Both very different on how they handle the game. Hell, they bring back Dogmeat just to give something back to the vet. Oh, and if ya haven't notice, they made Dogmeat like a sidekick, hench why they put a great deal that mutt too much.


There no alternative. Pet are nothing more then just animal with simple companion script and not make pet an emphasis like Dogmeat.

Nonsense.

1: It [pets] is not that big of a thing that it should hinder any other aspect of the game Bethesda had an intent to include.

2: By that argument, one could say that the reason there is no dual-wield because that would take away from the resources needed for a player to use a shield.

No it wouldnt, because they would be pleasing everybody. The people who want a pet can take the pet, and the people who dont want a pet get something else so they dont miss out. Theyr not making an option for the option, just two options

Wrong on both:
1. Its may sound simple, but how does one know that it might or might not hinder the Dev? The way the OP wanted, it take alot more time to put in a whole new system into the game. That is why I prefer they just give pet "simple" companion script and not make a great whole deal on the system. Remember, when they add thing into the game, they remove things as well in return.

2. Dual Wield is its own topic. It have nothing to do with pets.


No, ya suggesting if they add pet and no one want it, they get item instead. How about not adding pets at all? It also remove the pointless choice as well. Ya adding more and more resource input if ya suggest something like that.

1. Add in the planning of quests/events/rules to acquiring pets, determining how they survive (must the player feed them, tend their wounds, etc) deciding how they will level with the player, building the mechanics of the world to give the pet some credence (as opposed to just having pets and not having the world react to them in the slightest), and designing the AI packages that a pet would follow, along with commands the player could give the pet. That's a fair amount, and nor is it everything.

2. Yes, one could say that. Your point?



You're really not getting the point. By that, they are still having to spend the resources on pets, and on top of that they are now spending resources on providing an alternative to pets.

But the point is that half the people will want a pet and half wont, so to please everyone they make an alternative to the pet so that the people who dont want one dont miss out.

EDIT: Look at the poll results, 12/19 want a pet, your acting as if they will be wasting resources because no one wants a pet, just because you dont want one.

You are being quite silly. It is so easy to add a pet that there's a good number of mods that do just that. You can have a companion NPC or you can have a mountain lion or a wolf. All the mechanics of it are pretty much already in game. Stop giving the argument that adding an animal companion would be such a mountainous task, it is not.

Me thinks thou dost protest too much!

I've already stated earlier in this thread that a basic animal companion that uses only the AI packages that already exist in the game (basically, a stock companion that just happens to be an animal) wouldn't ruffle my feathers too much.

It's when you start getting posts talking about animal skill trees and growing that pet alongside you with multiple options that I get wary.

Ya missing the point, again. Ya adding an option that is not even there in the first place, and yet ya add another option just put it with the other option taht isn't there to begin with.

The way ya wanted, it is a big waste of resource putting in that kind of system. Rather, a common companion script on pet is just enough. No whole unnecessary system needed.


Ya do realize those mods are not as easy to make as one say. Nor that mod did not interfere with the Dev work themselves.

The way OP wanted, he want a whole new system just for pet, hench the whole argument take place.

It would prob just be like the one in F3. It followes you bout everywhere, finds stuff for you, the only really responsibility you have is keeping it alive.

Like I mention before, they made that mutt a great deal just because the name "Dogmeat". They made it into the Lone Wanderer sidekick.

On that I can agree. I don't even want a quest, I just want the choice of walking into the pet store or walking past it.

I didnt mean it like that, i was thinking a kind of WoW type thing were you choose a class to get the pet, but other calsses cant get it. But now i take that back, it would be much simpler just having a F3 pet which follows you about and you only have to give it food/potions etc to keep it alive

Meh, I'm going with the "no" crowd on this one, at least in as far as the particular idea I think is being expressed here. I haven't much cared for the companions, pets or what have you that already exist in Bethesda games. Pets would just be another thing getting in the way when I try to shoot something, right next to the stupid DB murderer, mage apprentice and adoring fan. And then If I shot it by accident enough times, I'd wind up having to kill it anyway.

I'd go with a stay at home pet, perhaps, something to liven up the house we'll undoubtedly be able to buy in the next game. But please, no more irritatingly retarded followers. In fact I'd be happy if the next game didn't even have escort quests, TES NPC's are rediculously suicidal. It's like they're saying, "neener, neener, neener! You can't save me!" as they gleefully jump in front of your sword strokes.

True the DB, mage and adoring fan sidekicks were a pain, but how would an animal up to your knees get in the way of your shot, unless you got rubbish aim.

I would only say "yes" to this for the sole fact that I miss my pet scrib... poor Clifford Rodham Eisenhower III...

The wolves and lions in oblivion had that lunging thing they did, I've shot them out of the air at eye level before. And I don't usually take the time to go for headshots in oblivon because bodies are easier targets and it doesn't matter where your arrow hits them anyway, so I've killed bandits in the leg or belly more often than not.

Well they could make an option to turn the lunge ability off on your pet

They'd have to have an option to also turn off suicidal tendencies like ratting me out to the badguys. I played mostly stealth characters in Oblivion and I hated when my DB companion in stealth mode would just run into the middle of a group of bandits, blowing our cover AND jumping in front of all of my arrows. This also happened with that stupid Fighters guild kid which I was supposed to be protecting. Still gonna have to go with no for the companions, furry or otherwise.

Well if i was playing a stealth character i wouldnt get a pet either, im talking about them fighting alongside you not sneaking about, cos that would be awful if you were invisible and they werent.

I was just playing Oblivion, I was in an ayleid ruin with a fellow knight of the 9, I ahd not been spotted by the passing dread zombie when the my idiotic companion chased after the zombie. Now that i see the stupidity of the AI, they would either need to improve it for the pets, or just forget about the pets concept. Just make it an official plugin, so the people who do want a pet can buy the plug in, whilst the people who dont want an annoying dog following them dont have to buy the plug in.
I rest my case. B)

Simple, just have different modes for the pets/companions.

Agressive-Attacks anything on sight.

Defensive-Attacks anything that attacks you or your pet/companion in the first place.

Passive-Does not attack.

I rest MY case

i think it bethesda does it right, animals would be a very interesting addition. but i don't think everyone should be allowed to get one.

I want pets! ... I always wanted to have the option of a pet in the game. Knowing me though, I wouldn't have it follow me around, I would just leave it in my house like an actual pet not a companion ... But about the arguement about whether the pet takes resources away from the game ... If there are already companions in the game, It's just one more creature/npc in the game, as it can use the same scripting etc. And if your even against that ... then it can be left out and be made a mod. I bet that if pets aren't in the game, then there will be a mod containing them ready for download very soon after release.

Exactly! I dont think it would be a very hard thing to make plus the resources wouldnt be wasteful because alot of people would use it as well. If beth does this right it could turn out very good.