So, I got Strong yesterday, and we're doing one of the Cabot missions where we get the serum from the Creamery. Anyway, after killing the raiders, I start looting the place, and ended up picking the lock to a container. Then he says he doesn't like that.

I'm like, I don't care if you like it or not. Shut the he11 up.

Which made me think really hard about the mechanic in Fallout 4 to get your companions' perks. Is that really the way to do it? By only doing things they like, and not doing things they don't? Or should it instead be something like doing a special mission or two for them that helps them in some way?

My preference is for the later, so I can play the game the way I want, without worrying about what they like or not.

That's my opinion. What do you think?

It's both. You do enough things they like which opens up a specific quest for each companion.

They build affection simply by spending time with you as companion.

and this is major way of increasing affection in any companion.



You can pick as many lock as you want in front of strong.. but the fact is he still gains more affection simply by traveling with you and eventually will end up idolizing you. (Some companions need to finish certain quests before this happens)


Only exception to this is if you travel with good karma companions and massacre innocent people.

So, it sounds like just spending time with them will outweigh the locks that I pick? If so, then I'm cool with that.

Also, I think that makes sense that if you're with a "good" companion, slaughtering a village may cause them to feel a slight sense of unease

Yeah, I can see what they were going for but I don't like the implementation.

Companions telling me what they like/don't like in real time incentivizes me to change my gameplay or do things I wouldn't normally do just to up their affinity. I've reloaded conversations, etc to get the "liked" "loved" message or to eliminate a "disliked" "hated" message and I hate myself and what the game is manipulating me to do every time it happens. Not so much because I don't think a companion should influence my behavior, but because it happens so often.

Also, rewarding the perks at the end of the relationship building incentivizes players to use companions simply for their perks, which basically wastes the relationship building. Rewarding the perks up front would eliminate that issue; or maybe awarding them at 250, but to make the relationship building worthwhile to us as players we should be doing it because we like that character, not because we want the perk that companion offers.

Edit:

Exactly. A good character won't like it if you kill an innocent. That's appropriate, but like, yesterday, I killed a known synth even though we weren't in combat anymore. Danse "hated" that. I facepalmed. It's a synth you big dummy!

I thought Piper was severely starting to hate me after going 50 levels with her and being a not exactly "nice" guy, but I liked having her around anyway. Eventually she did end up falling in love with me and the romance options appeared. I'm guessing just the fact I had her around so much outweighed the fact I'm a monster to her affinity, lol.

Maybe consider playing the way you want and rolling with a companion that's down with that? There's a word for people that change their behavior to please others... you don't have to roleplay as one of those people, and you don't have to get every companion perk or have every companion like you.

Plus, companion affinity seems to be built in such a way that you'll almost always do things the companions like more than you'd ever do things companions hate. Or maybe my playstyles are all just really tolerable.

Just use companions that fit your character. If you're a good guy Piper, Preston, Codsworth and Deacon are best. Cait and MacCready are better for neutral characters. Strong is probably best for a evil character.