Dude, come on...

First of all, you're not being forced to reload when your companion dies. If you want to play realistically then you can do so.

Second, what kind of game would it be if you can't die. This is frankly a terrible comparison and a huge leap in logic.

the worrysome part is that it seems companions have become unkillable without any choice on the part of the player. with the lack of information on a hardcoe mode there isnt much hoping to having that changed. until then if bethesda really is caring this much on making unneccesery reloads the past then they should honestly make the player immortal. how else would one make the gaming experience more fun? remember all the aonnoying and difficult times of you getting killed by somebody with a better weapon, by groups of supermutants, traps and landmines then reloading in anger? who would want that? well these days are no more when youre invincible.

agreed. I hate to jump on the bandwagon of games being dumbed down for players in recent years but it is kind of happening to an extent.

Here is an article that I thought was really funny. take it with a grain of salt
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-crucial-lessons-learned-by-watching-kids-play-video-games/

(not saying bethesda is dumbing the game down by adding immortal companions)

Make it an option or only have killable companions in hardcoe mode (if there is one).

Immortal, all the way! Having the companions able to perma-die almost guarantees they wont have fleshed out personalities. If I care about them in the slightest (like with dogmeat in FO3) then I will never take them with me and I'll always leave them somewhere safe and that defeats the purpose. If I don't care about them (like the companions in Skyrim) then I just treat them as the disposable cardboard cutouts they are and go get a new one when they die. There may also be a lot of annoying save reloading and backtracking.

The only way I'd be ok with permadeath for companions is:

1) If you partially controlled your companion as well as your PC and could tell them which moves to use, where to go, etc...(like in Mass Effect) so that their death would be YOUR fault instead of the result of them spazzing onto a trap or mine or trying to melee a deathclaw when you want to retreat.

2)Their death had an impact on the story so I had a reason to play both ways.

No.

Even though the crappy AI control makes them too dumb to live without the "unconcious" hack, they need to overhaul them - or at least let us further customize them, control their behaviour, give them level ups and assign them supporting perks too. I also don't want them to just get "knocked out", because it feels too fake.

Instead they need a timer so we have the choice to revive them or not. I'd also rather companions to be easier to replace but generic AI should be recruitable no differently than you can enslave them. Maybe if they had a perk where human companions could respawn in your character's home fort after they die and alert you on the pip-boy.

They only way I'd say No is if the AI is actually good. But it never is. So I vote yes.

The approached I liked in the "old days" was if you died you lost something like inventory items, gold, or all you items were seriously damaged and you had to repair. I thought it made the game generally more fun.

But these days most gamers don't even finish a game.

I don't like being punished because the game's AI is dodgy, so if they aren't going to improve the AI I rather they be immortal.

That said, they shouldn't be able to revive on their own. That way, you can't just run and hide to let them do all the work.

No, of course not, it takes alot out of the game if we can't experience loss of someone we care about. That's what the wasteland is, a grueling dog eat dog hell hole and death is around every corner. It's not supposed to be a freakin' amusemant park. This excuse that, oh well I don't expect Bethesda to code the AI right. so yes, is ridiculous. We should expect Bethesda to code the AI right, not be all defeatist and just except it.

I'm not saying I accept Bethesda's shoddy AI. I'm just saying that if they are going to keep the AI as stupid as it's been in the past, I'm glad they're doing something to mitigate my frustration.

I think I could live with them being immortal as long as I have to do something to bring them back in the fight.

I would hate to have my companion take a nuke to the face and kneel down for 10 seconds and start fighting again, but if they fell down and were basically dead until I gave them a stim pack or something I would like that system.

That's why the game saves so much, to mitigate that the player shouldn't have to save every 5 minutes so they don't need to reload too far back if something stupid happens. but using immortal AI to mitigate that issue for people who want their companions to live forever encroaches on those that want a more realistic, finite, and final experience of that dog eat dog wasteland.

I'm all for the immortal companions as long as they can get taken down realistically fast if I walk them into something stupid. I dont want accidentally blow up my dog in the first fight while I'm learning combat mechanics, eg how far I can actually toss a grenade.

Invincible damage sponges, no.... But companions who can wounded and taken out of combat without permanent death, yes.

They'd have to go a long way to get to companions that we "care about". It generally takes a lot more story for some random NPC to hit that point, probably even a semi-linear story where the companion figures in a lot of it. Not the random "oh, you can take this guy along with you if you want" minor people we get in these games.

(Probably why I don't bother with companions in Beth games - I mostly see them as annoyances who get in the way.)

Didn't vote, cuz my answer depends on the AI.

Yes they should be essential if they still do the same stupid things AI has done in past games.

No they should not be essential if the AI is significantly improved... as in self preservation being at least somewhere on their priority list....

Usually you build up a relationship when you travel with somebody for so much. It doesn't always have to be about some pre-written story. You make up the story as you go along and share experiences with the companion. Though I do prefer NV's companions more as their backgrounds more fleshed out, but you still have to actually experience the journey together, to build up any sort of attachment. The loss of said companion adds a crucial part to the immersion of the game. That this is a dog eat dog world, and death is very much a part of life in the wasteland. It could happen at any time. So, choose wisely your actions, the people you fight or help and where you explore.

This is a poor comparison but I think it helps to outline the problem. Its one thing if the player dies for whatever reason, because in 99% of cases the player can learn and given that same situation not die. I would even go as far as to assert that most player deaths are, situational speaking, miles apart from companions. Basically what im saying is the player does not die from the same reasons as companions the majority of the times. This while a part of the problem is not the whole problem.

The whole problem is that AI's that work for you are well...strategically terrible. Combine that with the fact that most companions have poor combat stats, you end up with situation of looming death for your companion. This leads to countless times your companion just die's in hilariously bad incidents. Because enemies are not limited in their combat abilities, they are designed to use all resources given to them to kill you and you them. As such you are designed by the dev to do the majority of the damage to hostile enemies, and those working with you are designed to "help".

The whole immortality argument is based on the fundamental situation that the AI's are so bad, that its entirely possible for them to die 5 minutes after you get them. But lets be real here, if you actually like your companion, 9/10 times you will reload to set your self in a position to combat the situation before your companion dies. If you don't like your companion, then in the fight they die in you really could care less, and it turns out to be a situation.

Immortality just takes out the middle man, you don't have to reload (which imo is worse than your companion fainting, come on now your PC tanks rockets to the face and shoots up drugs to fix it, your telling me your companion fainting is "unrealistic" "immersion breaking"?) if you like your companion and if you don't like your companion then just don't use them. Rather simple really.

Unless the AI has improved enough to where they won't go blindly charging into a crowd of super mutant over lords, they need to be immortal. Nothing svcks more than loosing progress/ existing time because of a reload due to head scratchingly stupid decisions by companions.

Didnt todd say dogmeat could be injuryed and would have to stay and heal at home for a while? So maybe they made a new injury system companions?

Should be an option.

Frankly I would say yes especially if the AI is as bad as previous Bethesda games

Immortal. I don't see how a companion who stands completely out of any resemblance of cover, right in front of the enemies who are shooting at him with automatic weapons,, is in ANY way realistic somehow. They all act like Rambo !
So it feels cheep when they die, as a resault I always reload a prior save. In fact I no longer take companions into interiors, they act stupid as [censored].
Also I don't get invested in them because of their mortality, their character and story is where the magic happens.

Of course, needing to repeatedly reload a save due to moron companions (either running up to melee the dude with a minigun, or shooting you in the back with full-auto bursts), goes all the way back to Fallout 1, so I suppose it's traditional for the series.

Having immortality compensate for terrible AI does not fix the problem, it just makes them unreliable dead weight, all they did as they were was just add on a few rounds in when you had to reload, literally useless everywhere else.

I'm fine with protected character, that only the player can kill. But I wouldn't want any character in the game to be essential. Immortal's okay, if they're a ghoul.