I don't know how i feel about what Todd said on the podcast about companions being more plentiful in Skyrim, with the downside of less depth. I kinda liked what Fallout had.

However, I don't know many details about Radiant Story, so i don't know what these companions, that are selected through your actions (as far as i understand), are gonna be like. I have the feeling that they are gonna be pretty boring, but they'll have all the types (mage, assassin, Barbarian, Paladin, Necromancer etc.). though without enough background I feel like it'll just be townspeople, that you easily manipulated to like you, who blindly follows you out into the [censored]. When he dies, you just harvest his valuable belongings and move on to the next brainless sap.

Hopefully I'm wrong and they're great, or if not then Bethesda should take the time to add a couple more companions with long story's and sidequests.

Quite happy to have someone help me rescue their own daughter/son/pet bear cub, instead of the usual 'I'll wait here while you do all the work', but other than that 'I Work Alone.'

I personally liked what I heard, but then again it might be that TES is not about having companions in the same detail as FO. I wouldn't mind if they chose quality over quantity though.

Alright, if quality of AI combat is really improved as they're saying, I'll be okay with the quantity version. But if its like oblivion where combatants beehive around each other, making it fairly impossible to avoid friendly fire, I'll be making the journey solo.

I edited the poll to reflect your point of view

Much appreciated.

My long answer is in the other thread on how companions should be done: http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1164555-well-developed-companions/

Short answer: I Work Alone?

I always love a good story, but companions in fallout are such a commitment, not to mention so strong as to unbalance the game.

I do like the idea of more throw away companions, like an assist for a quest, or someone with whom I need to work with to accomplish things, not just let them take all the damage as I pick guys off.

Oooh, that's a difficult one! Before NV, I would have put "I work alone", but seeing companions done so well I've changed my mind a bit. However, I'm pretty certain there won't be the depth of those companions even after they cut down on the amount you could have, so it looks like I'll be a lone wolf in Skyrim.

I work alone, if the companions are just there to be a meatshield.

I prefer few companions with more character depth and background story.

I'm also more inclined to work alone, but I think I'd prefer companions which had deeper back stories. If I had a companion, I'd like to feel some responsibility to their role as a companion. Either I should feel like they should be protected and looked after, or I should be friendly to them. Or if I want to stab them in the back, or not bother protecting them in combat, then I should feel like that's a bastardy thing to do. And I think I'm more likely to feel that way if the companions had some depth - otherwise they'd feel pretty unconvincing and disposable.

It seemed to me that Todd Howard was saying that whilst most of the companions will simply be 'mercenaries for hire', some will have more back story and be worth keeping around.

I'm somewhat hopeful that it will be a bit of both types - which actually, if it is well implemented, could be awesome

Companions are only important as a entertaining story-telling device ... or a thing for players that like to roleplay characters that doesn't do all the fighting him/herself on occassion.
Well, I don't think the idea of companions in Skyrim can be trilling ... a heap of boring, lifeless AI following me around the world... doesn't need something like that. What's the use for it? So I'll be a strict loner in Skyrim.

I think they should learn a bit from Obsidian/Bioware.

Have a set amount of characters with nice fleshed out personalities and backgrounds.

I need an "It depends on the game and the nature of the companions' utility" option.

I work alone.
My favourite play-style is assassin/ranger,i do that alone.
I will try other styles later of course.
I will only use companions,when i'm a werewolf....and feel a bit peckish :thumbsup:

I much prefer quality over quantity, however, I don't even use companions myself.

Companions are good for photos,but they get in the way when in action.
I never used companion mods as well...

I want to be saddened by the death of a companion, not feel like it's just another corpse on the pile.

I don't like the "shallow" direction that has been taken.

New Vegas took a step in the right direction but it still wasn't quite there yet.

Skyrim sounds like a step back in that regard but I'll have to play it see how it really is.

I believe there will be both quantity and quality, but I really dont care. I just want my dog.

HA! A viable point of view!! i think there's still time to shoehorn it into this poll.

I don't think numbers and depth should be mutually exclusive. I would like both. You can always place a few very well portrayed characters in the game, alongside many other 'john doe's available to hire. If I need a small army to ransack a village, I will need as many as possible and I won't need to know everybody's backstory. But when I need a companion to develop a long term relationship, I want that companion to be as real as possible. Obsidian did a great job in this respect, the Tes modders did a great job in this respect (I did care about Ruined Tail more than Martin, Sheogorath and Lachance combined), I would highly appreciate Bethesda to put some more effort into character development.

I believe there should be a good amount of both quantity and quality. If you're taking one on a hike with you in the woods, you'll better want to know what kind of fellow you're dealing with.