If we accept that all video game characters fall under one of three literary classifications — prototype, archetype, and stereotype — it’s easy to see the appeal of the archetype. This is the established, easily-understandable character model. The badass space marine or seductive sorceress. The prototype, while imaginative and interesting, is too easily viewed as ‘weird,’ and that means inaccessible. The stereotype? Overused, oversimplified, and more often than naught, offensive.
The only difference I can see between what he considers an archetype and a stereotype is that stereotypes are "more often than naught (sic), offensive". The jive-talking token black guy is just as boring as the badass space marine or the seductive sorceress because they're all overused and oversimplified.
The archetypal portion of a character should only constitute a minor aspect of what defines them. "<s>Badass</s> space marine" is an archetype. "<s>Seductive</s>" sorceress is an archetype. Does this cunt seriously believe that "seductive space marine" would cause their end user to throw an exception and start thinking "DOES NOT COMPUTE"?
"Space marine" is an archetype - people understand what being a space marine entails. Prefixing that with "seductive" is the bit that sets Zapp Brannigan apart from Marcus Fenix.
The prototype, while imaginative and interesting, is too easily viewed as ‘weird,’ and that means inaccessible.
Is he fucking serious? He's basically saying "anything original is inaccessible". While it explains a lot about the sort of characters we get in Bethesda games, that's a fucking ridiculous attitude to take. How the fuck does anyone expect to have a memorable character if they're exactly the same as everything that's come before?
Best character I've related to in recent times? GlaDOS. She'd be so much less interesting if she was a SHODAN "kill all humans" wannabe. But instead, she's childish, to the point of being endearing and it's hard to pin any moral label on her, despite represhensible actions on her part. Does anyone seriously believe GlaDOS is "inaccessible" because she's different? Everyone gets the "not entirely sane AI" archetype. That's familiar, but it's such a small portion of her actual persona - which has a solid foundation of imaginative concepts.
Fucking hell.
Anyway.
…creating fiction for a video game poses one very distinct challenge - you’ve got to accept that the whole of your writing - characters, narrative, everything - is simply not as important as the gameplay…
See this I find a bit wayward too. He's right that gameplay ought to be paramount in the interactive medium, but "not as important as the gameplay" implies a needless separation. It would be far better to say something along the lines of - "You've got to accept that when working within an interactive medium, the whole of your writing ought to be integrated into gameplay with as little compromise as possible. Gameplay is paramount, so concessions must be made on the narrative side if the two don't integrate easily.
But will someone please kick this fucker's soapbox out from under him? Everytime I read Op/Ed ravings from him I think - "you're doing it wrong".