You always have the option to tell your companion to "wait", so I don't think those things would be an issue. As it stands now, I don't have a problem with it as long as they nerf the companions a bit in the final release.
A fair point - but would it "punish" players who do travel with companions or discourage people from traveling with one if a "killer takes all, but you don't have to bring a companion" system was implemented, thus wasting the effort to put them in the game in the first place? As for nerfing companions, I fully agree that it needs to be done if they are capable of wiping out mobs all by themselves, but it's a difficult line to balance - if they are too powerful, it ruins the challenge, but if they are too weak, it breaks the immersion. Hopefully they manage to get the balance right.
I wouldn't mind seeing something like that, but I hope Piranha Bytes doesn't attempt it. I like their games because of the unique atmosphere they've always provided, and going party-based would undoubtedly change too many things for my liking. They need to stick with what they're good at doing.
I also wouldn't want to see PB attempt such a thing for the reasons you just mentioned. If Bethesda could poach some good writers who are experienced at writing dialogue and creating character back-stories, I wouldn't mind seeing them try such a thing - but then again, they kind of fall in the PB category for the same reasons already stated. Also, they already have enough problems with things such as path-finding and A.I. that would be crucial for a smooth party-based/open-world experience
.
Dragon Age: Origins was close to that kind of experience, but was held back by the linear level design.
Ah, yet another disappointing aspect of Bioware being…well, Bioware, and mutilating the DA setting. Origins left a very strong base for a larger game world with mechanics that would work quite nicely in a more open but not quite open-world design template. Then again, Bioware has always been very story-driven, and even if a true DA2 had been created, it would have never been strong in exploration (not that that's a bad thing - I love story-driven experiences more than open-world exploration most of the time). I also feel that real-time/action combat would be the only way to make a party-based RPG work in an open world; I have a feeling that tactical systems - as much as I adore them - would cause combat to take too long in a game as big as a Gothic or Elder Scrolls game.
Ironically, Baldur's Gate is probably the closest thing to what you describe.
And BG is also the best example of why such a thing would be so difficult to achieve. Compared to BG2, BG1 just doesn't quite feel right in terms of pacing, content, balance, encounter design, and other various issues. But it does serve as a good template for any future designers who would ever want to attempt such a thing.
…And now i have gone completely off-topic…sorry for that, maybe I should start a new thread if the "dream game: a party-based RPG in a true open-world" discussion continues