My Thoughts
Charr culture shares similarity to: Mongols, Roman Empire, Industrial Ages.
Guild Wars is adorned with 5 playable races. What is suprising is Human's are most played. What is unsuprising to me is Charr's are an undesirable choice. My opinion on the matter is because in GW1, the Charr were just the "enemy". They weren't playble, they weren't very distinguishable, they were a race built for war and hate. I personally remember killing low level Charr's at the start of my GW experience, and them being labelled the "enemy" in my head. Only in GW2 did the Charr topic broaden, an extensive history given (one of which is still riddled with conflict with Humans) and the species finally given a chance to look good to players. But even still, they're described as harsh, creatures born to fight, their colours are mostly brown and red, and their brutal honour centered life-style is still negative views.
"The charr would be the main threat to the humans of Ascalon, so we wanted something inhuman, iconic, and intelligent." - Katy Hargrove, on creation of Charr for GW1
Of course there are more races, but I'm focusing purely on a race that's been vilified, was once (and still often can be other than a select few in the GW history/universe) undistinguished from one another, and has a feud with the Human race (who lean more towards good, pictured in much lighter tones than Charrs, but aren't without fault!!)
Charr culture shares similarity to: Mongols, Roman Empire, Industrial Ages.
Guild Wars is adorned with 5 playable races. What is suprising is Human's are most played. What is unsuprising to me is Charr's are an undesirable choice. My opinion on the matter is because in GW1, the Charr were just the "enemy". They weren't playble, they weren't very distinguishable, they were a race built for war and hate. I personally remember killing low level Charr's at the start of my GW experience, and them being labelled the "enemy" in my head. Only in GW2 did the Charr topic broaden, an extensive history given (one of which is still riddled with conflict with Humans) and the species finally given a chance to look good to players. But even still, they're described as harsh, creatures born to fight, their colours are mostly brown and red, and their brutal honour centered life-style is still negative views.
"The charr would be the main threat to the humans of Ascalon, so we wanted something inhuman, iconic, and intelligent." - Katy Hargrove, on creation of Charr for GW1
Of course there are more races, but I'm focusing purely on a race that's been vilified, was once (and still often can be other than a select few in the GW history/universe) undistinguished from one another, and has a feud with the Human race (who lean more towards good, pictured in much lighter tones than Charrs, but aren't without fault!!)
Others opinions of races in GW2 (what they’ve been inspired by)
- Disappointment at 5 races and humans being most selected. Why? Lack of imagination.
- “Asura are scientists, tinkerers, and inventors.” “They are a large, predator race – in appearance, they clearly draw resemblance from canine and feline species.” “Human popularion exists at an interesting nexus of pastoral and industrial.” “The Norn are totally not Vikings. Any resemblance to Nordic mythology, or to Britain circa the 9th century, is totally coincidental. Right?” “The Sylvari don’t simply dwell in nature; they are nature.”
No comments:
Post a Comment