I'm actually quite worried that many of these companions will end up being like the ones from Fallout 3, no real personal quests, only a few dialogue options etc. I'd rather take 6 well fleshed out characters with loads of dialogue and quests associated with them than 12 thinned out characters. I know we don't much and these 12 companions could well be very well fleshed out but, But I am still worried. The companions of New vegas were one of the best things about the game.

Eh, too little is known at this point for me to pass judgement on the companions. Personally, I hope the prescence of a voiced main character will lead to more fleshed out companions that you can actually have a conversation with instead of listening to Raul deliver a monologue for 10 minutes.

Perhaps half of these companions are non-human (like Dogmeat) and dont require quite as much fleshing out

Twelve doesn't seem like too bad a number to me, I think Beth can work within that number and still produce something akin to NV. As long as they don't pull the Skyrim mess with 100s of random recruitable people then I know they're going more for quality over quantity.

I'd still say 12 is a good amount of companions. I mean, it's only four more than the eight in New Vegas. Not like Skyrim's dozens of copy and paste ones (I think that's the third time I've said it today with all of the companion talk). I think it's safe to say Bethesda is definitely more for quality over quantity this time around. Only question being the quality itself compared to New Vegas companions.

Well, I can't immagine animal/robot companions having too much backstory, regardless. So, there's that.
Hopefully this "more story driven experience" includes more of a NV approach to followers.

12? That sounds ok. Do you know how many companions they had in Skyrim? That was worryable! 12 is a nice number.

Agreed, here's to hoping we get some more interesting and fleshed out characters like NV had.

We've already seen that we have deep, multifaceted companions in this game though.

"Woof." ~ Dogmeat, 22xx

Makes you think.

I can see some of them being minor companions like mercs and such.

Why are you worried?

The best companions are the ones to complement your gameplay style, not the ones that are the most fleshed out story-wise. As long as the companions have unique abilities and/or combat techniques (like the dog as you can see in the footage vs molerat) everything's fine.

Of course a nice story that is expressed through gameplay (including quests) is icing on the cake.

So long as they have a centralizes location like in New Vegas so I don't have to hunt for them all over the map, I'm good with 12 companions.

But seriously, I'd like to bring more than just two companions. What if I were the sort who wanted an army of twelve people behind me? I don't care how easy it'd make the game for me, it's my game, dammit!

12? Will they all fit in my house? I enjoyed having all companions hanging out in the Lucky 38.
12 companions seems like some HAVE to be Karma-based if not rep-based. I'm going to assume at least 4 other hate each other automatically due to Faction disputes.

Sticky had plenty of dialogue

I just hope one of those 12 is a Deathclaw.

I can dream can't I?

For some of us story is more important than mere combat. So, for some of us, the best companions are the ones with the most flesh-ed out stories.

That's true.

Story is of utmost importance for me. But if story doesn't relate to gameplay, it becomes a purely informative practice. That doesn't mean it's bad. It means it doesn't live up to it's potential. A story that shapes the gameplay experience is expressed not only through visuals, audio, directives, letters, noninteractive channels, but also through an effect on gameplay.

This is where story shines the most (next to the general quest-directive of the game and the emotional impact) imo. That's why I personally prefer little story with grave gameplay consequences to deep story and almost no gameplay consequences.

I understand your reservations my friend but 12 isnt so frightening. I agree with Legion, I'd rather have 12 over like 50 copypasta companions in Skyrim.

Writing 12 fleshed out character shouldnt be that difficult. Though it's more likely 10 since Dogmeat and Codsworth might not get a backstory

I am also worried that there are 12 companions.

That's just too much, man.

I don't think my 2015 PC could handle the game including 12 voiced companions, I just....

Vargrin, you beautiful bastard, thank you for being the comedic releif that is so desperately needed around these parts.

Then there's also companions who offer the best of both worlds! For example, in the old Infinity Engine RPGs where you wanted companions to complement your player character,but were also incredibly detailed and complex characters.

I don't think Fallout 4 is a challenging enough game to warrant justification for the former. So let's just hope they have good backstories and plots like in New Vegas.

Haven't they worked on this game for like...how you say....years? I would imagine that some of those years or at the very least one of those years were used/spent on developing decent and interesting characters. Theres no way Beth is oblivious to the fact that most of their companions in other games have been total meh-ness. I figure they have been hard at work on this exact issue/fear.

If there were only six companions, people would worry that there wasn't enough choice. I'd say let's wait and see what we get before worrying ourselves silly.

Fallout 3 had 8. and while they were more memorable than the ones in Skyrim. . . they were ok but apart from Fawkes and Charon . . they were just ok

Skyrim had something like 50 followers.

Most of them were about as interesting as an arrow in your quiver.....and almost as disposable

New Vegas had Ed-E Boon and Cass and some other suporting bit players. .. (ok TBH Gannon was not that bad)

with 12 in 4 thats 4 more than the 8 in Fallout........