Stop making companions leave perm

[asnjas]

Its dated and dump. Its like romances where people used to think it was cool but now it just annoying.

1. It is lazy. They dont like me so they just leave, ok. Instead write something in there to get em to stay. I influence them and they change. They stick around for a revenge and betrayal reveal at the very end. You know something xool and fun instead of a harsh consequence that dont really do nothing. 

Make the point of conflict mean something, be part of the story, a highlight or event. 

Id sacrifice the useless reputation system for meaningful character confloxt.

At the least let us use the charavters we like. Characters leaving is pointless consequence. Its like if only specific races or classes can join principi, rdc or huana. You can make a reason for this that fit but why tho? 

So dum

[Carys]

Every point of conflict that can cause a story companion to leave is part of the story.

If you choose to side against the RDC, Maia will leave.  Of course,  you, as the player, knows she works for the RDC.

If you choose to side against the VTC, Pallegina will leave.  Of course, you, as the player, knows she works for the VTC.

If you choose to side with Huana, Takehu will leave.  Of course, you, as the player, knows he is loyal to the throne and a local.

If you choose to side with the Crookspur Slavers, Sarefen will leave.  Of course, you as the player knows he is an ex-slave, and Serafen is very very very vocal about not working with slavers.

If one of your companions leave, it's over choices you made, choices you had control over.  That's the entire point to RPGs that make consequences matter.  You make choices and they impact that playthrough.   That's the why you're looking for.  That's the entire point of having choices.  

 

[Boeroer]

6 hours ago, asnjas said:

So dum

...and Gomorrah!

[evilcat]

One of reasons why Game of Thrones (books) is so popular was that every character may die, and if they died they will probably stay that way.

So in cRPG stuff may happen, companions may leave or die.

It is better if possible loss had been foreshadowed or fallow general logic, like insulting proud Barbarian may result in some combat.

The player may have choice and impact outcome.

PS. Romances are great and always has been.

[Boeroer]

1 hour ago, evilcat said:

PS. Romances are great and always has been.

Ehhhhh...
 

...lol?

[asnjas]

Yes, i get that companions leaving is consequence. The point is its lame, lazy and doesnt mean anything. It doesnt mean anything when palagina or malaria leaves. Its just some dumb game consequence: you cant use this character anymore. For the story, no, it doesnt mean or contribute anything when pala or malaria leave, nothing. 

To repeat myself, i am saying let them stay and focus on their influence on the story. Pala saying bye is a consequence, yes, but it doesnt contribute anything. Saying her departure meant something to poe 2 story is very unimaginative. Plus, we as gamers get to use full companions wich is fun, like having full access to all spell and skills.

There is sooo much potential for companions to be a part of the story and its never tapped into. Just leaving cause mad is not exactly the best example.

Romances are terrible, dude. One thing i liked about outerterd is that everything didnt revolve around you. People liked other people like normal people would. You werent bratt pitt michael jordan jesus.

 

[xzar_monty]

3 hours ago, asnjas said:

Yes, i get that companions leaving is consequence. The point is its lame, lazy and doesnt mean anything. It doesnt mean anything when palagina or malaria leaves. Its just some dumb game consequence: you cant use this character anymore.

You don't really have a point here, or a logical point anyway. If the companions are to have any meaning, they need to have a personality. From the fact that they have a personality, it follows that it is possible to do things they absolutely cannot accept or agree with. Thus, it follows that it is possible for them to leave. This is a good thing.

If you don't want your companions to leave, simply generate a host of custom characters who are essentially your slaves: they have no personality and nothing to say.

[asnjas]

On 11/22/2020 at 2:40 AM, xzar_monty said:

You don't really have a point here, or a logical point anyway. If the companions are to have any meaning, they need to have a personality. From the fact that they have a personality, it follows that it is possible to do things they absolutely cannot accept or agree with. Thus, it follows that it is possible for them to leave. This is a good thing.

If you don't want your companions to leave, simply generate a host of custom characters who are essentially your slaves: they have no personality and nothing to say.

The point is fine. Companions walking out is hollow. Pala and maia walking out had no impact on the story. There isnt even a story about them walking out. Its just i dont like you anymore so im leaving. They might as well take silverware too while they storm out. 

You can do better then this. I know it.

Companions dont have to be slaves devoid of personality in order to remain permanent party members. Thats fallacious reasoning . Very illogical. Paths can form that have you keep your companion while maintaining their personality and even add to the story, talk about having and eating the cake. Companion A betrayal at the end game is one example. He maintained personality, stayd in your party and going against his preferences carried meaning, actual meaning. 

Even a companion lazily switching sides is preferable to just walking out. 

[xzar_monty]

Well, that is your opinion, and that's fine as far as it goes, but it's still not a cogent argument. You have to be able to distinguish your preferences from what is reasonable. Companions leaving is perfectly reasonable, even if you don't like it. It is a fact of companionship that once disagreements become insurmountable, companions can leave. And they do in Deadfire.

[Slotharingia]

I think it depends upon the character. Lots of these types of games are littered with opinionated companions that basically prefer the world to end than stick with a "leader" who disagrees with them on some things, and I'm not talking about being evil where it might make some sense. In Deadfire, Aloth is most guilty of this (although I don't think he leaves?). His opinions of the other companions and the MC are ridiculous and not even logical in my opinion. Looking at the long list of things he hates about various companions still annoys me, even though I can now play characters  artificially built to please him.

The rivalry system used in DA2 was a kind of compromise, as it allowed characters to remain loyal to you in spite of disagreeing, although even that required metagaming and intentionally leaving people behind etc. to work.

Edited November 25, 2020 by Slotharingia

[Boeroer]

I nearly always take Aloth with me and while he shows some of the reactions during dialogue, especially when Tekehu or Serafen are talking, most of the time he doesn't come over as too critical. But that may also depend on when you last played him (his reactions were tuned down a lot after release) and what PoE background he has. Since I mostly pick the benevolent soul background Aloth is anti Leaden Key. Maybe that makes him more relaxed in general, no idea. 

Once you play a super "clever" character he can get quite annoyed though. 

Edited November 25, 2020 by Boeroer

[xzar_monty]

3 minutes ago, Boeroer said:

Once you play a super "clever" character he can get quite annoyed though. 

He also doesn't like humour that much, especially if it contains even a hint of recklessness or irresponsibility. I occasionally chose those options just to annoy him a bit. (Not sure if what I'm saying here falls into the "clever" category you mention -- possibly so.)

[Boeroer]

Yes, those are mostly the clever dialogue options - the ones with the icon.

Edited November 25, 2020 by Boeroer

[Slotharingia]

11 minutes ago, Boeroer said:

I nearly always take Aloth with me and while he shows some of the reactions during dialogue, especially when Tekehu or Serafen are talking, most of the time he doesn't come over as too critical. But that may also depend on when you last played him (his reactions were tuned down a lot after release) and what PoE background he has. Since I mostly pick the benevolent soul background Aloth is anti Leaden Key. Maybe that makes him more relaxed in general, no idea. 

Once you play a super "clever" character he can get quite annoyed though. 

I use a mod that makes him less obnoxious to the player (he approves of resourceful if he's anti leaden key and of skulduggery if he's pro) - not sure if it works though, but by now I know what to avoid saying to make him annoyed, although I'd often rather say those things. Nevertheless, Tekehu and Serafen still always get pages of angry reacts from him relating to random crap they say, while he rarely - if ever - approves of the good stuff.  It doesn't seem to have any effect on anything though.  I feel like I'm both rambling and have changed the subject of the thread now , so getting back to that, I think characters walking out is fine if there's a good reason for it. If you dislike them, you might even want them to walk out. Constantly doing things they find highly objectionable would qualify (I don't count cracking jokes as highly objectionable though ), unless the game provided mechanics to change their personality via persuasion/manipulation or them simply realising their opinions were wrong. In Deadfire if I recall, they only do so if you ally with the faction they hate the most, which seems fair enough, because even if they were to realise their own faction is imperfect, the other one also is, so it still makes sense - better the devil you know etc.

[xzar_monty]

2 hours ago, Boeroer said:

Yes, those are mostly the clever dialogue options - the ones with the icon.

Oh yes, right. I completely forgot about that. I always play so that the consequences / meanings of the options are not displayed. I suppose that all humorous options fall to the "clever" category.

Btw, I have recently learned that it might have been a good idea to keep that stuff displayed, because sometimes a dialogue option that looks "clever" on the surface may actually turn out to be "cruel" or "aggressive". This is realistic, in a sense, because the same words said in different ways can indeed give very different messages...

[asnjas]

On 11/24/2020 at 7:44 AM, xzar_monty said:

Well, that is your opinion, and that's fine as far as it goes, but it's still not a cogent argument. You have to be able to distinguish your preferences from what is reasonable. Companions leaving is perfectly reasonable, even if you don't like it. It is a fact of companionship that once disagreements become insurmountable, companions can leave. And they do in Deadfire.

Both are reasonable. A lot is reasonable. Eothas not even talking to you while carrying on his mission is perfectly reasonable but it's objectively boring. You need to distinguish between whats reasonable and whatd an improvement. Something can be reasonable while still boring. Boring isnt good. We need to figure out what is boring and whats an improvement, not what is reasonable. 

[xzar_monty]

17 hours ago, asnjas said:

Both are reasonable. A lot is reasonable. Eothas not even talking to you while carrying on his mission is perfectly reasonable but it's objectively boring.

I'm sorry but you're misusing words now. Nothing can be objectively boring, so you're simply in the wrong here. Boredom is a subjective experience, hence nothing can be objectively boring. You have to be more careful and to the point if you wish to have a proper argument. Thus, let us stop this here.

Edited November 30, 2020 by xzar_monty

[daven]

On 11/29/2020 at 6:32 PM, xzar_monty said:

I'm sorry but you're misusing words now. Nothing can be objectively boring, so you're simply in the wrong here. Boredom is a subjective experience, hence nothing can be objectively boring. You have to be more careful and to the point if you wish to have a proper argument. Thus, let us stop this here.

Star Trek The Motion Picture is objectively boring... but it is still my favourite Star Trek film! Boring in a good way.

Dunno what point I was making.

[Boeroer]

I'd say that using a drill to make holes into solids is objectively boring.

*schenkelklopf*

[xzar_monty]

8 hours ago, Boeroer said:

I'd say that using a drill to make holes into solids is objectively boring.

*schenkelklopf*

When dealing with words, that option tends to be there, and as a lover of intentionally bad puns, I certainly appreciate it.

[asnjas]

On 11/29/2020 at 10:32 AM, xzar_monty said:

I'm sorry but you're misusing words now. Nothing can be objectively boring, so you're simply in the wrong here. Boredom is a subjective experience, hence nothing can be objectively boring. You have to be more careful and to the point if you wish to have a proper argument. Thus, let us stop this here.

It is very easy to fall in love with subjectivity, so i do not blame you too harshly. This is only a video game message board. People change their minds when they learn more of human nature rather than thinking off the top of their head, armchair thinkers. Subjectivity  is a very common mistake amongst undergraduates.

Example of objective bordem is repetition. No one, regardless of religion, race, culture or locale, gains interest from repetition. When the novelty wheres off, that is it. 

/shrug

[Slotharingia]

3 minutes ago, asnjas said:

It is very easy to fall in love with subjectivity, so i do not blame you too harshly. This is only a video game message board. People change their minds when they learn more of human nature rather than thinking off the top of their head, armchair thinkers. Subjectivity  is a very common mistake amongst undergraduates.

Example of objective bordem is repetition. No one, regardless of religion, race, culture or locale, gains interest from repetition. When the novelty wheres off, that is it. 

/shrug

This is going completely off-topic, but I'm not sure you are right. It seems to me that a lot of people like repetition, even need it. Lots of people need to do the same things every day at the same time, or enjoy doing super boring, repetitive stuff like ironing. In gaming too there are copious examples of this, like people who like grindy games, or doing stuff like mining for hours on end.

[xzar_monty]

@Slotharingia: He is quite obviously wrong, and not only for the reasons you rightly point out. But apparently, given his somewhat superior references to armchair thinkers and undergraduates, it is unlikely he is going to accept it.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-like-repetition-in-their-lives

Edited December 3, 2020 by xzar_monty

[asnjas]

Yes people love that idea of subjectivity. No getting through to them. Human nature is a thing we come to acknowledge when we move beyond quora and wiki.

Safety is not interest. This is obviously true so i dont know what that quora has to do with any thing. Plenty of things are safe but boring. 

Keep researching though. This will be a good learning exp. Try Robert sapolsky behave. Good read overall especially concering how subjective we really are. 

Cheers

Edited December 16, 2020 by asnjas
None ya business

[xzar_monty]

Unjustified superior attitude is really not a good approach to a conversation. I understand that you have gone to school, but please do not assume that others have not. As Sapolsky is a modern classic of the field, you would do well to keep in mind that others, myself included, know his work, too.

There is a delightful paradox in a fellow who professes to teach others about human nature but remains stunningly blind to his own foibles in this regard, isn't there?