I want ride able pets, like a bear or huger siberian-esque tiger. I would want there to be some sort of command system like Necool suggested. That would be an easy feature to implement.

I also saw that someone said there were no domesticated animals in TES series, what about all the huskies in Oblivion, not to mention the sub breeds of khajitt?

Anyway people don't have to use them, but I think having to buy them as DLC would be terrible.

It could be nice if they implemented it correctly, which if they did it I think they would. I am not talking outrageous pets, but things like some NPCs had in the previous games/Oblivion. Pets like dogs, maybe a type of cat, rat, imp for mages.

I don't really like the idea, no particular reason it just doesn't seem to fit.

Only Smaller animal, like mudcrabs or cliff racers. I dont want someone running with a dragon

Why are there three yes's and one no? Does that make any sense at all?

Anyways, I'd so no, but not absolutely no. I don't really care that much.

You dont need any more nos. A no is a no, there is no negotiation. But the other yes's are meeting people halfway.

Pets definitely about lowest on my priority list, but can you imagine a brown bear in daedric armor???

I understand they need to fix alot of things from OB first but i dont see why not

Again, even more options for an option. Very wasteful of resources. Sure this one isn't very much, but still goes to show how ridiculous it is. You said most people on the forum agree with you. Unfortunately for you, the forumers are not the only ones Bethesda listens to. I'd be okay with animal companions, but trying to take a Fable gimmick just for kicks would seem very... pointless.

How is it ridiculous? If that is the case then you could say that unarmed is a waste of an option because nobody uses it, that block is wasteful cos nobody uses it. It doesnt matter, as long as a reasonable amount of people use it, and by the poll you can see that alot of people would, then its not a waste. You cant have everything in the game made for you, because the game isnt made specially for you, its made for millions of people, so the easiest way is too have an option. Your the one thats being ridiculous.

Thats why the pets thing, should be a mod/plugin, that way everybodys happy, and Beth can concentrate on making TES V good first. Like people have said, the pets wont be the centre of the game, but it should be avaible to those who want it.

My sentiments exactly. If you want a pet, get a mod. Let Bethesda actually work on what matters. Though I wouldn't mind return of the pack rat. How I miss my dear ol' Packie...

Getting tired of hearing "It worked well in Fable 2". I only read the first page, and from what I gathered, pets that you have to feed and play with, I would rather not have. An animal that simply follows me around and helps me fight or serves as a pack mule, sure.

Only if they act like companions.
NO FEEDING!

I voted "Yes to certain classes". I love playing pet classes in other games. The ES series suffers from a lack of differentiation between classes since everyone can max every stat. It would be nice to have a few things that make a class unique, like pets.

However, there would have to be a way to resurrect the pet, probably through some type of ability that can be used during combat. Skills/abilities that determine how well a pet is trained (meaning how much help it provides during combat) would be great.

It does matter! If more than half the people use it then it would be worth putting in a game. You are forgetting that other people want it just because you dont like the idea. I will admit that beth need to get rid of leveling enemies and other major issues first but they are not limited to changing a few things each game.

You have to keep in mind that we on the forums make up less than 1% of their customers and fans. Also, pets seriously don't add anything to the game a simple companion would not.

I think they add a fair bit for such little input. Like someone else said earlier beth need to focus on features that define classes from each other, so this would be good for a hunter like class.

The basic idea of having a creature following you around and helping you in battle has already been implemented though in the form of the command creature spell. If that idea needs to be expanded on further, there's a construction set for a reason. If you have it for the xbox, just remember that TES was originally made for the PC. :blink:

Read the rest of it, no ones said that in about 2 pages. I take back what i said bout it worked in fable II cos they are different games, but it worked in fallout 3 and it was made by beth as well, so that proves that beth can do it very well. SPOILERS Thats why in fallout 3 you didnt start out with your dog, it was optional and it worked! You didnt get anyone moaning "You wasted resources on it you shouldnt have made it because I didnt want it".

Dogmeat was an easter egg, there wasn't anything there that was special except maybe sending him off to fetch ammo. Otherwise he was a generic companion.

And like I said before, "Dogmeat" tend to be the unofficial sidekick of the hero of the Fallout Series, hench why they make a great deal about that mutt there. Its not the case for TES. Its all about you, not the companions that follow ya around. A simple companion script is more then enough for pet.

sparky!!! mojo!! etc ect i wanna pet khajiit that doesnt get along with my pet argonian anyone agree???

I couldn't have been bothered reading the whole thread, so pardon me if this has already been said (I doubt it has though).

I think pets are a good idea. But I also strongly beleive they should be in the Ultima Online fashion. Where pets really are just summoned creatures that don't require magic. They require a taming skill. So for the theif or ranger type player. Summoning Daedroths and Skeletal Knights makes you look like some kind of Necromancer. Whereas going out, chasing down animals, beating one into submission, taming it and then depending on the animal, feeding it so that it is happy with you, well that nice long ToDo list not only makes you look like a ranger/hunter, it adds depth to the game that was lost after Daggerfall.

Actually, UO had lots of features I wished were in Morrowind. And lots more after that, hell, I don't think I've ever played a game with a learning curve that big. The amount of ideas one could get from it are astronomical. BUT, with the steady downfall of complexity in TES I don't see much depth being added. Unless Beth risks bringing their games back to a higher level of depth.

So your pro slavery then???? Do you live in a state that's directly below missouri?