View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
01-21-2012, 03:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mephihsto View Post
If you spent less time being butthurt and spent more time paying attention to responses you would see Cryptics motive behind the name change. The amount of complaining because exocomps and hortas being "pets" and not "companions" was unreal. SWTOR didn't do companions first, so revering them because their companions are more like *SLAVES* is stupid anyway. I also refer to the post defining what a companion even is. Vanity pets, by definition are companions. People that run around doing every whim of yours, gathering, cooking, cleaning, fighting, being cannon fodder or whatever else you can force them to do, they aren't companions, they are slaves.
This entire post kind f came off as a little rude and entirely unecessary. I'm not saying that one is better over the other, in terms of games or definition of companions, but that i find it a bit much that one game is starting to change terms and names and adding items just because that's how the more popular game has it.

Have you even played that game? sure SOME of them can be slaves, but you're making it sound like they all are and nothing more. Story wise they give reasons for being there other than forced servitude as well as will send you on missions for them as well. One of my characters was kind of forced into not being with one companion and marry another..... not the kind of demands slaves get to make.

Sure SWTOR didn't DO companions first, or have legacy unlocks, or weapons that have energy blades popping from the hilt. But star trek online didn't either and i'm commenting on the fact that once SWTOR came out, suddenly that what they had to have. This game is great on it's own and shouldn't have to make it's self more like another just to try and be more popular.