36 réponses à ce sujet

[Derengard]

Old. It's not even specially convincing and full of mistakes on their part.

[Wrath of Doom]

konfeta wrote...

Before anyone rages, Cracked's purpose is not accuracy. It is humor. No more, no less.

Having said that, it was dead on. Trajan60 had a review of DA:O that nailed BioWare for recycling character archetypes.

[Daerog]

Wrath of Doom wrote...

konfeta wrote...

Before anyone rages, Cracked's purpose is not accuracy. It is humor. No more, no less.

Having said that, it was dead on. Trajan60 had a review of DA:O that nailed BioWare for recycling character archetypes.

Recycling character archetypes? I'm not sure, but isn't it the point of archetypes to be used over and over? So, saying "recycled archetypes" seems redundant.

Anyway, archetypes in BW games, no surprise there, but the article was okay.

[BossHroth]

LOL. Nice.

[Maria Caliban]

konfeta wrote...

Before anyone rages, Cracked's purpose is not accuracy. It is humor. No more, no less.

But I didn't laugh. Does that mean I can rage?

Mock Effect is much better because it's funny AND accurate.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 20 février 2010 - 09:16 .

[Aeto Alessos]

I found it amusing.

[Feraele]

BeautyoftheBeast wrote...

Okay, I didn't see this posted anywhere- but I may have epically failed and missed it but whatever.

I bring you: The Only Five Characters in Bioware Games.

http://www.cracked.c...y-3872-bioware/

This thing made me giggle uncontrollably.

Had a look,  for a "supposed" journalist..his spelling is not very good..have to say.

Example:  "Baulder's Gate"??? Hello...didn't just do it once, but a few times.   I think maybe he forgot some research in his rush to attempt to be funny.   

I think he failed at both journalism ..and "funnyism"   to be honest.  

[Feraele]

Ralnith wrote...

The critical research failure comes at the end though: "Shale from Dragon Age
is technically not a robot, but he is a artificially created golem [...]".

How does he talk in real life I wonder...doesn't he find it awkward to say...a artificially created... it's AN artificially created...whatever. 

I wonder  what they teach in journalism schools these days....Pig Latin?   Or texting..yeah thats it.   U r redding my stry...nd i tink itz a gud 1.

[Mlai00]

I have to agree that Leliana got crammed into the Naive Minx archetype.

Her background should dictate that even if she has "converted" to the Chantry religion and set of morals, she should not be so... innocent and wide-eyed as shown in the DAO story.

In fact, Morrigan should be the one who is innocent and wide-eyed. That's not saying Morrigan can't still be The **** -- she just should have been The Innocent Wide-eyed ****. While Leliana should logically have been The Experienced Born-Again Minx.

There you go, new archetypes. And more logical. But more difficult to write.

[maxernst]

Leli's an oddball character. I wouldn't say she conforms to an archetype at all. And Alistair's an odd spin on the heroic leading man archetype.

[Mlai00]

You take out the background that she is a [occupation spoiler] from [country spoiler], and she is the quintessential Naive Minx. And yes, Naive Minxes are often devoutly religious.

I was actually quite suspicious of her for a long time in-game, because I just couldn't reconcile her background with her behavior. "Why are you acting so innocent and naive? This must be your typical ploy!"

[TheRealIncarnal]

I really like this one.



Bioware, like every publisher, keeps to their well known archetypes for the most part. It makes things easier to work with, and it's definitely not broken.