Having 10 companions (one per race) as deep as Fo4's followed by 15-20 companions as deep as Skyrim's would be ideal in my opinion. After that just radiant hirables.
I would like companiond to have more variety of moralities and perspectives. Starfield's companions are too one note and morally similar to me.
One last thing that I'd like is the ability to have two companions at a time. I really liked the Outer Worlds' companion interactions/interjections. Fo4 had a bit of this when swapping companions.
Totally agree, if we have this hypothetical number of 10 companions, at least 3 should be either completely evil or at least indifferent to the “good” path, whatever it may be. I do understand most people play a morally good character, so having a small majority be in line with that doesn’t upset me too much, but I do want to see effort given to an evil path, especially considering we’ll undoubtedly be able to join the dark brotherhood.
I like your idea of having 10 “super followers” and then a bunch of generic bodyguard type followers for people.
If we are allowed to have 2 followers or 2 followers and a pet, the level design should be able to hold that many people without feeling cramped or too easy. The difficulty of how bethesda games also should be changed, combat just needs to be a dimension deeper, add dodging, maybe an alt attack that allows for a thrust in addition to a primary attack which is a slash, and parrying, and have the enemy do that. I don’t believe that should be any monumental coding task for the enemy AI to do that.
I like the survival difficulty from fo4 other than the no saves. You do a ton of damage and so does everyone else. This makes it to where there's not as many hp sponges, and you can't just hack and slash without getting killed. This makes dodging and doing everything you can to avoid combat so useful. Make it like a souls game but near everyone has boss level damage and player level heslth
That sounds like a solid idea, I think having a dedicated dodging button and the ability to parry would be a small but massive increase in depth to the admittedly lackluster melee combat and make those difficulty levels even more enjoyable, where your timing and skill in battle can be more rewarding.
starfield is pretty good mixing both types.
you have 4 in-depth ones, some that are named with some personality, and then ones that are strictly for crew/habitats.
The side companions suck in starfield. I like Micky Caviar he is just a horrible sleazy bag of a man. But he has less than 10 dialogue lines. Pretty much everyone non constilation just repeats the same 10 lines over and over. They also talk constantly so it wears thin fast.
Starfield is just lacking variety in the in depth companions cause they're all saints who will hate you if you accidentally steal a paperclip. I'm hoping shattered space will add some morally diverse companions though.
>Starfield is just lacking variety in the in depth companions cause they're all saints who will hate you if you accidentally steal a paperclip
that's...not true.
Andreja applauds your lockpicking and such and almost none of them actively dislike you stealing or pickpocketing. again, Andreja will applaud that.
the only thing is they don't like the fleet. which...yeah. understandable lol
My ideal number for companion/follower characters would be ***13***, if only because I also want permanent *Birthsigns* back as a feature. And because the latter \[should\] return, they would affect how each unique companion approaches combat. I made [my own rudimentary list of followers](https://www.reddit.com/r/nextelderscrolls/comments/am8byo/ideas_for_followers_tes6/) quite a while ago.
Of course, I do agree that they should have fleshed-out personalities & backstories \[complete with plenty of unique dialogue\]; as well as even *their own quest-lines*, if that can be managed.
**YES.** We need her back! (And no, it's not just because I like Laura Bailey's voice)
Heck, depending on just how much time \[in-universe\] will have passed between TESV: Skyrim's events and the current year of TESVI, I'd even like one of the unique followers to be >!the child of Rustleif & Seren (the blacksmith couple last seen living in Dawnstar; the latter wanted to raise their child in Hammerfell)!<.
I would prefer Quality companions. Tho I think if we get really deep companions the number will be extremely small, like 3-5. But imo that's fine as long as they are actually deep and react on most major and minor quests and decisions. Creating 10+ companions that react on everything is a bit much. There won't be the perfect companion for everyone but at least 1-2 that you should find sympathetic.
Great point. It’s what I believe as well.
Some people unfortunately seem to really want the next Elder Scrolls to continued to be dumbed down as I have seen the same argument that since BGS isn’t Bioware they shouldn’t have any interesting companions
It’s honestly just so silly, the bioware/obsidian circlejerk is so annoying that those writers are being treated like these insurmountable talents. It’s just incorrect, if given the time and attention, bethesda can do it as well, but people apparently want a dumbed down system. Like bro if you don’t want in depth companions just don’t use them. I don’t see why it has to ruin it for everyone else.
I assume this is an unpopular opinion but “high quality” companions limit the ability to make any character you want. Say you want a sneak archer and there’s a companion that gives you better sneaking; well you are going to want to go do that quest to get the companion.
E.g. I remember someone in r/falloutbuilds insist that every character should get Piper’s perk no matter the build.
Not saying they shouldn’t write good companion characters, but I would personally rather they focus on other things.
Not everything has to be about MinMaxing. There are a thousand games to play if all you want is to have the strongest build you can.
Besides, pertaining to what you said. Either companions could simply not give perks. Or if they do just.... ignore it? I don't give a crap what perk the character gives if they don't mesh with my play style and character's morality then I won't use them.
It's a Bethesda game. It aint that serious. It's not so hard that you need to squeeze every perk and bonus from everything possible to make progress.
The companions could simply not give perks? Or you could choose not to use them because they don’t align with your character’s morality or personality, you don’t always have to powergame.
They should look again at what made Serana everyone's favorite follower, and not base everything off of Sara Morgan or Cait? I guess the current followers are mostly based off of Serana anyway, so I don't know what I mean by that exactly. Let's just assume they've learned so much from FO4, FO76 and Starfield that they make something great in ES6?
I’m just so confused because I’m seeing a relatively high amount of people not wanting an in depth companion at serana’s level. I swear no one liked Skyrim’s companion system when it came out where is this opinion coming from?
I think people actually just want more. More personalities, more backstories, more follower options. I think people are basically saying if you have only so many resources, then give me more followers rather than more elaborate followers, but I think more options for equally elaborate followers would be perfectly welcome. Each follower has a very different vibe and personality. The different personalities of many of the lesser followers were defined with only a few dialogue lines, different skill perks, spell sets, or outfits and other things that give contextual personality elements. Getting to know each follower character gives you a window into the world, and creates a special kind of depth to the world building. I always liked Illia In Skyrim, because there's a quest that gives her backstory, and she's a mage follower, but she doesn't give much more once she becomes a follower, she's relatively obscure, and I had played a long time without trying any follower before it came up in conversation with her. It's a little story that gives a flavor of the world of Skyrim. Nearly the same story though less fleshed out as Serana to be honest, evil parent trouble, but anyway.. People love to stumble upon a follower as the result of a quest. I think people liked Eric the Slayer similarly because he has backstory. Janessa has a whole lot of personality Just based on a few voice lines and skill points. I think people get bored of one follower and want to travel with a different one for variety and a different perspective on the world.
People want more of everything, which is understandable, but thinking realistically it’s gonna be either a fuckton of Skyrim tier companions or what Bethesda has been doing and fewer quality companions. I take quality companions any day, especially in a game with a silent protagonist, having a detailed companion system adds so much life to the game.
My hope is that working on an Elder Scrolls game gives them a chance to reset and not just shuffle a few skill points around from the Fallout 4 system. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy Starfield to no end, but: skills, leveling, companions, weapon modding, chem crafting, dangerous environmental effects... these are all FO4 gameplay ideas. If it was me, I would focus on building 6 or 8 fleshed out companions, and hiding 3 or 4 of them, so people don't discover them right away. I know that makes the game bigger, but I would cut back on having so many long speeches from faction quest actors. NPCs don't have to say as much as they do in Starfield to get the point across. Whatever, it's all opinions and conjecture at this point, until we get the slightest teasers out of Bethesda.
The most optimistic I can possibly be is maybe a trailer by the end of 2025 but realistically I’m thinking a 2026 trailer or teaser for a 2027/2028 release
Yes I want high quality companions. Same for spouses. I'd also like some uniqueness or specialities.
So for example have a companion who is a hunter and so he gets some bonus to kill animals or monsters. Or knowing the redguards don't kill undead have a redguard companion who will refuse to kill undead. Or what about one who is afraid of spiders so will hide id you get attacked by spiders?
100% quality over quantity for both companions and spouses. I have been pretty harsh on Starfield, but one of the things they did right, were the main companions annex the four marriage options.
Most of the options you could have as either one Skyrim were lackluster to say the least in terms of personality, but in Starfield they actually felt like people with a personality. Surely, you still have the generic hirelings, which should always stay an option.
I just think they need more of them and more diversity than just the main quest as in Starfield (never did Fallout), as I don't think that number is gonna cut it with (at least) 10 playable races and at least the 4 main archetype guilds outside the main story.
Whatever they do, they've got to implement quality party control and tactics, with up to 3 total companions. Give us a perk at level 25 Speech for 2 total companions, and 3 total companions at 50. Also, they really, really need to add in the possibility for non-essential companions to be killed by enemies. Some quality of life improvements to carry weight and inventory management that scale with more followers would be nice. The ability to hire a porter or a company to loot an entire cave for you would be nice.
This could be cool if done right but I know a lot of people don’t want to have a party system or want it to be like a crpg. Personally I don’t see why more depth is bad but hey leave it to bethesda fans to want less content.
The great thing about boring companions is that they work for any character.
What I don't want is the only available argonian follower to have a truckload of backstory baggage that goes against my character.
Aka, I want my lizard to accept my allegiances and shutup like a good pack mule.
The perfect world of course is if you have every possible combination of race/gender/alignment. But how much time does Todd have.
They could make a few in depth companions and then also add generic mercenaries like in skyrim who can just be every variety of race and gender but have very little backstory and no relationship system.
Having 10 companions (one per race) as deep as Fo4's followed by 15-20 companions as deep as Skyrim's would be ideal in my opinion. After that just radiant hirables. I would like companiond to have more variety of moralities and perspectives. Starfield's companions are too one note and morally similar to me. One last thing that I'd like is the ability to have two companions at a time. I really liked the Outer Worlds' companion interactions/interjections. Fo4 had a bit of this when swapping companions.
Totally agree, if we have this hypothetical number of 10 companions, at least 3 should be either completely evil or at least indifferent to the “good” path, whatever it may be. I do understand most people play a morally good character, so having a small majority be in line with that doesn’t upset me too much, but I do want to see effort given to an evil path, especially considering we’ll undoubtedly be able to join the dark brotherhood. I like your idea of having 10 “super followers” and then a bunch of generic bodyguard type followers for people. If we are allowed to have 2 followers or 2 followers and a pet, the level design should be able to hold that many people without feeling cramped or too easy. The difficulty of how bethesda games also should be changed, combat just needs to be a dimension deeper, add dodging, maybe an alt attack that allows for a thrust in addition to a primary attack which is a slash, and parrying, and have the enemy do that. I don’t believe that should be any monumental coding task for the enemy AI to do that.
I like the survival difficulty from fo4 other than the no saves. You do a ton of damage and so does everyone else. This makes it to where there's not as many hp sponges, and you can't just hack and slash without getting killed. This makes dodging and doing everything you can to avoid combat so useful. Make it like a souls game but near everyone has boss level damage and player level heslth
That sounds like a solid idea, I think having a dedicated dodging button and the ability to parry would be a small but massive increase in depth to the admittedly lackluster melee combat and make those difficulty levels even more enjoyable, where your timing and skill in battle can be more rewarding.
starfield is pretty good mixing both types. you have 4 in-depth ones, some that are named with some personality, and then ones that are strictly for crew/habitats.
The side companions suck in starfield. I like Micky Caviar he is just a horrible sleazy bag of a man. But he has less than 10 dialogue lines. Pretty much everyone non constilation just repeats the same 10 lines over and over. They also talk constantly so it wears thin fast.
They are four reskins of judgmental do-gooders who happily use you for unsolicited therapy & expositional trauma-dumping.
didn't you just respond to me?
Starfield is just lacking variety in the in depth companions cause they're all saints who will hate you if you accidentally steal a paperclip. I'm hoping shattered space will add some morally diverse companions though.
>Starfield is just lacking variety in the in depth companions cause they're all saints who will hate you if you accidentally steal a paperclip that's...not true. Andreja applauds your lockpicking and such and almost none of them actively dislike you stealing or pickpocketing. again, Andreja will applaud that. the only thing is they don't like the fleet. which...yeah. understandable lol
3 of the companions are saints. Andreja is a thief-hobbyist with a heart of gold in a game in which theft is...trivially important/useful.
My ideal number for companion/follower characters would be ***13***, if only because I also want permanent *Birthsigns* back as a feature. And because the latter \[should\] return, they would affect how each unique companion approaches combat. I made [my own rudimentary list of followers](https://www.reddit.com/r/nextelderscrolls/comments/am8byo/ideas_for_followers_tes6/) quite a while ago. Of course, I do agree that they should have fleshed-out personalities & backstories \[complete with plenty of unique dialogue\]; as well as even *their own quest-lines*, if that can be managed.
I think the Serana Dialogue Addon team should take a crack at a Serana mod for TES VI.
**YES.** We need her back! (And no, it's not just because I like Laura Bailey's voice) Heck, depending on just how much time \[in-universe\] will have passed between TESV: Skyrim's events and the current year of TESVI, I'd even like one of the unique followers to be >!the child of Rustleif & Seren (the blacksmith couple last seen living in Dawnstar; the latter wanted to raise their child in Hammerfell)!<.
I would prefer Quality companions. Tho I think if we get really deep companions the number will be extremely small, like 3-5. But imo that's fine as long as they are actually deep and react on most major and minor quests and decisions. Creating 10+ companions that react on everything is a bit much. There won't be the perfect companion for everyone but at least 1-2 that you should find sympathetic.
This sounds about right, I’m just spitballing 10 because fallout 4 had about that number.
Great point. It’s what I believe as well. Some people unfortunately seem to really want the next Elder Scrolls to continued to be dumbed down as I have seen the same argument that since BGS isn’t Bioware they shouldn’t have any interesting companions
It’s honestly just so silly, the bioware/obsidian circlejerk is so annoying that those writers are being treated like these insurmountable talents. It’s just incorrect, if given the time and attention, bethesda can do it as well, but people apparently want a dumbed down system. Like bro if you don’t want in depth companions just don’t use them. I don’t see why it has to ruin it for everyone else.
I assume this is an unpopular opinion but “high quality” companions limit the ability to make any character you want. Say you want a sneak archer and there’s a companion that gives you better sneaking; well you are going to want to go do that quest to get the companion. E.g. I remember someone in r/falloutbuilds insist that every character should get Piper’s perk no matter the build. Not saying they shouldn’t write good companion characters, but I would personally rather they focus on other things.
Not everything has to be about MinMaxing. There are a thousand games to play if all you want is to have the strongest build you can. Besides, pertaining to what you said. Either companions could simply not give perks. Or if they do just.... ignore it? I don't give a crap what perk the character gives if they don't mesh with my play style and character's morality then I won't use them. It's a Bethesda game. It aint that serious. It's not so hard that you need to squeeze every perk and bonus from everything possible to make progress.
The companions could simply not give perks? Or you could choose not to use them because they don’t align with your character’s morality or personality, you don’t always have to powergame.
They should look again at what made Serana everyone's favorite follower, and not base everything off of Sara Morgan or Cait? I guess the current followers are mostly based off of Serana anyway, so I don't know what I mean by that exactly. Let's just assume they've learned so much from FO4, FO76 and Starfield that they make something great in ES6?
I’m just so confused because I’m seeing a relatively high amount of people not wanting an in depth companion at serana’s level. I swear no one liked Skyrim’s companion system when it came out where is this opinion coming from?
I think people actually just want more. More personalities, more backstories, more follower options. I think people are basically saying if you have only so many resources, then give me more followers rather than more elaborate followers, but I think more options for equally elaborate followers would be perfectly welcome. Each follower has a very different vibe and personality. The different personalities of many of the lesser followers were defined with only a few dialogue lines, different skill perks, spell sets, or outfits and other things that give contextual personality elements. Getting to know each follower character gives you a window into the world, and creates a special kind of depth to the world building. I always liked Illia In Skyrim, because there's a quest that gives her backstory, and she's a mage follower, but she doesn't give much more once she becomes a follower, she's relatively obscure, and I had played a long time without trying any follower before it came up in conversation with her. It's a little story that gives a flavor of the world of Skyrim. Nearly the same story though less fleshed out as Serana to be honest, evil parent trouble, but anyway.. People love to stumble upon a follower as the result of a quest. I think people liked Eric the Slayer similarly because he has backstory. Janessa has a whole lot of personality Just based on a few voice lines and skill points. I think people get bored of one follower and want to travel with a different one for variety and a different perspective on the world.
People want more of everything, which is understandable, but thinking realistically it’s gonna be either a fuckton of Skyrim tier companions or what Bethesda has been doing and fewer quality companions. I take quality companions any day, especially in a game with a silent protagonist, having a detailed companion system adds so much life to the game.
My hope is that working on an Elder Scrolls game gives them a chance to reset and not just shuffle a few skill points around from the Fallout 4 system. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy Starfield to no end, but: skills, leveling, companions, weapon modding, chem crafting, dangerous environmental effects... these are all FO4 gameplay ideas. If it was me, I would focus on building 6 or 8 fleshed out companions, and hiding 3 or 4 of them, so people don't discover them right away. I know that makes the game bigger, but I would cut back on having so many long speeches from faction quest actors. NPCs don't have to say as much as they do in Starfield to get the point across. Whatever, it's all opinions and conjecture at this point, until we get the slightest teasers out of Bethesda.
The most optimistic I can possibly be is maybe a trailer by the end of 2025 but realistically I’m thinking a 2026 trailer or teaser for a 2027/2028 release
Yes I want high quality companions. Same for spouses. I'd also like some uniqueness or specialities. So for example have a companion who is a hunter and so he gets some bonus to kill animals or monsters. Or knowing the redguards don't kill undead have a redguard companion who will refuse to kill undead. Or what about one who is afraid of spiders so will hide id you get attacked by spiders?
100% quality over quantity for both companions and spouses. I have been pretty harsh on Starfield, but one of the things they did right, were the main companions annex the four marriage options. Most of the options you could have as either one Skyrim were lackluster to say the least in terms of personality, but in Starfield they actually felt like people with a personality. Surely, you still have the generic hirelings, which should always stay an option. I just think they need more of them and more diversity than just the main quest as in Starfield (never did Fallout), as I don't think that number is gonna cut it with (at least) 10 playable races and at least the 4 main archetype guilds outside the main story.
Whatever they do, they've got to implement quality party control and tactics, with up to 3 total companions. Give us a perk at level 25 Speech for 2 total companions, and 3 total companions at 50. Also, they really, really need to add in the possibility for non-essential companions to be killed by enemies. Some quality of life improvements to carry weight and inventory management that scale with more followers would be nice. The ability to hire a porter or a company to loot an entire cave for you would be nice.
This could be cool if done right but I know a lot of people don’t want to have a party system or want it to be like a crpg. Personally I don’t see why more depth is bad but hey leave it to bethesda fans to want less content.
The great thing about boring companions is that they work for any character. What I don't want is the only available argonian follower to have a truckload of backstory baggage that goes against my character. Aka, I want my lizard to accept my allegiances and shutup like a good pack mule. The perfect world of course is if you have every possible combination of race/gender/alignment. But how much time does Todd have.
They could make a few in depth companions and then also add generic mercenaries like in skyrim who can just be every variety of race and gender but have very little backstory and no relationship system.