Companions

[Calistarius]

I just realized that the companion does not have to be one that actually goes into the field with you. A companion might even be back at homebase or something, your "off-site hacker"... or information guy... or what ever.

As I realized that I instantly thought of Hal Emmerich, aka "Otacon", from the Metal Gear games.

A character like that could in various ways help you along the way, the story, and the missions.

Now... I do not necessarily think that you should have this character from the start. Maybe it could be part of a mission or something where this character joins you as thanks (or your character is able to offer that character a job or something). Maybe your character knew this Otacon like character since befor, or maybe it's a compleatly contact for your character.

Variations could be that you have the character from the start, and old friend of your character, who at the start of the game helpes you through some several missions, long enough time for the players to hopefully get attached to that character. And then in a mission something happends, either you hear scuffling over your coms, maybe a final cry for help from your friend befor the sound cut out or you just hear white noice or something. You might get caught on that mission and go away to jail for a few years. And once your released again, due to the epicness of your failure on that mission, your standing as a reliable guy is ruined, and your basicly unhirable or something.

So you have to start from the bottom again, without the help of someone like your friend, and you try and work your way up again, trying to regain your reputation again. But... a significant amount of your time is also put on trying to figure out what happend with your friend. Where you try and find clues and such, like checking out the place where your friend operated out of when he/she was helping you befor your jail time. Occationally you might come across some hints as your doing your normal missions, or when walking around town and talking to people you might get some minor amounts of information that will lead you on to hopefully figure out what happend. Then at some point pretty significantly into the game you will finally find your friend again (probably worse for wears in some way), find out why your friend was taken, and find out what the people who took your friend are really up to, and that will give you possibly your next target, to take revenge on those people. But, since trying to go up against some big corperation is never easy, and is probably going to cost a lot of money to do so as well (to be able to do it properly), you will still need to take on more and more difficult jobs (to get the cash and stuff you need), at the same time as you occationally do self apointed missions aimed at the ones who did this (to gain information, leverage, opertunities, etc).

But you know... this could just be one of many options and ways that CDPR might go with... they might/probably will go with a compleatly different route, one that is better what I have been musing about for the last half an hour. XD

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

I just realized that the companion does not have to be one that actually goes into the field with you. A companion might even be back at homebase or something, your "off-site hacker"... or information guy... or what ever.

That's not a bad idea. Although, they shouldn't be the players "slaves" that are infallible and omnipresent, and not without their own agendas and aspirations.

The problem I see with companions in a real time action game that CP will likely be (hopefully not, though), where the cNPC's are not in the players direct control as they likely would in a turnbased situation, is that they tend to be in the players way and be either utterly useless or grossly overpowered; and I don't see the Bioware way of letting the player switch between characters as a good solution as it only distracts from the importance of the role you are building.

I think a better solution would be to hire/contact specific help for preparation of the upcoming missions (optional, of course, and still with their own stories to tell and possibly "personal quests" to solve). The "infolink" guy you mentioned who may provide some aid (but not without the ability to fail) during missions and elsewhere just roaming around, someone who you might be able to send to cause a distraction that helps you infiltrate somewhere (again, things should be able to go awry), some who may be able to arrange certain contacts (blackmarket, information, etc).... people like that rather than fellow combatants and packmules that you drag along.

 

[Pug.]

Companions generally reflect the nature of the poor, poor AI in games and are a major immersion crash. I enjoy the humour if done well, but having a retarded minion who regularly runs in front of my flamer while repeating the same line over and over is pretty blech.

Your argument about freedom of choice is one I've offered myself and the best counter-argument is that I'd rather see CDPR devote all their time on perfecting the parts of the game that aren't optional. If they do that and then want to add in things like multiplayer, companions and vehicles, great, go ahead.

I just don't consider companions particularly necessary or interesting. Spend the resources on interesting NPCs who don't follow you around like puppies.

Companion NPC's are not always a nuisance. Elizabeth in Bioshock was actually quite useful. She was a bullet sponge, couldn't be killed, and she handed you ammo and health packs during combat. Oh yeah, and she was also an integral part of the plot. Go figure.

That being said, I don't have a problem with going it alone in this game. I would, however, like the protagonist (whoever that is) to have some meaningful relationships in the game (e.g. the way Geralt has Zoltan, Dandelion, Yennefer, Vesemir, etc.)

I could do without the half-assed online component that forces me to contend with a bunch of pimply teenagers shouting into their mics. Hopefully CDPR will steer clear of the multiplayer - that's something I associate more with EA.

 

[Hoplite_22]

I dunno, a GTA on-line style multi-player would be pretty good.

but then I really like GTA on-line.

 

[MasticatorDeelux]

I don't think that 'companion' is a good term, both in the case of thematics (totally not a 'cyberpunk' term or feel) and game mechanics...I don't want a companion, I want a crew member. Gangbanger. 'Merc contact. Someone disposable yet oddly useful enough to keep around. Someone who...I know I can depend on, but if shit goes sour, s/he's gotta be worth a bunch to a bodybank...

 

[helios969]

If we could get Mass Effect like support companions with Dragon Age banter that would be entertaining. Not sure how useful they'd be from a combat/mission perspective. I only ever found ME companions good for setting up combos and I don't know if such is going to apply in Cyberpunk. Bottom line for me is I want CDPR to do whatever is going to provide the best story and gameplay experience. If companions will enhance that I want 'em, if they're there just because, put the resources elsewhere.

I do think from a story standpoint allies are a must. I don't see one isolated badazz (douche ex) taking down the Corporatocracy. But allies don't necessary mean mission companions. If they do decide to go with companions I'd like to see a system where depending on the mission parameters you take combat specialist, tech specialist, hacker, etc...which improves or diminishes your chances of success depending on who you bring.

 

[moonknightgog]

Well...I don't know how companions could be in Cyberpunk. If CD Projekt wants to keep the core philosophy of Cyberpunk 2020 in the game....the more you being "augmented", the more you lose empathy, getting trouble to establish a relation with other people and feeling easier to establish a relation to machines, and when you empathy reach 0, you become a killing machine in an uncontrolled rage, killing humans until you being killed or re-educated.
I don't know if they will ever put this in to the game, but I hope so. It's the opposite of the transumanist philosophy in Deus Ex.

 

[Calistarius]

Well...I don't know how companions could be in Cyberpunk. If CD Projekt wants to keep the core philosophy of Cyberpunk 2020 in the game....the more you being "augmented", the more you lose empathy, getting trouble to establish a relation with other people and feeling easier to establish a relation to machines, and when you empathy reach 0, you become a killing machine in an uncontrolled rage, killing humans until you being killed or re-educated.
I don't know if they will ever put this in to the game, but I hope so. It's the opposite of the transumanist philosophy in Deus Ex.

Because CDPR have said that they are making an RPG where Cyberpunk‘s pen & paper roots will play into the game’s mechanics.

Now... of course that could just mean the character stats, and rules, etc, of the game are used in CP2077... but... it could also mean that you might get a team. Because one of the roots of all pen & paper RPG's is that you play with other people, that your character is part of a team of other characters who go about the world doing their thing.


Of course, this would maybe more point towards that they should include multiplayer, co-op, or something... and it does seem that they are going to include some elements of multiplayer features into the game. "It will be a story-based RPG experience with amazing single-player playthroughs, but we're going to add multiplayer features." This could of course just mean that they will do something like how Boarderlands did it, where the game is single player, but you can invite other people to play with you, where the opponents in the game become more difficult and more numerous if you do. It could also potentually mean that parts of the game might need a team to deal with, which would then mean that you would either need other people playing with you to do them... or... that you might be able to have a team of companions with you do deal with it as well if you do not want to play with others.

 

[otis0310]

As I recall in the announcement interview with Mike Pndsmith "You are a one man army, or a one woman army." This quote heavily implies no companions at all.

 

[thewarsend]

As I recall in the announcement interview with Mike Pndsmith "You are a one man army, or a one woman army." This quote heavily implies no companions at all.

That quote implies no such a thing. Other than your character can be really strong. No one can survive alone in Cyberpunk for too long.

 

[Suhiira]

Agreed.

You won't Lone Wolf Cyberpunk unless your GM is incompetent, an idiot, or probably both.

 

[xxTotexx]

It's really important to me that we have companions! I don't want to just be running around killing people, there are so many games like that already and it feels empty to me.

 

[Kalfear]

Best Companion system I ever saw to date was Dragon Age Origins
Companions interacted with each other in the field (so important)
but each had a story to tell at camp as well
and the tactics system they utilized in DA:O for companion tactics was the best I have ever seen

Companions/NPC party members so important for battle but even more for adding backstory and environment to the main story and world.
But they have to be interesting and well crafted

Otherwise you end up with Fall Out type of companions where they really add nothing positive to the experience.

 

[xxTotexx]

I thing I don't get is if there's different classes and you can play as a cop, you wouldn't really have the same companions as you would if you were playing something else right? It'd be all your cop friends unless you're going undercover or something (btw I really wanna play as a cop lol)

 

[Zagor-Te-Nay]

Dis/Agree with both sides on this one.
Ideally, good companions are great addition to gameplay ( MGSV), but let's not kid ourselves: this would take a ton of work and it's far better to not have this, than it be done poorly ( and CDPR is still very much hiring AI designers).
And having someone trail in behind you, like in Skyrim/Fallout, chattering on everything...feels off, here.

Instead the player could take a role of back up, ideally for non combat, specific missions , focus should be more on character/relationship development.
Outside of this, game should treat them as people with their own agendas and living in Night City( the phone is busy...)
They could show up at your place from time to time and have a more spontaneous, dynamic presence in the world( showing up unexpectedly in certain locations/quests), but nothing like it's done in Bioware games( standing in same location, wait for player interrogation->unlock flirt options->romance...)
And god no, I don't want to go bowling with them.

 

[Suhiira]

While the Dragons Age companion interactions do have their problems, they're still the best I've seen.

In Inquisition:
Ailasters lyrium addiction.
"The Bull" taking you around to various campfires anonymously.
Playing pranks with Sara.
Cassandra secretly being a romance novel junkie.
Helping Vivienne help the love of her life die with dignity.

But I TOTALLY agree not all (or even most) of your companions should be romanceable. And if one is the way Bioware handled it was far far to shallow.

 

[sv3672]

I would not expect Skyrim style companions, they are difficult to implement well, so CDPR may prefer not to have them at all, and they were not added in any of the Witcher games. Rather than that, I think there will again be NPCs like Keira Metz or Syanna in The Witcher 3 to accompany the player in a couple of (well written) quests, possibly followed by an optional "romance", and some kind of moral decision. After that, they disappear or (assuming they survive) only have a minor role in the rest of the game. Basically, a story driven approach instead of simulation and "radiant" content.

 

[Zagor-Te-Nay]

While the Dragons Age companion interactions do have their problems, they're still the best I've seen.

In Inquisition:
Ailasters lyrium addiction.
"The Bull" taking you around to various campfires anonymously.
Playing pranks with Sara.
Cassandra secretly being a romance novel junkie.
Helping Vivienne help the love of her life die with dignity.

But I TOTALLY agree not all (or even most) of your companions should be romanceable. And if one is the way Bioware handled it was far far to shallow.

Eh, I wouldn't agree with that... interactions feel too one sided, lack of sense of spontaneity, personalities that hinge too much on the player, resolve x trauma from the past, stereotype with defining personality trait perk approach.
BW highlights them much, much more than others, but I think other games write them better...Saints Row, GTA ( obvious parody), Witcher, New Vegas( especially Dead Money).
They should frame it on Witcher, but take it a step further and integrate them more in world to give them more active role. Surprise the player, when you show up at night club to see them with friends of their own.
I know some people want some kind of Hearthfire Skyrim life simulation, but it's enough for player/npc storyline to feel concluded in the end ( like with Blood and Wine).

 

[Gwydden]

I wonder, when talking about companion-like characters in The Witcher series, who are you referring to? Okay, Iorveth and Roche, but who else?

 

[kofeiiniturpa]

Possible party mechanics is its own thing to discuss, but if they plan on more or less temporary companions, do not do it like they were done in Witcher 3. First of all, being immortal for story reasons is one bad thing, but even worse is what they did during fights... I swear, there is nothing more boring than to notice how the wizard women would simply repel the enemies infinitely with some force-push spell that did no damage, or how Vesemir would fight the early griffin for all eternity if you decided to stand aside and watch them flail away, and so on.

And one other thing... Please no Bioware-style companions.

I think New Vegas did this quite well. There was a bit a bad mojo with how it sometimes felt you are babysitting people who never before had tackled their personal problems, and only started finding that out once you showed up, but that's something that can be fixed. The good thing about them was the they could die, they opened up with who they were very gradually after certain actions that weren't prompted (nor indicated... no messages "X loves it when you pick locks"), and while they had drama-arcs of their own, it never felt like being forcefed syrup or that the character was clearly written by a bluehaired militant-liberal feminist lesbian who spends her freetime waving a "every man is a potential rapist" plaque in front a of a university.