Some of these companion disproval triggers are just dumb.

FantasticFreddie

Btoop wrote: »

Mirri not liking me snatching a butterfly out of the air and pulling it's wings off is understandable. Azandar's distaste for crafting coffee and playing ToT or Sharp-as-Night disliking the use of outfit stations however, these are all just dumb things that the developers appear to have just decided upon at random.

Adding characters with qwirks is fine but when those qwirks come in the form of their disproval over menial things, you just make the characters come across as petty and harder to like. (To clarify, the rapport system itself isn't the issue, the issue is how the rapport system is being used).

On a side note, I actually do agree with Azandar not liking ToT, that game is genuinly terrible.

If I was traveling with someone and they kept stopping to play a card game, that I do not play, that was 20 minutes a hand, I'd like them less too.

spartaxoxo

It's good that they have incidental pet peeves. It adds character from a lore perspective. And from a gameplay standpoint, it makes it easier for the player to avoid, if they so chose.

IRL Everyone has pet peeves. It's part of being human.

Dokolus

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

Btoop wrote: »

Mirri not liking me snatching a butterfly out of the air and pulling it's wings off is understandable. Azandar's distaste for crafting coffee and playing ToT or Sharp-as-Night disliking the use of outfit stations however, these are all just dumb things that the developers appear to have just decided upon at random.

Adding characters with qwirks is fine but when those qwirks come in the form of their disproval over menial things, you just make the characters come across as petty and harder to like. (To clarify, the rapport system itself isn't the issue, the issue is how the rapport system is being used).

On a side note, I actually do agree with Azandar not liking ToT, that game is genuinly terrible.

If I was traveling with someone and they kept stopping to play a card game, that I do not play, that was 20 minutes a hand, I'd like them less too.

Then stop hanging with them?.

Also this is a video game, not irl.

emilyhyoyeon

Dokolus wrote: »

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

Btoop wrote: »

Mirri not liking me snatching a butterfly out of the air and pulling it's wings off is understandable. Azandar's distaste for crafting coffee and playing ToT or Sharp-as-Night disliking the use of outfit stations however, these are all just dumb things that the developers appear to have just decided upon at random.

Adding characters with qwirks is fine but when those qwirks come in the form of their disproval over menial things, you just make the characters come across as petty and harder to like. (To clarify, the rapport system itself isn't the issue, the issue is how the rapport system is being used).

On a side note, I actually do agree with Azandar not liking ToT, that game is genuinly terrible.

If I was traveling with someone and they kept stopping to play a card game, that I do not play, that was 20 minutes a hand, I'd like them less too.

Then stop hanging with them?.

Also this is a video game, not irl.

now I'm imagining permanently losing access to Azandar on a character after like 3 games of tribute since he figures he should just stop hanging with them

ArchangelIsraphel

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

Btoop wrote: »

Mirri not liking me snatching a butterfly out of the air and pulling it's wings off is understandable. Azandar's distaste for crafting coffee and playing ToT or Sharp-as-Night disliking the use of outfit stations however, these are all just dumb things that the developers appear to have just decided upon at random.

Adding characters with qwirks is fine but when those qwirks come in the form of their disproval over menial things, you just make the characters come across as petty and harder to like. (To clarify, the rapport system itself isn't the issue, the issue is how the rapport system is being used).

On a side note, I actually do agree with Azandar not liking ToT, that game is genuinly terrible.

If I was traveling with someone and they kept stopping to play a card game, that I do not play, that was 20 minutes a hand, I'd like them less too.

Let's take a step back from the roleplay element of companions for a moment to consider that companions are not real, and do not have actual feelings. While your perspective might be relevant to real life interactions with actual human beings, in this instance, it is extremely poor game design.

Frankly speaking, a companion the player has paid to have access to, should not be programmed to actively discourage the player from participating in other elements of the game they have paid to have access to through a system of punishment and reward.

There are far better ways to establish the sense of a unique individual than a bare bones rapport system where the player is punished for playing the game by losing progress with a companion.

I enjoy roleplay and delving into character personalities, but I feel their likes and dislikes could have been expressed through a more robust system where the gain and loss of rapport didn't feel arbitrary and based on petty grievances normal people would talk through.

From an rp perspective, having a system where a companion basically goes "I don't like TOT and you played it, therefore you're bad and seen as less in my eyes" is not good character development. It is the equivalent of a child having a tantrum. There is no interaction where the player has the opportunity to even reconcile the issue, as real people would. From a roleplay perspective a "hey it was an accident" or a "sorry I didn't realize you hated cards, we can go do something else" response to give the companion would be welcome.

Instead the player must obey the companions whims or loose progress (or keep them unsummoned) the player is treated as an unapologetic cad by the companion, and it seems the companion feels you intend to offend them at every turn, with no chance to apologize or explain your actions.

It sounds petty to many on paper because it is when it discourages the use of game mechanics, and because the roleplay is entirely one sided.

It would have been better if the system has the companion react, then give the opportunity for an interaction before rapport loss takes place. For example:

You accidentally pick up a torch bug, and mirri reacts.

Talk to her, and get options to say:
1. Sorry it was an accident! I wanted the flower instead (no rapport loss)
2. I don't care (rapport loss)
3. I need these insects for (insert justification here) (mirri isn't pleased but no rapport loss takes place)

(Written better than this, obviously, but this is the best I can do on my phone in the middle of lunch )

Then, if the action is repeated more than once during the same hour, more rapport loss could occur.

This would at least make the rp feel two sided, as if you are able to have a discussion, rather than having your character regarded as someone intending to cause offense at every turn.

The player character must gain their trust and cater to their likes and dislikes, yet it seems they must do nothing to gain our trust. Very one sided, one dimensional, and lacking. While it is indeed true that they fight at our side, and this is a part of gaining trust, it would have been more interesting to allow us to deepen that trust, from a roleplay standpoint, by engaging in more mature discourse in regards to their likes and dislikes.

The_Boggart

I want a pro active companion, not necessarily humanoid to precede me in the environment and attack nasties, a hunting joint would do. all current companions are reactive and sometimes wait too long to get involved

spartaxoxo

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

Btoop wrote: »

Mirri not liking me snatching a butterfly out of the air and pulling it's wings off is understandable. Azandar's distaste for crafting coffee and playing ToT or Sharp-as-Night disliking the use of outfit stations however, these are all just dumb things that the developers appear to have just decided upon at random.

Adding characters with qwirks is fine but when those qwirks come in the form of their disproval over menial things, you just make the characters come across as petty and harder to like. (To clarify, the rapport system itself isn't the issue, the issue is how the rapport system is being used).

On a side note, I actually do agree with Azandar not liking ToT, that game is genuinly terrible.

If I was traveling with someone and they kept stopping to play a card game, that I do not play, that was 20 minutes a hand, I'd like them less too.

Let's take a step back from the roleplay element of companions for a moment to consider that companions are not real, and do not have actual feelings. While your perspective might be relevant to real life interactions with actual human beings, in this instance, it is extremely poor game design.

Frankly speaking, a companion the player has paid to have access to, should not be programmed to actively discourage the player from participating in other elements of the game they have paid to have access to through a system of punishment and reward.

Rapport systems are pretty common to video games and aide greatly in roleplay. I don't think roleplay should be set aside when considering them because it's a primary purpose of rapport systems to aide in roleplay. There's many successful games with this system and many players who seek this type of thing out. In fact, there's an entire genre of games dedicated to just getting to know NPCs, although such games are more fleshed out than a side feature in an MMO would be.

I don't think it's poor design at all given the large success of such systems and how many people enjoy them. It's not punishing a player who doesn't care about roleplay to have it decrease, as the purpose is mostly just roleplay.

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

From an rp perspective, having a system where a companion basically goes "I don't like TOT and you played it, therefore you're bad and seen as less in my eyes" is not good character development. It is the equivalent of a child having a tantrum. There is no interaction where the player has the opportunity to even reconcile the issue, as real people would. From a roleplay perspective a "hey it was an accident" or a "sorry I didn't realize you hated cards, we can go do something else" response to give the companion would be welcome.

As for the system being able to be more robust. Sure. But, the companion doesn't dislike you as a person just because they lost -1 rapport. The rapport with them does not work that way. They lose it in stages which usually requires repeated action. The only exception is if you were on the absolute borderline anyway.

So, if you have maxed out rapport with Mirri. You find out she doesn't like seeing torch bugs get squished because she makes a comment about it. And her opinion of you doesn't significantly change whatsoever. She got annoyed in the moment, but her overall of opinion you didn't change. But then you wouldn't stop calling her 100 times to catch torchbugs, you though you know she doesn't like it. That will make her opinion change. And that's pretty reasonable.

To use your real life example. People may have pet peeves and boundaries they want you to respect. Let's say a person doesn't like pranks for example. You prank them once. They express their irritation. You apologize. And then you never do it again. That will always be a disagreement you had and something they find a bit annoying. But, you two can easily remain friends. Now, let's say you refuse to stop pranking them. Then yes, that person would reevaluate that friendship with you. Rightfully so.

In that regard, companions not being able to be sweet talked out of their personality and not exclusively fawning over the player character no matter how poorly they are treated makes them more real, not less. Would it nice to be able to have a dialogue? Sure. But they aren't shallow because the rapport system imitates a boundary that they enforce. I think the player character "having" to respect a companion's boundary to maintain a good relationship far more imitates a healthy friendship than being able to do whatever the player wants when they feel like it because they can constantly talk their way out of it. Why should Bastian hang around someone who refuses to accept that his allergy means he doesn't even like being around cheese because it makes him nauseous? Why should Mirri want to hang around someone who insists on calling her to squish the bugs she loves? etc etc. The companions frankly let players get away with that type thing more than a real person would, for very good gameplay reasons.

There's not even much actual gameplay punishment for doing it either. The rapport bar is mostly for roleplay and once it's maxed once on the account, it ceases to matter.

ArchangelIsraphel

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

Btoop wrote: »

Mirri not liking me snatching a butterfly out of the air and pulling it's wings off is understandable. Azandar's distaste for crafting coffee and playing ToT or Sharp-as-Night disliking the use of outfit stations however, these are all just dumb things that the developers appear to have just decided upon at random.

Adding characters with qwirks is fine but when those qwirks come in the form of their disproval over menial things, you just make the characters come across as petty and harder to like. (To clarify, the rapport system itself isn't the issue, the issue is how the rapport system is being used).

On a side note, I actually do agree with Azandar not liking ToT, that game is genuinly terrible.

If I was traveling with someone and they kept stopping to play a card game, that I do not play, that was 20 minutes a hand, I'd like them less too.

Let's take a step back from the roleplay element of companions for a moment to consider that companions are not real, and do not have actual feelings. While your perspective might be relevant to real life interactions with actual human beings, in this instance, it is extremely poor game design.

Frankly speaking, a companion the player has paid to have access to, should not be programmed to actively discourage the player from participating in other elements of the game they have paid to have access to through a system of punishment and reward.

Rapport systems are pretty common to video games and aide greatly in roleplay. I don't think roleplay should be set aside when considering them because it's a primary purpose of rapport systems to aide in roleplay. There's many successful games with this system and many players who seek this type of thing out. In fact, there's an entire genre of games dedicated to just getting to know NPCs, although such games are more fleshed out than a side feature in an MMO would be.

I don't think it's poor design at all given the large success of such systems and how many people enjoy them. It's not punishing a player who doesn't care about roleplay to have it decrease, as the purpose is mostly just roleplay.

I was not saying that roleplay should be set aside within the mechanics of the game- I was setting aside the roleplay perspective in the first half of my post for the sake of speaking of mechanics, explaining why the system is bad for both roleplayers and non-roleplayers alike, without getting wrapped up in treating the companions like actual people. Sometimes it is nessicary to step back from the story elements and emotional perspective roleplay can induce, and see the mechanics as pure mechanics, for what they really are under the hood, and how they effect those other than ourselves.

In the rest of that post, I explained how the roleplay elements can be enhanced to be much better than they are. As they stand, they are extremely shallow. No where in my post did I say they should be done away with totally, but improved upon and refined to allow some actual roleplay to occur.

I've played many games with much better rapport systems than this one has, very likely some of the ones you're thinking of. By comparison, this rapport system is quite poorly designed, especially when many other games focused on such elements do it so much better (or allow modders to improve upon the experience) I'm actually a huge fan of these types of games, which is why I am very critical of the companion rapport system in this one. I wouldn't personally call the system in this game successful, as many players find it clunky and unpleasant.

I also disagree that the system isn't punishing to non-roleplayers, because even non-roleplayers raise the rapport on companions to receive perks. It is frustrating to them for the arbitrary dislikes of companions to lower rapport and punish them for engaging in game mechanics.

As someone who enjoys roleplay, if the entire system were handled differently, with a more robust system that allows the player to actually respond to the companions dissatisfaction (as I explained in my other post) I would not find it as cumbersome and arbitrary.

As for the system being able to be more robust. Sure. But, the companion doesn't dislike you as a person just because they lost -1 rapport. The rapport with them does not work that way. They lose it in stages which usually requires repeated action.

So, if you have maxed out rapport with Mirri. You find out she doesn't like seeing torch bugs get squished because she makes a comment about it. And her opinion of you doesn't significantly change whatsoever. She got annoyed in the moment, but her overall of opinion you didn't change. But then you wouldn't stop calling her 100 times to catch torchbugs, even you though you know she doesn't like it. That will make her opinion change. And that's pretty reasonable.

To use your real life example. People may have pet peeves and boundaries they want you to respect. Let's say a person doesn't like pranks for example. You prank them once. They express their irritation. You apologize. And then you never do it again. That will always be a disagreement you had and something they find a bit annoying. But, you two can easily remain friends. Now, let's say you refuse to stop pranking them. Then yes, that person would reevaluate that friendship with you. Rightfully so.

In that regard, companions not be able to sweet talked out of their personality and not exclusively fawning over the player character no matter how poorly they are treated makes them more real, not less. Would it nice to be able to have a dialogue? Sure. But they aren't shallow because the rapport system imitates a boundary that they enforce. I think the player character having to respect a companions boundary far more imitates a healthy friendship than being able to do whatever the player wants when they feel like it.

But therein lies the problem- when the player accidentally trips over these mechanics, there is no dialouge which allows for an apology and reconcilliation, as there would be in life. The player is assumed to have done the action purposely, with no dialouge allowing them to say "hey, I accidentally touched that torch bug, but didn't actually pick it up"

No where in my post did I say the companions should excessively fawn over the player, or that a character can not have boundaries. But when the player runs into these boundaries inadvertently, discourse should take place. It would deepen the friendship rp wise, and make it more real, if you were allowed to actually apologize, or even have a negative interaction where you tell the companion you disagree with their perspective. We are also playing a character, who has opinions, likes and dislikes, of their own, if we are a roleplayer.

Letting the player set their own boundaries and play their own character as they see fit, instead of blindly submitting to a companions desires, would make the system far more robust. There is a difference between setting boundaries, and getting upset at someone because they poured themselves a coffee when you like tea.

As it stands, if the player is to assert their own boundaries with a companion that is nagging them- the solution is to unsummon them. Our own characters have personalities as well when we roleplay, and a few simple options would make the experience much better.

It isn't a healthy friendship when someone is imposing their likes and dislikes on you, with no opportunity to apologize or tell them you disagree, if we're going to look at it from a real life perspective. Friendship goes two ways.

Nestor

I stop caring about Rapport once they hit L20. Once you have unlocked their reward and house placement, Rapport no longer matters. And, on an alt where the main had already gained everything, it matters even less.

spartaxoxo

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

As it stands, if the player is to assert their own boundaries with a companion that is nagging them- the solution is to unsummon them. Our own characters have personalities as well when we roleplay, and a few simple options would make the experience much better.

It isn't a healthy friendship when someone is imposing their likes and dislikes on you, with no opportunity to apologize or tell them you disagree, if we're going to look at it from a real life perspective. Friendship goes two ways.

Except the whole "apology" thing as laid out was just to avoid rapport loss. To erase the negative result of the interaction. An apology doesn't make negative feelings go away in real life, and not every pet peeves is given deep conversation in real life. Sometimes someone just tells you they don't like a certain thing and then you don't do that thing with them.

Friendship goes two ways doesn't mean that you should just get to constantly disrespect someone else's boundaries, apologize, and then do it again. But that's effectively the system created when a rapport loss is negated because of a dialogue option so that you never lose the rapport in the first place.

Edit:

Also, you can "make it up" to the companion by doing something they like, such as reading a book.

ArchangelIsraphel

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

As it stands, if the player is to assert their own boundaries with a companion that is nagging them- the solution is to unsummon them. Our own characters have personalities as well when we roleplay, and a few simple options would make the experience much better.

It isn't a healthy friendship when someone is imposing their likes and dislikes on you, with no opportunity to apologize or tell them you disagree, if we're going to look at it from a real life perspective. Friendship goes two ways.

Except the whole "apology" thing as laid out was just to avoid rapport loss. To erase the negative result of the interaction. An apology doesn't make negative feelings go away in real life, and not every pet peeves is given deep conversation in real life. Sometimes someone just tells you they don't like a certain thing and then you don't do that thing with them.

Friendship goes two ways doesn't mean that you should just get to constantly disrespect someone else's boundaries, apologize, and then do it again. But that's effectively the system created when a rapport loss is negated because of a dialogue option so that you never lose the rapport in the first place.

I'm afraid you've completely misinterpreted what I was getting at with the adjustments to the system- and if we're going to look at this from an RP perspective, I'm sorry, but our character behaving like an automaton that simply accepts the dissatisfaction of a companion constantly is not what I would call a healthy relationship at all. Especially when many of us have characters who would attempt to help a companion with an issue, but have no RP opportunity to do so within the context of how the system works.

Boundaries should be discussed and established in healthy ways, and constant nagging when accidentally tripping over the mechanic of a game is a very poor representation of what the word boundaries entails. Boundaries are very serious things that are not handled well by the companion system. Not even a little bit.

I also never said the system was in place to allow the player to CONSTANTLY disrespect a boundary- it is there so that an accident can be apologized for- perhaps it wasn't clear, but I stated that if the player continues to do the action after an apology has been made, rapport loss happens. I also said that there should be an hour or so between actions and the ability to apologize, but maybe it wasn't clear. This is to account for ACCIDENTAL things. It is very easy to, for example, accidentally pick up an object and steal, or accidentally touch a torch bug- players shouldn't have to dance around using addons or toggles to avoid displeasing an AI.

It makes more sense, RP wise, to be able to say to Bastian "oh my god, I accidentally picked that up and want to put it back!" and interact with him a bit, have some kind of dialogue with him regarding how you can fix it. Or tell mirri that you didnt mean to touch the torch bug (especially when you didn't even pick it up) And to have some kind of dialogue with them.

Like I said, I'd like dialouge on a much deeper level than what I wrote out that actually provides some level of roleplay, but apparently I wasn't clear enough.

I mean, I think apologizing to a companion and admitting to a mistake like an adult makes a lot more sense to retain rapport than taking her to a delve to regain it. If we're going to use your logic, according to how you've phrased it, their negative feelings shouldn't be erased by an apology...but apparently they can be by a trip to do dolemans or a quest? I think I'd rather have the ability to have my character apologize for a transgression rather than this rather cold and lifeless system. That way my character can express actual remorse for overstepping a boundary, rather than just topping up rapport.

Unfortunately, due to the way the game itself is designed "respecting a companions boundaries" is very easy to trip over, even if you are trying to respect them, and want to (In the context of RP). And that's why I prefer to take a step away from the emotional/roleplay side of things when discussing the issues with a system, and how they can be mitigated, or done better. A lot of us have absolutely no desire to disrespect anyone's boundaries, and yet we're at the mercy of a system which tells us we have when the action taken was purely accidental because the targeting system was off

(I also want to make one thing very clear to anyone else out there- please do not feel pressured to "respect" an AI companion who is not real. Respect your real friends and your families, discuss boundaries with them, and be a good person. But for the love of Mara, this is a game. Relax and enjoy it. Not wanting to cater to an AI in a videogame doesn't make you a bad person. Don't let the game play you.)

spartaxoxo

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

As it stands, if the player is to assert their own boundaries with a companion that is nagging them- the solution is to unsummon them. Our own characters have personalities as well when we roleplay, and a few simple options would make the experience much better.

It isn't a healthy friendship when someone is imposing their likes and dislikes on you, with no opportunity to apologize or tell them you disagree, if we're going to look at it from a real life perspective. Friendship goes two ways.

Except the whole "apology" thing as laid out was just to avoid rapport loss. To erase the negative result of the interaction. An apology doesn't make negative feelings go away in real life, and not every pet peeves is given deep conversation in real life. Sometimes someone just tells you they don't like a certain thing and then you don't do that thing with them.

Friendship goes two ways doesn't mean that you should just get to constantly disrespect someone else's boundaries, apologize, and then do it again. But that's effectively the system created when a rapport loss is negated because of a dialogue option so that you never lose the rapport in the first place.

I'm afraid you've completely misinterpreted what I was getting at with the adjustments to the system- and if we're going to look at this from an RP perspective, I'm sorry, but our character behaving like an automaton that simply accepts the dissatisfaction of a companion constantly is not what I would call a healthy relationship at all. Especially when many of us have characters who would attempt to help a companion with an issue, but have no RP opportunity to do so within the context of how the system works.

Boundaries should be discussed and established in healthy ways, and constant nagging when accidentally tripping over the mechanic of a game is a very poor representation of what the word boundaries entails. Boundaries are very serious things that are not handled well by the companion system. Not even a little bit.

I also never said the system was in place to allow the player to CONSTANTLY disrespect a boundary- it is there so that an accident can be apologized for- perhaps it wasn't clear, but I stated that if the player continues to do the action after an apology has been made, rapport loss happens. I also said that there should be an hour or so between actions and the ability to apologize, but maybe it wasn't clear. This is to account for ACCIDENTAL things. It is very easy to, for example, accidentally pick up an object and steal, or accidentally touch a torch bug- players shouldn't have to dance around using addons or toggles to avoid displeasing an AI.

It makes more sense, RP wise, to be able to say to Bastian "oh my god, I accidentally picked that up and want to put it back!" and interact with him a bit, have some kind of dialogue with him regarding how you can fix it. Or tell mirri that you didnt mean to touch the torch bug (especially when you didn't even pick it up) And to have some kind of dialogue with them.

Like I said, I'd like dialouge on a much deeper level than what I wrote out that actually provides some level of roleplay, but apparently I wasn't clear enough.

I mean, I think apologizing to a companion and admitting to a mistake like an adult makes a lot more sense to retain rapport than taking her to a delve to regain it. If we're going to use your logic, according to how you've phrased it, their negative feelings shouldn't be erased by an apology...but apparently they can be by a trip to do dolemans or a quest? I think I'd rather have the ability to have my character apologize for a transgression rather than this rather cold and lifeless system. That way my character can express actual remorse for overstepping a boundary, rather than just topping up rapport.

Unfortunately, due to the way the game itself is designed "respecting a companions boundaries" is very easy to trip over, even if you are trying to respect them, and want to (In the context of RP). And that's why I prefer to take a step away from the emotional/roleplay side of things when discussing the issues with a system, and how they can be mitigated, or done better. A lot of us have absolutely no desire to disrespect anyone's boundaries, and yet we're at the mercy of a system which tells us we have when the action taken was purely accidental because the targeting system was off

(I also want to make one thing very clear to anyone else out there- please do not feel pressured to "respect" an AI companion who is not real. Respect your real friends and your families, discuss boundaries with them, and be a good person. But for the love of Mara, this is a game. Relax and enjoy it. Not wanting to cater to an AI in a videogame doesn't make you a bad person. Don't let the game play you.)

Building on your point about how the rapport system can mirror real life doesn't mean that I think the companions are actually real.

The apology mechanic as described would prevent the loss of rapport at all (for accidents), which as it stands just is video gamey representation of mild dislike occuring. So, there's a roleplay difference between losing rapport and then regaining with whatever action: an apology, making it up to them with a likable activity, or whatever, and a rapport loss never occuring in the first place.

Edit:

Actually let me phrase it different so I'm more clear.

I'd like it to be

Companions loses rapport. Player has the option to talk to the companion to gain the rapport back.

Rather than companion opening a dialogue and then the player talks there way out of it for -0 rapport.

End edit

As I said but probably didn't make totally clear, I'm not against those deeper conversations in general. So, I'd agree with you that we could use some more dialogue options. I just think the rapport loss should occur regardless of the player's actions when the companion is taken to do things they dislike. It aides in immersion and models a healthier dynamic. I'd be okay with more dialogue, including apologies, in general. But companions definitely should lose rapport when players do things they don't like imo.

Ilsabet

People have pet peeves that don't have to make sense, although I see where ArchangelIsraphel is coming from wishing that the nitpicky preferences aligned better with the rest of a character's personality and values. But you can be friends with someone and still find things about them annoying, and it's not going to destroy your friendship unless it's something that crosses some sort of line. Bastian will still be my BFF even if I rob an entire marketplace right under his nose, and a few fondue plates aren't going to ruin our relationship either. Obviously people are allowed to be put off by the negative comments and/or dislike seeing rapport decreases for trivial actions, but in my mind those things are likewise too trivial to bother much when I generally gain much more enjoyment from having the companion around.

Treselegant wrote: »

When a game company does release a character that approves of everything you do, never pushes back, always thinks you're great - it's my observation from some of the single player games I've played - that those characters may have an initial boom of popularity but ultimately they get less attention and don't have much of a fan following after the shine has worn off.

Hell, I chose Bastian as the official sidekick for my thieving nightblade because their differing moral compasses created the potential for an interesting personal dynamic. Ilsabet and Mirri might have had a great time going around being nightblade pals, but the initial friction and eventual coming-to-terms with the idealistic do-gooder was ultimately much more satisfying. It helps that I'm literally writing out the development of my character's relationships, and most people won't put as much thought into their RP as I do, but you can definitely have enjoyable experiences with characters who aren't total yes-men.

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

It would have been better if the system has the companion react, then give the opportunity for an interaction before rapport loss takes place. For example:

You accidentally pick up a torch bug, and mirri reacts.

Talk to her, and get options to say:
1. Sorry it was an accident! I wanted the flower instead (no rapport loss)
2. I don't care (rapport loss)
3. I need these insects for (insert justification here) (mirri isn't pleased but no rapport loss takes place)

This sounds like it would get real tedious after the first or second time you accidentally (or non-accidentally) grabbed something and felt the compulsion to beg forgiveness. I bet most people would stop bothering pretty quick, since the negligible rapport loss isn't really worth the time and trouble, and it's unlikely we'd get a meaningful conversation out of it like you'd want to have with a real friend.

Also the game has no way of knowing whether the player did something accidentally or not, so it would have to be presented for everyone and would indeed become a get-out-of-rapport-loss-free card that would kinda negate the meaningfulness of the companion's preferences.

What we really need are fewer peeves that can be triggered accidentally in the first place, especially given how notorious the game is for things like janky targeting.

Dokolus

I honestly think they should just redesign the rapport system entirely, because I'm seeing people in here not being able to distinguish real life opinions from "opinions" from an NPC in-game that impose their will upon you and somehow that's okay, when it really isn't.

Like I fully understand what ArchangelIsraphel and absolutely agree on their take, because logically it makes sense, but then you have others in this thread trying to cite it being okay to just stay the way it is and have the pet peeve "opinions" be imposed on you, and that's just not a good argument, I'm sorry, that's a bad take on the system in it's current state.

This game isn't real life, the NPC's are not real, and their "opinions" shouldn't be thrust upon the player as a punishment mechanic to deter players from dabbling in other mechanics the devs want you to use, that you also can pay to use as well.

I want to go so far as to say that is a non argument of a standpoint, because if a dev designs something to deter you from doing something they spent years coding to get you to use, to pay to use, then I am sorry, so very very sorry, but that isn't my issue, that's the devs not deciding, not sitting down at the table and thinking this through and writing a final decision on how things should be run (remember how Overworld content got nerfed and now people are saying the game is too easy?, that's the devs/execs, not me, that's not my problem, that's their problem they created).

Devs are humans like everyone else, they are absolutely fully capable of making bad systems or not tuning them to where everyone is fine with it. People are voicing issues right now about this very system, and thus people would like to see it changed, not excused for being fine and dandy or being tied to irl life logic (which doesn't work, stop trying to use that for a fantasy MMO).

At the end of the day, what ArchangelIsraphel said was fine, and I feel like it would be a net benefit instead of this imaginary net negative that 1-2 of you seem to be pulling out of thin air. It's fine to disagree, but please, do desire improvement, not stagnation, just because you're content with the current system does not mean we all are, and we are just as valid in our say as those that somehow wish for stagnation.

Northwold

Biggest irritation for me is the game telling you to do something that will damage your rapport with them without telling you it will damage your rapport. Classic example is getting a writ to make a cheese plate and then Bastian has a fit.

(And, like, why? No one's asking him to eat it.)

Also, the idea of of Bastian being lactose intolerant is so anachronistic and not part of the world of Tamriel that it's really jarring when he talks about it.

spartaxoxo

Dokolus wrote: »

This game isn't real life, the NPC's are not real, and their "opinions" shouldn't be thrust upon the player as a punishment mechanic to deter players from dabbling in other mechanics the devs want you to use, that you also can pay to use as well.

Companions having their own opinions increases immersion and characterization. If someone was talking about the floatiness of combat and how real spears don't work like pool noodles when it comes to the jabs animation, nobody would say that person think jabs is real. It's okay for little sprinkles of realism to add in some grounding in a fantasy video game.

The rapport mechanic doesn't deter players from dabbling in other mechanics. A player can just stow the companion if they care that much about their rapport while doing it. And it's also so little rapport loss that a player can just straight up ignore the companion and do it anyway with them out. Companions also change opinions in stages so incidental rapport loss or gain is unlikely to change the rapport stage of the player. A single, very easy quest also knocks out hours of negative rapport.

If someone refuses to do an activity because their companion will dislike it, that's their prerogative. But, I can say I have never been dissuaded from doing something I want to do in this game because of a companion's rapport. I just stow them or ignore it depending on my mood.

katanagirl1

All this discussion may be because, at least on console, and from what I understand on PC without add-ons, there is no way to know how much the rapport goes up or down for various activities. There is no numerical value associated with it.

It took me a while to realize the whole discussion about it taking so long to raise companion rapport was because other players did not realize things like harvesting a runestone was not equal to doing a zone daily quest in terms of rapport increase.

I am able to quickly increase rapport knowing which activities give greater values so it doesn’t take very long at all. Not nearly as long as leveling their XP. Yet I have seen many a post about the slow grind of increasing rapport.

Kappachi

emilyhyoyeon wrote: »

Dokolus wrote: »

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

Btoop wrote: »

Mirri not liking me snatching a butterfly out of the air and pulling it's wings off is understandable. Azandar's distaste for crafting coffee and playing ToT or Sharp-as-Night disliking the use of outfit stations however, these are all just dumb things that the developers appear to have just decided upon at random.

Adding characters with qwirks is fine but when those qwirks come in the form of their disproval over menial things, you just make the characters come across as petty and harder to like. (To clarify, the rapport system itself isn't the issue, the issue is how the rapport system is being used).

On a side note, I actually do agree with Azandar not liking ToT, that game is genuinly terrible.

If I was traveling with someone and they kept stopping to play a card game, that I do not play, that was 20 minutes a hand, I'd like them less too.

Then stop hanging with them?.

Also this is a video game, not irl.

now I'm imagining permanently losing access to Azandar on a character after like 3 games of tribute since he figures he should just stop hanging with them

is that what happens when your rapport hits zero? even with all the negatives i get, the golden positives always take me to max rapport in no time

katanagirl1 wrote: »

All this discussion may be because, at least on console, and from what I understand on PC without add-ons, there is no way to know how much the rapport goes up or down for various activities. There is no numerical value associated with it.

It took me a while to realize the whole discussion about it taking so long to raise companion rapport was because other players did not realize things like harvesting a runestone was not equal to doing a zone daily quest in terms of rapport increase.

I am able to quickly increase rapport knowing which activities give greater values so it doesn’t take very long at all. Not nearly as long as leveling their XP. Yet I have seen many a post about the slow grind of increasing rapport.

it's clearly outlined with the color of the rapport gain and how many hearts are in the rapport +.

emilyhyoyeon

Kappachi wrote: »

emilyhyoyeon wrote: »

Dokolus wrote: »

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

Btoop wrote: »

Mirri not liking me snatching a butterfly out of the air and pulling it's wings off is understandable. Azandar's distaste for crafting coffee and playing ToT or Sharp-as-Night disliking the use of outfit stations however, these are all just dumb things that the developers appear to have just decided upon at random.

Adding characters with qwirks is fine but when those qwirks come in the form of their disproval over menial things, you just make the characters come across as petty and harder to like. (To clarify, the rapport system itself isn't the issue, the issue is how the rapport system is being used).

On a side note, I actually do agree with Azandar not liking ToT, that game is genuinly terrible.

If I was traveling with someone and they kept stopping to play a card game, that I do not play, that was 20 minutes a hand, I'd like them less too.

Then stop hanging with them?.

Also this is a video game, not irl.

now I'm imagining permanently losing access to Azandar on a character after like 3 games of tribute since he figures he should just stop hanging with them

is that what happens when your rapport hits zero? even with all the negatives i get, the golden positives always take me to max rapport in no time

I have no idea what happens at max negative report. I thought of the losing access thing after what the post I responded to implied. I also have essentially max positive rapport at all times with all the companions. For me it also feels natural to not bring them along (ie put them away) for things they don't like doing, and bring them for things they do.

Carcamongus

The companion system isn't the deepest in the market, but I like it. Yes, some of the quirks are annoying, but companions are meant to imitate people and people have annoying quirks. Considering the system's depth, these quirks do add personality to the characters. Companionship means dealing with differing opinions and, just as in real life, you can do something nice to make up for something bad. I don't see this as having their opinion imposed on the player, especially considering how many of these transgressions cause minor rapport loss. It's not an imposition because the player has the power to just send the companions away at any time when their traits become a burden. I got tired of Sharp reprimanding me for letting my gear break and Azandar throwing hissy fits over mushrooms, so off they went.

When I played Skyrim, I avoided killing torchbugs, instead getting their alchemy ingredient from vendors. As a result, at first I actually liked that Mirri wanted those insects left alone. However, this has backfired considerably, as the fetching bugs get in the way of looting so often I keep angering her and then get angry myself: now, every once in a while, I rampage through the land grabbing all the little [censored] I can find. Obviously, Mirri stays home when that happens.

spartaxoxo

katanagirl1 wrote: »

All this discussion may be because, at least on console, and from what I understand on PC without add-ons, there is no way to know how much the rapport goes up or down for various activities. There is no numerical value associated with it.

It took me a while to realize the whole discussion about it taking so long to raise companion rapport was because other players did not realize things like harvesting a runestone was not equal to doing a zone daily quest in terms of rapport increase.

I am able to quickly increase rapport knowing which activities give greater values so it doesn’t take very long at all. Not nearly as long as leveling their XP. Yet I have seen many a post about the slow grind of increasing rapport.

I actually really agree with this. I realized it was miniscule long ago when the companions were first introduced and I tried to power level rapport. At that point, I realized that the small increases/decreases don't actually matter. But, I had to do experimenting and the reading online to verify to come to that conclusion. I actually was mislead by the graphics themselves to think they were more important than they actually were. I don't think a lot of people actually know how minuscule those annoying interactions are in terms of point value.

zaria

Dokolus wrote: »

Grizzbeorn wrote: »

The coffee thing is logical, since tea is his beverage of choice.

I'm not a fan of him throwing a hissy when you give some coin to the needy folk.

Yes but disliking someone because they like coffee does in fact come off as rather petty mentality, and well, this game involves crafting as a core mechanic, so an NPC not wanting you to craft something specific seems petty onto itself by their own logic.

Same goes for giving to needy folk as well, petty no matter how many fans or devs try to spin it. There was no need for that to even be added in, other than a phone it in-type response to devs asking what their likes/dislikes should be like.

Also another; "I don't like it when you fish"

yet you're a Khajiit, and I've seen plenty around ES lore that do in fact fish and eat fish, so it is thus accepted that Khajiit do in fact like fish, but this one companion that happens to be a Khajiit that doesn't like you fishing, both comes off as illogical and mechanics breaking, because you need to fish to fillet fish in order to cook a dish.

It's almost like none of the devs know how to use the rapport system properly and integrate it to give the companions some actual personality that could otherwise bloom far better than the state it is in now, where you are basically blocked off from mechanics the devs created and wanted you to make use of (which you can't when a companion throws a hissy fit at you, which is also the devs basically telling you not to do and thus becomes a duality paradox).

The system should have revolved around interactions with the companions, instead of what the player is doing, or at the very least, involve more companion quests and letting the player decide how to approach their quests and the outcomes affecting their rapport directly (which would have been a far better use of the system, rather than currently, where it is absolutely used to deter you from using other mechanics).

It's so weird how we're in 2023, and we're seeing a rise in voice generated AI and ChatGPT, yet devs in games still cannot create an AI companion that isn't bolted down to an archaic rapport system that's barebones and tied to deterring you from other game mechanics/systems. I'm not asking for Skynet elvel self aware AI, I'm just asking for a companion like this, that actually has some love and soul put into it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5jiK9aTGVg

Even with this companion mod, they even give you a toggle switch to tell them not to give you more picks, and she even says "I'll keep my thoughts for myself from now on ". Like how hard is it for devs on ESO to allow for you to tell or even ask your fellow companion to keep their thoughts on coffee/fishing to themselves and simply abiding by that advice? (I know it's not impossible if this modder is able to both voice the companion and mod/create it in the first place).

That mod looks amazing, almost get me to want to play Skyrim again.

richo262

Once max level and rapport is achieved, it should all go away.

I just won her total undying affection and solved a mystery that has plagued her for a long time or saved her life. The fact she wants to get annoyed at me for catching a torch bug becomes quite petty at that point. I can understand 'pet peeves' if we just met, but max rapport and quest completion and max level should render all pet peeves obsolete at that point.

I can understand significant actions, like committing a murder should have meaning, but all the trivial things at least should be done with at a certain point. Not just because its petty, but because once max level and rapport is achieved and you unlock the permanent perk, the rapport system itself becomes obsolete and more of a nag than anything with actual purpose.

Necrotech_Master

emilyhyoyeon wrote: »

Kappachi wrote: »

emilyhyoyeon wrote: »

Dokolus wrote: »

FantasticFreddie wrote: »

Btoop wrote: »

Mirri not liking me snatching a butterfly out of the air and pulling it's wings off is understandable. Azandar's distaste for crafting coffee and playing ToT or Sharp-as-Night disliking the use of outfit stations however, these are all just dumb things that the developers appear to have just decided upon at random.

Adding characters with qwirks is fine but when those qwirks come in the form of their disproval over menial things, you just make the characters come across as petty and harder to like. (To clarify, the rapport system itself isn't the issue, the issue is how the rapport system is being used).

On a side note, I actually do agree with Azandar not liking ToT, that game is genuinly terrible.

If I was traveling with someone and they kept stopping to play a card game, that I do not play, that was 20 minutes a hand, I'd like them less too.

Then stop hanging with them?.

Also this is a video game, not irl.

now I'm imagining permanently losing access to Azandar on a character after like 3 games of tribute since he figures he should just stop hanging with them

is that what happens when your rapport hits zero? even with all the negatives i get, the golden positives always take me to max rapport in no time

I have no idea what happens at max negative report. I thought of the losing access thing after what the post I responded to implied. I also have essentially max positive rapport at all times with all the companions. For me it also feels natural to not bring them along (ie put them away) for things they don't like doing, and bring them for things they do.

my understanding at the lowest companion rapport level, if you do something the companion doesnt like, they will unsummon themselves, with a cooldown timer on when you can resummon them again

kind of their way to actively leave you, but you can never permanently lose access to them

Amottica

spartaxoxo wrote: »

It's good that they have incidental pet peeves. It adds character from a lore perspective. And from a gameplay standpoint, it makes it easier for the player to avoid, if they so chose.

IRL Everyone has pet peeves. It's part of being human.

I thought it was an interesting twist to a companion.

evan302

I'd be happy if they would just fix it so Mirri gets annoyed if you take the torchbug (for me, it's always a torchbug), but not if you accidentally touch it then leave it alone.
Torchbugs always seem to be hovering over nodes and it's frustrating getting a scolding when you didn't even loot the pesky little thing.

I quite like the idea of having some way of apologising or at least 'discussing' an incident with your companion. That would feel more realistic to me.

Some of the dislikes don't feel very well thought out at all. It's like the devs just plucked out things at random.
Azandar and his dislike of mushrooms always makes me laugh as I lose rapport for picking them but then I gain rapport with him from doing Alchemy, which needs mushrooms.

I don't want my companions to be my cheerleaders, but at the same time, it's no fun having them around when they whinge about me doing stuff that's simply normal game-play.

jommerryrth

i think of them more as pet peeves... remember when that phrase was popular? in grade school we would talk about our pet peeves. back in the 70's and onward...

MasterSpatula

For me, nothing about this system is as dumb as the fact that Mirri gives you a penalty for killing insects even if you exit out of the menu and let the insect fly away unharmed. That's some genuinely surprising bad design right there.

amig186

By far the worst trigger is Sharp losing 5 rapport when I destroy something from my inventory. Mirri losing 1 point for clicking a bug is nothing compared to this. I'm used to destroying items from daily quests that I don't need, as well as most of the stuff I find in chests, it's just muscle memory at this point. But it seems Sharp would prefer that I leave chests half-looted like a prick. It once led to a funny (in a sad way) situation where after turning in the Necrom WB daily he was ready to give me a quest, but then he changed his mind when I destroyed the blue pauldron from the reward box and his quest marker disappeared. The reasoning behind this is just as dumb, he complains that I'm wasting perfectly good coin when the item was worth 40 gold. What do I care about 40 gold when I have millions in my bank. Please ZOS, just lower this to 1 and it will cease to be a problem.

zaria

One weird thing with ember is that you have to use to long time an not get an purple box to get report.
Yes, I get that they think perfect heist is to hard but why not let both give report.