG, very different indeed.

Well the Fallout 3 with dogmeat is by beth and thats the one im talking about.

Look at the poll^^ Clearly alot of ppl want pets.

Im not suggesting that we make it like fable were your dog plays half the game, i just think it would be alot more interesting if they added in a quest or 2 about it, and some nice touches.

When you put it that way they sound different, but if you play it youll be surprised how very similar and very comparable(if thats a word lol) they actually are.

Dogmeat also exist in the first one as a companion and second one as an easter egg. The one in Fallout 3 is more or less just a resurrection for "vets" of the past and "trying" to put stuff that of the past.


The poll does not really represent the idea of pets well. Some people might want it just for pets as in pets and not savage beast of killing machine and other want the latter and some want it for packrats. There alot of reason, but its more like the link I presented earlier, just add a compaion script and that all, no other addition.


But then again, not to a point where it would take up alot of resource, like a "quest for pet" or what not. They are just simple tiny addition, no other things needed.


I am looking at a more different approach, as in how they deal with the setting and gameplay. Fallout deals with using firearms and technology for their game. TES deals with weapons of the old and magics, not to mention both are at different setting and how they deal with the Hero of the game.

Good god, I bet if they put in freaking pets of nearly any style the majority of people would use them at least once. Qwased asep you are completly bull-headed in this thread and are almost being rediculous. I understand your point and I respect it but your arguments are not 100% perfect either so chill. The essence of tes is freewill, choices, diversity, and adventure, if I want a pet to follow me or anything as most people I am willing to bet would at some point let them spend an extra month adding it.

Yes but something like, My woodelf used his unity with nature to tame a fox. Then the fox could help you find items, boost your stealth skills and act as a watch dog.

Id love a pet puppy or a kitty following me around. But I DONT want a Dogmeat that runs stright into combat and jumps in front of my sword/gun and gets him self killed. Pets should behave exactly like they do in Fable 2, back off, growl, bark, meow, squeek, play dead, warn, find treasure, fetch stick. If not then whats the point.

Exactly, if they improved the AI it could work very well. Maybe dont add all the interaction type things like in fable II, i do agree that the pet shouldnt be that big a part of the game, as it is unfair because some people still dont want it, but it would definetly be worth putting in if they did it right.

Yes, it would be cool. Having a companion to RP with, BUT I don't think it should be implemented. It's like dragons. Yes, they are cool, but it doesn't work in the TES universe, plus the lore "prevents" it.
It works in Fable, because Fable is high-fantasy game without such a big amount of serious lore and history.
It works in Fallout for the simple reason they spent a lot of time on creating Dogmeat and it added a strong emotion to the game (the only one you could trust in a rotten world).

Adding pets to TES would just feel the way it is "Well, they WANTED to add a pet." Not having it part of the atmosphere.

Yes i think that pets should be allowed for all classes , but only a few classes like elves could use them as a warrior pet ;p .

I'll say what I say to almost everything in this forum. If it's done correctly, it could work. If you're not going to spend the time thinking it through, balancing the concept, and developing the idea, forget it. I feel like this could be a terrible thing if done poorly, but it has potential to be cool.

I don't see how pets don't fit into the TES universe. I saw plenty of NPCs with them in Oblivion and I believe a couple in morrowind. In fact in the mournhold expansion you could buy pets, so... I personally think that horses count as pets and are in Oblivion, although mounted combat would have made them so much more worth it. My belief in pets as far as the TES series is concerned is to have them, but with little inpact on gameplay, more for the horse of course lol And make them unkillable, just knockout-able, because ya a dog and/or a horse is nice companion, but they will die, especially against higher level enemies and it just gets anoying.

And how exactly does the lore prevent pets being introduced in TES? And why would it not work?

i kinda just skimmed through peoples writings, but i would def. say have pets. It doesnt have to be as good as the dog in Fable 2 (which by the way with DLC you can get back, and with more DLC you can change it to a husky or dalmation or blood hound, for those who dont know that lol) but if it were similar to the pets from mournhold, or fallout 3, then it would be all good. Also, the AI will be better obviously so hopefully the pets have some sort of personality to em.